Upon this basis, then, the quarrel with Perrot was settled.  But at that very moment a larger and more serious contest was about to begin.

CHAPTER IV

GOVERNOR, BISHOP, AND INTENDANT

At the beginning of September 1675 Frontenac was confronted with an event which could have given him little pleasure.  This was the arrival, by the same ship, of the bishop Laval, who had been absent from Canada four years, and Jacques Duchesneau, who after a long interval had been appointed to succeed Talon as intendant.  Laval returned in triumph.  He was now bishop of Quebec, directly dependent upon the Holy See [Footnote:  Laval had wished strongly that the see of Quebec should be directly dependent on the Papacy, and his insistence on this point delayed the formal creation of the diocese.] and not upon the king of France.  Duchesneau came to Canada with the reputation of having proved a capable official at Tours.

By temper and training Frontenac was ill-disposed to share authority with any one.  In the absence of bishop and intendant he had filled the centre of the stage.  Now he must become reconciled to the presence at Quebec of others who held high rank and had claims to be considered in the conduct of public affairs.  Even at the moment of formal welcome he must have felt that trouble was in store.  For sixteen years Laval had been a great person in Canada, and Duchesneau had come to occupy the post which Talon had made almost more important than that of governor.

Partly through a clash of dignities and partly through a clash of ideas, there soon arose at Quebec a conflict which rendered personal friendship among the leaders impossible, and caused itself to be felt in every part of the administration.  Since this antagonism lasted for seven years and had large consequences, it becomes important to examine its deeper causes as well as the forms which under varying circumstances it came to assume.

In the triangular relations of Frontenac, Laval, and Duchesneau the bishop and the intendant were ranged against the governor.  The simplest form of stating the case is to say that Frontenac clashed with Laval over one set of interests and with Duchesneau over another; over ecclesiastical issues with the bishop and over civil interests with the intendant.  In the Sovereign Council these three dignitaries sat together, and so close was the connection of Church with State that not a month could pass without bringing to light some fresh matter which concerned them all.  Broadly speaking, the differences between Frontenac and Laval were of more lasting moment than those between Frontenac and Duchesneau.  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.