But a hundred and eighty miles of wilderness separated the governor of Canada from the governor of Montreal.  In short, before Perrot could be disciplined he must be seized, and this was a task which if attempted by frontal attack might provoke bloodshed in the colony, with heavy censure from the king.  Frontenac therefore entered upon a correspondence, not only with Perrot, but with one of the leading Sulpicians in Montreal, the Abbe Fenelon.  This procedure yielded quicker results than could have been expected.  Frontenac’s letter which summoned Perrot to Quebec for an explanation was free from threats and moderate in tone.  It found Perrot somewhat alarmed at what he had done and ready to settle the matter without further trouble.  At the same time Fenelon, acting on Frontenac’s suggestion, urged Perrot to make peace.  The consequence was that in January 1674 Perrot acceded and set out for Quebec with Fenelon as his companion.

Whatever Perrot’s hopes or expectations of leniency, they were quickly dispelled.  The very first conference between him and Frontenac became a violent altercation (January 29, 1674).  Perrot was forthwith committed to prison, where he remained ten months.  Not content with this success, Frontenac proceeded vigorously against the coureurs de bois, one of whom as an example was hanged in front of Perrot’s prison.

The trouble did not stop here, nor with the imprisonment of Brucy, who was Perrot’s chief agent and the custodian of the store-house at Ile Perrot.  Fenelon, whose temper was ardent and emotional, felt that he had been made the innocent victim of a detestable plot to lure Perrot from Montreal.  Having upbraided Frontenac to his face, he returned to Montreal and preached a sermon against him, using language which the Sulpicians hastened to repudiate.  But Fenelon, undaunted, continued to espouse Perrot’s cause without concealment and brought down upon himself a charge of sedition.

In its final stage this cause celebre runs into still further intricacies, involving the rights of the clergy when accused by the civil power.  The contest begun by Perrot and taken up by Fenelon ran an active course throughout the greater part of a year (1674), and finally the king himself was called in as judge.  This involved the sending of Perrot and Fenelon to France, along with a voluminous written statement from Frontenac and a great number of documents.  At court Talon took the side of Perrot, as did the Abbe d’Urfe, whose cousin, the Marquise d’Allegre, was about to marry Colbert’s son.  Nevertheless the king declined to uphold Frontenac’s enemies.  Perrot was given three weeks in the Bastille, not so much for personal chastisement as to show that the governor’s authority must be respected.  On the whole, Frontenac issued from the affair without suffering loss of prestige in the eyes of the colony.  The king declined to reprimand him, though in a personal letter from his sovereign Frontenac was told that henceforth he must avoid invading a local government without giving the governor preliminary notice.  The hint was also conveyed that he should not harry the clergy.  Frontenac’s position, of course, was that he only interfered with the clergy when they were encroaching upon the rights of the crown.