L’affaire de la Mary Fortune. Les traités de Saint-Germain de 1632 et la souveraineté sur le Canada
On March 29, 1632, France and England signed two treaties that officially put an end to the war that had opposed them from 1627 to 1629. Historians generally consider that one of these treaties officially returned the possession of Canada and Acadia to France. But the English did not understand it t...
| Published in: | Revue d’histoire de l’Amérique française |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Text |
| Language: | French |
| Published: |
Institut d’histoire de l’Amérique française
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.7202/1071206ar http://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1071206ar |
| Summary: | On March 29, 1632, France and England signed two treaties that officially put an end to the war that had opposed them from 1627 to 1629. Historians generally consider that one of these treaties officially returned the possession of Canada and Acadia to France. But the English did not understand it that way and would continue to claim sovereignty over the entire territory, except the specific places given back to France in March 1632 : Québec, Port-Royal and Cape-Breton Island. The case of the Mary Fortune, an English ship boarded in the Bay of Tadoussac in 1634, exposes these differences of interpretation. Le 29 mars 1632, la France et l’Angleterre signent deux traités qui mettent officiellement fin à la guerre qui les avait opposées de 1627 à 1629. Les historiens considèrent généralement que l’un de ces traités remettait officiellement la France en possession du Canada et de l’Acadie. Or, les Anglais ne l’entendaient pas ainsi et continueront à revendiquer la souveraineté sur l’ensemble de ce territoire, hormis les places précises cédées à la France en mars 1632 : Québec, Port-Royal et le Cap-Breton. L’affaire de la Mary Fortune, navire anglais arraisonné dans la baie de Tadoussac en 1634, expose au grand jour ces divergences d’interprétation. |
|---|