But other counsels prevailed in 1716 when the government determined to improve the fortifications and the Regent imposed on the town a contribution of 6,000 livres, of which 2,000 had to be paid by the Seigneurs and the rest by the religious communities and the inhabitants, without exception. The works, however, did not begin till 1722. The new walls of rough stone, ornamented with barbicans, were eighteen feet high, four feet thick at their base and three feet at the top. They presented thirteen bastions, four facing the St. Lawrence, four giving on the Little River, and the five others, which were armed with little pieces of artillery, faced three on the north, and two on the west. There were five gates and five posterns. The space enclosed was about 110 arpents (ninety-three acres). The fortifications were never completely finished. As intended by de Léry they might have been strong for he wrote to France on August 17, 1717, "I have determined to commence an inclosure capable to resist the artillery that the English might bring from Orange." Yet a French officer, quoted by Sandham, in "Montreal and Its Fortifications," as present in the city during Amherst's siege of Montreal in 1760, which was to end in the Capitulation, writes of the results as follows: "Montreal was in no way susceptible of a defense. It was surrounded with walls built with design only to preserve the inhabitants from the incursions of the Indians, little imagining at that time that it would become the theatre of a regular war and that one day they would see formidable armies of well disciplined troops before its walls. We were, however, all pent up in that miserable bad place without provisions, a thousand times worse than a position in an open field, whose pitiful walls could not resist two hours' cannonade without being leveled to the ground, when we would have been forced to surrender at discretion if the English had insisted upon it." [174]
The extent of the paternal supervision of France, over what we should consider trifles, is shown in a royal decree of June 9, 1723, on the subject of the renting of pews in the churches, to the following effect: that widows, remaining such, shall enjoy those pews granted to their husbands by paying the same rent; that with regard to children, whose father and mother are dead, their seats shall be put up for auction, and given to the highest bidder, but they shall have the preference, if they pay the same price as that offered by the last bidder.
In 1723, de Vaudreuil commenced the building of his Château.
In 1724 the King found it necessary by a decree of May 22d to prohibit peltry being conveyed into New England or the returning from there with merchandise. As Montreal was evidently the recognized business point of distribution, whence the trouble had arisen, the King ordered all who should have permission from the Governor General or his representative to cross the frontier, to declare at Montreal the quantity and quality of the effects taken, making a similar declaration on their return.
Students watching the progress of the liquor traffic will not be surprised at the skillful adroitness of illicit traders, in evading detection. An edict of de Vaudreuil and Intendant Bégon of May 22, 1725, ordered all those who possessed birch bark canoes to make a declaration of them to the nearest greffe (record office) within a fortnight of the publication. The object was to frustrate illicit traders who made use of the light weight of these canoes to carry liquor into the woods and then to hide there and thence distribute the liquor without arousing the attention of the authorities. The canoe was also doubtless to be watched as a means of illicit trade in furs. No less a person than the lieutenant-general of the government of Montreal, Sieur François Marie Bouat, was condemned in 1719, to a month's imprisonment, and was suspended from his office, for having sent a canoe up-country for trading purposes. The deliberations of the court martial are dated October 18, 1719. The suspension was raised by the King on June 2, 1720.
The year 1724 saw the death of the governor of Montreal, Claude de Ramezay, who was succeeded by Charles LeMoyne, first Baron of Longueuil.
On October 25, 1725, the Governor General de Vaudreuil also died. He was succeeded as administrator by the Baron of Longueuil. In 1726 the Marquis de Beauharnois became Governor General and Thomas Claude Dupuy Intendant, his first act being signed on December 1st of the same year.
In 1727, a special edict concerning commerce with outsiders was issued by the King. [175] Title VI enacts that "strangers established in Our Colonies, even naturalized, cannot be merchants, brokers or commercial agents under any form, on a penalty of 3,000 livres, applicable to the denounceand of perpetual banishment from Our Colonies. We permit them only to make use of their lands and dwellings, and to trade only in provisions which come from their lands. We forbid all merchants and traders established in old said Colonies to have any clerk, assistant, bookkeeper or other persons engaged in their business who are strangers, although they may be naturalized...."
Clearly the modern cosmopolitan character of Montreal was not foreseen.
A decree of the Sovereign Council of February 16, 1682, had already been made, forbidding the transportation by habitants or others of peltries to Manhattan or Orange or other places, and back, under pain of confiscation of their peltry, money, attire, canoes and other effects seized on their departure or return. This was promulgated at Montreal by Sergeant Lorry about March 8th of the same year.