Frederick Arthur Verner (Upper Canada, 26 Feb 1836; d at London, Eng 16 May 1928).
“His mellow vision conveyed an image of the Canadian West as a secret garden, an oasis of calm and quiet, rather than the tragic battlefield portrayed by many American painters.” (“Frederick A Verner,” The Canadian Encyclopedia)
Photo credit: unknown source
—ooo—
What a week! It took me two days to write “More on the Second Amendment,” and I could have used a third day. But, while digging, it occurred to me that members of the National Rifle Association (NRA) were acting in violation of the Second amendment. The Second amendment is obsolete because the US has long had law-enforcement mechanisms, ie. “a well regulated militia.”[i] But not only is it obsolete, it is also flawed.
To be clear it should read “a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, [in the absence of a well regulated militia],[ii] the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” But it does state, unequivocally, that a well-regulated militia is “necessary to the security of a free state.” Neither the settlers nor the NRA can be considered a well-regulated militia and by advocating a civilian’s right to own and bear firearms, the NRA now jeopardizes “the security of a free state.”
And there is good old-fashioned common sense. How can anyone shoot someone else without a firearm? It is the sine qua non of gun shooting.
________________________
[i] The U.S. Cavalry was active from 17 November 1775 until 1951. See US Cavalry in Wikipedia[ii] Or something to that effect.
—ooo—
composer: Thomas Tallis (c. 1505 – 23 November 1585 [by the Julian calendar; 3 December 1585, by the Gregorian calendar])
title: “If Ye Love Me” (anthem)
performers: the Cambridge Singers
director: John Rutter (b. 1945)
One morning, this song appeared on YouTube. So I wrote a post, but later the song was removed. I have therefore modified my post by inserting a new video that contains instrumental variations of the song, composed by Johann Nepomuk Hummel (14 November 1778 – 17 October 1837). We no longer hear the lyrics of Ach, du lieberAugustin but the melody still brings to mind part of my childhood. It was a Proustien (Marcel Proust) experience. The song had the same effect on me as Madeleines, French pastry dipped in teach had for Proust. My experience will not yield a literary masterpiece. Proust (10 July 1871 – 18 November 1922) wrote In Search of Lost Time or Remembrance of Things Past (À la recherche du temps perdu), a form of anamnesis (recollection) published between 1913 and 1927.
—ooo—
After World War II, many Europeans migrated to Canada and several French-speaking immigrants settled in Quebec. Somehow, my parents met a Belgian couple whose life became inextricably linked with ours. Henri and Mariette were closer to us than most of our relatives.
Henri was a jeweller and Mariette had been the wardrobe mistress for the Brussels Opera (called La Monnaie [the mint]). While my father had long conversations with Henri, my mother and Mariette sat together talking away as they did needlework and sewed. Mariette often designed and sewed clothes for us, frequently using fabric reclaimed from larger garments. As a student, I also designed and sewed clothes using reclaimed fabric. I then thought I was wearing inferior garments, but I have changed my mind. These garments were one-of-a-kind ‘designer clothes.’
Henri and Mariette both spoke French, but Mariette knew several languages, one of which was German. She therefore endeavoured to teach me little sentences in German as well as songs, one of which was the very well-known “Oh, du lieber Augustin” (Oh, you dear Augustin) or Ach, du lieber Augustin. Mariette did tell me that it was and was not a children’s song. How confusing! But she was right. “Du lieber Augustin” sounds like a children’s song, but it is about the plague. It laughs away the plague, so it is not a memento mori(remember your own mortality), good medicine for absolute monarchs.
The Plague
I am not taking us back to one of the worst pandemics in history, which took place between 1346 – 1353. It was called the Black Death and killed 6 to 7 persons out of 10, perhaps more, perhaps less. According to Wikipedia, the plague usually kills two-thirds of its victims within four days. (See Bubonic plague, Wikipedia.)
The Bubonic Plague is a zoonotic disease because it is transmitted from one species, fleas, Oriental rat fleas, to another species: human beings. The pathogen is Yersinia pestis, a bacterium. The 1346 – 1353 pandemic travelled the Silk Road. There were flea–infested rats on merchant ships. The bacterium entered the skin and then traveled through the lymphatics system.The patient developed buboes, from βουβών, the Greek word for “groin,” hence the name Bubonic plague. It caused swelling in the groin and the arm pits (For pictures, see Rare diseases, Wikipedia.)
There were many epidemics of the plague, one of which took the lives of the Limburg Brothers, the miniaturists who had been commissioned, by Jean de France, duc de Berry to illuminate his Très Riches Heures de Jean de France, duc de Berry. The Limburg brothers died in 1416, as did Jean de France. Plague epidemics lasted up to the beginning of the 19th century.
“Oh, du lieber Augustin”
The song “Oh, du lieber Augustin,” was composed by Marx Augustin who sang ballads, played the bagpipes and was called ‘dear Augustin.’ Marx Augustin passed away during the Great Vienna Plague, which occurred in 1679. He was asleep and seemed dead. So he was thrown in a pit with the corpses if victims of the plague. Marx Augustin had been a professional entertainer. Therefore, when he woke up, he decided to die as he had lived, composing and singing a ballad. The Wikipedia translations of Oh, du lieber Augustin (just click) differ from the German-language original. However, let us listen to the melody.
Oh, du lieber Augustin, Augustin, Augustin,Oh, du lieber Augustin, alles ist hin.Geld ist weg, Mensch ist weg,Alles hin, Augustin.Oh, du lieber Augustin,Alles ist hin.1.Money‘s gone, girlfriend’s gone,/ All is lost, Augustin!/ Oh, you dear Augustin./
All is lost!
RefrainRock ist weg, Stock ist weg,Augustin liegt im Dreck,Oh, du lieber Augustin,Alles ist hin.2. Coat is gone, staff is gone,/ Augustin lies in the dirt./ Oh, you dear Augustin,/
All is lost!
RefrainUnd selbst das reicheWien, Hin ist’s wie Augustin;Weint mit mir im gleichen Sinn,Alles ist hin!3. Even that rich town Vienna,/ Broke is like Augustin;/ Shed tears with thoughts akin,/ All is lost!
RefrainJeder Tag war ein Fest,Und was jetzt? Pest, die Pest!Nur ein groß’ Leichenfest,Das ist der Rest.4.Every day was a feast,/ Now we just have the plague!/ Just a great corpse’s feast,/
That is the rest.
RefrainAugustin, Augustin,Leg’ nur ins Grab dich hin!Oh, du lieber Augustin,Alles ist hin!5. Augustin, Augustin,/ Lay down in your grave!/ Oh, you dear Augustin,/ All is lost!
Related Article
The First Thanksgiving 1621, oil on canvas by Jean Leon Gerome Ferris (1863–1930). The painting shows common misconceptions about the event that persist to modern times: Pilgrims did not wear such outfits, and the Wampanoag are dressed in the style of Plains Indians
It has become common knowledge that the first Thanksgiving in North America was held by Martin Frobisher and his crew in the eastern Arctic in 1578.
Sir Martin Frobisher(b near Wakefield, Eng 1539; d at Plymouth, Eng 22 Nov 1594).
Sir Martin Frobisher, a mariner, explorer and “chaser of fool’s gold” made three trips to the Arctic looking for a route to India. Jacques Cartier had embarked on such a mission making two trips to what is now the East Coast of Canada. The first of these trips took place in 1534. He then claimed the territory he had reached for France by planting a ten-meter cross in the Gaspé area feeling he had discovered an Asian Land. He kidnapped Taignoagny and dom Agaya, the two sons of Iroquois chief Donnacona and took them to France. In 1535, he made a second trip returning his sons to Donnacona.
Frobisher & a Stormy Arctic Sea
As for Sir Martin Frobisher, hoping to find a northwest passage to India, he traveled to inauspicious destinations.[i] In 1578, he commanded a flotilla of 15 ships and more than 400 men. However, a storm threatened the entire flotilla. One ship returned to Europe and another was sunk by ice. Yet, Frobisher was undeterred.
Frobisher and his men, the thirteen ships that remained, were then at the northern entrance to the Hudson Strait, the sea to the north discovered by land, from the south, by Pierre-Esprit Radisson and his brother-in-law, Médard Chouart Des Groseillers, a sea that permitted easy access to beaver pelts.[ii]
The thirteen remaining ships assembled at the Countess of Warwick’s Island, known today as Kodlunarn Island, 500 miles (800 kilometers) off the northeastern shore of Frobisher Bay, a relatively large inlet of the Labrador Sea. Frobisher’s men established two mines on the island and tested the ore spending a month battling storms for most of July.[iii]
Sir Martin’s Thanksgiving
When they returned to Frobisher Bay, Martin Frobisher and his men “celebrated Communion and formally expressed their thanks through the ship’s Chaplain, Robert Wolfall, who ‘made unto them a godly sermon, exhorting them especially to be thankefull to God for theyr strange and miraculous deliverance in those so dangerous places’ (Collinson).[iv]
Frobisher’s Thanksgiving resembles a Te Deum as would, after the Seven Years’ War, the Thanksgiving held by the people of Nova Scotia. However, United Empire Loyalists, the British who remained loyal to Britain after the Thirteen Colonies chose to part with their motherland, brought to British colonies to the north, where they fled, the tradition of celebrating that year’s harvest, although it may not have been a firmly-entrenched yearly event yet. But after W. W. I, Thanksgiving and Armistice, Canada’s current Remembrance day, were celebrated the same week and seemed indistinguishable.
Two Different Feasts: Thanksgiving and Armistice
Yet the two feasts are of a somewhat different nature. In the lengthy chronicle of human deeds or misdeeds, wars stand as mostly inglorious events. The end of a war is cause for celebration, despite devastating losses. However, giving thanks to Providence because the earth has been generous seems mainly joyful. What is celebrated is life eternal. So, I am rather pleased that, on January 31, 1957 “[Canadian] Parliament proclaimed ‘a day of General Thanksgiving to Almighty God for the bountiful harvest with which Canada has been blessed,’ to be observed on the second Monday in October.”
At this point, the Canadian celebration merged with the apparently regular American observance which was first conducted by the Pilgrims’ first harvest in Massachusetts in 1621 and brought to Canada by United Empire Loyalists. But the Canadian feast would be celebrated earlier that its American counterpart. In the United States, Thanksgiving is now observed later than in Canada, but this may not have been the case in earlier days. Given that American winters do not usually set in as early as Canadian winters, in most Canadian provinces, an earlier celebration makes sense. In fact, there are parts of the United States where winter is not a cold season.
However, Sir Martin Frobisher’s Te Deum, “God, We Praise You,” was called a Thanksgiving and it is remembered as such. The Canadian Encyclopedia‘s entry underscores the fact that “Frobisher sailed for Elizabeth I, whose reign was marked by public acts of giving thanks; Elizabeth expressed her gratitude for having lived to ascend the throne (and not being whacked by “Bloody Mary”), for delivery from the Spanish Armada and in her last speech to Parliament, for her subjects. The first known use of the word “Thanksgiving” in English text was in a translation of the bible in 1533, which was intended as an act of giving thanks to God.”
So whether it be the end of a destructive storm, the end of atrocious hostilities or the sight of a plentiful harvest, we give thanks for weather becalmed, for peace restored and for our daily bread. Some people still say Grace.
[i]Richard Collinson, The Three Voyages of Martin Frobisher: In Search of a Passage to Cathaia and Indiaby the North-West (Cambridge University Press, 2010), quoted in Laura Neilson Bonikowsky, “The First Thanksgiving in North America,” The Canadian Encyclopedia.
[iv] Richard Collinson, The Three Voyages of Martin Frobisher: In Search of a Passage to Cathaia and Indiaby the North-West (Cambridge University Press, 2010), quoted in Laura Neilson Bonikowsky“The First Thanksgiving in North America,” the Canadian Encyclopedia.
Indian encampment on Lake Huron by Paul Kane (1848–50)
Missionaries to New France had to adapt Christianity so their converts could understand it. Amerindian languages were simple languages that did not provide “black robes” with ways of expressing abstract notions. To befriend Amerindians they therefore chose to sing with their congregation.
“Jesous Ahatonhia”
The best-known piece composed for Amerindians is the Huron carol entitled: “Jesous Ahatonhia.” It was composed in 1643 for the Hurons at Ste Marie, in all likelihood, by Jean de Brébeuf, a Jesuit missionary, who was tortured to death by Iroquois Amerindians and has become a mythic figure. The Huron Noël belongs to Canada‘s répertoire of Christmas carols. The melody was borrowed from a French song entitled: Une jeune pucelle (A Young Maid).
Jesous was translated into French by Paul Picard, an Amerindian notary at Quebec City and, into English, by Jesse Edgar Middleton. It was then adapted for voice and piano by Healey Willan (ca 1927), an Anglo-Canadian organist and composer (12 October 1880 in Balham, London – 16 February 1968 in Toronto, Ontario).
I have written down two stanzas of the Huron carol and two stanzas of its French translation, and a full English translation. To access the lyrics, please click on Jesous Ahatonhia.
Huron lyricsEhstehn yayau deh tsaun we yisus ahattonnia/ O na wateh wado:kwi nonnwa ‘ndasqua entai / ehnau sherskwa trivota nonnwa ‘ndi yaun rashata / Iesus Ahattonnia, Ahattonnia, Iesus Ahattonnia /Asheh kaunnta horraskwa deh ha tirri gwames / Tishyaun ayau ha’ndeh ta aun hwa ashya a ha trreh / aundata:kwa Tishyaun yayaun yaun n-dehta / Iesus Ahattonnia, Ahattonnia, Iesus Ahattonnia /French lyrics
Chrétiens, prenez courage, / Jésus Sauveur est né! / Du malin les ouvrages / À jamais sont ruinés. / Quand il chante merveille, / À ces troublants appas / Ne prêtez plus l’oreille: / Jésus est né: In excelsis gloria!
Oyez cette nouvelle, /Dont un ange est porteur! /Oyez! âmes fidèles, / Et dilatez vos cœurs. / La Vierge dans l’étable / Entoure de ses bras / L’Enfant-Dieu adorable. / Jésus est né: In excelsis gloria!
‘Twas in the moon of wintertime when all the birds had fled
That mighty Gitchi Manitou sent angel choirs instead;
Before their light the stars grew dim and wondering hunters heard the hymn, Jesus your King is born, Jesus is born, in excelsis gloria.
Within a lodge of broken bark the tender babe was found;
A ragged robe of rabbit skin enwrapped his beauty round
But as the hunter braves drew nigh the angel song rang loud and high
Jesus your King is born, Jesus is born, in excelsis gloria.
The earliest moon of wintertime is not so round and fair
As was the ring of glory on the helpless infant there.
The chiefs from far before him knelt with gifts of fox and beaver pelt.
Jesus your King is born, Jesus is born, in excelsis gloria.
O children of the forest free, O seed of Manitou
The holy Child of earth and heaven is born today for you.
Come kneel before the radiant boy who brings you beauty peace and joy.
Jesus your King is born, Jesus is born, in excelsis gloria.
From the story of Madeleine de Verchères, we know that among Amerindians, there were “Noble Savages” and “Savages” who were not so noble. We know moreover that Madeleine’s father was a member of the Carignan-Salières Regiment. However, the story of Madeleine de Verchères has not told us about the Carignan-Salières Regiment itself, whose members started to protect New France in 1665. Nor has it told us that, during the 1660s, France sent women to Canada. This matter was discussed in a post entitled Richelieu & Nouvelle-France, but is again relevant. We therefore require more information.
In the above-mentioned post, I wrote that “between 1663 and 1673, 500 to 900 Frenchwomen, the King’s Daughters (les filles du Roy), were given a dowry by king Louis XIV and sent to Nouvelle-France, if they were deemed sufficiently healthy to survive the crossing of the Atlantic Ocean.”
The 1660’s were the early years of Louis XIV’s reign and he became interested in France’s North-American colonies. Since 1628, the Company of One Hundred Associates had ruled New France, but it was forced out of business in 1663 and Louis took charge. He in fact created a “Royal Government whereby France would run the government of New France through a Sovereign Council.” The Sovereign Council comprised a GOUVERNEUR (governor), a bishop, an INTENDANT and 5 councillors.[i]
In other words, to quote the Canadian Encyclopedia,
[i]n 1663 Louis XIV equipped the colony with a complete administrative system modelled on those used to govern French provinces.
However, hostile Amerindians, the Iroquois, were threathening the life of settlers. Attacks, such as the attack that would make Madeleine de Verchères a heroine in 1692, were becoming a genuine obstacle to the growth of the colony. How would the Filles du Roy and their husbands survive? The remedy consisted in the deployment of the Carignan-Salières Regiment.
(please click on the picture to enlarge it)
Le Régiment
Le Régiment de Carignan-Salières
The Carignan-Salières Regiment combined two regiments, the Régiment de Carignan and the Balthasar Regiment. However, after the death of Balthasar, in 1665, the Régiment became the Régiment de Carignan-Salières. These were informal mergers. (Carignan-Salières Regiment, Wikipedia)
The Régiment de Carignan-Salières had fought against the Ottoman Turks in Hungary in 1664, but its main enemy as Régiment de Carignan-Balthasar had been the Spanish However, after the Treaty of the Pyrenees, which ended Franco-Spanish War (1635–1659), France no longer needed a large military force. Consequently, in 1665, the soldiers of the Carignan-Salières Regiment were deployed to New France to protect the settlers from attacks by not-so-noble “savages.”
By November 1665, forts had been built along the Richelieu River, considered as the main invasion route. The French and Canadiens attacked the Mohawk Country in February 1666. Men were ambushed and the expedition had to retreat losing some 60 men on its return journey to Quebec City. It was midwinter, which seriously jeopardized the success of military operations.
The French attacked again in September 1666, but no Iroquois was to be found in Mohawk Country. Soldiers of the Carignan-Salières Regiment burned the villages and cornfields and took possession of the Mohawk Country. Alexandre de Prouville, Marquis de Tracy was ruthless. He forced the Iroquois to convert to Roman Catholicism and to speak French as taught by the Jesuit missionaries. A mission village was set up for Catholic Mohawks at Kahnawake, south of Montreal.[iii]
According to the Canadian Encyclopedia “[i]n July 1667 the Iroquois finally came to terms. The regiment was recalled to France in 1668, but some 400 officers and men chose to remain and settled on seigneuries along the Rivière Richelieu, greatly strengthening the colony’s defences, military ethos, and economy.”[iv]
Back to Madeleine de Verchères
Those 400 officers and men proved a godsend to a previously feeble New France. It protected the colony, but they also settled New France. François Jarret de Verchères, Madeleine de Verchères’s father, was among the 400 officers and men who decided to stay behind. He was given a seigneury, married Marie Perrot, and built the fort his daughter defended on 22 October 1691.[v]
The Iroquois were defeated, but a defeated Iroquois may well be a more dangerous enemy than a victorious one.
Yesterday, I went to my Gmail account and read posts written by people who are following my blog. It was an education and I am not finished. At least two of my readers are investigating their French-Canadian and French ancestry.
The story of the French in North America is a lengthy tale and although Quebec is home to the largest concentration of French-speaking North Americans, French Canadians are everywhere in North America and a large number are in the United States. Let us raise that curtain.
The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes
The first to leave New France and find a home in the United States are the Huguenots (Reformed Church of France or Calvinist Protestants). There were many Huguenots in New France. They left when Louis XIV revoked the Edict of Nantes, in October 1685.[ii]For instance, whenever the Bourbeau family, my mother’s family, has a reunion, most “relatives” comes from the United States. The Bourbeau family was a Huguenot family. Three Bourbeau families found refuge in Canada, but two left for the United States in 1685 so they could remain Huguenots. One Bourbeau family converted to Catholicism. They stayed in New France and are my ancestors.
In an early edition of his Histoire du Canada, written between 1845 and 1848, François-Xavier Garneau expressed the view that New France was weakened when the Huguenots left. However, he had to delete these comments to avoid condemnation on the part of the Church. His Histoire would have been à l’Index, or on the List of Prohibited Books.
The Voyageurs
The Tonquin in 1811 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Many Canadiens who worked as voyageurs were employed by German- and Waldensian– born John Jacob Astor (July 17, 1763 – March 29, 1848).[iii] Upon retirement, they settled in Minnesota, but many moved to other parts of the United States.
Gabriel Franchère
In fact, John Jacob Astor so trusted one of his voyageurs, Gabriel Franchère (3 Nov. 1786 in Montreal – 12 April 1863 in St Paul, Minn), that he asked him to take voyageurs from New York to Fort Astoria, at the mouth of the Columbia River, in the Oregon Country. These voyageurs, some of whom were employees of the North West Company, based in Montreal, traveled on the Tonquin around Cape Horn. The Tonquin was purchased by American John Jacob Astor on August 23, 1810, the day John Jacob founded the Pacific Fur Company. It left New York on September 8, 1810 and reached its destination on March 22, 1811.
Gabriel Franchère returned to Montreal, married and wrote his memoirs for his family and friends. However his manuscript was edited and published by Michel Bibaud in 1820. After spending several years in Montreal, Franchère went back to the United States and died in St Paul, Minnesota.
It is possible to follow the path of Canadiens voyageurs who worked for John Jacob Astor. They gave French names to rivers, forts and other locations. For example, it has been suggested that Ozark comes from aux arcs, at the arches, because of bends in a river. I heard this on A&E.
Other inhabitants of New France who became Americans are Acadians deported in 1755. Some boats did not sail down the Thirteen Colonies, but some did. The deportees stayed aboard until one of the colonies, Georgia, allowed them to leave their ships. A few of these Acadians found their way back to Canada’s current Atlantic provinces, but many traveled from Georgia to Louisiana, another province of New France, and are known as Cajuns.
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (27 February 1807 – 24 March 1882) immortalized the Great Expulsion (le grand dérangement [the great disturbance]) by creating a fictional Évangéline whom Acadians transformed into their héroïne. The mythic Évangéline is alive in the mind of Acadians.
French Canadians and Acadians: US Migration
Moreover, close to a million French Canadians and Acadians left Quebec or Acadie because they could not find employment in Canada. This period of Canadian history, the USA Migration FR (1840-1930), is often referred to as l’Exode. I have an American grandfather. He could not find work in Canada. My grandmother stayed in Canada, but my grandfather rebuilt his life in Massachusetts. I would never have met him had my mother not decided that her children would have at least one grandfather. Her father had died.
In fact, many of the voyageurs were French Canadians or Canadiens who could not find employment on the shores of the St Lawrence. The thirty acres of land they had rented from a seigneur since the seventeenth century could no longer be divided. Some retired near the Red River in Manitoba, but the voyageurs who had been in the employ of John Jacob Astor became Americans. These could be considered exode French-Canadians.
Conclusion
The above seem the main groups of Canadiens who became Americans. But there may be others. For instance, the people of Louisiana, other than the Cajuns, were also French, but traditionally Canada and Acadie have been considered the provinces of New France. Until recently, Louisiana was not looked upon as a province of New France.
Therefore, the French-speaking inhabitants of Louisiana are the descendants of the French who settled in Louisiana and did not return to France after the Louisiana Purchase (1803). They are not descendants of French-Canadians. Acadiens, called Cajuns, are the descendants of Acadiens who were deported and settled in or near Baton Rouge when Louisiana was still a French colony. Other French-Canadians are descendants of voyageurs, or French-speaking Canadians who left New France to avoid religious persecutions or migrated south because they could no longer earn a living in Canada.
I will conclude by saying that French Canada and the United States are inextricably linked because of migrations from New France and Canada to the United States. Many, if not most, Americans of French-Canadian descent do not speak French, but we share cultural affinities and a collective memory. Historical events have linked Americans and French-Canadians. There is a brotherhood among us, a brotherhood I celebrate.
[ii] The Edict of Nantes, an edict of tolerance, was issued on 13 April 1598, by Henri IV, king of France and Navarre. Henri IV had been a Huguenot. He is famous for have said that “Paris (being King) was well worth a mass” (Paris vaut bien une messe). The first expeditions to Canada, Acadie to be precise, were undertaken during his reign by Pierre Du Gua de Monts (c. 1558 – 1628) a Huguenot, and Champlain, also a Huguenot but less visibly.
On 5 October 1970, Richard Cross is abducted from his home by two members of the “Liberation Cell” of the FLQ (Front de libération du Québec, Quebec Liberation Front).
On 11 October, the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) broadcasts a letter from Pierre Laporte to Robert Bourassa, the Premier of Quebec.
On 12 October, the Canadian Army starts patrolling the Ottawa region, Ottawa is Canada’s capital. They were requested to do so by the Federal government.
On 13 October the CBC interviews Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau (18 October 1919 – 28 September 2000). He says his now famous “Just watch me.”
On 3 December, after being held hostage for 62 days, kidnapped British Trade Commissioner James Cross is released by the FLQ Liberation Cell in return for their being granted safe passage to Cuba by the government of Canada after approval by Fidel Castro. They are flown to Cuba by a Canadian Forces aircraft.
On 23 December, Pierre Trudeau announces that troops will withdraw from Quebec on 5 January 1971.
On 28 December, members of the Chénier cell, who murdered Pierre Laporte, are arrested.
— Chénier Postcard
Tough Leadership
There are times when political leaders take a strong stand against persons who put explosives in mailboxes, threaten the bulk of society or kidnap important figures. Trudeau was criticized for involving the army in what was a serious crisis but not a war. He was condemned by Civil Libertarians. Pierre Elliott Trudeau would not allow what he thought was nonsense.
The Chénier cell, Pierre Laporte’s murderers, was named after Jean-Olivier Chénier, a medical doctor and patriote who was killed as he was leaving the burning church were many of the men he had led into battle had found refuge during the battle of Saint-Eustache (14 December 1738) FR. He died at the age of 31, but his memory lingers. He’s a saint to Indépendantistes and there was a celebration in Saint-Eustache on 10 May 2012: la Journée des patriotes.
During the October Crisis, 497 persons were arrested under the War Measures Act, 435 were released, 62 were charged and “32 were accused of crimes of such seriousness that a Quebec Superior Court judge refused them bail.” (October Crisis, Wikipedia.)
These words are uttered by the philosopher or person who uses reason only. He always sleeps peacefully. He is not endowed with the pity/compassion that moderates self-love (l’amour-propre or l’amour de soi-même) in the savage. (Part One, more than two paragraphs after Note 15)
The Romney-Ryan Team
Allow me to place in the proper mouths, the mouths of extremists in the Republican Party, Rousseau’s “Perish if you wish; I am safe.” I may be wrong, but I suspect that the reason these Republicans can speak like choir-boys on the subject of planned parenthood is that they are sufficiently wealthy to fly to countries where birth-control is available and inexpensive as well as to countries where abortions are not criminalized. They can also pay a doctor the “right” fee. In other words, I suspect a substantial degree of hypocrisy: “Perish if you wish: I am safe.” (On rape, see The Washington Post). On the “Gag Rule,” see The Huffington Post).
In fact, hypocrisy may not be the only sin. We are also looking at inequality and at an unjust society. The rich and wealthy will have a freedom that will be denied the poor. As I have indicated in earlier blogs, the rich and the wealthy do not need health-insurance. They can pay for medical treatment and medication. Well, let’s raise that curtain again: the wealthy, wealthy women, need not give up controlling how many children they will have and when these children will be born. This is again something they can buy. In fact, they can also afford several children and help galore, in which they are very fortunate (no pun intended). They are therefore saying: “Perish if you wish; I am safe.”
So it could be that the debate is not about morality
In other words, if Republicans are against planned parenthood and abortion, I am inclined to think it has little to do with morality. I hope I’m wrong, but the debate about abortions seems such a convenient front. Extremists among Republicans will attract the votes of persons who are against abortion and who think naively that because a party does not criminalize abortion, members of that party are for abortion. This is not the case and there are very real drawbacks to criminalizing abortion. For instance, what are doctors to do when an abortion is an imperative?
Tying up the hands of doctors: unfit women
An abortion may indeed be an imperative. What does a doctor do—assuming a woman can afford to see a doctor—if a woman’s life is at risk, if the fetus is abnormal, if she is taking medication that can harm the child, if she is taking drugs or is an alcoholic, if the pregnant patient is much too young to bear a child or if a women cannot otherwise face a pregnancy, etc. Under privatized health-insurance, it may again be privatized, not only will these unfit women be told that they are suffering from a pre-existing condition, but if an unfit woman consents to an abortion and a doctor intervenes, he or she, i.e. the doctor, and the unfit patient will face criminal charges. “Perish if you wish; I am safe.”
A few years ago, I met a woman who had not slept since giving birth. Her son was three years old but she could not look after him. Nor could she work. Fortunately, she lived in Canada so all that could be done, medically-speaking, was done at no cost to her. However, I doubt that a doctor would have allowed a second pregnancy. She was sick: severe postpartum depression. Doctors need a little leeway.
Would that matters had been as they are now when my mother was having her babies. My poor mother carried a child every year knowing that the child would probably die in infancy of a congenital blood disease. Her first children survived. But she buried all the others. I will spare you the number. To make matters worse, in those days, a good Catholic woman could not say “no” to her husband. Sexual intercourse was a duty (un devoir). It was called: le devoir conjugal. I fail to see what was good in having babies that would die. This was cruelty. And I also fail to see what was good in our attending a funeral or two every year.
Saying “no” as the only recourse
If Mr Romney is elected to the office of President of the United States, the only recourse women who are poor and “women of humble means” will have is the word, “no” both outside and inside marriage. There are husbands, such as Charles de Gaulle (rumor has it), who will not ask their spouse to engage in sexual intercourse if she is not prepared to carry a child and give birth to this child.
That is rather noble, but it isn’t very realistic in the case of most couples. After a fine meal and, perhaps, one or two glasses of wine, hormones tend to take over, crippling intellectual resolve, particularly in younger people. In fact, even we, older folks, snuggle up from time to time and just may be induced to “play doctor.”
The above poster: reality
The above poster goes a long way into describing the situation poor and raped women will face (there is no “legitimate rape”) if planned parenthood is criminalized. Before abortion was decriminalized in Canada, women, particularly unmarried women, who could not face a pregnancy, sometimes used tools that killed (metallic coat hangers) or went to charlatans and, in many cases, they committed suicide. In the Quebec of my childhood, to avoid bringing shame on their family, young girls who got pregnant were sent to special institutions and when the baby was born, it was taken from them. The babies were raised in an orphanage or adopted. It would appear that some were sold.
So allow me to say that when it comes to a woman’s right to choose when and if she will have a child and her right to undergo an abortion when an abortion is necessary, I take matters very seriously. It would be my view that a woman
should not be forced into a pregnancy, especially if she has been raped (there are no “legitimate rape”), including rape within marriage;
that she should act responsibly when she engages in sexual intercourse, as should her husband or partner. Pregnancies can usually be avoided. And I would like to point out
that there are cases when a doctor, with the consent of his or her patient, should be allowed to end a pregnancy.
On Day One: shackling women
However, if Republicans get into office, “On Day One,” not only will Mitt Romney call the Chinese “currency manipulators” and end the health-care reforms introduced by President Obama, but he will also shackle women who are poor and women of “humble means.” Poor women and women of “humble means” will not have access to what is available to the rich.
The Conclusion
So scratch out most of the paragraph preceding the “On Day One,” because the conclusion is that “On Day One” women who are poor and women of humble means will be denied what will be accessible to the rich. It will again be all about money and appearing virtuous when virtue is not part of the equation, but a convenient means to an end: being elected People who are against abortions will be fooled into thinking that are voting for the morally superior party.
Such is not the case. If members of that party are elected they will impose on the poor repressive measures that seem virtuous, yet they will be hiding millions and billions, if not more, and demand tax cuts thus acting criminally. So how can these persons talk about morality? So wake up; it’s a smokescreen. What they are saying is “Perish if you wish; I am safe.”
Make sure everyone knows that if the President does not criminalize abortions, it does not mean that he is for abortion.
Canadians were lucky. In 1967, future Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau got the Omnibus Bill passed. One can access the details, including videos by clicking on Omnibus Bill, or CBC Digital Archives.
Everybody voted and Madame Pauline Marois, the leader of the Parti Québécois, is Quebec’s new Premier. Shots were fired as the Parti Québécois was starting to celebrate, so madame Marois was quickly removed from the stage by bodyguards. One person was killed and one critically injured.
Earlier today I interviewed several individuals. I asked these persons to give me one reason why they voted for an indépendantiste party, but no one could provide me with my one reason. One person told me he had at least fifty reasons, but he added that he did not have the time to give me his reasons. Name one, I asked. He repeated that he was too busy.
Bill 101 had been preceded by the Official Language Act (Bill 22), passed in 1974 under the Liberal government of Premier Robert Bourassa. Bill 101 (1977) has been challenged and too rigid an interpretation can lead to dangerous situations.
When friends and I were trying to cross the Champlain bridge to leave Montreal, an island, the overhead traffic monitors gave information and instructions in French only. I told my friends that the information should be given in both French and English to protect all drivers, including French-speaking drivers.
Bill 101 also stipulates that the children of immigrants be educated in French, etc. For more information click on the Charter of the French Language. My main source of information in writing this post was Wikipedia’s entry of the Charter of the French Language.
However, yesterday, as reported in Le Devoir, Jean Charest stated he might expand Bill 101. Expansion could mean constructive amendments to the current law, but not necessarily. However, during a political campaign, leaders often attempt to win over support from undecided voters by making promises they cannot respect once they are in office. I could be wrong, but I believe monsieur Charest did not need to raise the issue, if indeed he raised it. He may have been compelled to address this subject.
The Canada Act of 1982
Moreover, Quebec has yet to sign the “patriated” (from England to Canada)Constitution of Canada or the Canada Act of 1982. One wonders. What is the status of Quebec? Might it be, to some extent, more closely linked to Britain than other provinces? I am being slightly facetious, but not altogether.
I would hate to see French Canadians swallowed up by an English-language majority, but choosing the appropriate means to protect the French language is a thorny matter. Language policy remains a central issue in the forthcoming election.