The Downfall of New France Essay

During the sass the continent of North America was discovered by numerous different explorers, such as Giovanni Cabot, Columbus, and Jacques Carrier. This set off a great race for the ownership of this new continent, and France and England would fight over the country known as Canada. New France was first established by Jacques Carrier in 1534. While Montanan deserves much of the blame for the loss of Quebec in 1759, New France, in fact, was destined to fall because of the policies and approaches that had been taken since the earliest foundations of the colony.

The recitalist standpoint of Jean-Baptist Collect was also a large benefactor to the downfall of New France. This policy crippled New France and constricted its growth economically, militarily and population wise. The unnecessary expansion to the west also constricted the colonies growth as it meant that the population of the colonies could not grow well since men would run off into the woods. This also spread New France over a vast indefensible area of land.

Montanan is to be blamed for losing the ultimate and last battle for New France, the siege of Quebec in 1759, having been outwitted by Wolfe and beaten on the Plains of Abraham. Montanan was guaranteed that defeat as he had made several strategic mistakes that cost him the battle. While the downfall of New France was largely attributed to Nonmetal’s failure at Quebec, early French approaches to the policies in New France also impaired the colonies military effectiveness and economical standpoint in North America.

Jean Talon, the Intending of New France during the reign of Louis XIV from 1665-1672 wanted New France to become a powerful state but the response given to him by Jean-Baptist Collect, the Minister of Marine and Colonies, was as follows “The King Anton concur with you [Jean Talon] in the whole of your reasoning as to the meaner of rendering Canada a great and powerful State, perceiving many obstacles thereto which cannot be overcome except by a long lapse of time;”[l] With this Collect literally stated that France does not want New France to become strong and independent or they would not lose their hold over the colony in North America.

This meant a long period of struggle for the colony in North America since they received only small amounts of help from France, at any given time. Even at the siege of Quebec Talon was told by a messenger of Collect “When the house is on fire, who rises about the stable? [2] ,another indication that France was not too concerned about its Colony in North America The next big blow to New France’s economic struggle was the implementation of a mercantilism system that crippled New France’s industrial growth as it was not allowed to have any secondary industries and had to buy all of its mechanical items or other earthly goods from the mother country. Collect wrote in a letter to Talon “It is equally important to prevent every type of trade between the inhabitants of Canada and the English, since the latter could only supply them with merchandise hat they would otherwise obtain from France… [3] Even though Collect had encouraged the construction of ships in New France, the Industry was never able to get a proper standing as it and to acquire all instruments, mechanics and labored parts from France, which was an inefficient and extremely time-consuming process as each way took about two months to complete. Historian Cycles also talks about this issue with mercantilism. He States that the Colony of New France was constricted by the mercantilism policy as it did not allow New France to build any secondary industries, and so it was unable to create a stable economy in North America and was largely dependent on France for supplies. 4] This meant that New France could not train its own professional soldiers, nor could it manufacture new weapons and ammunition, this meant any reinforcements had to be sent from France and usually that was not a large number. Since the ship building industry was very small it did not have much of a Ana power either, whereas if it did, it would have been able to fend for itself, Quebec might have never fallen to the British in 1759, and the entire nation of Canada would be entirely different.

And so while the mercantilism policy was largely in favor of France it was not at all helpful in letting New France grow on its on. It was not able to have secondary industries, which meant that it was not able to create a self sufficient economy or a reliable way of defending itself. In addition to the mercantilism policies in New France, the expansion of the colony beyond reasonable limits, and the rush for the fur trade also led to the downfall of New France. For the first century of New France’s history the main goal was to explore this “new’ country, and not as much to settle in it, As historian J.

M. S Careless states “A century of exploration without occupation”[5] With this he meaner that while New France was still in its youth the main goal was to find a route to Asia, and so settlement was not a large factor at this time period. Historian W. ] Cycles states that the French claimed a vast amount of territory without really occupying it. [6] France also later claimed a lot of land that they couldn’t control and couldn’t settle. Another important reason for the fall of New France was that it had spread itself too thin over the vast expanse of territory that it had claimed for France.

Now if the policy of a compact colony had been followed as Talon had been instructed to do, then the westward expansion would have been less of a problem and so New France would not have been weakened by having to protect such a large landmass. [7] Since Governor Forefront wanted to line his pockets he didn’t listen to Collect and so the westward expansion continued. Historian W. ] Cycles also states that “Despite the constant demands of Collect that the exodus of Canadians for the west be stopped it continued apace. “[8] So even though the government in New France did try to get people to stay in the colony, it was Just not working.

The Problem with the men wandering into the woods to become trappers was a large problem in an agricultural based society. Historian William Bennett Munroe states that the lure of the fur trade constricted the growth of the colony and that of the agricultural aspect, as it lured all of the strong healthy young men into this exciting aspect of New France the fur trade[9]. But as the problem of the fur trade became apparent, according to historian Thomas B. Sustain, the government in New France tried to curb the tendency to roam by trying to issue Congo©s, or permits to limit the tendency to roam. 0] This didn’t work out too well as hoped, as those who could not acquire permits went out as illicit traders. The problem to the westward expansion was that New France was being too spread out and it did not have enough manpower to protect and occupy all of that land, the fur trade made it virtually impossible for the colony population to grow or for its fields to be farmed and land to be cleared as all of the men wanted to run into the woods to trade with the natives. While the fall of New France is attributed to many different reasons, Montanan was a large contributor to the downfall of New France.

According to an article in “The Beaver”, entitled “The fight for Quebec” historian Morton Despond explains that Montanan was a distinguished, battle- hardened soldier and commander. He had already had a great victory at Ticonderoga in 1758 and that winter he sent an aide, Louis-Antoine, Comet De Bougainvillea, to France to acquire reinforcements. He was given the answer of: “When the house is on fire, who worries about the stable? “[11]Since France had to do everything it could to save itself. Bougainvillea returned with supplies and only 200 recruits from the kings army. 12] This meant that Montanan had to face the British armada with only a mindful of troops and a group of Canadian militia; this made it hard for Montanan to withstand the constant attacks from the British at Quebec. Now Montanan was known to be a very good strategist but he failed to see the importance of the native styles of guerilla warfare, historian W. J Cycles states that since France brought in its own generals to fight in the Seven Years War, all that these generals wanted to do was to fight in the traditional European style of warfare, a war of attrition.

They failed to see the importance of the natives style of guerilla warfare which was ideal for the Canadian environment. 13] Since Montanan did not want this style of warfare with going and raiding the soldiers, Montanan specifically stated, “The Canadian concept of war is going on raids that resemble hunting parties,” [14] In this one sees Nonmetal’s dislike for the Canadian and native styles of warfare. While Montanan did use the natives as snipers in the woods during the battle on the Plains of Abraham he did not employ their styles of warfare while the British were camped at Pointed-L©ivy, on the opposite side of Quebec.

Although some of the civilian Canadians did sneak in to assassinate guards or officers. Montanan was a great commander but Montanan was notably lacking in one quality. As Canadian historian and university professor, C. P Stacey points out “He [Montanan] lacked the invaluable ability to penetrate his antagonists intentions” [1 5] but Stacey also continues and points out that “Wolf’s planning had an illogical and unpredictable quality that made it a very difficult intelligence problem”[16] And so while Montanan did fail in predicting Wolf’s actions he was not completely at fault since Wolfe was an irrational strategist.

While Montanan was a great commander he did make one very grave mistake. According to historian Morton Despond Nonmetal’s greatest mistake was that he had mixed in the militiamen with the white coated troops of his royal majesty. And while the kings troops would stand firm in a firefight, the militiamen would drop down to reload, shoot their targets and crawl away to find shelter. 17] What this meant was, that when the English started shooting at the French line, royal and militia troops alike would drop because of wounds or because they had died, but because of the militiamen dropping even if they weren’t hit it meant that the royal soldiers thought them to have been shot, and so they believed that everyone had en snot and so the royal troops tile d. A French officer said “never was route more complete than that of our army'[18] If the militia had been trained properly, they would not have dropped and they then the royal troops would not have fled, and the battle of the plains might have had a different outcome.

And so it can be seen that while the downfall of New France was predetermined through the course of its history, Montanan can be attributed to the downfall of New France as he lost Quebec through a number of different strategic faults such as mixing in the militiamen with the kings troops, underestimating Wolf’s plans, and he ailed to implement the important styles of native guerilla warfare which was suited to the Canadian landscape and the geographical situation of Quebec. With that one sees the inevitable downfall of New France and the reasons behind it.

While Montanan deserves much of the blame for the loss of Quebec in 1759, New France, in fact, was destined to fall because of the policies and approaches that had been taken since the earliest foundations of the colony. Montanan is to be blamed for losing the ultimate and last battle for New France, the siege of Quebec in 1759 and having been hat defeat as he had made several strategic mistakes that cost him the battle. The also constricted the colony growth as it meant that the population of the colonies France over a vast indefensible area of land.

And so the downfall of New France was predetermined from the beginning of its founding due to neglect from France and its people.

x

Hi!
I'm Tamara!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out