His prolixity often serves as a foil to the terseness of
Champlain, and suggests that he must have been a merciless talker. Yet,
though inclined to be garrulous, he was a good observer and had many
correct ideas--notably the belief that corn, wine, and cattle are a
better foundation for a colony than gold or silver mines. In temperament
he and Champlain were very dissimilar, and evidence of mutual coolness
may be found in their writings. These we shall consider at a later
stage. For the present it is enough to note that both men sat at
Poutrincourt's table and adorned the Order of Good Cheer.

Meanwhile De Monts was in France, striving with all the foes of the
monopoly. Thanks to the fur trade, his company had paid its way during
the first two years, despite the losses at St Croix. The third season
had been much less prosperous, and at the same moment when the Dutch and
the Basques [Footnote: Traders from the extreme south of France, whose
chief port was St Jean de Luz. Though living on the confines of France
and Spain, the Basques were of different racial origin from both
Spaniards and French. While subject politically to France, their
remoteness from the main ports of Normandy and Brittany kept them out
of touch with the mariners of St Malo and Havre, save as collision arose
between them in the St Lawrence. Among the Basques there were always
interlopers, even when St Jean de Luz had been given a share in
the monopoly. They are sometimes called Spaniards, from their close
neighbourhood to the Pyrenees.] were breaking the monopoly by defiance,
the hatters of Paris were demanding that it should be withdrawn
altogether. To this alliance of a powerful guild with a majority of
the traders, the company of De Monts succumbed, and the news which
Poutrincourt received when the first ship came in 1607 was that
the colony must be abandoned. As the company itself was about to
be dissolved, this consequence was inevitable. Champlain in his
matter-of-fact way states that De Monts sent letters to Poutrincourt,
'by which he directed him to bring back his company to France.'
Lescarbot is much more outspoken. Referring to the merits and struggles
of De Monts, he exclaims:

Yet I fear that in the end he may be forced to give
it all up, to the great scandal and reproach of the
French name, which by such conduct is made a
laughing-stock and a byword among the nations. For as
though their wish was to oppose the conversion