Devoe-deVaux…AN ACADIAN FAMILY, BEAUBASSIN
TO BRAS D’OR
deVaux in
France
The stream is brightest at
its spring, / And blood is not like wine; /
Nor honoured less than he who
heirs/ Is he who founds a line
JOHN GREENLEAF WHITTIER
Without exception
genealogical scholars agree that Michel came to Acadia directly from France and
my research indicates no known relationship with members of those of the name
who came to New France some decades before Michel and settled in what is now
Quebec Province. I place our progenitor’s arrival around 1691 and have reason
to believe he was a soldier relieved from duty in the French army while in
Acadia. The first record of his presence is in the 1698 census of Beaubassin
where he is found with wife, family, and holdings, the data suggesting his
arrival at that place around 1692. He is listed as “Michel DeVaux” in that census.
No information thus far known to be extant provides us with his place of origin
in France. In later records he is referred to as “Michel DeVaux dit Dauphiné”
and in at least one census as simply “Dauphiné”. This is significant, for
Dauphiné was the name of one of the provinces of France at the time, and I have
been led to understand that soldiers were required to adopt, as a “dit” (also
known as) name, the name of the province from which they came. This is hardly
valid evidence of his place of origin, and given the absence of a marriage
record, we are likely never to establish his place of birth nor his parentage.
deVaux DeVaux DeVau Deveau DeVeaux Deveaux DesVaux Desveaux DeVoe Devoe
The
very first deVaux is surely lost in the mists of time, but the name “Vaux”
appears as early as the 8th century in France. The French expression
“par monts et par vaux” (up hill and down dale), extant today, contains the
meaning and suggests the origin, fitting the most common pattern of many of the
early surnames in that it is topographically derived. The French word “vaux” is
the ancient plural of “val” which means narrow valley or dale. The prefix “de”
was used almost exclusively with names which derived of geographical features.
The phonology of the name, unfortunately, is tolerant of many spellings in both
English and French, albeit it is rarely mispronounced. In older times spelling
was a matter of some indifference and not alone with respect to surnames. As a
result we now see the descendants of one man using, as is the case with of this
family name, close to fifty variations if one takes into consideration plurals,
capitalization, French and anglicized versions, many of which never existed
across the Atlantic. Like most folks of the time many Acadians were not
literate, thus the guesses of the scribes (many perhaps not overly literate
themselves) through the generations were both varied and creative.
As
indicated, it is a very old name, predating the Norman Conquest (which in
addition to other things brought surnames to
England), thus one of the earliest of surnames. It is said that a Robert
deVaux (sic) made the voyage from Normandy to England in 1066. Robert was the
son of Harold deVaux, Lord of Vaux of Normandy. The son remained in England,
thus bringing the name to that country. In France, between 1200 and 1600, no
fewer than fifteen coats of arms existed with the name deVaux, some few with
variants such as “de la Vaux” and “desVaux” but none with an “eau” or “eaux”
endings and the spelling “Deveau” had yet to be invented. “Gueles a lion
passant d’argent” describes the arms of deVaux, Province of Dauphiné. It would
be as difficult to dismiss the possibility of a shared heritage as it would be
to claim it, and it is known that many of the socially and economically lesser
folks assumed the names of their overseers in time We likely will never
know…and likely never really care. The Acadian deVaux family did the name no
less honour than did a noble who bore it on his shield in battle. While as I
have said earlier, no Acadian family has legitimate title to a coat of arms, I
have used as a decorative icon (in my book and on this site) the armorial
ascribed to the deVaux family of the Province of Dauphiné.
With
respect to the derivation of surnames, I quote from the Encyclopaedia
Britannica (The prestigious Eleventh Edition): “Topographically derived
surnames are the names most often associated with the prefix ‘de’ or its plural
‘des,’ meaning ‘of’ such and such a place. The noble and landowner was called
‘of’ such a place, while the humbler man was called not ‘of’ but ‘at’ such a
place as in the name ‘Attewell,’ or merely by the local name without the
prefix. The ‘de’ might also indicate merely the place of a person’s birth or
residence; it was no proof of noblesse.” There is no doubt that the
original form of the name being discussed began with “de” and not an upper-case
“D” and when the lower-case was dropped
(as it was not in my ancestor d’Entremont’s name) that is what led to
the subsequent misspellings…who would suppose that a man, soldier, farmer,
tradesman, who signed his name with an “X”, would be entitled to a “de” prefix?
Perhaps the probably literate d’Entremont corrected any scribe who took liberties
with the spelling of his name…or wrote it himself.
While
topographical features have given names to many families, it does not follow,
as some erroneously believe, that a people who came (for example) from a valley
area came from a place name so described. It is in fact the reverse,
for a study of place names indicates that such names generally derive from the
surnames of prominent early settlers or variations/derivatives of those names,
though a few are topographical in origin. Place names in France which carry the
name “Vaux” were likely named after royal families who bore the name from
earlier times, not because of a topographical feature nearby. Place names also
originate from the names of respected patriots (Washington, New Hampshire being
the first municipality to honor the first president of the United States of
America). It also is common for names to be selected by officials in
recognition of a prominent individual in a “mother” country, Halifax, and
Sydney come to mind in Nova Scotia…but many, many more towns are named for
early settlers in that province albeit their names may have derived from
a topographical feature, an occupation, or characteristic in the distant past;
but, do not get the cart before the horse. In fine, surnames do not
derive from place names.
The
“French” spelling that appears to have survived more than any other is the
misspelling “Deveau” a creation of later French priests (literate, but hardly
scholars of the language) who apparently were not familiar with the old plural
of “valleys” or indeed aware of the significance of the lower-case prefix “de”
in French surnames. The word “veau” translates “calf” but few surnames derive
from domestic animals as compared with topography. The earlier French priests,
and in fact the later English-speaking priests (and other English speaking
scribes) used the “aux” or at least “au” ending. When Michel and one of his
sons “signed” an Oath in 1729 their names were written “DeVaux” by the person
making the list; When my g-g-g-grandfather Joseph was given a land lease on
Isle Madame in the early 1800s it reads “Jos. DeVaux” on the official
documents. Members of the family who are found in France after the1858
Deportation (Paul, Genevieve, Vincent and Marie, etc.) are found in the
registers in that country with the “aux” ending. While “deVeau” might make
sense, the “Deveau” (all lower-case) makes none and this creative form was
likely unknown across the Atlantic.
Historian
Genevieve Massignon uses the “aux” ending in her Anciennes Graphies as
the oldest form as does Duzat’s dictionary of surnames. Godbout uses “au”, as
does Rider in his Acadian Church Records. Gaudet, Arsenault, and White
use the “Deveau” form, to them convenience, standardization, or whatever,
apparently more significant than historical accuracy with respect to origin.
As
has been said, all spelling was a matter of some indifference in the past, thus
why is the original spelling significant? If one were to travel to France to
search this surname it would be wise to ignore the form which has become the
“standard” in hands of some scribes, family researchers, and genealogists
(albeit some of the last at least provide “alternate” spellings) and revert to
the original French form(s).
The
two most common anglicized versions are “Devoe” and “DeVoe” in the U.S. and Canada.
There
are in North America at least four distinctly identifiable sources of the name.
The Acadian family, with but one progenitor, arrived late in the 17th
century, while another family not identified as having any relationship to the
first, arrived in the Quebec area some decades earlier. Two Huguenots of the
name arrived in the (now) New York City area in the 17th century as
well. There is no evidence of any close relationship to either of the first two
family arrivals in Canada. The fourth group bearing the name in the U.S. are
Negroes originally from the southeastern states, being former slaves who took
the name of their Huguenot holders.
I am the original author of the above thesis and text on the family
name, first promulgated in 1974 and sent to a number of distant cousins.
One, (ACGS # 1022), without my consent
or knowledge, submitted a plagiarized (thesis and much text) version of it to a
genealogical society for publication. It appeared on pp 25-31, Vol. V, #2,
August 1979 issue of the American-Canadian Genealogist. I
discovered the theft in 1999. I have documentation to support this allegation
and submitted it to the American-Canadian Genealogical Society. No response was
received. In Vol. VI, #1 February 1980 in a Part II article (p25>), he
begins the listing of a number of DeVaux generations which evolves into the
descendants of Jacques, son of Michel. He names one J. Alphonse Deveau and a Marie-Jeanette
Dinwoodie as his guides in this endeavor and he did not have the benefit of my
research here. There are no fewer than a dozen or more significant errors in
the first two generations: Wrong parents and date of birth for Marie-Magdeleine
Martin, wrong number of wives for Guyon Chiasson, wrong wife for Pierre DeVaux,
wrong parents for Charlemagne DeVaux, wrong mother for Joseph son of
Charlemagne, etc. I am not in a position to judge the work on subsequent
generations (those who settled in southwestern Nova Scotia) but if he relied on
the same individuals for having revealed what he called “new sources I did not
know existed” his work on further generations should be as suspect as for the
first two. Having based my correct conclusions on nothing but primary sources,
it is obvious that neither he nor those he consulted had done so, doubtless
relying much on Arsenault and Gaudet; the work of both seriously flawed with
respect to this Acadian family. JBD
GENERATION ONE
Surnames associated with this generation: Cassie Chiasson
Gaudet Girouard Godin
Henry LaFleur Martin
Mignot Mirande Moreau
Mouton Poirier Poitier When this family lineage link is completed, there will be at the end a
listing of all Acadian surnames associated with my research. (The Martin
and LaFleur names here listed are not of Acadian origin).
I
Michel, Born ca. 1663, France, parents and location unknown,
m. Marie-Magdeleine Martin, dau. of Pierre and Joachine LaFleur, probably at
Beaubassin, Acadia, ca. 1693. Marie was b./bap. 29 JUN 1666 at Sillery, Quebec
(Province), and was the widowed second wife of Guyon Chiasson. Michel was the
progenitor of all Acadians who bear this surname including other orthographic
forms of it. He is referred to in some records as Michel DeVaux dit
Dauphiné or simply as Dauphiné. As has been this dit name may hold a clue as to
his origins in France. He is first found in Acadia in the 1698 census of
Beaubassin where his age is given as 35, his wife Marie’s as 35 as well (she
would be 32). Children in this census are listed as: Angélique, 14; Marie, 7;
Anne, 6; Pierre, 4; and Magdeleine, 3 mos., the first three born of
Marie-Magdeleine and Guyon Chiasson, the last two of Marie and Michel.
Marie-Magdeleine “Mitron” (Martin) is listed as a widow at Beaubassin in 1693,
Anne apparently not yet born, thus she could have been with child when she and
Michel married, he likely assuming other holdings of Guyon as well. The 1698
census indicates that the family owned 12 cows, 6 sheep, 1 pig, had 2 ½ acres
under cultivation, 1 fruit tree, no guns. The population of Beaubassin at the
time, 178.
Marie-Magdeleine Martin
was not descended of the Acadian Martin family, but rather from a Quebec family
of that name, she “becoming” an Acadian by virtue of her marriage to Guyon
Chiasson who had lived in Acadia prior to his second marriage. Marie’s father
Pierre, b. ca.1643 was the son of Louis and Sebastienne Coutande of Ste-Verge,
Poitiers, Poitou, France and her mother Joachine, b. ca.1642 was the dau. of
Charles and Jeanne Gachet of La Châtaigneraie, Luçon Poitou, France; she came
to New France as a Filles du Roi. They were m. 11 FEB 1664 at Sillery.
Pierre d. 9 OCT 1713 at St-Augustin, Joachine d. 10 FEB1698 at the same place.
The census of 1700 lists
Michel as having family, 11 cows, 11 sheep, and ten acres under cultivation; a year
later 15 cows, 11 sheep, and 1 pig. The recensements of 1707 lists him
simply as Dauphiné and records his livestock as 10 cows, 12 sheep, and 10 pigs.
The last census for that period was taken in 1714 and simply lists he, his
wife, and children Pierre, Jean, Jacques, Cècile, and Augustin, his
step-children apparently having moved on. The population of Beaubassin was now
about 350 and livestock numbers for cows, sheep and pigs were close to 1,000
each. Pierre, the first born Acadian DeVaux, was a lad of 20.
The British did not
continue the French practice of periodic census reports but fortunately a
stroke of serendipity moved into the picture in that some church registers of
the period are extant, covering a number of years after 1714. We know that Michel
was still alive in 1729, for in that year he and his son Pierre signed (with an
“X” as did most on the list) an Oath of Allegiance at Beaubassin. “Je
promets et jure sincèrement que je serai fidèle et obéirai véritablemant à
Majesté Le Roy George Second. Ainsi Dieu me soit en aide” which translates
“I promise and sincerely swear that I will remain faithful and will truly obey
His Majesty King George II. So help me God.” The officer Governor Armstrong
sent to Beaubassin for the administration of this oath gave the Acadians many
concessions in writing (but not contained in the corpus of the oath) including
promises that they would not have to fight against the French or Indians and
would have the right to practice their Roman Catholic faith. At Annapolis Royal
the British Council declared the oath null and void. This signing of the oath
by Michel and Pierre is evidence that they were living under British rule, thus
living in Beaubassin proper and not across the Missaguash in French territory
at that time. Michel was 64 years of age.
How long did Michel and
Marie-Magdeleine Martin live? Extant burial records from the church registers
at Beaubassin from 1712 to 1723 include neither Michel nor his wife. A lacuna
exists in those records from 1724 to 1732, again from 1732 to 1735, and a third
from 1740 to 1748. We know Michel was alive in 1729, and the absence of Marie
from the death records through 1723 suggests she was alive through that period.
One or two of these lacunas likely integrate the time their deaths, and since
they were not found as refugees across the Missaguash after the destruction of
Beaubassin in 1750 (see below) it is likely they died prior to that date and
are buried near the site of the last Acadian church.
The children of Michel
and Marie:
1. Pierre, b. ca. 1694. See Pierre II below.
2. Magdeleine, b. ca. 1698. In 1707 she would be 9 years of age,
one of the two “girls under 12” listed in that census and by the next, in 1714,
she would be 16 but is not listed with the family; marriage at that age was not
uncommon. A Madeleine “Devaud” appears in the registers at Beaubassin as
godmother to Pierre’s (above) dau. Magdeleine 20 JUN 1732; the godfather is a
Jean Mouton. This Jean is likely the son of Sr. Jean Mouton and Marie Girouard
and he was married to Marguerite Poirier (Louis and Cécile Mignot) 19 JAN 1734
at Beaubassin. Had the godmother been Pierre’s mother her surname would have
been given as Martin. No further information on Magdeleine.
3. Jacques, b. ca. 1699 (twin) at Beaubassin, m. 17 OCT 1719
Marie-Anne Poitier, dau. of Jean and Anne Poirier, at Beaubassin. Their
children: Michel 1721; Pierre 1723; Jacques 1726; Jean 1727; Joseph 1730; Marie
1732; Anne 1736; Louis 1740; Louise-Felicite 1744; and Jean-Jacques 1745. This
family was at Île
Saint-Jean as early as 1728 and many of the descendants of Jacques are
those who settled along the St. Mary’s Bay area of southwestern Nova Scotia
upon their return to that province in the latter part of the 18th
century. Jacque’s son Joseph was one of the two “Deveaus” among the founders of
Cheticamp, Cape Breton. According to one record Jacques died before 12 AUG
1760.
4. Jean, b. 1699 (twin) at Beaubassin, m. ca. 1725 Cécile
Cassie, dau. of Pierre and Marie-Thérèse Mirande. He is found in New York in
1763, likely deported in 1755 given that location. Their children: Marguerite
1726; Pierre 1727; Paul 5 JUN 1732; Michel 1740; Marie-Joseph 7 DEC 1741;
Grégoire 23 NOV 1743; Rosalie 25 MAR 1746 and Felix 7 JUN 1748. Jean’s sons
Pierre and Michel are at Montreal as early as 1762 and are at least two of the
progenitors of the Acadian DeVaux families in that province. This Pierre’s son
Pierre was married in St., Louis 18 AUG 1788 to Marie Moreau. The elder
Pierre’s brother-in-law, Pierre Gaudet, was with him in Montreal in 1762. The
families are found at Batiscan in 1784 and 1772.
5. Cécile, b. ca. 1701 at Beaubassin, m. ca. 1720 Germain
Henry, son of Robert and Marie-Magdeleine Godin at Cobequid. Deported from Île
Saint-Jean, she arrived at Saint-Malo, France in 1758 ; d. bur. at Saint-Servan
in that country. 11/12 FEB 1759. age 58.
6. Augustin, b. ca. 1710 at Beaubassin, m. ca. 1732 Marie
Caissie, dau. of Pierre and Marie-Thérèse Mirande. Their children:
Marie-Josephe 1733; Michel 1742; Joseph 1744; Marie-Josephe 1746. n.f.i.
BEAUBASSIN
This place called Beaubassin
was located just west of what is now Amherst, Nova Scotia. From the time Michel
arrived and the three or four decades which followed, it took on a broader
meaning in that many of the settlements to the west, across the Missaguash
River, became Beaubassin the parish, the community. After the Treaty of Utrecht
in 1713, the territory to the west of that river remained French, yet in many
ways retained its one community characteristics, the strong ties of Acadian
families and the common parish making
it such. Beaubassin had its beginnings when our ancestor Jacques Bourgeois, a
surgeon and farmer from Port Royal observed the marshes and rich adjoining
uplands and he and a number of his relatives removed to that place. In 1676 the
governor of New France created a new seigneury on the Chignecto Isthmus near
the settlement known as Bourgeois Ville. Called Beaubssin, the area consisted
of some 1,000 square miles extending northwest from what is now Springhill,
Nova Scotia to Dorchester, New Brunswick and thence northeast to the coast of
the Northumberland Strait at Shemogue, New Brunswick, thence southwest to its
beginning at Springhill. This seigneury was granted to Michel LeNeuf, Sieur De
La Vallière who arrived from the west with a number of French Canadians,
establishing himself on a mound of upland consisting of several hundred acres,
rising from the marshes and located just across the Missaguash River from the
Acadian settlement previously mentioned. The area was soon dyked but before
that time the flood tides created an island, thus it became known as La
Vallière Isle, now called Tongs Island.
By 1686 the population
was 127 and when our Michel arrived, around 1692, it was but119 souls, then
nearly doubled within a decade. A parish was established here as early as 1679,
the Church of Notre Dame De Bons Secours, but extant registers are from that year only until 1686, the
records from then until 1712 apparently lost. The first two churches were
located on LaVallière Isle, probably as a concession (or demand) of the Seigneur,
albeit the population center was on the east side of the Missaguash. The marshy
lands near that Isle being unsuitable, the cemetery was located across the
river as well, funerals thus had to coincide with the low tide of the Missaguash.
After the destruction of the first two churches in British raids, a third and
final church was built on the ridge of land near that cemetery. This church was
named Our Lady of the Assumption, it being burned to the ground under the
direction of Le Loutre, the “Black Priest” (of which more to come) and its site
the location of the British Fort Lawrence. Late in the 19th century
when the railroad from Amherst west was being built, it cut through that ridge,
disturbing a portion of the unidentified Acadian burial ground; Michel and his
wife and very possibly their son Pierre are (were) likely buried there. Today
it remains publicly unidentified, though the owners (Trenholm Farm) know of the
undisturbed portion and afford it a degree of respect. While some burial
records from this place are extant, a lacuna exists in those documents that
survived and my search of them revealed no DeVaux names, albeit other records
suggest Michel and Marie-Magdeleine and their son Pierre had died before the
final destruction of Beaubassin in 1750.
While Beaubassin enjoyed
plenty in its early years it was not without disaster. On the 25th
of August in 1696 New Englanders under Captain Ben Church attacked and
destroyed the settlement, he himself saying (the Acadian) “…cattle, hogs, sheep
and dogs were lying dead about their houses, chopped and hacked with hatchets.”
Michel and the other residents fled to the woods, returning only after Church
had left, to begin rebuilding for the winter months ahead. Church reappeared in
1707, again devastating the village in retaliation for French and Indian raids
from Quebec on New England villages, the British not quite willing to challenge
the French military in the heart of New France; Beaubassin was undefended. This
time the Acadians were warned and brought many of their most prized possessions
into the woods, yet 20 houses were burned and120 cattle slaughtered. In 1710
the British took Port Royal ending the French control of the major part of
Acadia, the treaty of Utrecht in 1713 ceding all of what is now mainland Nova
Scotia to the English Crown.
With the end of the
constant raids Beaubassin and all of Acadia thrived and in spite of the new
rulers trade with Quebec and Louisbourg grew and gold was paid for grain and
cattle. As the years passed more lands were cleared, orchards increased, and
overall reigned a prosperity the peasants of Europe never knew. Bricks were
made from the marsh clay and a tannery dressed leather for footware, a new
chapel replaced the one burned by Church’s men and a stone mill soon ground
their wheat and corn. Like most Acadian men, those at Beaubassin were
unsurpassed in their skills with the axe and knife on wood. Their houses were
made from squared logs fitted together at the corners to form a solid rectangular
building of modest size, furniture came from the same hands that provided the
shelter. The ordinary home had but one large room where the family ate and the
women cooked, spun, and rocked the cradle. One corner of the large room was
curtained off for the parents’ bed and the baby’s cradle. The rest of the
children slept in the loft which was undivided and served also as a storehouse
for grain.
The words of early
writers describe the conditions at Beaubassin: “The children sang gaily under
the apple trees and their merry shouts echoed over the fields as they clapped
their hands to frighten the wild pigeons from the crops. The booming note of
the huge seashells called the men from their haying on the marshes to their
noon meal. Great flocks of ducks and geese graced the ponds, fish and game were
staple foodstuffs, baked shad and hot barley cakes a favorite meal.
“In the fields, fresh
and green in the sunlight great flocks of sheep nibbled daintily in the
luxurious feeding. Thriving herds of swine wallowed in the cooling marsh mud.
Wild flowers spangled the slopes and in the orchards feathered songbirds sang
shrill chorus to the humming undertone of Nature’s organist. Blue smoke spiral
eddied lazily from the huge chimneys in thatched roofs of whitewashed cottages
and sweet odours drifted from the deep low barns filled with the fresh fruits
of autumn. Women gossiped gaily from their gardens and their chatter was not
quelled at the sight of a Micmac party filing from the forest. The Indians came
often to drink buttermilk and cider while they exchanged choice venison for the
wheaten loaves of the French.”
For nearly four decades
from the time of the last raid by the British, all but seven years under the
British flag, the Acadians enjoyed the life described with little doubt that
their children and children’s children would have the same experience. The
parish and community continued to expand, primarily in the areas across the
Missaguash which was defacto French territory on the Chignecto Isthmus in part
because growing families sought new lands to cultivate, and to build new homes.
Some likely made the move as well to remain under French rule; nonetheless, the
entire community remained one parish.
Our ancestor Michel’s
first born, Pierre, was married in 1715 and he and his wife, Marie Cassie,
presented Michel with his first grandchild in1719. His son Jacques was married
in that same year and Michel was a witness, signing with “his mark” the
register at the Church of the Assumption. As will be seen, it appears that some
of his children and most of his grandchildren moved west across the river to
what might be called Greater Beaubassin and some to Ile St-Jean, thus two
generations at most enjoyed the storied bucolic ways of the original
settlement. The initial moves, beginning as early as 1720, were prompted by a
need for land and not, as would later be the case of other families left in Old
Beaubassin, to avoid the turmoil that beset that village.
The matter of the Oath
of Allegiance to the British Crown was ever a problem since Utrecht, and the
Acadians of Beaubassin had taken it in 1727, and as an extant document shows,
the “signatures” in the form of their marks included both Michel and his son
Pierre. While not included in the corpus of the document’s text, those who
signed were promised they would not be expected to take up arms against the
French or Indians and would continue to enjoy the practice of their Roman
Catholic faith. The oath was later declared invalid, but the Acadians were not
pressed further by the governors and they continued to enjoy peace and plenty
for a number of years.
THE DEATH
OF BEAUBASSIN
In 1737 the arrival of
Abbe Joseph Louis Le Loutre, the “Black Priest” was to dramatically alter the
peaceful condition of the Acadians, and in particular those at the Isthmus of
Chignecto where this Spiritain missionary was to establish his headquarters.
Though intended to be dedicated to the spiritual welfare of the Indians, his
mission in fact became the harassment of the British, using Indians and as many
Acadians as he was able to persuade to join him. His center of operations was
at Shubenacadie, west of the Missaguash in French territory. This priest has
been much written about and the deed described below is not atypical of his
character. The Acadians put much store in their priests and it should be said
that the trust was for the most part well deserved, for the priests selflessly
served them, frequently cajoled them, helped solve their disputes, enjoyed
respect. Educated but not highly so, they nevertheless frequently served as a
kind of legal advisor and certainly the transmitters of the contents of written
communications from the authorities from time to time, given the limited
literacy of most Acadians (and others) of the time.
Le Loutre was lacking in
the most significant of pastoral duties, care of his flock; he instead bent on
toiling in a vineyard for which he was ill-equipped except for his hatred of
the English. He ended his life in France, caring for displaced Acadians, but he
began his life with them by contributing little to their well-being. Large sums of money, firearms and
ammunition, and other supplies were made available to him by the French
government in Quebec to aid him in his work with the Indians, which actually consisted
primarily of preparing them for the raids against the English and using them as
a threat to Acadians who would not do his bidding, adding the spiritual threat
of “neither sacrament in this life nor heaven in the next.” His bidding amounted to an effort to move
the Acadians from Beaubassin proper and other places in what was now British
Acadia across the river to French territory, thus strengthening the French hand
in the area. What he appeared not to understand was the nature of the Acadians;
the profession of arms was not to their taste and life at Beaubassin was
preferable to breaking new ground.
We have no evidence that
any members of the DeVaux families were living in Beaubassin proper (east of
the river) at this time, many were deceased, or had years before moved to the
west of the river, to Ile St.-Jean, or Isle Royal (Cape Breton).
While the British
insisted that the treaty of Utrecht had ceded portions of the present New Brunswick
to them, the French had continued to dominate the area and in fact built a
substantial fort on their side of the Missaguash calling it Fort Beausejour.
With the building of this fort the English felt compelled to control the other
side of the river and plans were made to put a force in place and build an
opposing fort. The Acadians would now be truly in British hands and under more
effective British rule. When Le Loutre heard of the increased presence of the
English and the proposed fort he became even more diligent in his efforts to
move his flock Unsuccessful in his attempts, in the spring of 1750 he led a
band of Indians across the river and burned Beaubassin to the ground. The
thatched roofs that had sheltered one of the largest and most prosperous
settlements of Acadia belched flame and smoke. One hundred and twenty
buildings, the church, mill, tannery, and brick kiln were all destroyed that
afternoon, and smoking embers of the clustered homes, desolate sheep and
straying cattle were all that remained as evening turned to darkness on the
eastern shore of the Missaguash.
Within the year the
British Fort Lawrence stood in a prominent place amid the cleared rubble of
Beaubassin; on the very site of the Acadian church and cemetery.
▼
The village
that was once Beaubassin is now called Fort Lawrence and is located immediately
after crossing the Missaguash River as one enters Nova Scotia from New
Brunswick on T. C. Highway 2. A
turn-off will bring you to the Visitors’ center where there is an indoor
display more devoted to the fort than the old village. At the east end of the
center is a narrow road that goes south to a railroad bridge. Just prior to
that bridge, on the right side of the road, there is a small monument
indicating the site of the fort. Nearby is the Trenholm farm and the old burial
ground is behind (presumably, but possibly under as well) a barn on that
property. It is untilled land, thus I believe NS Law permits access, but ask
the owners who are aware of the significance of the site and afford it a degree
of respect as I have said. To get a sense of the character of the Missaguash
one must get a tide chart and plan to view it at high and low tide…the picture
is truly astounding if one recalls that large vessels serving the forts and
communities used the river to great advantage.
A book
entitled A History of Fort Lawrence was published in 1986 written by
three authors (an approach destined to produce a less than well organized
format and this book is evidence of it): Gladys Trenholm, Miep Norden, and
Josephine Trenholm of Fort Lawrence. No publisher, Canadian government grants
provided funding. The book is unabashedly pro-British with little empathy for
the Acadian pioneers of the town. It begins with that old chestnut concerning the
British Crown’s entitlement to the land that became Acadia, the adventures of
John Cabot (who was in fact Giovannii Cabota, an Italian citizen in the service
of the English king).. Early in the 17th century, but subsequent to
the French establishment of the settlement at Port Royal, a half dozen abortive
attempts at colonizing Scots within the boundaries of French Acadia were
attempted and where, in fact the name, “Nova Scotia” was coined and applied to
land which both the treaties of St. Germaine-en-Laye (1632) and Bréda (1667)
declared to belong to the French Crown. However, to the victor belongs the
spoils, thus the 17th century affront to logic in the place name,
and the Deportation, brings us the Province of Nova Scotia rather than (had
more moral heads prevailed in 1755) the Province of Acadia, albeit (given
subsequent events) still likely under the British Crown. Having said that, the
book deserves a read if not a purchase, for there is considerable history of
the area included, albeit much carefully omitted. One does not read that the
French, the Acadians, the priests, and the Indians did anything worthy of
praise while the British government and military did nothing to be condemned.
The book is tireless in its mistaken insistence that armed Acadians constantly
harassed the British on the Chignecto peninsula from the time of the first
deportation and the British conquest of all of Acadia in 1758 through the
conquest of all of Canada and the peace of 1763. The average Acadian male was
entirely occupied with attempts to flee (initially) to Quebec or hide in the
woods to save his wife and children who were being relentlessly pursued by
armed British troops whose intent it was to deport them or worse. That some
Acadians joined the French military and the Indians in their opposition to the
British is not beyond question but their numbers were insignificant; the
authors obviously believed that if the man was French he was an Acadian. It is
not a scholarly work, but its bibliography includes a broad range of authors on
the subject of Acadian history (perhaps selectively read if consulted at all by
the authors) and a fair amount of genealogical data on the post-Deportation
families of the town as well as excerpts from the Beaubassin and other Acadian
church registers. I am in no position to judge the accuracy of any of the
genealogical data for few sources are given.
Use of this short
history of Beaubassin is granted, source it as authored by Colonel John Brooks
Devoe.
.
II Pierre, Born ca 1694, at Beaubassin, Acadia, son of Michel and
Marie-Magdeleine Martin, m. 26 FEB 1715 at Beaubassin, Marie Cassie, dau, of
Roger-Jean and Marie-Françoise Poirier. Marie was born ca 1697 based on the
1698 census of Beabassin. She was the second child named Marie in the family,
the first b. ca 1669 who married Toussaint Doucet ca 1685. She was the last
known child of J-R and M-F. and her mother was 49 years of age at the time of
her birth.
Pierre’s parents were likely present at the marriage
since at least Michel was a witness at the marriage of their son Jacques at the
same church, Notre Dame, some four years later. Roger Cassie was an early and
prominent figure in the Beaubassin area and had come there from Port Royal
where a number of his children were born, albeit Pierre’s wife Marie was born
at Beaubassin. Roger declared in a legal document that he was a native of
Ireland. He had a rather generous land holding, located on a promontory called
Butte á Roger on a number of maps. The site was just west of the Missaguash
River. Some declare that it was Roger Cassie that brought the fruit trees to
Beaubassin, others that he introduced them to Acadia.. Two sections of the
butte were leveled to accommodate the present four lane road (it earlier had but one split), but one can
see an area on the hill which suggests it was the location of his house. After
the Treaty of Utrecht in 1714 this area remained under the French flag and
while it is possible that Pierre and his wife lived on this land at some time in
their married life, the fact is that Pierre and his father “signed” an oath to
the British Crown in 1729 suggesting they were living at the center of
Beaubassin on the east side of the boundary river in British Acadia. The
history of this place has been earlier described. and it was thus that during
Pierre’s young life he lived through that extraordinary time of peace and
plenty for Acadian families; on whatever side of the Missaguash River they
lived it remained one community under
two kings, one faith. When his children married they appear to have moved
across the Missaguash and some on to Îsle Saint-Jean (now Prince Edward Island)
where they are found in the census reports of that island. When the British
moved to deport Acadians from that place in 1758 many escaped to the forests,
to the Chaleur Bay area or to Quebec, but most were rounded up and sent to
France, some to England. The children of Pierre and his brothers are the
generation that suffered under British cruelty to the greatest extent and many
lost their lives as a result of disease, shipwreck, or starvation. These
children led a nomadic life, vastly different from the stable and abundant life
of their parents’ early days at Beaubassin.
From the time Pierre reached adulthood there were no longer
census reports in British-held Acadia, thus we have no record of his holdings
from the time of his marriage in 1715 at age 21. There are apparently few if
any land records extant for Acadia and indeed if there were such records at the
time of the Deportation they were undoubtedly destroyed. That Pierre makes no
appearance in any documents in the area still under French control suggests he
had remained on the east side of the Missaguash and likely died there. After
the burning of Beaubassin in late 17509 the Acadians fled to the west across
the river where many are found as refugees at Beauséjour; his wife and a son
are found there in 1751, he is not. Church records hold little in the way of
identifying his location in Greater Beaubassin. Daughter Anne was born in April
of 1740, thus we know he lived until or shortly before that time. A French
census of the Îsle Royale (now Cape Breton) in 1752, a few scant years after
the evacuation of Beaubassin proper places his widow at Port-Toulouse (now St.
Peter’s) living with his daughter Marie and here husband André Templet. Thus he
lived 57 years or less. Two of Pierre’s chidren, Pierre 18, and Anne age 13,
were living with André and their sister as well. As is evident in the brief
history found in the Prologue, the peace of Acadia had begun to crumble in the
mid-1740s and the burning of Beaubassin in 1750 scattered Pierre’s family
beyond the confines of even Greater Beaubassin and might indeed have
contributed to his demise in some fashion if indeed he had lived through that
experience. There are a number of lists
of refugees located in various settlements west of the river subsequent to the
destruction of Beaubassin but none
include Pierre: his wife and some siblings and nephews, nieces, and in-laws are
found. Additional information on his wife Marie and their daughter Marie, will
be found in the lineage which follows.
2. Paul, b. ca 1720 at Beaubassin
1.
Last update, 6 MAY 2004 SPECIAL ADVISORY: All 200 copies of my Devoe-deVaux
Family History 1691-1991
have been sold but it is now available on a CD…go to CD Book For a review of the book go to
Book Review For the history of the decision to create a
CD of the book go to: Decision
Back
to Salut Table of Contents
Back to Acadian
Grandfathers Introduction