Cape Breton's Magazine

bourg, as a very quick way of building, a nearly temporary way of building. That's my opinion. Because, it's a very ineffic? ient way of building, logs in the ground. Although we are amazed how some of them lasted; one built in 1713 was still there in 1745. Still, it's quite astonishing that he, an officer, 30 years after the start, still built in that technique. And we found the foundation, and we found the traces of the piquets in the ground. It's on account of his building here that way, that we wonder whether the Acadians did not build like that in Port Royal as well. We don't know how they built in Port Royal. In some of our other buildings, you'll see the piquet technique exposed. Here, during the archeological excavation, we found little bits of plaster in the foundation, so we presxime that the inter? ior was plastered, or partly. We don't really know. We tried both. We covered some with boards, and some with the plas? ter. And you'll notice we arranged the plaster to show slightly the forai of the piquet underneath. But by far, the inter? iors seemed much, much more often boarded than plastered inside. Building this modest little house in 1742, de Cannes must have gone through a very low time, a difficult time business-wise. Because he had owned three lots in town, on which one had a house from quite early, where he must have lived. He died in '52. And we know that in the early '40s, when he sold his lots, he was living on another of his lots. So therefore he had two houses. We know he sold those three lots in a fairly short period of time. We know he'd sold all his lots, so it's by that that we presume that he was living here. This house shovzs on the first English plan The de Gannes House, above in 1745. So it's by all that surmising that we figure he was here. What we really only know is that he died here. Because, when he died, it's definitely this house, by the inventory. But why would he build such a house? His wife was from an engineer's family, de Cat- alogne. She died in 1750. Around that time, his daughter got married. She got a dowry of over 10,000 livres, of which he had paid 8,000 at his death. Therefore, he must have been quite well off. Oh yes, and when the family came back after the first siege, three of his daughters came back with him. They had interesting names. Whereas, usually you're Mary or Anne or something like that, they were Mademoi? selle de la--Something or Other--Mademoi? selle de So-and-So. That seems to mean that they had become attached to some prop? erty in France. They came with four ser? vants. And they presumably settled down in this house. Three girls and a son, the fa? ther and mother, four servants who might have been living there. So therefore, they must have been fairly well off. But it's not a house which seems to indicate that kind of living. (Because of the use of pi? quet?) And small, and sort of temporary. The modesty of the building does not seem to add up. Whether it was a choice... or influence, or perhaps he built it when he was in low means in the '40s. We just don't know. When he died, he had lots of stuff, but there were lots of old things. And it appeared that his family was not living with him--there was no evidence of the family in his inventory. Although of? ten they didn't inventory the things con? sidered belonging to the children or oth? ers. So that is why it makes it difficult for us at times. CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE (53)