small flourish

Confrontation of Marie-Louise Poirier dit Lafleur, 9th witness, with Angélique, audience of 4 in the afternoon, 15 May 1734.


Confrontation done By Us Pierre Raimbault King's counsellor Lieutenant General, Civil Et Criminel, at the seat of the Jurisdiction Royale of Montreal at the Request of the King's prosecutor Plaintiff And Litigant Accuser Against Marie Joseph Negress Slave of the said widow francheville, prisoner In the Gaols of This city; of the witnesses heard at the Information done by us on the fourteenth of April and This, In the Execution of Our ordinance of the sixth And eighth of May, with which Confrontation we proceeded as does Follow.

On Saturday May fifteenth
Seventeen Hundred thirty-four
four in the afternoon
In the Chambers of the Gaol
of This city

Had brought Before Us By the Gaol keeper of the Prison the said accused that we


Confronted with Marie Louise Poirier ninth witness heard at the said Information And after taking the oath to Tell the truth And Asked if they Know of each other, Said that they Do having resided Together; following which a reading was done To the said accused of the first articles of the Deposition of the said witness Containing her name, surname, age, status And Residence, And her Declaration that she is not family, allied to, Servant nor Domestic to the Accused, And the said accused was Interrogated to make known presently her Reproaches Against the said witness, That if Not done And failing to Do so she will have no Recourse, after having been read The Deposition And Re-examination of the said witness, in accordance with The ordinance that We Gave her to Hear; the Said accused stated that she had no Reproaches to make Against the said witness.

This done we proceeded with a reading to the said accused of the Deposition and


Re-examination of the said witness And upon hearing it she stated [that] it is untrue that the said Poirier Forbid Her to Drink Eau de vie; that she is a true liar; that she had no authority to Forbid her to go out Having No need to Ask permission of anyone, And that she went out as She wished. That it Is true that the widow de francheville had Said to the said Poirier that she would Take Her back, when She the Negress was No longer at her house; that she stole no Deer skins from the said De francheville When she fled with The man named thibault Towards New England; that she Obtained Them from the man named des Custeaux for six francs In silver that she had brought from New England When she was Sent by Niclas Bleck to the now deceased Sieur francheville


And that she never Stated that If She could Ever return to Her country And there Were Whites there, She would have Them Burned Like Dogs wherever possible And that there was little wrong in Her stating that the French are of Little worth but that she did not state that she would have Them Burned. And the Said Poirier stated that Her Deposition Is truthful and said of the said Accused present that she heard her speak as stated in Her Deposition and Re-examination And Maintained this to the said Negeress Explaining that What she said about the theft of three Deer skins, Was what she had Heard stated to dame widow francheville. A reading done to Them of the present Confrontation, Each persisted on Their own Behalf And Declared not to Know how to Write nor Sign, as Requested.

[signed] P. Raimbault

[signed] C. Porlier

Source: Archives nationales du Québec, Centre de Montréal, Procedure Criminel contre Marie Joseph Angélique negresse - Incendiere, 1734, TL4 S1, 4136, Juridiction royale de Montréal, Confrontation of Marie-Louise Poirier dit Lafleur with Angélique, May 15, 1734, 1-4.

Return to parent page