Treason or Loyalty?

Frontier French in the American Revolution

Author(s): Donald Chaput
Source: Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society (1908-1984) , Nov., 1978, Vol. 71,
No. 4 (Nov., 1978), pp. 242-251
Published by: University of Illinois Press on behalf of the Illinois State Historical
Society

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40191256

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Illinois State Historical Society and University of Illinois Press are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society (1908-
1984)

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Treason or Loyalty?

Frontier French in the American Revolution

DONALD CHAPUT

THE TREATY of peace between

theEngland
French ports in 1761 disgorged men
and France in 1763 ended the French em-
who had spent decades in the West; they
pire in the American Midwest. Never popu- included members of the families of
lated heavily with Frenchmen, the region Beaujeu, Chabert Joncaire, Hertel, Be-
nevertheless witnessed the work of famous lestre, Boucher, La Corne, and Celoron, to
explorers such as La Salle, Marquette, and name a few. Yet France was not to be the last
the Tonty brothers, as well as the origin ofhome for many of those men. A generation
trading and military posts that becameor so in the New World, where they had
major centers: Detroit, New Orleans, andbeen able to work into the higher ranks of
Mackinac. colonial aristocracy, meant more to them
After the defeat at Quebec and Montreal than being at the bottom of the social ladder
in 1759 and 1760, hundreds of French offi- in France. In 1763 the French court gave
cers were returned to the mother country;
several dozen officers permission to return
for some of them, this was a visit to a coun- to Canada "to settle their affairs"; they ar-
try they had never seen. Some members of rived in Quebec, tried to rearrange their
lives, and in a year or so many of them had
the minor nobility, such as the Godefroy de
Linctot family, had been in the New World gone again to the frontier regions where
for generations. The ships that docked at they had served earlier.1
The former French empire in North

Donald Chaput specializes in the history of the French

in North America and has published many articles in Archives des Colonies, D2C, Vol. 48, 1763, con-
American and Canadian journals. He is also tains a list of officers who obtained permission and
contributor-consultant to the Dictionary of Canadian funds to go to the colony to settle their affairs. This,
Biography. After six years as editor of Michigan History,and subsequent citations to French sources, are from
Chaput in 1 972 joined the staff of the Natural History the Public Archives of Canada, Ottawa.
Museum, Los Angeles, where he is senior curator of history. 2 "Luc La Corne de Saint-Luc," Rapport, Archives de

242

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Luc de La Corne de Saint-Luc

America was now owned by Spain and Eng- that Frenchmen were not to be trusted: the
land. In the Spanish zone - roughly the French would wait until the appropriate
western Illinois country down the Missis- event or moment, then try to overthrow
sippi to the Gulf of Mexico- the former their new American masters.
French officers and merchants had few There seems to have been no basis for
such
problems adjusting to the new Spanish re- a belief in a widespread conspiracy.
gime. By 1770 most officials and army
Yet there were enough incidents to feed the
officers in Spanish Louisiana were British rumor mill. One man the British
Frenchmen. This smooth transition was originally distrusted was Luc de La Corne
aided by a common religion and a common
de Saint-Luc, a former French captain and
royal family - the Bourbons, who ruleda in
chevalier de Saint-Louis living in
both France and Spain. Montreal. La Corne had served earlier at
However, in British North America noMackinac and other western posts, and he
such easy transition was possible. France
had much influence among the Indians.2
In the late 1760's and early 1770's, La
and England had had a series of wars, on
the continent and in the colonies, and Corne visited the western posts several
animosity was difficult to shelve. There wastimes on business. Yet the British thought
a continuing belief among British officialshe was up to mischief, trying to break the
Indian link to the British crown. Daniel

la Province de Quebec, 1947-1948 (Quebec: RedemptiClaus wrote to Sir William Johnson in 1773,
Paradis, 1948), pp. 31-36. claiming that La Corne's business trips were
3Claus to Johnson, July 3, 1773^ The Papers of Sircovers for intrigue.3 Meanwhile, La Corne
WilUamJ ohnson (Albany: University of the State of New
York, 1921-1965), XII, 1026-27 (hereinafter cited aswas, in reality, filing accurate, useful re-
Johnson Papers). ports with other British officials. When the

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
244 FRONTIER FRENCH
add to their incomes. By 1763 Chabert was
back in Canada. In 1764 he requested com-
pensation for his seized lands at Niagara,
and at the same time petitioned to move
there. Both requests were denied, and Lord
Halifax warned Governor James Murray
that Chabert "is to be hindered from going
among the Indians, with whom his influ-
ence is hurtful."6
By the late 1760's Daniel Chabert de Jon-
caire settled with his family at Detroit, a post
he had often visited. By that time Sir Wil-
liam Johnson, superintendent of Indian af-
fairs, and a man who had every reason to be
wary of Chabert, apparently had decided to
treat Chabert as a man of honor unless
there was reason to do otherwise. On March
22, 1766, Johnson wrote a favorable peti-
tion regarding Chabert's Niagara losses.
Johnson also wrote to Sir Guy Carleton that
any suspicions of Chabert were groundless.
Crest of the Johnson further suggestedfamily,
Beaujeu that he again be m
dien aristocracy
permitted to engage in trade.7
But generations of suspicion and intrigue
Revolution erupted,
were difficult to dispel. In May, 1768, Gen- he c
British cause and became an officer of vol-
eral Thomas Gage wrote of Chabert's
unteers with the English forces.4 It took "treacherous
La conduct" and "bad Designs"
Come years to be accepted by the British,
because he and his family had served
French New World interests for genera-4Gage to Johnson, Sept. 7, 1772, ibid., VIII, 592;
tions. Gage replied that British officers should not be con-
fused, as there was no question of La Corne's loyalty. A
The Chabert de Joncaire family suffered
strange comment from Gage, who continued to sus-
the same type of British suspicion for more
pect, without proof, the loyalty of many Frenchmen.
than a decade. Louis-Thomas Chabert de See also Hector Cramahe to Earl of Dartmouth, July
15, 177 4,ReportonCanadian Archives, 1890: State Papers
Joncaire had been a problem to the British
(Ottawa: Brown Chamberlain, 1891), pp. 55, 89 (here-
since the early 1700's, when he established
inafter cited as Report on Canadian Archives ). Cramahe,
himself in the Niagara region and becameacting governor in Quebec, reported that La Corne
one of the few Frenchmen able to crack was using his influence with the Indians to keep them
allied to the British.
the strong British-Iroquois alliance. His
5 See article on Louis-Thomas Chabert and family
sons Philippe-Thomas and Daniel also in Dictionary of Canadian Biography, II, 125-27.
•Halifax to Murray, Oct. 27, 1764, Report on Cana-
served in the Iroquois post, thus earning
dian Archives, 1890, p. 10. For other relevant comments
the hatred of Sir William Johnsononand Daniel Chabert during this period, see ibid,, pp. 9,
other British officials.5 14, 21. "The Canada affair" involved dozens of offi-
After the conquest in 1760, Danielcers and merchants, especially those close to Intendant
Francois Bigot, notorious peculator and womanizer.
Chabert was held more than a year in the Many of the canadiens convicted and imprisoned as a
Bastille for being implicated in "the Canadaresult of those hasty trials in Paris were guilty, but
affair." Like dozens of other officers he was proof was lacking in many other cases.
7 For petition, March 22, 1766, see Johnson Papers,
charged with misappropriating funds. All V, 92-93; Johnson to Carleton, June 24, 1767, ibid.,
had taken advantage of their positions toXII, 329-30.

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
DONALD CHAPUT

at the Detroit post, where Chabert's home

was a great resort for the Indians. Gage's
comments were based on malicious gossip;
he admitted that he had no proof of
wrongdoing, but warned nevertheless that
Chabert's "motions will be watched." 8
Meanwhile, Chabert was in financial
trouble. En route to Detroit in 1768, his
boatmen deserted, and upon arriving at
Detroit he learned that British rumors of
his conduct had ruined him. A supply of his
furs had been at the post but were disposed
of because the traders had been told that he
"should never enter that post." He wrote to
Johnson, asking for protection so that his
family would "have a bit of bread." 9
Other traders were active at Detroit, with
or without licenses, but Chabert was careful
to stay within the law. Where there was any SIR GUY CARLETON
question of legality, he would contact
Johnson, in order that authorities would
British officials seemed to have no doubts
know that he was following correct proce-
dures.10 that he was a loyal subject.
Chabert did not have time to recover his When the Revolution spread to the west-
ern
losses or establish a thriving business at De- country, the sons of Daniel Chabert de
troit, for he died there in 1771, leaving a Joncaire not only maintained the family
widow and four children. n By that time theloyalty to the crown but volunteered for the
most hazardous tasks. Philippe and Fran-
gois Chabert were lieutenants in the Indian
Department at Detroit as early as 1 778, and
8 Gage to Earl of Hillsborough, May 15 and Junetraveled as far as Niagara with messages
18, 1768, in Clarence E. Carter, ed., Correspondence and
of expeditions. In 1780 Philippe was
General Thomas Gage (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1931), I, 172-73, 180-81. commissioned a captain of volunteers and
•Chabert to Johnson, Sept. 30, 1768, Johnson Pa-joined the expedition that attacked at Lick-
pers, VI, 416-21. ing River in Ohio.12
10Chabert to Johnson, Oct. 1, 1768, ibia\t VI, 430-
3 1 , enquiring about the possibility of wintering at San-
Louis Lienard de Beaujeu was another
dusky. victim of distorted suspicion. A noble of the
nCarleton's report on the condition of the French highest rank of the canadien aristocracy, De
nobility in Canada, 1767, listed Daniel Chabert as a
former lieutenant, age forty-eight, with four children, Beaujeu was the last French commandant
living in Detroit; Report on Canadian Archives, 1888, p. at Mackinac. He left that post in 1760 and
44. went to Illinois rather than surrender to the
11 For the services of the Chabert de Joncaire family British.13
in the Revolution, see Michigan Pioneer Collections, 9
(1886), 470, 484, and 20 (1892), 225; Public Archives of General Gage became upset in 1768
Canada, Report, 1881, p. 17; M. Agnes Burton, ed., when he learned that Beaujeu, en route
Manuscripts and Recordsfrom the Burton Historical Collec-
tions, 1 (1918), 353. from Illinois to Quebec, had stopped at
13His full name was Louis Lienard de Beaujeu et de Mackinac. Gage reported possible Spanish
Villemonde; his father ( 1 720's) and he had both served
as commandants at Mackinac. See Archives des Col-
intrigue and discussed his order to cut off
communication between Canada and the
onies, D2C, F-803, and Dictionary of Canadian Biog-
raphy, III, 402-03. interior. Such farfetched rumors were not

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Charles-Michel de Lang lade, described by Governor Carleton as a man of "very much use to His Majesty's
affairs"

dismissed in England; Gage was instructed family was of the untitled nobility and be-
to "take the proper Measures to watch the came important merchants in the West.
Conduct, & discover the purposes of Mon- Young Langlade led a force of Ottawa war-
sieur Beaujeu's Journey to Canada."14 riors and French militia in a major attack on
During the American invasion of La Demoiselle's Miami village in Ohio in
Quebec, 1775-1776, Beaujeu volunteered
his services to Governor Guy Carleton and
became an officer in the militia. He was in
14Gage to Hillsborough, Sept. 9, 1769, in Carter,
several skirmishes and was eventually cap-
Correspondence of General Thomas Gage, I, 192-95; and
Hillsborough to Gage, Nov. 15, 1768, ibid., II, 78-79.
tured by the Americans. In such a manner
15 Carleton to George Germain, May 14, 1776, Re-
did another Frenchman convince the port on Canadian Archives, 1890, p. 70.
British of his loyalty.15 16 A lengthy biography of Langlade is in Joseph
The career of the metis LangladeTasse, Les Canadiens de VQuest (Montreal: Cie rim-
is re-
primerie Canadienne, 1895), I. There are dozens of
plete with devotion to the Britishmentions
cause of Langlade, as well as key documents, in the
after 1760. Born at Mackinac in 1729, he volumes of the Wisconsin Historical Collections.
twenty
was christened Charles-Michel Mouet de 1 ' Langlade s marine commissions are in Archives
des Colonies, D2C, F-586.
Moras; like his father Augustin, he adopted
18Gage to Langlade, July 17, 1763, Ayer Collection,
the additional surname of Langlade. TheNewberry Library, Chicago.

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 DONALD CHAPUT 247
1752, satisfied with and who from
temporarily his influence
eclipsing
ence there.16 amongst the Indians . . . may be very
A few years later Langlade was commis- much use to His Majesty's affairs." Yet Cap-
sioned an ensign of marines, and in 1 760 tain Arent de Peyster from Mackinac re-
became a half-pay lieutenant; such a posi- ported to Carleton that Langlade "wants
tion was unusual in New France for a. metis. looking after; he is strictly honest, but re-
In the French and Indian War he led sev- tains all the French customs, and can refuse
eral parties of Mackinac Indians to aid inIndians nothing they ask."20
the
the defense of Quebec and Montreal. At the The pressures on frontier Frenchmen
time of the conquest, Governor Pierre
were far different from those on the cana-
Francois Rigaud Vaudreuil placed dien aristocracy in Quebec proper. A dec-
Langlade temporarily in charge of Mac-ade of French dissatisfaction with British
kinac, with instructions to turn over the rule led to the Quebec Act of 1774, which
post to the British.17 was a major British gesture towards answer-
During the Indian massacre of the ing demands of the French clergy and no-
British garrison at Mackinac in 1763,bility. The Catholic church was assured its
Langlade, at great personal risk, was able torights - including tithes - and French civil
save several officers, as well as the merchant law was reinstituted. The act also upheld
Alexander Henry. General Gage later the seigneurial system, thus placating the
wrote a personal letter of thanks tonobility and other large landowners.
Langlade for his efforts.18 Therefore, when the Revolution began
During the Revolutionary War, Langladetwo years later, the French in Canada, in
and his nephew Charles Gautier de Vier-particular the clergy and nobility, were
ville were officers in the British Indian De-
closely allied to the British crown. When
partment, Langlade as a captain. Seeminglythreatened by an American "rebel" inva-
ubiquitous, Langlade led Indians to aid insion, the nobility turned out almost to a man
the defense of Montreal in 1776, of Vin- to maintain British authority. The leaders
cennes in 1778, and of the Illinois coun- in those military affairs were Francois-
try in 1779-1780. In several actions, Marie Picote de Belestre, Luc de La Corne
Langlade's mixed force of Indians and Saint-Luc, and dozens of other former
militia was victorious.19 French officers who, prior to 1760, had
The official British attitude towards
been lifelong enemies of the British.21
Aside from the canadiens of Quebec,
Langlade was one of appreciation, and cau-
there
tion. Sir Guy Carleton called Langlade a were thousands of Frenchmen in the
"man I have had reason to be very much
Ohio Valley, the Great Lakes region, and
the entire Mississippi River basin. There is
no generalization that can explain the roles
of those Frenchmen during the American
Revolution. It does appear, however, that
19 For some primary sources relating to Langlade in in
those portions of North America where
the Revolution, see Wisconsin Historical Collections, 18
British rule was firm, and where the
(1 908), 355-56, and 8 (1879), 220-2 1 ; Michigan Pioneer
Collections, 8 (1886), 466-67, and 10 (1886), 270.Quebec Act was known and accepted,
"Carleton to Col. John Caldwell, Oct. 6, 1776,
Frenchmen overwhelmingly favored the
Michigan Pioneer Collections, 10(1886),270; DePeyster
British.
to Carleton, June 6, 1777, Report on Canadian Archives,
1890, pp. 84-85. Detroit, Mackinac, and Green Bay were
important posts in the British economic or-
21 These few comments on the impact of the Quebec
Act are based on Fernand Ouellet,// wtot'r* Economique
bit, and in most cases the Frenchmen there
et Social du Quebec, 1760-1850 (Montreal: Fides, 1966),
volunteered
pp. 1 16-24; and Mason Wade, The French Canadians, for military service against the
1760-1967 (Toronto: Macmillan, 1968), I, 63-66.
American rebels. British regulars at Detroit

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 248 FRONTIER FRENCH

were few, many but Frenchmen;

the he was local
the great- m
sive and were used even for offensivegrandson of Pierre Boucher, the first cana-
dien ennobled by King Louis XIV.
forays. The Chaberts were sent to Niagara;
the DeQuindre brothers led expeditions Aside from Clark, the most romantic fig-
ure in the West during the Revolution was
south to Kentucky and west to Lake Michi-
Daniel-Maurice Godefroy de Linctot. He
gan. The roll of the British Detroit militia
had been commissioned an ensign of
read like a French roster: DeQuindre,
French marines in 1759, and after the con-
Chabert Joncaire, LaMothe, Navarre,
Chapoton, Baby, and so on.22 quest was sent to France. Linctot returned
to Canada and entered the trade near
At Mackinac and Green Bay, Langlade
Prairie du Chien and in the Illinois coun-
and his nephew Gautier were very effective
in controlling British interests in thetry.25
upper Linctot entered American service in
early to
and western Great Lakes; they even tried 1779, when he raised a troop of horse
extend British influence towards St. Louis. soldiers at Cahokia for an abortive attack on
Yet there was a vast land claimed by Detroit. For the next few years Linctot
the British but inhabited by thousands of traveled in the Illinois country, east to Fort
Frenchmen whose allegiance was in fluxDuquesne, south to Virginia. He was an
during most of the Revolution. The areaofficial American agent, charged with keep-
stretched roughly between the Ohio River, ing the Indians from dealing with the
the Great Lakes, and the Mississippi River.British. He was so effective that Major De
Here, there was little reason for FrenchmenPeyster sent the following instructions to
to be impressed with British authority. A the Ohio Indians in 1781: "Send me that
few Frenchmen took up the British cause,little babbling Frenchman named Monsieur
and some went west into Spanish domain; Linctot, he who poisons your ears."26
but the bulk of Frenchmen welcomed and Linctot enjoyed a pleasant visit with offi-
joined the American rebels. cials in Virginia in 1780, including his
The adventures of George Rogers Clark former family friend the Marquis de Vaud-
in the Revolution involved dozens of reuil. By that time France had entered the
Frenchmen, most of them working wareffec-
against the English, and Vaudreuil en-
couraged
tively for the Americans. Father Pierre Linctot to arouse the frontier
Gibault has become somewhat of a legend
in the Illinois country for his efforts "in per-
There is no source in which to follow those men
suading other Frenchmen to aid the
during the Revolution, though there are dozens of
Americans. Gabriel Cerre of Kaskaskia, useful documents in the forty volumes of the Af khigan
Pioneer Collections. For example, two documents of
who went out of his way to supply Clark and 1778 for Detroit list five members of the DeQuindre
his troops with food and clothing, was typi- family serving as officers in the Indian Department;
cal of the frontier merchants.23 ibid, 8 (1886), 470, 485.
"Cerre to Clarkjuly 1 1 , 1778, in American Historical
Another Frenchman of note was
Review, 8 (1903), 498-500; James Alton James, ed.,
Timothe Boucher de Montbrun, who George first
Rogers Clark Papers, 1771-1781, Collections of
served as a militia lieutenant at the Illinois State Historical Library, VoL 8 (Spring-
Vincennes,
field: Illinois State Historical Library, 1912), pp. 228-
and later, as deputy county lieutenant
29, 236-37. of
Illinois, led several expeditions 24against
The name Montbrun is now the standard usage in
Canadian historical writing. See Dictionary of Canadian
marauding Indians and British forces.
Biography, III, 82, and Kathryn De Monbreun
Clark's assistant, Lieutenant Colonel John
Whitefort, A Genealogy and History of Jacques Timothe
Montgomery, referred to Boucher
Boucher Sieur de de
Monbreun and His Ancestors and Descen-

Montbrun as a "frend to the Cause of dants (Ann Arbor, Mich.: Edwards Brothers, 1939).
America."24 Boucher was a member of the Boucher was also related by marriage to Father
Gibault; he was accompanied by Boucher from
colonial elite and was able to influence Quebec to the Illinois country in 1768; George Pare

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Crests of the Boucher and Blainville families

French against the British. For his efforts Thus, Godefroy de Linctot and Boucher
and victories, Linctot was appointed a de Montbrun were acknowledged leaders
major of the troops by Governor Thomas of the French of mid- America during the
Jefferson of Virginia, in February of Revolution. They were out of the British
1780.27 trade orbit and had little sense of loyalty to
the crown. They may have been inspired by
France's decision to join the American
and M. M. Quaife, "St. Joseph Baptismal Register," cause, but by that time most Frenchmen on
Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 13 (1926-1927), the frontier had already made such deci-
234-35. For Boucher at Vincennes, see Michigan sions. Both Linctot and Montbrun held im-
Pioneer Collections, 9 (1886), 475; for his Illinois ser-
vices, see Clarence Walworth Alvord, ed, Kaskaskia peccable credentials: they were canadien
Records, 1778-1790, Collections of the Illinois State nobles and members of the leading French
Historical Library, VoL 5 (Springfield: Illinois State military and merchant families. Their deci-
Historical Library, 1909), pp. 322-23, 355-57.
25 His commission is in Archives des Colonies, D2C, sion to join the American cause must have
VoL 58, 39; his time in France is covered in ibid., D2C, had a major impact on other frontier
VoL 48, "1762" and "1763." Frenchmen.
28De Peyster's letter of April 12, 1781, in Louise
Phelps Kellogg, ed. , Frontier Retreat on the Upper Ohio, The only exception in the Midwest to the
1779-1781 (Madison: State Historical Society of Wis- new allegiance was Philippe-Francois Rastel
consin, 1917), p. 375. de Rocheblave, who ended his career as a
27 For an anti-Linctot letter by a British official, French officer at Fort de Chartres in Illinois
which also mentions Linctot's Virginia activities, see
Philippe de Rocheblave to Gov. Haldimand, Sept. 9, in 1763, moved across the Mississippi, en-
1780, Kaskaskia Records, pp. 177-78. Jefferson's com- tered Spanish service, and for the next few
mission to Linctot is printed in Julian P. Boyd, ed.,The
Papers of Thomas Jefferson, III (Princeton, N.J.: years served as commandant at Ste
Princeton University Press, 1951), p. 296. Genevieve. For reasons yet unknown,

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FRONTIER FRENCH

This was another family of colonial el

Pierre-Joseph was a major in the Fr
and Indian War, the highest ranking of
colonial soldier in New France.30
In July, 1777, Jean-Baptiste Celoron was
appointed commandant of the British post
at Ouiatanon, in modern Indiana. He
stayed there for most of 1778, with orders
to destroy the cannons at Vincennes to
thwart Clark's advance. He was also in
charge of Indian affairs in southern In-
diana.31
Most of the Celoron family, though, had
moved to France, where sentiments were
strong for the Americans. Jean-Baptiste
had a brother in France, Paul-Louis, who
came to America in 1778 as a captain in
Casimir Pulaski's Legion. It is not known
what communications the brothers ex-
changed, but word traveled through the
frontier that British officer Jean-Baptiste
Phillippe-Franqois Rastel de Rocheblave
Celoron had a brother serving as an officer
with the Americans.32

Rocheblave again changed sides a few years In November, 1778, the commandant at
later and became a loyal subject of the
British in Illinois.28
When the Revolution began, Rocheblave
maintained that loyalty and was entrusted
by British officials in Canada with control
over British Illinois, though he never re-
28 The Rocheblave family has yet to have a biog-
ceived the title of governor. With no troops,
raphy. Three sons of Jean-Joseph de Rastel de
an unreliable militia, and the surrounding Rocheblave served as French officers in Louisiana.
Frenchmen eager to welcome the Ameri- The best available summary, which includes some
primary sources, is in Percy J. Robinson, Toronto Dur-
cans, Rocheblave was helpless. When ing the French Regime: A History of the Toronto Region from
George Rogers Clark captured Kaskaskia Brul'e to Simcoe, 1617-1793 (Toronto: Ryerson Press,
on July 4, 1778, Rocheblave was taken pris- 1933), Appendix. See also Desire Girouard, "La
Famille de Rocheblave," Bulletin des Recherches His-
oner. He was practically without support on
torique, 4 (1898), 357-59. One possible reason for
the frontier. He was taken to Virginia, but Rocheblave's staying out of French influence may be
eventually escaped and made his way to the case of his brother, who in the late 1750's in French

Quebec. After the war, he became a promi- Louisiana was imprisoned because of differences with
Governor Kerlerec; see E. Fabre Surveyer, "The
nent legislator in Canada.29 Rocheblaves in Colonial Louisiana," Louisiana Histori-
There were a few cases of confused fam- cal Quarterly, 18 (1935), 332-45.
ily loyalties in the Revolution. An interest- ZJ*Much of Rocheblaves Quebec correspondence
during the Revolution is abstracted in Report on Cana-
ing example is that of Jean-Baptiste Celo- dian Archives, 1890; see especially pp. 91, 93-96, 106-
ron of Detroit. His father was Pierre-Joseph09.
Celoron de Blainville, leader of the famous 30 A good article on Pierre-Joseph is in Dictionary of
Canadian Biography, III, 99-100.
expedition down the Ohio in 1749 and 31 Hamilton to Carleton, July 3, 1777, Report on
commandant of Detroit in the early 1750's.Canadian Archives, 1890, p. 93; Hamilton to Carleton,

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 DONALD CHAPUT 251
Detroit wrote to Governor Frederick Hal- cote de Belestre, leader of the French
dimand in Quebec that Celoron had a militia that played a crucial role in repelling
brother in American service and no longer the American invasion of Quebec in 1776.34
could be trusted. It was believed that Celo- This is a clear example of the power of the
ron was intentionally delaying a planned Quebec Act, which bound the canadien aris-
British offensive against Clark. The com- tocracy of Canada to the British, yet had no
mandant may have had proof, as he re- impact on relatives living in the Midwest or
ported: "Double pay I take it has been hisSpanish Louisiana.
seducer." Soon thereafter, Jean-BaptisteOn the North American continent, then,
officially quit the British forces in order during
to the Revolution, Frenchmen acted in
join the rebel cause openly.33 their own interests, as was to be expected.
Among the dozens of onetime French
Those in Quebec proper, encouraged by
officers in the service of Spain in Louisiana
British acknowledgement of canadien cul-
ture by the Quebec Act of 1774, responded
there was no hint of disloyalty or treachery.
Spain, ever anti-British, favored the by coming to the defense of the crown. The
Americans - a policy consistent from New American rebels threatened the newly won
Orleans up into Spanish Illinois. authority and social status of the canadien
In the British attack on St. Louis in 1780,
elite. Some of this attitude was felt even at
one of the Spanish heroes was Francois- northern British frontier posts such as De-
Louis Picote de Belestre, a former French troit and Mackinac, where Frenchmen def-
officer. In the same year, his son was serv- initely favored the British.
ing as a cadet with the Spanish forces attack- In Spanish North America, hundreds of
ing the British at Pensacola. Yet the father former French officers and merchants
of Francois-Louis was Francois-Marie Pi-
were loyal subjects to the King of Spain,
supporting the American rebels and fend-
ing off the few British probes in Spanish
Illinois. From St. Louis to Natchez and Pen-
sacola, whenever the British threatened
militarily, former French officers carried
out the requests of Spanish authorities.
Aug. 8, 11, 1778, ibid., 1881 , p. 17; roster of Ouiata-It was in the undigested part of the conti-
non, Sept., 177 '8 Michigan Pioneer Collections ,9 (1886),
470. nent, the Ohio-Mississippi country, that the
32 See a series of three articles, P.-G. Roy, "La Famille Frenchmen had a true choice. Since no
Celoron de Blainville," Bulletin des Recherches His-
group had strong military-political control,
torique, 15 (1909), pp. 302-14, 329-50, 360-76. Paul-
Louis' services are summarized in Ludovic Guy Marie the region offered an ideological choice for
du Bessey de Contenson, La Societe des Cincinnati de most Frenchmen. Encouraged and led by
France et la Guerre d'Amerique, 1778-1783 (Paris: A. such members of the aristocracy as Gode-
Picard, 1934), p. 151. He later joined French service in
the Caribbean, retiring in 1791. froy de Linctot and Boucher de Montbrun,
33 Quotation from Henry Hamilton to Haldimand, most Frenchmen in mid-America joined
Nov. 1, 1778, Wisconsin Historical Collections, 11 (1888), the American cause.
18 1 ; see also Pierre-Georges Roy, "La Famille Celoron
de Blainville," Bulletin des Recherches Historique, 15 From Quebec to Illinois and down to
(1909), 366. New Orleans, Frenchmen were heavily in-
34There is no single source for this widespread fam- volved in the Revolution, but the positions
ily, but most of the vital statistics in the following are
accurate: Cyprien Tanguay, Dictionnaire Genealogique they took were no longer dictated by or
des Families Canadiennes (Montreal: Eusebe Senecal & related to the wishes of the King of France.
Fils, 1889), VI, 353. For 1780 events, see Abraham The Frenchmen had been cut adrift, and
Nasatir, "St. Louis during the British Attack of 1780,"
New Spain and the Anglo-American West (Los Angeles: they made their decisions according to their
Privately printed, 1932), I, 259-61. new situations.

This content downloaded from

206.172.40.217 on Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:36:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms