overnor, the bishop, and the intendant had seven associates at the
council-board. Still, as time went on, the king felt that his control
over this body was not quite perfect. So in 1703 he changed the name
from Sovereign Council to Superior Council, and increased its members
to a total of fifteen.

The Council met at the Chateau St Louis on Monday morning of each week,
at a round table where the governor had the bishop on {10} his right
hand and the intendant on his left. Nevertheless the intendant
presided, for the matters under discussion fell chiefly in his domain.
Of the other councillors the attorney-general was the most conspicuous.
To him fell the task of sifting the petitions and determining which
should be presented. Although there were local judges at Quebec, Three
Rivers, and Montreal, the Council had jurisdiction over all important
cases, whether criminal or civil. In the sphere of commerce its powers
were equally complete and minute. It told merchants what profits they
could take on their goods, and how their goods should be classified
with respect to the percentage of profit allowed. Nothing was too
petty for its attention. Its records depict with photographic accuracy
the nature of French government in Canada. From this source we can see
how the principle of paternalism was carried out to the last detail.

But Canada was a long way from France and the St Lawrence was larger
than the Seine. It is hard to fight against nature, and in Canada
there were natural obstacles which withstood to some extent the forces
of despotism. It is easy to see how distance from the court gave both
governor and intendant {11} a range of action which would have been
impossible in France. With the coming of winter Quebec was isolated
for more than six months. During this long interval the two officials
could do a great many things of which the king might not have approved,
but which he was powerless to prevent. His theoretical supremacy was
thus limited by the unyielding facts of geography. And a better
illustration is found in the operation of the seigneurial system upon
which Canadian society was based. In France a belated feudalism still
held the common man in its grip, and in Canada the forms of feudalism
were at least partially established. Yet the Canadian habitant lived
in a very different atmosphere from that breathed by the Norman
peasant. The Canadian seigneur had an abundance of acreage and little
c