The Louisiana historical quarterly vol 2 reports from the URL, page 195, that on April 11, 1725 there was a note of Summons to Witness in the Records of the Superior Council. I have NO idea what this means…BUT here is the item with all of the names listed from that page.
Curious still is that the following excerpt indicates that the “wreck”, La Bellone, floated back to France.
“It is a historical fact that King Louis XV sent a number of ships laden with supplies to support Charlie while he was in hiding. Two named “Le Mars” and “La Bellone” were laden with a huge quantity of gold and weapons.
These two vessels never reached Charlie. They were intercepted and damaged in an encounter with the English Navy, after which they limped back to France with their valuable cargoes.” — Bonnie Prince Charlie’s Wreck
And that this URL indicates the ship La Bellone had gold bullion on board, but was captured and relieved of its cargo then returned to Nantes.
The team believe that the wreck is an English frigate, captured by the French, one of two used to unload weapons and bullion from two French ships, the Le Mars and La Bellone, which had limped back to the port of Nantes after an earlier unsuccessful relief attempt. http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/Seabed-find-leads-divers-to.5666347.jp Sept. 22, 2009
“The two ships “Le Mars” and “La Bellone” sent earlier, had made it back to the port of Nantes, laden with 852,000 lavres in Louis d’or coins.”
http://www.cdnn.info/news/industry/i090603.html June 3, 2009
More still about a witness of the “capture” of La Bellone from Google Books by J. Murray 1849 that indicates the capture of La Bellone was witnessed by William Luckcrafts, whose entrance into voluntary service began on 25 June 1796.
And finally, a list of Captains of La Bellone from this URL that states that the ship was captured 17 August 1796. My mad math skills say that there is a lapse of much information somewhere. The time period between 1725 and 1796 is quite an abyss.
Perhaps the Louisiana historical society made a mistake in its transcription of the item mentioned? Did the title actually read 1725 or was the script 1796 perhaps? I can understand how writing with a quill and ink can be so difficult and made even more difficult still with the passage of time. I’m sure the original is around somewhere? What a great mystery! You can see more about the period of 1725 here. This url presents that microfilmed material available came from the Notorial Archives Paris. This JSTOR document from 1951 explains a bit about what a French Notorial Archive really is…..Google refuses to translate this site: http://www.archivesnationales.culture.gouv.fr/
There is a French Colonial Guide from NONA that illustrates exactly what a French Colonial document looks like. And you thought your sons handwriting was bad! Page 38