The negotiations commenced in 1629 were not resumed until 1632.  In the meantime the English authorities had not been idle.  Charles I had not forgotten his promise, and even if he had, there were men in France who had a good memory.  On June 12th, 1631, Charles I addressed a long letter to Sir Isaac Wake, ambassador to France, respecting the restitution of Quebec and Acadia.  The terms were as follows:—­

“That which we require, which is the payment of the remainder of the money, the restitution of certain ships taken and kept without any colour or pretence, and the taking of arrests and seizures which were made in that kingdom against our subjects contrary to treaty, being of right and due.  And that which is demanded of us concerning the places in Canada and those parts, and some few ships of that nation (French) which remained yet unrestored, but have passed sentence of confiscation in our high Court of Admiralty upon good grounds in justice, being things of courtesy and good correspondence.”

According to her marriage settlement the Queen Henrietta possessed a dowry of eight hundred thousand crowns, equivalent to eight hundred thousand ecus de trois livres, French currency.  The half of that sum had been made payable on the day before the marriage in London, and the other half a little later.  The marriage took place on June 13th, 1625, and the first instalment was then paid.  In the year 1631 the second instalment had not been paid, and Charles I claimed it as one of the conditions of settlement.

Some historians have stated that the king took this opportunity to have a money question solved.  If, however, the debt was legitimate, France was obliged to pay it, and the difficulties that had occurred in the meantime had nothing to do with the deed of marriage upon which the claim was based.  Chateauneuf had promised to pay the claim.  Unless, therefore, there was any doubt as to the right of the king to claim the sum, it is difficult to understand why the king should be blamed.

In his letter to his ambassador at Paris Charles I alludes to documents exchanged between Chateauneuf and Fontenay-Mareuil on the one side, and the lords commissioners appointed to give a ruling.  In this document it is noticed that Guillaume de Caen had discussed with Kirke the value of the goods and peltry that had been taken out of the stores at Quebec.  They disagreed both as to the number and value.  De Caen claimed four thousand two hundred and sixty-six beaver skins which had been captured by Kirke, while Kirke pretended to have found only one thousand seven hundred and thirteen, and that the balance of his cargo, four thousand skins, was the result of trade with the Indians.