u. In the end governor and intendant quarrelled
over everything simply because they had come to be irreconcilable
enemies. At the outset, however, their theoretical grounds of
opposition were much less grave than the matters in debate between
Frontenac and Laval. To appreciate these duly we must consider certain
things which were none the less important because they lay in the
background.

When Frontenac came to Canada he found that the ecclesiastical field
was largely occupied by the Jesuits, the Sulpicians, and the Recollets.
Laval had, indeed, begun his task of organizing a diocese at Quebec and
preparing to educate a local priesthood. Four years after his arrival
in Canada he had founded the Quebec Seminary (1663) and had added
(1668) a preparatory school, called the Little Seminary. But the three
missionary orders were still the mainstay of the Canadian {54} Church.
It is evident that Colbert not only considered the Jesuits the most
powerful, but also thought them powerful enough to need a check.
Hence, when Frontenac received his commission, he received also written
instructions to balance the Jesuit power by supporting the Sulpicians
and the Recollets.

Through his dispute with Perrot, Frontenac had strained the good
relations which Colbert wished him to maintain with the Sulpicians.
But the friction thus caused was in no way due to Frontenac's dislike
of the Sulpicians as an order. Towards the Jesuits, on the other hand,
he cherished a distinct antagonism which led him to carry out with
vigour the command that he should keep their power within bounds. This
can be seen from the earliest dispatches which he sent to France.
Before he had been in Quebec three months he reported to Colbert that
it was the practice of the Jesuits to stir up strife in families, to
resort to espionage, to abuse the confessional, to make the Seminary
priests their puppets, and to deny the king's right to license the
brandy trade. What seemed to the Jesuits an unforgivable affront was
Frontenac's charge that they cared more for beaver skins than for the
conversion of the savages. This {55} they interpreted as an insult to
the memory of their martyrs, and their resentment must have been the
greater because the accusation was not made publicly in Canada, but
formed part of a letter to Colbert in France. The information that
such an attack had been made reached them through Laval, who was then
in France and found means to acquain