Canada by the reports of Talon and Frontenac. These three men were
wholly devoted to the interests of France as well as to those of the
colony, but they judged things only from a purely human point of view.
"I see," Colbert wrote in 1677 to Commissioner Duchesneau, "that the
Count de Frontenac is of the opinion that the trade with the savages in
drinks, called in that country intoxicating, does not cause the great
and terrible evils to which Mgr. de Québec takes exception, and even
that it is necessary for commerce; and I see that you are of an opinion
contrary to this. In this matter, before taking sides with the bishop,
you should enquire very exactly as to the number of murders,
assassinations, cases of arson, and other excesses caused by brandy ...
and send me the proof of this. If these deeds had been continual, His
Majesty would have issued a most severe and vigorous prohibition to all
his subjects against engaging in this traffic. But, in the absence of
this proof, and seeing, moreover, the contrary in the evidence and
reports of those that have been longest in this country, it is not just,
and the general policy of a state opposes in this the feelings of a
bishop who, to prevent the abuses that a small number of private
individuals may make of a thing good in itself, wishes to abolish trade
in an article which greatly serves to attract commerce, and the savages
themselves, to the orthodox Christians." Thus M. Dudouyt could not but
fail in his mission, and he wrote to Mgr. de Laval that Colbert, while
recognizing very frankly the devotion of the bishop and the
missionaries, believed that they exaggerated the fatal results of the
traffic. The zealous collaborator of the Bishop of Quebec at the same
time urged the prelate to suspend the spiritual penalties till then
imposed upon the traders, in order to deprive the minister of every
motive of bitterness against the clergy.

The bishop admitted the wisdom of this counsel, which he followed, and