122 ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 



Historic Sites. 



side of the river, hence making the bridge the more easily defensible 

 by a post on the upland, and at the same time it is above the wide 

 tidal part of the river, where it was narrow enough to be easily bridged. 

 It was, however, no doubt much wider than it is at present, since the 

 size of the present stream, which is little more than a ditch a few 

 feet across, has been greatly affected by the digging of the " tide- 

 feeder " ditch many years ago, as well as by the larger canal; 

 furthermore, from natural causes the tidal part of the river is moving 

 all the time towards its mouth. Comparing Franquet's map with 

 modern conditions it seems very plain that the modern stream is 

 much further from the bank there than in Franquet's time, due no 

 doubt to the cutting across of the ox-bow at this place. But never- 

 theless the old courses of the streams can be traced, and about as 

 shown on the map. This would bring the Pont à Buot about as 

 marked though there is not the slightest trace of it in existence. 

 Neither can the site of the post on the upland near by be identified,- 

 though the nature of the ground shows its approximate position. 



290. Memramcook. A memoir of 1750 by Léry mentions "A l'embouchure 



de la riviere de Memeramkouk," certain buildings, — a bakery (bou- 

 langerie) 10 feet square, a hospital (hôpital) of 18 and a house of 12 

 (feet square), all of round stakes and covered with bark. It is pos- 

 sible that this was the post at Fort Folly, (page 290 of Historic Sites), 

 though it may have been on the site of Dorchester. 



The existence of a post at Meringuin in 1749 is shown by a 

 Memoir of Father Germain of that year. He speaks of a great cape 

 opposite Shepody where " l'on faisait le garde dans le temps du dé- 

 tachement à Beaubassin. " 



291. The Indian Fort is mentioned by Gesner (New Brunswick, 141) who 



states that it is the remains of a fortification thrown up by the 

 French immediately after the capture of Quebec. The local tradition, 

 as told me by Judge Hanington, is that the works were " thrown up 

 by the crew of a French frigate which wintered there in 1760. This 

 vessel was bound to Quebec, but on learning of its surrender to the 

 British in the fall of 1759, the Captain ran into Shediac and remained 

 until the spring of the next year. " 



Some important information about Shediac in 1749 is contained 

 in a Memoir of that year by M. Léry, for a copy of which I am indebted 

 to M. Gaudet. After describing the port, in which vessels could not 

 go farther than the Little island [Indian Island], he says that in 

 1749 there was built at the port of Shediac a store-house of 20 by 

 36 feet, a house of 20 by 24, two other houses of 20 by 30, and another 

 building of 10 feet square. Unfortunately he gives no idea of the 

 location of these buildings, though he adds, that at the head of tide 

 two leagues up the river, where a road to Petitcodiac started, there 

 was a house of 9 feet square, a storehouse of 30 feet by 24 of round 

 stakes and covered with bark. He makes no mention of the fort 

 established in that year by La Corne, and it is very likely the fort was 

 nothing more than the former buildings palisaded. Early maps 



