YaleUnwersityUnan,

3900202802150]

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

WILLIAM I. MARSHALL

ACQUISITION OF OREGON

AND THE

Long Suppressed Evidence About
Marcus Whitman

BY
PRINCIPAL WILLIAM I. MARSHALL
OF CHICAGO

VOLUME I

Copyrieht 1905 by
WILLIAM I. MARSHALL
All right! rtiervtd

Lowman & Hanford Co.. Printers
Seattle. Wash.

CONTENTS

FOREWORD  2
INTRODUCTION  6-21
WILLIAM I. MARSHALL. A Biographical Sketch  23-24
CHAPTER I. The Unique Features of the History of Oregon 25-28
CHAPTER II. The Period of Maritime Discovery  29-38
CHAPTER III. The Louisiana Purchase and the Lewis and
Clark Exploration  3948
CHAPTER IV. The Founding and Capture of Astoria  49-52
CHAPTER V. The True History of the Discovery of Routes
Practicable for, and the Development of the First Trans
continental Wagon Road  53-140
CHAPTER VI. Governmental Action Relating to the Acqui
sition of Oregon  141-284
CHAPTER VIL The Truth About the Relation of the Hud
son's Bay Company to the American Exploration, Occu
pation and Settlement of Oregon as Shown in Original
Documents  285-450

FOREWORD

The publication of these volumes is made possible by the volun
tary contributions of a number of citizens of the States of Oregon
and Washington who are interested in the encouragement of indi
vidual research that concerns the history of those States and of the
whole of "Old Oregon." These contributors may not necessarily
agree with all of the sentiments and conclusions herein contained,
but desire that the citations and quotations which have been so care
fully and laboriously gathered together by Mr. Marshall, and his
conclusions, shall be permanently preserved for the use of those who
may seek for the truth of history. They also wish to give recogni
tion to the work of an author whose life was largely spent in the ill-
paid profession of an educator and whose best years were given
without financial reward to the study of the history of the acquisi
tion of the "Oregon Country" to the United States, and who at the
time of his death ranked among the highest authorities upon that
subject. No attempt has been made to change the manuscript ; it has
been printed as left by the author.
Many years ago Mr. C. B. Bagley, of Seattle, became interested
in the controversy regarding any influence Dr. Marcus Whitman
might have had upon the final adjustment of the rival claims of the
United States and Great Britain to a part of Old Oregon, and began
collecting material for a pamphlet or book giving his views upon
the questions involved.
After the death of Mr. Marshall, the private library, letters, note
books and manuscripts of that gentleman passed into Mr. Bagley's
possession, making his collection perhaps the largest extant of books,
pamphlets, manuscripts and early newspapers covering both sides
of the controversy. Several years ago a small book published by
Mr. Marshall came under his observation; this was' followed by
personal acquaintance and knowledge of the extent and value of
the work that Mr. Marshall had in preparation. This led to a
change of plan whereby Mr. Bagley furnished valuable historical
material allied to the work in hand and abandoned the plan of writ
ing and publishing on his own account because of his general accord
with the findings and conclusions of Mr. Marshall.

INTRODUCTION

My discussion of Prof. Bourne's paper as an appendix herein,
being a reprint from the plates of the Trans. Am. Hist. Asscn. for
1900, necessarily retains the paging of the Transactions.
Justice to us both requires the statement that his investigations
up to the Detroit meeting, Dec. 27-29, 1900, were entirely independ
ent of mine, neither of us knowing of the other's work till shortly
before that time, and we never having corresponded or met till the
evening before his paper was read, when, for the first time, I learned
its scope and point of view.
In 1888, after eleven years' careful investigation of the History
of the Acquisition of the Old Oregon Territory, I wrote a book of
300 pages on it, but not wishing, as so many have done, "to darken
counsel by words without knowledge" on so important a subject,
when it was ready for the press I laid it aside to follow up the exam
ination of some minor points, on which (though as my subsequent
studies proved my conclusions were right), I had not then obtained
as irresistible evidence as for all the more important points.
In 1893, just as I had found the evidence which established
beyond question the correctness of my conclusions on these minor
points, so that I was ready to revise and publish, the panic nearly
ruined me, and I was obliged to again postpone publication and
struggle for my financial existence, as I well knew that there could
be no pecuniary profit in publishing the truth about the Whitman
Saved Oregon fiction. Though not able to print, the industry and
devotion of my daughter, who was my private secretary for four
teen years, enabled me to send to many of our leading historians
and teachers and students of history extensive duplicate type-writ
ten transcripts of much of the long-concealed contemporaneous evi
dence in the Whitman matter, in nearly 2,000 pages (letter size) of
criticisms of the astonishing errors on every important phase of the
Oregon Acquisition — its diplomacy; the executive and congress
ional action upon it; the discovery and development of the trans
continental wagon road to it; the interest of the people of the
nation in it ; the extent to which it had been explored and reported
on to the government prior to March, 1843; the true relations of
the Hudson's Bay Company to the American exploration, occupation

6 INTRODUCTION
and settlement of Oregon; the origin and proper place in its his
tory of the missions to the Oregon Indians of the Methodist and
the Am. Bd. of Com. of Foreign Missions ; and the origin, purpose,
and results of Whitman's ride — which were in many of our leading
school histories and in a number of more pretentious historical
works, as the result of the dependence of their authors on Revs.
H. H. Spalding, Wm. Barrows, J. G. Craighead, C. Eells, M. Eells,
and on Mr. W. H. Gray, and other advocates of the Whitman Saved
Oregon Story.
These "original sources," which are the only proper basis for the
history of Oregon (as, when existent and accessible, they are for
the history of all other regions), the advocates of the Whitman
Saved Oregon Story have all either totally ignored, like Revs. C.
Eells, Wm. Barrows, H. H. Spalding, J. G. Craighead, and Mr. W.
H. Gray, or else have deliberately suppressed nearly all of it and
misquoted and garbled the very little they have used, like Nixon,
and Mowry, and Coffin, and Mrs. Eva Emory Dye, and Revs. M.
Eells, S. B. L. Penrose, Thos. Laurie, H. W. Parker, and L. H.
Hallock. I requested the leading historians to whom these manuscripts
were sent to subject them to the most rigorous scrutiny, to compare
their quotations and summaries with any of the original documents
accessible to them, and to be so kind as to inform me if they found
any statement of any important fact incorrect, or any quotation
in the least degree inaccurate or any summary of documents
(which want of space prevented me from fully quoting), in any way
unfair, as he who shows me any error in my work does me the great
favor of enabling me to be wiser than I have been.
Of the several score of those who have read these manuscripts —
historians of national and international reputation, professors of
history in universities and colleges, teachers of history in normal
schools, high schools and academies, principals of schools, judges,
clergymen, lawyers, editors, and public officials of various kinds —
most of whom had been believers in the Whitman Saved Oregon
Story and had endorsed it in lectures or sermons, or in newspaper
and magazine articles, or in their school and other histories, and
therefore very naturally would have preferred not to have it proved
false, and who therefore subjected all criticism of and evidence ad
verse to it to the most careful, and some of them to the most hostile
scrutiny, no one has pointed out a single error of any fact of the
least importance, or a single inaccurate quotation, or unfair sum
mary, and, except Dr. W. A. Mowry, every person — man or woman
— who has read even one quarter part of these manuscripts, has been
convinced that they totally demolish every form of the Whitman
Saved Oregon Story.

INTRODUCTION 7
Why Dr. Mowry was not convinced will be apparent from some
extracts from a letter he wrote me on Dec. 9, 1898, imploring me
not to publish any of the really vital evidence relating to the Whit
man mission, and the origin and purpose of Whitman's ride as fol
lows: "I have copied hundreds of typewritten pages from those
letters" (i. e., of Whitman and his associates to the Am. Bd.) "dur
ing the last thirteen years.
"One thing, however, I have not felt at liberty to copy, and do
not think the Board should ever have permitted you or any one else
to copy. "I refer to the confidential letters written by the missionaries to
the Secretary of the Board, relating to their private and personal
affairs, and particularly complaints one of another.
"I do not think you ought to publish any extracts from the letters
of that character.
". . . In my own case, I always showed to the secretary the
matter which I had copied, and I believe that this has been the gen
eral practice. I certainly hope you will not make public such pri
vate affairs, even though the courtesy was extended to you to copy
private letters."
It only needs to be said concerning this attempt to cajole or
frighten me into continued concealment of all the really vital evi
dence as to the origin and purpose of Whitman's ride, and as to all
the other questions needful to an understanding of Whitman's life
and character, that, first, there were no "confidential letters," and,
second, that the Secretary of the American Board did not attempt
to limit the thoroughness of my investigations, and, third, that I
was not given the privilege "to copy private letters," but to examine
the official correspondence of sundry employes of the Am. Bd. of
Comrs. of Foreign Missions, a great eleemosynary corporation, con
tinually begging for funds from the public to support its employes
in missionary labor (which ought, certainly, to include not only the
inculcation by them upon heathen peoples of the importance of
constantly telling the truth, but also to include a constant practice
of that most fundamental of all the virtues by the said missionaries
themselves — and by the secretaries and other officers in the home
offices of the said American Board).
When, in an evil hour in 1866, Secretary Treat of the American
Board endorsed the Whitman Saved Oregon Story, by the publica
tion of Rev. C. Eells' letters of May 28, 1866, in the Missionary
Herald for December, 1866, it "goes without saying" that he at once
made every letter or other paper in the archives of the American
Board, which would throw any light on that historical problem, a
public historical document, freest access to which no officer of that
society had any moral right thenceforth to deny, to any honest stu-

8 INTRODUCTION
dent of the history of the United States, nor to put any limitations
on what such student should copy from and publish of them.
By constantly adhering throughout his "Marcus Whitman and
the Early Days of Oregon" to the ideas of the proper limits of his
torical investigation and publication, stated in the foregoing ex
tracts from his letter to me of Dec. 9, 1898, and carefully suppress
ing not only everything in the archives of the American Board, but
also everything in the government archives which would give his
readers the real facts concerning the origin, purpose and results of
Whitman's ride, and the real attitude of the national government
and the people generally towards the acquisition of Oregon, and
also all that relates to the rapid decadence of the American Board
mission in Oregon after 1839, and all that relates to the real causes
of the Whitman massacre, and nearly all that shows the true rela
tion of the Hudson's Bay Company to the missionaries, and to
Americans generally in the Oregon territory, and the most vital
parts of the evidence needful to a fair estimate of Whitman's char
acter and work, Dr. Mowry has produced a book somewhat less
hysterical than "Barrows' Oregon," and Nixon's "How Marcus
Whitman Saved Oregon," and Craighead's "Story of Marcus Whit
man," but a book every whit as worthless and misleading as any of
them. To several of these parties, that they might be fully informed of
all that could be said in defense of the Whitman Saved Oregon
Story, in addition to my copious quotations by page and chapter
from Gray, and Spalding, and Barrows, and Nixon, and Mowry, and
Craighead, and Mrs. Dye, and Revs. C. Eells, and Myron Eells, and
Penrose, and Parker, I sent a copy of a pamphlet published in 1883
by M. Eells, and the pamphlet published in Portland, Ore., in 1885,
entitled "The Whitman Controversy," containing articles by M.
Eells, W. H. Gray, and Edward C. Ross, and if I had had copies to
spare should have been glad to have sent these pamphlets to each
of them. Of course, I much regret that it should have fallen to the lot of
Prof. Bourne (who never began the examination of this subject
until some years after I had completed its investigation as far as
all really important points are concerned), to anticipate me in the
publication of its fictitious nature, but that is merely another ex
ample of "the irony of fate," and I have not the least cause to com
plain of him, as his treatment of me has been in all respects thor
oughly honorable and courteous.
The original form of his "Legend of Marcus Whitman" (in Am.
Hist. Review, January, 1901), was in print before we met, but I
had much pleasure in rendering him considerable aid in preparing

INTRODUCTION 9
his revised and fuller version of it (in "Historical Essays," Scrib-
ners' Sons, 1901), for which he gave me full credit therein.
Having got my head a little above water financially, it was my
purpose to publish in January, 1903, a volume containing the most
important part of the contemporaneous evidence on the Oregon
question, and I had procured an estimate of the cost, when my
daughter's health failed, and the doctors peremptorily ordered her
sent to California, where, unexpectedly to all, she died, Dec. 17, 1902.
This not only took all the heart out of life for her mother and
me, but again crippled me, not only financially, but otherwise also
by depriving me of her almost indispensable aid in preparing copy
and reading proof, and so again compelled postponement of publica
tion, and even now I cannot find time nor heart to prepare one-half
the matter that I think ought to be printed; but fearful that if
longer delayed some other stroke of adverse fortune may prevent
forever the publication of the evidence collected by me at such great
expense of time and money, herewith is presented to the public the
vital parts of that evidence, most of it first unearthed by me, and
heretofore wholly inaccessible to the general public, and only made
accessible to a few score historians and historical students by my
manuscripts, as stated on page 6, ante.
The study of the history of the Acquisition of Oregon has occu
pied most of my spare time since 1877. From 1875 to 1887, being a
lecturer with illustrations on Yellowstone National Park ; Yosemite
and the Big Trees of California; Colorado; Utah and the Mormon
Question; California; The New West; Gold Mines and Gold Min
ing, and other subjects pertaining to the scenery, resources, indus
tries and history of the Rocky Mountains and Pacific Coast regions,
appearing in many of the leading lecture courses of twenty-six
states from Maine to California, and from Minnesota to Georgia,
I was much taken with the Whitman Saved Oregon Story when first
told to me, in 1877, by Dr. W. A. Mowry, and, like Mrs. Victor and
Hon. Elwood Evans, and Gov. P. H. Burnett, and many others,
assented to it without investigation, because the men who originated
and endorsed it were in position to know the facts and ought to
have told the truth.
Besides, it would have been worth fifteen or twenty thousand
dollars to me as the basis of two illustrated lectures on "Where
Rolls the Oregon," if I could have found evidence to support it so
that I could have risked my reputation in advocating it from the
lecture platform, while, if not true, I saw clearly that no lectures
could be prepared on far-away Oregon which, in this generation,
would even repay the expense necessary for obtaining illustrations
for them, let alone any profit on them. Naturally, therefore, I very
much wished the story to be true, not only for the pleasure it would

10 INTRODUCTION
have been to me to have called the attention of the public to a neg
lected patriotic hero, but also because it would have greatly in
creased my income as long as I had cared to remain in the lecture
field. Thus strongly predisposed to accept the Whitman Saved Oregon
Story as true, and all the vital evidence having been so carefully
concealed from the public that I did not get access to it till 1887,
for five years I continued to assent to it, but was constantly puz
zled by my inability to obtain any definite and conclusive evidence
for it, though eagerly welcoming every bit of evidence that even
seemed to support it, and scrutinizing with utmost rigor all that
seemed to militate against it.
In 1882, having prepared a lecture endorsing the Whitman Saved
Oregon Story, and begun to book dates for it, I journeyed across
the continent from Massachusetts (where I then lived), to Oregon,
thinking I should certainly there be able to find the conclusive evi
dence that I had sought in vain for five years in the East. I made
a pilgrimage to Whitman's grave, and learned, from the man then
living on the site of the mission station, that there was very great
doubt about the truth of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story, and
returning to Portland called at the Oregonian office, and was re
ferred to Hon. M. P. Deady, United States District and Circuit
Judge for the Oregon region from 1860 till his death in 1893, and a
man whose ability and character I had heard Associate Justice
Field, of the United States Supreme Court, commend in the very
highest terms.
To Judge Deady I stated my purpose in journeying to Oregon,
and said : "I shall be greatly obliged, Judge, if you can inform me
where I can find valid evidence that will establish the truth of the
Whitman Saved Oregon Story."
He replied : "I am sorry that I can do nothing to help you out,
Mr. Marshall, but the fact is, there is no truth in the story, and no
evidence has been produced that will bear examination in support
of it. The whole story is merely one of old Gray's yarns."
He referred me to Mrs. Victor and Hon. Elwood Evans as two
persons who had on investigation been convinced of the total falsity
of the Saving Oregon Story of Whitman's Ride.
I corresponded with both of them (not having time then to
remain longer on the Pacific Coast), and soon became convinced
that I must cancel the dates already booked for the Oregon lecture
and give it a much more careful examination before risking my rep
utation by endorsing the Whitman Saved Oregon Story.
Hoping still that something might be saved from the ruins of
the story that I could use on the lecture platform, I continued my
study of the subject for two years more, and then, on Nov. 13, 1884,

INTRODUCTION 11
in a lecture on Oregon in the great Peabody Institute course in Bal
timore, after some forty minutes' discussion of the Whitman Saved
Oregon Story, I concluded with the following: "Heroic as was
Whitman's ride (as is every daring deed done for an adequate mo
tive), it was undertaken solely on missionary business, had no politi
cal purpose, accomplished no political result, and had no more to
do with saving Oregon, or any part of the Old Oregon Territory, to
the United States, than it had with the election of Louis Napoleon
to the presidency of the French Republic, and no man who will read
the evidence can doubt that if Marcus Whitman had never been
born our line would have been 49 degrees to the Pacific Coast, pre
cisely as it is today."
This conclusion having been questioned with no little acerbity by
Dr. W. A. Mowry, in the spring of 1885 I sent so much of the manu
script of the lecture as covered the discussion of the Whitman mat
ter (concluding with the above quoted paragraph) to George Ban
croft, with a request that he would read it, and give me his opinion
as to its historical accuracy.
George Bancroft knew the agencies which secured the Oregon
Territory to us, not only better than anyone else ever did know,
but better than anyone else ever can know them, because he was in
Polk's cabinet until after the Treaty of 1846 fixing the north bound
ary of Oregon was made, and immediately thereafter was sent as our
Minister to England, and remained there through the rest of Polk's
administration, and when, in 1871, after the San Juan Island ques
tion — which was the very fag end of the Oregon boundary question
— had, on several occasions, nearly embroiled us in a war with
Great Britain, it was submitted by the two nations to the Emperor
William for arbitration, Bancroft — then past 70 years of age and
a lifelong Democrat — was promptly nominated by the Republican
President, Grant, and unanimously confirmed by a Republican Sen
ate, as our Minister Plenipotentiary and Envoy Extraordinary to
Berlin, distinctly on the ground that from his intimate personal
connection with the settlement of the Oregon boundary he was the
one man best qualified to present our case successfully, as he did.
Six months later he returned it, with the following note :
"Newport, Sept. 17, 1885.
"Mr. William I. Marshall.
"Dear Sir: I have read your lecture and herewith return it.
It is conclusive on the question you discuss.
"Yours truly,
"GEORGE BANCROFT."

12 INTRODUCTION
This alone ought to be sufficient to satisfy any candid person
that the Whitman Saved Oregon Story is unhistorical.
Further, owing to the deceit practiced upon me in 1877, as here
inafter stated, it was not till 1887 that I obtained access to the
"original sources" at the American Board rooms in Boston, so that
the evidence which Mr. Bancroft so positively endorsed as "conclu
sive" was merely such printed matter as was even then easily
accessible to any patient and industrious student determined to
know the truth, and was not one-fiftieth part as weighty and con
vincing as that which I subsequently obtained and incorporated in
the manuscripts sent to leading historians in 1898, 1899, and 1900,
and the essential parts of which will be found herein published for
the first time.
My occupation as a lecturer traveling all over the country gave
me exceptional facilities for studying the subject in leading public
and private libraries, and old book stores, in nearly all of our large
cities, and there are few extensive collections of Americana of which
I have been able to learn in which I have not worked in person, or
from which I have not obtained by correspondence what they could
offer on this matter.
My investigations have been entirely independent of every one
else, except in the few cases in which I acknowledged indebtedness
(as e. g. to Prof. Bourne, for Atkinson's two letters of 1858 and
1859 ) , and while early in my study of the subject the letters of Mrs.
Victor and Hon. Elwood Evans to me furnished some assistance, it
is now more than sixteen years since I ceased to depend upon them
for anything, as I found that while they were in the main correct
in their conclusions on all the vital points involved in the Whitman
Saved Oregon controversy, their failure to examine the "original
sources" in the correspondence and diaries of Whitman and his
associates, and in the government publications and unpublished
documents, had resulted in so many errors on minor points that I
felt unwilling to rely upon them, preferring to patiently study the
original sources myself for evidence upon all the points involved.
I should probably never have made a thoroughly exhaustive ex
amination of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story if Mrs. Victor had
not written me, in 1883, as follows : "I would advise you against
going more deeply into investigation of the Whitman affair, for if
you begin you will be led on for a great length of time to no pur
pose." Pondering on that declaration, I said to myself: "Can it be true
that an honest investigator, seeking to know the truth about so
important a historical question as to what were the agencies which
secured to this country nearly one-twelfth of its domain on this
continent, when the disputed point is only forty years old (as was

INTRODUCTION 13
then the case), and when there must be, if one only has the patience
and the perseverance to search them out, contemporaneous docu
ments that will settle the matter beyond dispute— can it be that
such an investigator, on such a quest, is only to wade through a
dismal swamp of uncertainty and doubt and come out nowhere?
"If this is so, regarding historical matters only forty years old,
how about those eighty or one hundred, or two, or three, or five
hundred, or a thousand? If this statement is correct, . surely we
would all do better to burn all historical books, and read only fic
tion, for then we should be entertained, and not feel at the same
time that we were probably being humbugged and deceived.
"I do not believe Mrs. Victor is correct in this matter, and I am
going to the bottom of the Whitman myth."
I am free to say, however, looking back on it now, that had I
then supposed it would cost me to arrive at the truth about this
matter one-fortieth part of the time and labor and money it has, I
should not have been willing to undertake the task.
I have visited Washington, D. C, a half dozen times to pursue
my investigations in the State, War and Navy Departments, and the
Congressional Library.
I have been four times across the continent, in 1882, 1899, 1902
and 1905, to examine original sources in Oregon, California and
Washington, and have in my library a full set of the Transactions
of the Oregon Pioneer Association, and have carried on an extensive
correspondence with the pioneer settlers of Oregon, including the
real leaders of the migration of 1843.
I have read every book and every magazine article printed in
this country and in England, prior to the treaty of 1846, which in
any way related to the Oregon question, and also all of any impor
tance published since that time.
I have carefully studied all the debates on Oregon in the seven
teen sessions of Congress at which it was discussed prior to Whit
man's ride, and every one of the reports of committees of the Senate
or House of Representatives made to those seventeen sessions, and
also every report of special agents and government explorers and
cabinet officers on Oregon made before March 1, 1843, and all Con
gressional discussions had or committee reports on Oregon made
since that time.
I have studied with care the full official documents on the Louis
iana Treaty, the Treaty of Ghent, the Florida Treaty and the Ash
burton Treaty (all of which have an important bearing on the Ore
gon question), and also of the three great negotiations with Eng-
Fand in 1818, 1823-24, and 1826-27 on Oregon, and the negotiations
with Russia in 1823-4, all in American State Papers, Foreign Rela
tions, as well as the negotiations which resulted in the Treaty of

14 INTRODUCTION
1846, and the subsequent treaties for the settlement of the claims
of the Hudson's Bay Company and the Puget's Sound Agricultural
Company vs. the United States, and for the arbitration of the San
Juan Island question, including the volume on "The Berlin Arbi
tration." I have also gone carefully over the 2,300 pages of evidence, and
also the arguments of counsel in the famous cases of the Hudson's
Bay Company and the Puget's Sound Agricultural Company vs. the
United States.
I have read carefully every book and pamphlet, and every impor
tant magazine and newspaper article on both sides of the Whitman
Saved Oregon Story. I have carefully studied the files of the New
York Christian Advocate and Zion's Herald for 1833 to 1837, for
the early records of the Methodist Mission to the Oregon Indians,
and the files of the Missionary Herald from 1835 to 1906 for such
information as they were willing to give to the public, as to the
history of the mission founded by Messrs. Spalding and Whitman,
and, by far the most important of all, I have carefully studied all
the correspondence at the office of the American Board from all the
members of their Oregon mission from 1835 to 1871, and in Oregon
and Washington the existing fragments of the diaries of Rev. H. H.
Spalding, Rev. Elkanah Walker, Mrs. Spalding, and Mrs. Walker;
the whole aggregating very close to one million words.
In the winter of 1877-78 I, on three separate occasions, inquired
of the late Charles Hutchins, for years business manager of the
Missionary Herald, if there was anything at the American Board
rooms that would give me any information about the origin and
purpose of Whitman's ride, and he informed me that there was
nothing, except what was in the Missionary Herald for March, 1869,
and May, 1870, of which he sent me copies, and, relying on the cor
rectness of his statements, it was not till 1887 that I learned that
there was the above mentioned immense mass of original manu
scripts there.
Had I not been thus deceived, I should have gone to the bottom
of the whole matter in 1877, when the Whitman Saved Oregon
Story had never been even mentioned in any book or magazine (ex
cept the Missionary Herald) having any wide circulation, and
before the immense amount of legendary tales had grown up about
the matter which now exist, so that then a ten or twelve-page mag
azine article would have made an end of the whole fiction.
As I like to think of Mr. Hutchins as an honest man, I am in
clined to believe that he was himself imposed upon by the report of
some one else at the Mission House, and did not wilfully deceive
me; but, however that may be, the deception has cost me many
thousands of dollars in time and money.

INTRODUCTION 15
Beginning my investigations a believer in the theory that Marcus
Whitman was a great patriotic hero who saved Oregon, and that
the Hudson's Bay Company were hostile to Americans exploring and
establishing missions in and settling in Oregon, and that they
sought, by establishing trading posts and making settlements there
themselves, to hold Oregon for Great Britain; and that our people
and government down to Whitman's arrival in the States in March,
1843, were indifferent about retaining Oregon, and ignorant as to
its value, and believed it inaccessible by wagons over the Rocky
Mountains ; and at every step applying the strictest scientific meth
ods to the examination of all the evidence, seeking not to support
any theory, but to arrive at the exact truth about the acquisition
of Oregon, I was forced, after five years, to the conclusion that
Whitman was in no sense a great man or a great patriot; that his
ride was undertaken solely on the business of his mission, and had
nothing to do with saving any part of Oregon to the United States ;
but I still thought the charges against the Hudson's Bay Company
as made by Gray, and Spalding, and Barrows substantially correct,
and it was not till after five years' further study that I found the
abundant and irresistible evidence that those charges were false,
and that every particle of the contemporaneous correspondence and
reports of all Americans — explorers, travelers, settlers and mis
sionaries — (including Gray and Spalding themselves) — who actu
ally went to Oregon from 1828 to 1846, and came in contact with
the Hudson's Bay Company officers at their various posts, declared
that they had been most hospitably received and treated at each
and all of those posts, and aided in every way in exploring the Ore
gon Territory, and in establishing missions and making settlements
therein, and that only those Americans who sought to wrest the
fur trade from the Hudson's Bay Company, or to "jump" their land
claims at Oregon City and at Vancouver had the slightest cause
of complaint against them, and even they were subject to no fiercer
antagonism in the fur trade by the Hudson's Bay Company than
they were from rival American fur traders in regions farther east,
where the Hudson's Bay Company had no posts, nor to any severer
and often not as severe measures, as from Americans whose land
they tried to "jump" away from them, for it was a common thing
for men who "jumped claims" to be shot on sight all over the
Rocky Mountain and Pacific Coast regions by owners of mining
and other possessory claims (held by precisely the same tenure
that the Hudson's Bay Company at Fort Vancouver, and Dr. Mc
Loughlin at Oregon City, held their claims).
In my nearly ten years' residence in Montana (1866-1875) I
personally knew many men who had thus shot "claim jumpers," and
in every case, if any judicial inquiry was made (which was not

16 INTRODUCTION
commonly deemed at all necessary), the verdict was "justifiable
homicide," and I never knew of a case of more wanton and inex
cusable "claim jumping" than Rev. A. F. Waller's attempt, in 1842,
to seize on part of Dr. McLoughlin's claim at Oregon City (claimed
by him in 1829), the story of which (as very briefly told by
Dr. McLoughlin himself) will be found in a "Copy of a Document"
hereinafter (Part I., Chap. VIL), and more fully by H. H. Bancroft
in his "Oregon," Vol. L, pages 203-225, or the attempt of Williamson
and Alderman, in 1845, to jump part of the premises at Fort Van
couver that had then been in the peaceable and undisputed posses
sion of the Hudson's Bay Company for twenty years (Of. Rept. of
Dr. E. White, sub-Indian Agent to Secretary of War, dated April
4, 1845). But no one of these men experienced death, or even
the slightest violence at the hands of the Hudson's Bay Company's
officers or employes.
The contemporaneous evidence on this point from Americans
who went to Oregon to explore, or as missionaries and settlers,
prior to 1846, much of it never yet printed, and most of the rest of
it only to be found in old books, magazines, newspapers and gov
ernment reports, of which few copies exist, will fill about 250 pages
like this, and, of course, the scope of this volume will not allow
full quotation of this immense mass.
The reader may rest assured, however, that the quotations from
it, in the chapter on the "Truth About the Relations of the Hud
son's Bay Company to the American Exploration, Occupation and
Settlement of the Oregon Territory," are perfectly fair samples of
the whole.
It being an absolutely indispensable, postulate of the Whitman
Saved Oregon Story that the Hudson's Bay Company constantly
and bitterly opposed Americans getting to or settling in Oregon,
it goes without saying that these quotations have been carefully
omitted from the books and magazines and newspaper articles advo
cating that story.
Undoubtedly, the Hudson's Bay Company, as was their duty as
British subjects, desired and hoped that England would succeed in
retaining that part of the Oregon Territory north and west of the
Columbia (being all that was really in dispute after 1824), but
they understood perfectly well, as did the governments of England
and the United States, that by the express terms of the Treaties of
1818 and 1827 no settlements made by either party, while those
treaties remained in force, could in any way affect the question of
the title to the country, and that till the treaty of 1827 was abro
gated, and a boundary line established, the citizens and subjects of
each nation had exactly the same rights to be in any part of the
Old Oregon Territory.

INTRODUCTION 17
My investigations have been entirely independent of all others,
and every conclusion arrived at has been forced upon me by the
irresistible weight of the evidence. My opinions, however, like the
opinions of other people on historical questions, are not of the
slightest consequence, any farther than they are a faithful and
honest reflection of the valid evidence, and I have never asked any
one to accept my opinions, but only to examine the evidence.
Much of the most vital part of that evidence has never hereto
fore been accessible to historical students even, except in my manu
scripts, and much less to the general public, and while, for reasons
already stated, I cannot even now afford to print all I should like to
of it, there is enough herein, it seems to me, to convince any candid
mind :
First, that Marcus Whitman did not save Oregon, or any part
of Oregon, to the United States.
Second, that no thought of any possibility of doing any such a
thing was in his mind when he started to ride to the States.
Third, that about the region really in dispute between the two
countries, that is, the part north and west of the Columbia, Whit
man not only knew nothing of the slightest value to communicate
to the national government in the spring of 1843, but learned noth
ing about it till nearly three years later, and then learned it, not
from his own explorations, or those of any of his associates in the
American Board Mission, but from the report of an exploring party
sent into the Puget's Sound country from the settlement in the
Willamette Valley, in the autumn of 1845.
Fourth, that there was not the slightest danger of the loss of
any part of Oregon if no missionary had ever gone there.
Fifth, that there was really in dispute between the United States
and Great Britain, after 1824, only the region north and west of the
Columbia River.
Sixth, that the national government had very much fuller infor
mation about Oregon prior to 1843, from the reports of American
fur traders and government explorers, than it has had about any
other territorial acquisition we have ever made on this continent
on the day of its final accomplishment, and that before Whitman
went to Oregon, in 1836, or even the Methodist missionaries went
there, in 1834, it was generally understood throughout the country
that Oregon was easily accessible by wagons over the low passes in
the Rocky Mountains, especially the South Pass.
Seventh, that Marcus Whitman was not in any sense of the term
a great man, and that, though he was undoubtedly a very zealous
missionary, he was far from being a wise, or a far-seeing, or a
magnanimous, or a prudent, or a successful one.

18 INTRODUCTION
The Missionary Herald, the official organ of the American Board,
in its issue for July, 1848, on page 237, prefaced an account of the
dreadful massacre (Nov. 29-Dec. 8, 1847), in which Dr. and Mrs.
Whitman and twelve others were murdered by the Indians, among
whom he had been missionarying for eleven years, with the follow
ing 162 words of biography of Marcus Whitman. As the secretaries
of the Board had absolute control of the columns of the Missionary
Herald, and as they had before them all the correspondence of the
mission, including Whitman's own extravagant claims of great ser
vice to the government, and also had reasonably fresh in their mem
ories all that Whitman said when in Boston (March 30- April 8,
1843), about the origin and purpose of his ride, and as they have
never been in the least degree "backward about coming forward"
with claims of good accomplished in any direction by their mission
aries, and as they well knew that in this account of the massacre
they were chronicling the utter destruction of their Oregon mis
sion, which had cost them some |40,000, and also well knew that
every one of their readers, in the sympathy aroused by his tragic
end, would be in most receptive and least critical mood concerning
any claims they might make for the value of Dr. Whitman's life
and work, what is more evident than that if they had regarded him
as in any way a remarkable man, or believed that their Oregon
mission had in any manner favorably affected the political destinies
of the Oregon country, much more if they had believed that the
mission as a whole, or Whitman as an individual, had "Saved Ore
gon," or any part of Oregon to the nation, they would then have
claimed it?
Instead of which, they published the following absolutely truth
ful sketch of his life, a sketch whose correctness no critic of the
Whitman Saved Oregon Story is disposed to question in the slight
est: "Doctor Whitman was born in Rushville, in the State of New
York, Sept. 4, 1802. He joined the church in that place in Janu
ary, 1824, though he dated his conversion from a revival in Plain-
field, Massachusetts, in 1819.
"He gave himself to the missionary work in 1834. In February,
1835, he went to Oregon for the first time. Having returned the
same year, he was married in February, 1836 ; and in the following
month he set out a second time for his chosen field of labor. He
made a visit to the Atlantic States in the spring of 1843, being
called thither by the business of the mission. He was a diligent
and self-denying laborer in the work to which he consecrated his
time and energies. In the last letter received from him he described
at considerable length his plans and hopes in regard to the Indians

INTRODUCTION 19
showing his interest not only in the Kayuses, but in more distant
tribes." Nothing more did the Missionary Herald say about Marcus
Whitman's life and deeds till its issue of December, 1866, in which
appeared its first mention of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story.
Much better would it have been for Whitman's memory in the end,
as well as for that of all his associates in the mission, if nothing
but these 162 truthful words had ever been printed concerning his
life. Not a single advocate of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story in
book, magazine or newspaper, has ever been honest enough with
his readers to even allude to this biographical sketch of Whitman,
much less to quote it.
In my study of this subject I have depended on "Greenhow's His
tory of Oregon and California," and John Fiske's "Discovery of
America" for the history of the Spanish explorations of the Ore
gon coast, but for everything later than the Nootka treaty I have
in all cases gone to original sources, whenever possible to obtain
access to them, in no case trusting to any historian's account of an
exploration by land or sea when an account written by the explor
ers themselves could be obtained, nor to any "Abridgment" of
"Debates in Congress," but going to the full official report in the
"Debates in Congress," "Annals of Congress," and "Congressional
Globe," nor to anybody's summary of the reports of committees of
the House and Senate, but to the full reports in the bound volumes
of executive documents of the two Houses, nor to any one's state
ment of the results of the negotiations with England and Russia
about Oregon, and with Spain about Florida and the southwest
boundary of Louisiana, and the south boundary of Oregon, and
with France about the Louisiana Purchase, and with England about
the questions settled by the Ashburton Treaty, and the Treaty of
1863, concerning the claims of the Hudson's Bay Company and the
Puget's Sound Agricultural Company, but to the official reports of
the negotiations. I have myself made every investigation, except in
the very few cases where I acknowledge indebtedness to others, and
have taken the utmost pains to verify the accuracy of my work, and,
knowing well how easily mistakes are made in copying, I shall be
greatly obliged if any inaccurate quotation, or any error of fact is
found, if the finder will have the kindness to notify me of the same.
I hope that the enormous labor and pains I have bestowed on this
subject will make this book merit Prof. John Fiske's commendation,
in his letter to me, which is published in my discussion of Prof.
Bourne's "Legend of Marcus Whitman," as follows :
"You have done your work so thoroughly that it will not need
to be done again."

20 INTRODUCTION
It seems to me best to treat the Oregon Expansion under the
following heads : PART I.
1. The period of early maritime discovery and exploration
(1543-1792). This period outlined the coast and determined the
harbors, and discovered the mouth of the great navigable river
which drains nearly all the Old Oregon Territory.
2. The period of overland exploration and discovery and of the
fur traders (1804-1840). This period discovered every important
natural feature — mountain ranges, peaks and passes, plains, river
valleys, lakes (of any considerable size), desert regions, fertile
areas, forests and prairies of the whole Oregon Territory (south of
49 degrees), except that part north and west of the Columbia, being
about 55,000 to 58,000 square miles.
It is not claimed that all the minute details of the geography of
Oregon were known, even forty years later than 1842, but all the
great features were perfectly well known to the fur traders and to
the national government before there was any excitement in the
States about any missionaries going to Oregon, and no missionary,
Methodist, Presbyterian, Congregationalist or Catholic, ever dis
covered any important geographical feature of any part of the Old
Oregon Territory.
3. The beginning of real American settlement (1832).
4. The discovery of a route for and the development of the first
transcontinental wagon road.
5. Governmental action in relation to Oregon.
(a) The diplomacy of the Oregon question.
(b) Executive and Congressional action on the Oregon ques
tion.
6. The truth about the relation of the Hudson's Bay Company
to the American exploration, occupation and settlement of Oregon.
PAET II.
THE MISSIONARY EPISODE.
7. The truth about the origin of missions to the Oregon Indians.
8. The establishment and continuance of missions to the Ore
gon Indians. (a) The Methodist Mission (1834-1844-6).
(b) The A. B. C. F. Mission (1835-1848).
(c) The Catholic Mission to the Flatheads and allied tribes,
October, 1841, to 1850, and September, 1866, to the pres
ent time.

INTRODUCTION 21
9. The long-concealed facts about the origin, purpose and re
sults of Whitman's ride to the States begun Oct. 3, 1842.
10. The decadence of the American Board Mission after 1839.
11. All that Whitman ever claimed about his ride and the bene
fits of his mission in his letters after his return to Oregon.
12. The true causes of the Whitman massacre.
13. An examination of the "testimony" given in support of the
Whitman Saved Oregon Story.
Necessarily there must be some overlapping in time of some of
these periods, it being impossible to draw hard and fast chronolog
ical lines between most of them.

WILLIAM I. MARSHALL

A BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.
William Isaac Marshall was born June 25th, 1840, at Fitchburg,
Worcester County, Massachusetts. His father was William Mar
shall, a mason contractor, and his mother was Fiorina (Weeks)
Marshall. The first American ancestor of the Marshall family came
to Boston from London, England, in 1635, on the ship Hopewell.
Mr. Marshall's early educational training was limited to the
grammar school and one year at high school. His father died when
he was seventeen years old, and he was forced to labor to assist his
mother in the care and support of the family. At the age of eighteen
he commenced teaching in Massachusetts, and a few months later,
January, 1859, he moved westward to Conneaut, Ohio, where he
taught school for f 10 per month and "boarded round." In 1860 he
made the acquaintance of the late Prof. P. R. Spencer, originator of
the Spencerian system of penmanship, and became a student of his,
and graduated under his personal instruction. After this he taught
school in several towns in Canada, and was principal of the schools
of the borough of Manchester, now a part of Pittsburg, Pa. Follow
ing this experience, he acted for a time as agent for the "Spencerian
System," and also became part owner in the "Capital City Business
College," at Columbus, Ohio, and later sole owner of the institution.
While conducting this college he was in correspondence with an
old schoolmate, who induced him to go to Virginia City, Montana,
to the famous Alder Gulch gold mines. He remained there nearly
ten years, working his mines; was also principal of the schools at
Virginia City, and was superintendent of the schools of Madison
County, Montana. While there he studied law and was admitted
to the bar of Montana, and later, on his return East, to practice in
the United States courts.
Returning to Massachusetts in 1876, he began lecturing on "Gold
Mines and Gold Mining," "The Yellowstone National Park" and kin
dred subjects, and was the original lecturer, with illustrations, on
American subjects. As a lecturer he was accorded a place continu
ously in the leading lecture courses of the East, and occupied the

24 A BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
platform in all the large cities of the Eastern and Middle States.
He continued on the lecture platform till 1887, when he moved to
Chicago to enter an insurance partnership with his brother. This
partnership he left to become a principal in the schools of the city,
and was at the head of the William E. Gladstone School at the
time of his death, October 30th, 1906.
For twenty-nine years he had been studying about the "Acquisi
tion of the Old Oregon Territory to the United States." In 1904 he
published "History vs. The Whitman Saved Oregon Story," and in
1905 issued the pamphlet, "The Hudson Bay Company's Archives
Furnish No Support to the Whitman Saved Oregon Story," and
shortly before death claimed him, had finished the manuscript for
this book.
He was a member of the Third Unitarian Church of Chicago, and
for sixteen years its secretary and treasurer.
He was a Mason, one of the organizers of and first master of
Columbian Lodge No. 819, A. F. & A. M. ; a member of the George
Howland Club, Principals' Club of Chicago, and of the American
Historical Association, the National Geographical Society, and an
honorary member of the Oregon Historical Society.
In 1864 Mr. Marshall married Miss Ellen P. Foster, and one
child, Ellen Foster Marshall, was born to this union. She died four
years previous to her father's death. Mrs. Marshall still survives
them. Chicago, August, 1909. Mrs. Ellen Foster' Marshall.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON

AND THE

LONG SUPPRESSED EVIDENCE
ABOUT MARCUS WHITMAN

PART ONE.

CHAPTER I.
THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE HISTORY OF THE
ACQUISITION OF OREGON.
The Old Oregon Territory comprises all our territory on this
continent west of the summit of the main range of the Rocky Moun
tains between 42 degrees and 49 degrees, north latitude, covering
the present States of Oregon, Washington and Idaho, with so much
of Montana (about 28,000 square miles) as is west of the main
range, and so much (about 13,000 square miles) of Wyoming as is
west of the main range and north of 42 degrees, in all about 292,000
square miles, or nearly 1/12 of all our domain on this continent,
and the true history of its acquisition by the United States is not
only full of most romantic incidents, but is unique in the following
respects :
1. It is that part of our territory to which our chain of title is
not only as long as to any other, but is very much more curiously
complex than to any other region we possess.
2. It is the only territory on this continent to which we have
ever claimed a title by priority of (a) discovery, (b) exploration
and (c) settlement.
3. It is the only acquisition of territory on this continent to
which we have obtained an undisputed title without either conquest
or cash purchase.
4. It was the first territory on the Pacific Coast to which we
ever made any claim, and the first one on that coast to which we
established a title.
5. It was the first Pacific Coast region to which there was any
considerable overland migration from the States east of the great
plains.

26 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
6. It is the only part of our territorial acquisition concerning
whose great value to us the foresight of our greatest statesmen
was so clear and so unanimous that, while it was separated from
our most western settlements by a full thousand miles of little
known and wholly unsettled wilderness, they all — Jefferson, Madi
son, Monroe, J. Q. Adams, Jackson, Van Buren, Tyler, Polk, Pierce,
Buchanan, Calhoun, Clay, Gallatin, Everett, Webster, Walker, For
syth, Richard Rush, Henry Middleton, Cambreling, Choate, More-
head, Floyd, Robt. J. Walker, J. W. Taylor, Sevier, King, Benton,
Linn, Woodbury, John Reed, Caleb Cushing, and many others — in
sisted on no line more favorable to Great Britain than 49 degrees
to the Pacific— and, as early as 1826, J. Q. Adams' administration
notified the English government that "49 degrees to the Coast was
our ultimatum."
7. It is our only acquisition of territory on this continent
which had been very extensively explored by land and sea, alike by
our private citizens on fur trading, and scientific expeditions, and
by government parties under command of officers of our army and
navy, before our title to it was fully established. The reports of
their explorations had not only been widely read by our own citi
zens, but also republished in London and Dublin, and translated
into the French, German and Dutch languages, and published in
those countries in 1814 and 1819, and between 1836 and 1841.
8. It is the only territory not undisputably ours which Great
Britain captured from us in the War of 1812, and was compelled to
restore to us by the Treaty of Ghent.
9. It is the only territory in which for nearly a whole genera
tion (1818 to 1846) the citizens and subjects of Great Britain and
the United States were, by wise and freely executed treaties, at
iiberty to live on a footing of perfect equality, and where, during
all that time — as every particle of the contemporaneous corre
spondence of the Americans shows — every American who entered
the territory — fur traders, missionaries, scientists, explorers or
settlers — was very kindly received and most hospitably entertained
by the Hudson's Bay Company's officers at all their posts; and, if
they desired to remain in any other capacity than fur traders, were
aided in the most liberal manner to establish themselves as mis
sionaries or as settlers.
If Americans sought to engage in the fur trade they were met
with the strongest competition that the Hudson's Bay Company
could wage, but that competition was as fair as, and no fiercer than,
the rival American fur traders waged against each other in regions
far east of those ever occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company's
posts.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 27
10. It is the acquisition to which there was far less opposition,
whether we consider the relative numbers of those who spoke and
wrote against and for it, or their weight in the councils of the
nation, than to any other acquisition of territory we have ever made,
except the Florida Purchase and the Gadsden Purchase, to both of
which there was practically no opposition.
11. It is that part of our territory about which, before March
1, 1843 (i. e., more than three years before our title to it was fully
established, and before Marcus Whitman could have reached St.
Louis, let alone Washington), we had had more numerous and more
important diplomatic negotiations, more debates in Congress, more
committee reports to Congress — all unanimous by the committees
and unanimously adopted by Congress — more books and magazine
articles printed for general reading, more reports printed by the
government for gratuitous distribution, and therefore far more
knowledge possessed alike by the government at Washington and
by the people of the country generally, than about any other terri
torial acquisition we have ever made on this continent, even on the
day such other acquisition was finally accomplished.
12. It was the region which originated so much of the Monroe
Doctrine as declares "That the American continents, by the free
and independent position they have assumed, are to be henceforth
no, longer regarded as open to colonization by any European na
tion," this having been first stated July 22, 1823, in two letters of
instructions from John Q. Adams, Secretary of State, to Henry
Middleton, Minister to Russia, and Richard Rush, our Minister to
England, who were then negotiating respecting the Oregon bound
ary. 13. It is the only portion of our territory where for more than
twenty-five years all British subjects were liable to arrest and trial
by the officers of the Hudson's Bay Company for minor offenses,
and where, between British subjects, all civil cases involving no
more than 200 pounds were also tried before the Hudson's Bay
Company's officers, while for graver offenses British subjects were
liable to be arrested by the Hudson's Bay Company's officers and
sent to Upper Canada for trial, and civil cases involving more than
200 pounds, between British subjects, were also sent to Upper Can
ada for trial (Cf. Act of Parliament, July 2, 1821, quoted in full
by Greenhow, Ed. 1845, p. 467).
14. It is the only part of our territory where, for more than
three years, the citizens of the United States and the subjects of
Great Britain jointly supported a provisional government organized
by the people living in Oregon, without any authorization therefor
or assistance therein from either home government, and without
those of either nationality losing their allegiance to their respective

28 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
governments. In the language of a memorial of this provisional
government, dated June 28, 1844, "By treaty stipulations, the terri
tory has become a kind of neutral ground, in the occupancy of which
the citizens of the United States and the subjects of Great Britain
have equal rights and ought to have equal protection."
Although the Treaty of 1846, fixing 49 degrees as the north
boundary of Oregon, the news of which reached Oregon Nov. 12,
1846, ended "the neutral territory" matter, and also all authority
of the Hudson's Bay Company to arrest and try British subjects
in Oregon, or send them to Canada for trial, this provisional gov
ernment continued to be the only government in Oregon till, on
March 3, 1849, Joseph Lane of Indiana (having arrived at Oregon
City the day before) assumed his duties as the first regularly ap
pointed territorial governor of Oregon, under the Act of Congress
of Aug. 14, 1848, creating the Territory of Oregon, and providing
for its government.
15. It is the only territory we have acquired concerning the
obtaining of which there has been injected into our history, and
very widely circulated and believed, a pure legend known as the
Whitman Saved Oregon Story, a fiction for the history of whose
genesis and development, and the proof of whose total falsity the
reader is referred to Part II. of this book.
It is the purpose of this book (which is the result of more than
twenty-eight years' careful study of the subject) to establish be
yond any possibility of dispute the correctness of all the foregoing
fifteen propositions, and to state without fear or favor all the
important facts about the acquisition of Oregon, as they appear in
the original contemporaneous documents, many of which have not
heretofore been published (and the more important of which that
relate to Marcus Whitman have been deliberately suppressed for the
past half century or more by those advocates of the Whitman Saved
Oregon Story who have possessed or controlled them).
Conscious of his lack of a polished literary style, the author will
permit each of the important actors in the Oregon Expansion to
tell, as far as possible, in his own words, his part therein; and as
several of the positions he seeks to establish are directly contrary
to the ideas generally believed about the history of the acquisition
of the Oregon Territory, he must crave the reader's indulgence if he
not only cites very many original authorities, but if he also quotes
very fully from many of them, and especially from those which
other writers upon the subject have neglected to examine, or to
mention; or, in the case of a few that they have mentioned, to
quote fairly, so that the reader could judge for himself whether or
not the documents really sustain the claims that the advocates of
the Whitman Saved Oregon Story have advanced.

CHAPTER II.
THE PERIOD OF MARITIME DISCOVERY.
The true story of the acquisition of the Old Oregon Territory
must be sought in many an unfamiliar book and many an unpub
lished manuscript, and is all too little known, even by those who
are very well read in the history of our States east of the Rocky
Mountains, but one whose interest, as well as value, to all patriotic
Americans yields rich compensation for the time needed to rapidly
review it.
The history of the Oregon Territory vividly recalls the story of
Cinderella. From 1818 to 1848 the Oregon Territory largely occupied public
attention, while all else we now own beyond the Rocky Mountains —
then belonging to Mexico and Russia — was rarely mentioned. But
the discovery of gold in California in 1848, and later of the rich
silver mines in Nevada, so fixed attention on these States that for
more than thirty years little was heard of the Oregon Territory
till, a few years since, it suddenly appeared ; that when the prince
came seeking what Pacific Coast section could wear the dainty
slipper of highest prosperity, it best fitted, not the golden nor even
the silver State, but their long-neglected, patiently drudging sister,
"Where Rolls the Oregon." The exports of Oregon in 1880 having
exceeded, per capita, those of any other State in the Union, and
with the speedy completion thereafter of transcontinental railroad
communication with it, first by the Oregon Short Line division of
the Union Pacific, soon followed by the Northern Pacific, and a few
years later by the Great Northern, it began to receive again its
proper share of attention from the people of the rest of the country,
who had almost entirely ignored it. for a whole generation.
As in the case of all other territory on this continent, any part
of our title to which is derived from Spain, the first link in our
curiously complex chain of title to Oregon is written in the Bull of
Pope Alexander V., in 1493, granting Spain exclusive rights of
trade, navigation, fishery and conquest in all seas not before occu
pied by a Christian prince or people, which they might find in west
ward exploration, as Pope Nicholas had, in 1454, granted to Port
ugal for southward and eastward exploration.

30 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
In 1494 Spain and Portugal signed the famous "Treaty of Par
tition of the Ocean," which gave Portugal everything east of a
meridian passing 370 leagues west of the Cape Verde Islands, and
Spain everything west of that line. The east coast of Brazil being
afterwards found to extend east of that meridian, this treaty gave
that immense empire to Portugal, much to the chagrin of Spain,
which had hoped to monopolize the New World. In 1519 Cortez
landed in Mexico and soon conquered it.
Exploration crept northward along the Pacific Coast from Mex
ico very slowly till, in 1543, Cabrillo is supposed to have reached 43°
N. Lat., which is one degree N. of the line which, by the Florida
treaty of 1819, was established as the S. boundary of Oregon.
About 1543 Spain concluded that the less known about the
coasts and countries north of Mexico, the less likely would they be
to have other nations contending with them for the commerce and
dominion of the Pacific and its coasts, and for many years they dis
couraged all farther exploration, and by most stringent regulations
strove to prevent the too-rapid development of Spanish America.
No Spaniard could emigrate to America, no new settlement be
formed there, no new sea or country explored without express per
mission of the King, which was very difficult to obtain; and the
results of exploration were often concealed or tardily and imper
fectly announced. Nothing could be cultivated or manufactured for
commerce in America which could be imported from Spain ; and no
intercourse could be carried on between Spanish colonies, or be
tween them and Spain, except in government vessels, or those under
its immediate supervision. The Spanish American could have no
correspondence with other countries, and foreigners were prohibited
from touching territories claimed by Spain, or even navigating the
seas in their vicinity, under pain of death. "Whoever," says Hak-
luyt, at the end of the 16th century, "is acquainted with the Spanish
and Portugese writers shall find that they account all other nations
for pirates, rovers and thieves who visit any heathen coast, that they
have sailed by or looked on."
No other exploring expedition went to the N. W. Coast for sixty
years, when, in 1602-3, Vizcaino made a fairly good survey of the
California coast, discovering and remaining some time in the lovely
Bay of Monterey, but saw no more of Oregon than Cabrillo. His
voyage was attended with serious troubles. The scurvy raged vio
lently, and they were sorely tried— says Torquemada, the historian
of the expedition — by their "chief enemy the N. W. wind," (which
is the prevailing summer wind of that coast, but) which, in accord
ance with the general superstition of his age, he declares "was
raised up by the foe of the human race, in order to prevent the ad-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 31
vance of the ships, and to delay the discovery of those countries,
and the conversion of their inhabitants to the Catholic faith."
Though annually the Spanish galleons, on their voyages from the
East Indies to Acapulco sailed along the California coast south
ward from Cape Mendocino, and the Russians, under Behring and
Tchirikof, in 1741 and '42, had discovered and partly explored our
territory of Alaska, one hundred and sixty years passed after Viz
caino's voyage, before Spain consented to any colonization of Cali
fornia, or farther exploration of the N. W. Coast.
But while all the Oregon Coast remained thus untrodden and
unseen by Europeans, numerous fictitious accounts were published
in Europe, of explorations there, and of the discovery there of the
long sought N. W. passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific, the most
noted of which were those of Maldonado and of Fonte, which, though
widely believed, were pure fabrications, and of de Fuca, which (if it
had any foundation in an actual voyage) was mistaken in suppos
ing that the strait through which he claimed to have sailed led
across the continent. These fabulous narratives are striking proofs
of the ignorance, even of the most enlightened nations of Europe, as
late as the early years of the 18th century, concerning the shape and
extent of America, and especially its North West Coasts.
Spain's high pretensions to exclusive ownership of America on
the Atlantic coast were successfully resisted by other European na
tions, and French, English, Dutch and Swedish colonies had occu
pied that coast, from the St. Lawrence to some way south of the
Savannah, and were slowly creeping over the Alleghanies and along
the Great Lakes into the Mississippi Valley, when the mighty strug
gle between France and England for American supremacy ended
in the fatal defeat of Montcalm, and the fall of Quebec, in 1759, fol
lowed by the secret cession to Spain, in 1762, of all the claims of
France to territory west of the Mississippi River, and the following
year, by her surrender to England of all her claims east of the Mis
sissippi. Spain, now fearing for the security of her claims to exclusive
dominion on the Pacific Coast, devised an extensive but unpractical
scheme of colonization and exploration, under which between 1769
and 1779, eight missionary establishments under the charge of the
Franciscans were placed in the present state of California, stretch
ing from San Diego north to San Francisco.
Unlike the Jesuits who had had missions in Lower California,
from 1697 to 1767 (when they were expelled from Spain and all
Spanish America), and who had diligently explored the country and
studied all its natural resources, the Franciscans, who were mostly
from the lower orders of society and wholly uneducated (except in
their church duties and ritual, and some kind of industry), made no

32 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
attempt at exploration, and no efforts to acquire a knowledge of the
resources of Upper California.
They seem to have been honest, patient, well meaning men, who
labored heroically and faithfully to discharge their duty as they
understood it, but whose mental horizon was so very narrow, that
their seventy years' occupancy of the country added scarcely any
thing to the world's knowledge of its climate, natural features,
vegetable and animal productions or mineral resources, and under
whose regime California furnished nothing to the world's commerce
but hides, horns and tallow.
How different the history of the modern world would have been
had Spain, in the plenitude of her pride and power, explored Cali
fornia in the 16th century, sufficiently to have discovered its rich
mines of gold!
Even in her decline, in the latter part of the 18th and the earlier
years of the 19th century, had the Jesuits instead of the Franciscans
been put in charge of the Upper California missions or had Spain
not crushed the energy and enterprise out of her colonists by more
than 200 years of repression of development, there could scarcely
have been failure for more than half a century to find those mines of
gold, the possession of which by Spain would certainly have changed
the destinies of this country in ways no man's imagination can con
ceive, and have exercised a profound and far-reaching effect on all
the later, modern history of civilized humanity.
To strengthen her claims to exclusive ownership under the papal
bull by at least a show of occupancy, in 1774 for the first time in 171
years, the Spanish flag again saluted the breeze off the Oregon coast,
waving from the corvette Santiago, under command of Ensign Juan
Perez, whose explorations were so unsatisfactory that the next year
Capt. Bruno Heceta was sent in the same corvette, with Lieut.
Bodega accompanying, in the schooner Sonora. The day the battle
of Bunker Hill was fought, they were taking fresh water on board,
in the little harbor of Port Trinidad, about fifty miles south of the
Oregon line.
Exploring the Oregon coast with various adventures and mis
haps, on August 15, 1775, in Lat. 46c 17', Heceta came opposite
an opening whence rushed too strong a current to allow his enter
ing, though he remained another day to try it.
He named this bay Assumption Inlet, but on the charts pub
lished in Mexico, after his return, it is called Heceta's Inlet, and
Rio de San Roque. This opening was the bay at the mouth of the
"Great River of the West," the full discovery, exploration, naming
and ownership of which was reserved for the citizens of the new
nation, whose soldiers were then besieging their British foes in
Boston.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 33
In 1776, the last of Capt. Jas. Cook's famous exploring expedi
tions sailed from England, mainly to determine the question of a
northwest passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific, Parliament hav
ing amended an act offering 20,000 pounds reward to any English
merchant vessel discovering such a passage from Hudson's Bay, so
that it was offered to naval as well as merchant ships, for any such
passage by Hudson's Bay or otherwise. Cook made important dis
coveries farther north, but saw nothing on the Oregon coast not
previously seen by the Spaniards. He was murdered in the Sand
wich Islands, and in December, 1779, his ships anchored at Canton,
China, where they made a wholly unlooked for discovery, of vastly
more commercial importance than all the others they had made, and
one which profoundly affected the destinies not only of the Oregon
Territory, but of the whole N. W. Coast of America, opening new
avenues to commerce, and within a dozen years thereafter sending
adventurous vessels into every nook and corner of that immense
stretch of coast which for 250 years after the conquest of Mexico,
had only at long intervals, and at a few points been beheld by
white men.
As they had touched here and there, officers and crew had bar
tered to the natives old clothes, buttons, knives, and other things
to them of little or no value, for rich furs, not as articles of merch
andise, but for use on board ship, for clothes and bedding.
Many of them had thus become spoiled or much damaged.
When reported in Canton (whither no ship had ever before come
from the N. W. Coast of America), that Cook's ships had furs, there
was great excitement, and eager competition, and in a few days for
what had cost them little or nothing the seamen received money and
goods to the value of more than $10,000.
The news of this immense profit stimulated adventurous Eng
lish and American merchants to fit out vessels for this "Northwest
Trade," as it was called.
Irving well says "It was as if a new Gold Coast had been dis
covered." Some of the earliest vessels in this trade were commanded by
John Meares, a lieutenant in the British navy on half pay, but sail
ing under the Portugese flag to avoid the claims of the British East
India Co. to a monopoly of the commerce of the Pacific, in vessels
under the British flag.
July 5, 1788, he started to sail into the bay at the mouth of the
"Great River of the West," but, frightened by the terrible breakers,
hauled out without crossing the bar, and, though the river must
then have been at high flood, he unaccountably concluded that there
was no river there, entering in his log-book, that "We can now
safely assert that there is no such river as that of St. Roque exists,

34 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
as laid down on the Spanish charts ;" and so he rechristened the As
sumption Inlet of Heceta as Deception Bay, and the bold cape on its
north side as Cape Disappointment.
Yet, so hard pressed for argument were the British commission
ers, appointed in 1826 to treat with our Government on the ques
tion of title to the Oregon Territory, that they actually quoted this
paragraph from Meares' Narrative, as proof that he had actually
discovered the mouth of the river, whose existence is in it positively
denied. Meares' vessels were seized in 1789, by the Spanish Commander
at Nootka Sound, as intruders on Spanish territory.
This led to a vigorous diplomatic correspondence between the
English, Spanish and French governments, some phases of which,
owing to the famous "Family Compact" between the kings of France
and Spain, and to the complications of the French Revolution, are
very interesting and curious, if space permitted entering into par
ticulars of them, to extensive war preparations on the part of most
of the powers of Europe, and to various demands and counter pro
posals, one of which demands made by England was that the
Northern line of exclusive Spanish dominion should be fixed at the
40th parallel of North Latitude, from the Pacific to the Missouri
River. Fortunately for our national welfare, Spain absolutely refused
any limitation on the North, and the rapid progress of the French
Revolution compelling England to abate her unjustifiable demands,
finally, October 28, 1790, the first treaty ever made between any
European nations concerning the N. W. Coast of America, and gen
erally known as the "Nootka Treaty," was signed.
John Ledyard, the famous traveller, was born in Connecticut,
and was serving as a corporal of marines on board the Resolution,
one of Capt. James Cook's ships in his last famous exploring voyage
(1776-1780) and from his letters the news of the immense profits to
be made in the fur trade of the N. W. Coast of America soon spread
among the adventurous merchants and fearless seamen of New Eng
land, and the result is thus told by Geo. Bancroft, in the "Reply of
the United States to the case of the Govt, of Her Britannic
Majesty," in the San Juan Island Arbitration: "The British case
exaggerates the importance of the voyage of Captain Vancouver.
So far were American fur-traders from following his guidance, they
were his forerunners and teachers. Their early voyages are among
the most marvelous events in the history of commerce. So soon as
the Independence of the United States was acknowledged by Great
Britain the strict enforcement of the old unrepealed navigation laws
cut them off from their former haunts of commerce, and it became a
question from what ports American ships could bring home coffee,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 35
and sugar, and spices, and tea. All British colonies were barred
against them as much as were those of Spain. So American ships
sailed into eastern oceans, where trade with the natives was free.
The great Asiatic commerce poured wealth into the lap of the new
republic, and Americans observing the fondness of the Chinese for
furs, sailed fearlessly from the Chinese seas, or round Cape Horn
to the northwest coast of America, in quest of peltry to exchange
for the costly fabrics and products of China. They were in the
waters of northwest America long before the Hudson's Bay Com
pany. We know, alike from British and from Spanish authorities,
that an American sloop, fitted out at Boston in New England, and
commanded by Captain Kendrick, passed through the straits of
Fuca just at the time when the American Constitution went into
operation — two years before Vancouver, and even before Quimper
and de Haro. Americans did not confine themselves to one passage
in preference to others, but entered every channel, and inlet, and
harbor, where there was a chance of trafficking with a red Indian
for skins ; and they handed down from one to another the results of
their discoveries.
"The instruction from the British Admiralty to Captain Van
couver was prompted by an account, which they had seen, of the
voyage of Kendrick, and the belief, derived from that account, that
the waters of the Pacific might reach far into the American con
tinent." (Cf. Berlin Arbitration, pp. 124-125.)
Among the American captains in the N. W. trade was Robert
Gray, Master of the good ship Columbia, from Boston, who, sailing
from Nootka Sound, for Canton, in 1789, sold his furs, took in a
cargo of tea, and August 10, 1790, entered Boston Harbor, having
the honor of first carrying the stars and stripes around the world.
He immediately returned to the N. W. Coast, and remained
exploring and trading with the natives till the spring of 1792.
In April, 1792, the famous British explorer, Capt. Geo. Van
couver, reached the California coast, and sailed slowly northward,
examining closely — as he himself says — -"under the most favorable
conditions of wind and weather," the whole coast and especially the
Deception Bay of Meares, and April 29th, entered in his journal
that "The several large rivers, and capacious bays and inlets, that
have been described as discharging their waters into the Pacific,
between the 40th and 48th parallels were reduced to brooks, insuf
ficient for our vessels to navigate, or to bays inaccessible as harbors
for refitting."
The very day that Vancouver thus recorded his conviction that
there was no great river at Deception Bay, he spoke the Columbia,
and was informed by Captain Gray that he had been off the mouth
of a great river, in Lat. 46°, 10', where the outset was so

36 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
strong as to baffle all his attempts at entrance for nine days, where
upon, Vancouver, with that lordly contempt for an American cap
tain, then felt by all His Britannic Majesty's naval officers, added
to his entry of Captain Gray's information, in his journal, that
"This was probably the opening passed by us on the forenoon of the
27th, and was apparently inaccessible not from the current, but
from the breakers that extend across it."
Eminent explorer and great navigator as Captain Vancouver
of His Majesty's service was, he was vastly mistaken for once, as
the Down East merchant captain proved by immediately sailing
away to Meares' Deception Bay, and, on May 11, 1792 — a date ever
memorable in Oregon history — he sailed boldly through the break
ers which the British naval officers had agreed were impassable, and
into the mouth of the "Great River of the West," long sought for,
and which Meares and Vancouver both declared did not exist, and
thus gave us a claim by priority of discovery to the vast territory
it drained. Anchoring ten miles up the stream, he remained three days, trad
ing and filling his casks there with fresh water from its vast flood,
and then sailed twelve or fifteen miles farther up the stream, when
finding that he had taken the wrong channel, he anchored again,
and on the 20th sailed out and to the North, where, fortunately for
his fame as the discoverer of the most important river of the Pacific
coast, he gave Quadra, the Spanish commandant at Nootka the par
ticulars of his discovery, and charts of the mouth of the river.
That Captain Gray was a man of energy, and enterprise, and
dauntless courage is plain from his whole career, and from nothing
more so than from his passage of that fearful bar, which has swal
lowed so many lives in its foaming breakers and is even now dreaded
by many experienced seamen.
That he was modest is evident from his not attempting to affix
his own name to the Great River. That he was patriotic, as became
the captain whose good fortune it had been to first carry his
country's flag around the world, appears from the name he did give
it, and he would seem to have been gifted with something of pro
phetic vision, for he entered the name in his log-book, not as we now
have it, the Columbia River, but with the apostrophe and s of the
possessive— Columbia's River— as if giving notice to all the world
that his country would ever maintain its claim by right of discovery,
which his enterprise and valor had given it to the vast region which
it drains. Gray's log-book (covering May 7-21, 1792) was first
printed in full by Congress in Baylies' Supplemental Rept. (No.
213, H. of R., 19 Cong., 1st Sess., May 26, 1826) ; also in Linn's Rept.
(No. 470, Vol. 5, Sen. Docs., 25 Cong., 2d Sess., June 6, 1838) accom
panied by the deposition of Chas. Bulfinch ; also in Cushing's Rept.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 37
of which 10,000 extra copies were ordered printed January 4, and
February 16, 1839 (Rept. No. 101, H. of R., 25th Cong., 3d Sess.) ;
also in the Government edition of Greenhow's Oregon, February 10,
1840 (No. 174, Vol. 4, Sen. Docs., 26th Cong., 1st Sess.) of which
2500 copies besides the usual number were ordered. It was printed
in full in Hunt's Merchants' Magazine in April, 1842, and the article
copied in full into Niles' Register for May 21, 1842. It was also
printed on pp. 434-6 of the 1845 edition of Greenhow's "History of
Oregon and California."
Nixon (p. 17) of "How Marcus Whitman Saved Oregon" and p.
90 of his "Whitman's Ride Through Savage Lands," and Mowry,
("Marcus Whitman," p. 1) says "Gray took posession in the name
of the United States of America" but neither gives any authority
for it (and Gray's log-book gives no intimation of any such proceed
ing, which he certainly would have recorded had it been done). The
only entry in his log-book about any one from the ship going on
shore at all is the following: "May 15. In the afternoon Captain
Gray and Mr. Hoskins, in the jolly boat, went on shore to take a
short view of the country."
Nothing could be more unlikely than that Gray would attempt
to take possession of the country in the name of the United States,
for the United States reckoning from the Declaration of Independ
ence was not quite 16 years old, and since out of the confederation
of jealous and mutually distrustful colonies a still pretty loosely
"United States" had been formed, it was only three years when
Gray discovered and named "Columbia's River."
The population of these states (which were still so weakly bound
together that no one yet spelled Nation with a big N.) was almost
entirely on the Atlantic slope of the Alleghanies and its western
boundary was the Mississippi river, so that, between the headwaters
of the Columbia and any territory owned by the United States,
stretched about a thousand miles owned by Spain, a region wholly
unknown, except that all geographical principles made it certain
that there must be a vast mountain system there, and as the world
then looked it would take two centuries for the region east of the
Mississippi to become thickly populated.
Not till after the Treaty of Ghent had provided for the restitu
tion of Astoria to the United States did the U. S. Government have
so much as a copy of Gray's log-book, but knowing of the discovery
through "Vancouver's Narrative" and from newspaper accounts, in
1816 President Madison applied to Samuel Brown, Esq., the prin
cipal living owner of the sloops Washington and Columbia (which
Capt. Robt. Gray had commanded ) , for correct copies of all proceed
ings relative to the discovery of the Columbia that should be found
in the papers left by Captain Gray, and after some search Mr. Silas

38 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Atkins, a brother of the widow of Gray, found the log-book of the
Columbia, as appears by a deposition of Chas. Bulfinch of Boston,
accompanying the copy of the log which he furnished the Govern
ment. (Cf. p. 20, Linn's Rept., being No. 470, Sen. Docs., 2nd Sess.,
25th Cong., Vol. V., June 6, 1838.)
Five months to a day after Gray left the Columbia, Vancouver,
having obtained copies of Gray's chart and narrative from Quadra,
the Spanish Commander at Nootka Sound, sent his subordinate,
Broughton, into the river, who, anchoring a few miles from the
ocean, rowed 80 miles farther up the stream, and then had the
effrontery "To take possession of the river and the country in its
vicinity in His Britannic Majesty's name, having every reason to
believe that the subjects of no other civilized nation or state had
ever entered this river before. In this opinion he was confirmed by
Gray's sketch, in which it does not appear that Mr. Gray either saw,
or was within five leagues of its entrance." (Cf. Vol. 1, Chap. XL,
and Vol. 2, Chap. IIL, of "A Voyage of Discovery to the No. Pacific
Ocean and Round the world, etc., under command of Capt. George
Vancouver, London, 1798.")
This quibble, devised to rob Gray of the honor and his country
of the benefit of his daring deed, without which it is plain that Van
couver would never have thought of trying to enter the stream,
which he had declared to be "only a mere brook, or at most a stream
too small for navigation," must ever remain a stain on the fame of
Vancouver, and was based on the very ingenious and before un
heard of device of claiming that the river began 25 miles up the
stream, where it narrows to the width of a thousand yards, and that
Gray had only entered a bay at its mouth, and this though Gray's
log-book states that he filled his casks with fresh water at his first
anchorage only 10 miles inside the bar.

CHAPTER III.
THE LOUISIANA PURCHASE. THE LEWIS AND CLARK
EXPEDITION IN 1803-6.
After escaping in 1782 from a British frigate on which he was
compelled to serve against his native land, John Ledyard interested
the famous Robt. Morris in a project to trade on the N. W. Coast,
but the ruin of Morris' fortunes spoiled the plan, and in February,
1786, Ledyard was in Paris, trying to interest French capital in the
North West Coast fur trade, but failing to succeed, his adventurous
spirit led him to accept a proposition made him by Thos. Jefferson,
then our minister at Paris, which is stated in Jefferson's own words
as follows : "I then proposed to him to go by land to Kamtchatka,
cross in some of the Russian vessels to Nootka Sd., fall down into
the latitude of the Mo., and penerate to and through the "U. S."
(Coues' Ed. of Lewis and Clark, Intro, pp. XVIII. and XIX. See
also Biography of Ledyard by Jared Sparks, pp. 233-372. Also
Greenhow, 1845 Ed. pp. 162-63). Jefferson, through the famous
Baron de Grimm, obtained the consent of the Empress Catharine
of Russia and Ledyard had proceeded as far as Irkutsk, in Siberia,
where, on the night of the 28th of February, 1788, he was arrested
by order of the Empress (probably at the instigation of the Russian
American Co., who wished to keep all the details of their opera
tions secret), and conveyed night and day in a closed carriage to the
border of Poland, and there released with strict orders not to again
set foot on Russian territory.
In 1792, Jefferson (then Secretary of State) arranged with Cap
tain Merriwether Lewis to attempt to cross the continent, with
Michaux the famous French botanist as his only companion, and
they had proceeded as far as Kentucky, when Michaux was unex
pectedly recalled by the French government, and so the trans-con
tinental trip was abandoned (Cf. Coues' Lewis and Clark, Vol. 1,
Intro, pp. XIX.-XX.) October 1, 1800, Spain by a secret treaty
(never published in full till 1820) ceded to France "The colony or
province of Louisiana, with the same extent which it now has in the
hands of Spain, and which it had when France possessed it, and
such as it should be according to the treaties subsequently to be
made between Spain and other States."

40 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
The same year Thos. Jefferson, whose great mind had for years
appreciated the value of the Louisiana Ty., and the absolute neces
sity of at least the Isle of Orleans (on which New Orleans is sit
uated), with its control of the Mississippi River, to the prosperity
of the rapidly growing States beyond the Alleghanies, was first
elected President.
In unexpected emergencies, the mere politician, thinking only
and always of self, asks "What must I do to be consistent with my
own record, and my party platform?" But the statesman, knowing
that new conditions often impose new duties, and so the consistent
pursuit of his country's advantage will frequently require him to
do things inconsistent with his own past opinions, as well as with his
party's platform, asks only, "What action will best promote my
country's welfare?" Fortunately for our national welfare Thos.
Jefferson was one of the ablest, most unselfish, and most patriotic
of statesmen. He had been elected after an exceedingly acrimonious contest, as
the champion of "the strict construction of the constitution," and
the most ingenious sophistry could not find in a strict construction
of that instrument any authority for the President to purchase new
territory; but the good of his country demanded it, and so among
the early acts of his administration he instructed the venerable
Chancellor Livingston, our minister to France, to try to buy at least
the Isle of Orleans, and, if possible, all of Louisiana.
But Napoleon, bent on founding a great French military colony
in Louisiana, and so repairing the disaster of Montcalm's defeat
and the fall of Quebec, would listen to no proposition to sell, till in
the spring of 1803, it became plain that the famous peace of Amiens
would barely live out its first brief year.
Meanwhile Jefferson — determined to carry out his pet project of
a trans-continental exploration— on January 18, 1803, sent to Con
gress a confidential message recommending such an expedition,
which resulted in an appropriation of $2,500.00, and the selection
again of Captain Merriwether Lewis, who had been private secre
tary to Jefferson, to command the party in association with Captain
William Clark, a younger brother of General George Rogers Clark,
the conqueror of the N. W. Territory in the Revolutionary War, each
commander having equal authority.
This message of President Jefferson was on request of the House
of Representatives again , transmitted by President J. Q. Adams,
December 27, 1825, and they voted to continue to treat it as confi
dential. (Cf. Cong. Debates, 19th Cong., 1st Sess., 1825-6, Vol. 2,
Part 1, p. 662.) It is not printed in Jefferson's Works, and was
never published till 1846, when it appeared in the 2d edition of "The
Addresses and Messages of the Presidents of the United States, In-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 41
augural, Annual and Special, 1789 to 1846, 2 vols., 8vo., New York,
Edw. Walker, 1846, Appendix, pp. XXV.-XXVIL, entitled "Jeffer
son's Confidential Message recommending a Western Exploring Ex
pedition." It is now easily accessible, being printed on pp. 352-354 of "Mes
sages and Papers of the Presidents 1789-1897, Vol. 1, 1789-1817.
Richardson." As France then owned Louisiana, and Spain claimed
the whole Pacific Coast as far north as Prince William's Sound in
Lat. 61° No. it was needful to avoid exciting their antagonism.
The message began as follows :
"Gentlemen of the Senate and House of Representatives :
"As the continuance of the Act for establishing trading houses
with the Indian tribes will be under the consideration of the Legis
lature at its present session, I think it my duty to communicate the
views which have guided me in the execution of that Act, in order
that you may decide on the policy of continuing it in the present or
any other form, or discontinuing it altogether if that shall on the
whole seem most for the public good." Then for something more
than a page he states his view of the proper mode of conducting
Indian affairs so as to lead the Indians to abandon hunting and
fishing, for stock raising and farming, and then adroitly introduces
the subject of an exploring tour across the continent, on the plea of
the necessity of a better knowledge of the Indians along the Mis
souri River, and the great advantages which would accrue from the
fur trade being diverted from the Canadian route to some of the
numerous channels which our great river systems offer, mentioning
so many of them as to attract support for the measure from all the
Atlantic seaboard south of New England as follows: "The river
Missouri and the Indians inhabiting it are not as well known as is
rendered desirable by their connection with the Mississippi, and
consequently with us.
"It is, however, understood that the country on that river is
inhabited by numerous tribes, who furnish great supplies of furs
and peltry to the trade of another nation, carried on in a high lati
tude through an infinite number of portages and lakes, shut up by
ice through a long season.
"The commerce on that line could bear no competition with that
of the Missouri, traversing a moderate climate, offering, according
to the best accounts, a continued navigation from its source, and
possibly a single portage from the Western Ocean, and finding to
the Atlantic a choice of channels through the Illinois or Wabash,
the Lakes, and Hudson, through the Ohio and Susquehanna or
Potomac, or James Rivers, and through the Tennessee and Savan
nah Rivers.

42 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"An intelligent officer with 10 or 12 chosen men fit for the enter
prise and willing to undertake it, taken from our posts where they
may be spared without inconvenience, might explore the whole line,
even to the Western Ocean, have conferences with the natives on the
subject of commercial intercourse, get admission among them for
our traders as others are admitted, agree on convenient deposits for
an interchange of articles, and return with the information acquired
in the course of two summers.
"Their arms and accoutrements, some instruments of observa
tion, and light and cheap presents for the Indians would be ail the
apparatus they would carry, and with the expectation of a soldier's
portion of land on their return would constitute the whole expense.
"Their pay would be going on whether here or there.
"While other civilized nations have encountered great expense to
enlarge the boundaries of knowledge by undertaking voyages of dis
covery, and for other literary purposes in various parts and direc
tions, our nation seems to owe to the same object, as well as to its
own interests, to explore this the only line of easy communication
across the continent, and so directly traversing our own part of it.
"The interests of commerce place the principal object within the
constitutional powers and care of Congress, and that it should
incidentally advance the geographical knowledge of our own con
tinent cannot but be an additional gratification.
"The nation claiming the territory, regarding this as a literary
pursuit which it is in the habit of permitting within its dominions,
would not be disposed to view it with jealousy, even if the expiring
state of its interest there did not render it a matter of indifference.
"The appropriation of $2,500 for the purpose of extending the
external commerce of the United States, while understood by the
executive as giving the legislative sanction, would cover the under
taking from notice, and prevent the obstructions which interested
individuals might otherwise previously put in its way."
Thus (while it was uncertain whether or not we could buy any
part of Louisiana) originated that famous Lewis and Clark's expe
dition, which Coues fittingly characterizes as "Our great National
epic of exploration."
While the plans for the trans-continental exploring expedition
were thus taking shape, the negotiations relating to the Louisiana
Purchase went on, and Mr. Monroe, sent on a special mission by
Jefferson with written authority to pay $2,000,000 for the little
Isle of Orleans, and ample verbal instructions for the possible
chance to purchase all of Louisiana, joined Livingston, in Paris,
April 12, 1803, and, to his delighted astonishment learned that
Napoleon, who had so long refused all offers for a little island had

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 43
the day before thrown an empire at Livingston's feet by offering the
whole of Louisiana, comprising not only the present State of
Louisiana, but also all of Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, North
and South Dakota, and Indian Territory and most of Kansas, Okla
homa, Montana, Minnesota and Wyoming, and part of Colorado, an
area larger than the United States then possessed, and about four
times the size of France, because he knew that when the then rapidly
approaching war should begin, his hated enemy — Great Britain —
would seize it if owned by France.
Negotiations progressed rapidly, and April 30, 1803, the whole of
Louisiana (with the same provisions as to boundaries heretofore
cited from the treaty of 1800 ceding it to France (Cf. p. 39, ante),
was ceded to the United States for $15,000,000, or about two. cents
an acre. (Cf. Greenhow, p. 279, J. Q. Adams' Life of Monroe, pp.
255-6, Randall's Life of Jefferson, pp.  , and Am. State Papers,
Foreign Relations, Vol. IL, pp. 506-583.)
Though owned by France since 1800, the Spaniards still re
mained in possession of Louisiana, when the treaty was made ceding
it to the United States, and protested against its transfer to the
United States; and not till November 30, 1803, did the Spanish
Commissioners at New Orleans deliver possession of the Province
of Louisiana to the French Commissioners, and three weeks later,
on December 20, 1803, the French Commissioners formally trans
ferred it to our Commissioners, Governor Claiborne of the Mis
sissippi Territory and General Wilkinson. (Cf. Jefferson's Message to
Cong., dated January 16, 1804, in Messages and Papers of the Presi
dents. 1789-1817. Vol. 1, 1789-1817, Richardson, p. 367; also p.
581, Vol. IL, Am. State Papers, For. Rel.)
History records no other real estate transaction approaching this
in magnitude and in the importance of its results, and yet there
were not wanting many truly patriotic, albeit in this narrow minded
men, who bitterly opposed its consummation, and zealously labored
to prevent the ratification of the treaty — so true is it that parti
sanship often blinds the judgment even of able and honest men, and
the supposed necessities of party make even true patriots sometimes
opposed to measures, that their sons and grandsons, with fuller
knowledge, applaud.
Not always are the men knaves who stone the prophets, nor their
sons hypocrites when they build sepulchers, alike to the prophets
whose mission their fathers failed to comprehend, and to their
fathers also, not because they stoned the prophets, but, in spite of
that mistake for their many other sterling qualities of head and
heart. Thus, as in 1790, the early stages of the French Revolution com
pelled England to abate her unjust demands on Spain to fix her

44 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
northern boundary line at 40° N. Lat., to our serious injury, so in
1803, the progress of that mighty struggle, unexpectedly and with
out bloodshed, more than doubled our National domain.
In both cases the results appear to have been the best for human
ity which could have happened, and it is such events, which compel
all reverent souls as they read history to believe in a Divine Provi
dence ruling in human affairs and make them join devoutly in the
Psalmist's declaration, that "He maketh the wrath of man to praise
Him." A few days after the original instructions for the trans-con
tinental tour in President Jefferson's own hand writing had been
received by Captain Lewis, news of the signing of the treaty for the
cession of Louisiana reached our Government. This necessitated
some changes in the instructions, and though a start was made for
the West in the Autumn of 1803, with the hope of going some dist
ance up the Missouri before the winter should begin, the unexpected
delay in the transfer of the territory prevented it." (Cf. Ch. I.,
"Lewis and Clark Expedition.")
At length, on May 14, 1804, the party, in all forty-four persons
in three boats, entered the mouth of the Missouri River.
The steamboat was then just taking shape in Fulton's brain, and
they were forced to struggle against the swift current of the muddy
stream as best they could, with sails and oars.
October 20, 1804, they had worked their toilsome way 1,600 miles
up to the Mandan Indian villages, at "the great bend" of the Mis
souri. They had not merely to explore the country, and observe its
geography, but also to obtain all possible information about the
Indian tribes dwelling on it, and to notify them of the change in the
ownership of the country, and of the good intentions of the new
"Great Father" at Washington, and his purpose to establish trading
posts among them.
They held councils with various tribes, and many a chief there
after strutted proudly about his village, full dressed in an uncom
fortable cocked hat and feather, and an ill-fitting coat gaudy with
gold lace and scarlet embroidery and with a pewter medal proudly
displayed on his naked breast, while his favorite squaw was made
passing rich by the gift of an awl, a little mirror in a pewter frame,
some needles, a few yards of brass wire for bracelets, ear-rings, and
pendants to her jet-black locks, or by some strands of cheap beads-
more precious to her than pearls or diamonds— or perhaps best of
all, a little vermillion to heighten the color of her coppery cheeks
and forehead.
In the Aricaras they found one of the very few tribes of savages
wise and abstemious enough to despise strong drink, which they
refused with the sensible remark, "That they were surprised that

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 45
their great father should present them with a liquor which would
make them fools." ("Lewis and Clark," 1842 Ed., p. 111.)
Though thus singular in the matter of drink, they were thorough
Indians on the title to horseflesh, for, a few years after, when, in a
council about selling horses to the Astoria party, one chief doubted
if they could spare enough, another chief promptly rebuked him,
declaring that there need be no trouble about it, for, if they had not
enough, they could easily steal a plenty. ("Astoria," Chap. XX.)
Building a stockade near the Mandan villages they wintered
there, and their narrative furnishes many interesting glimpses of
Indian life, of which none is more thoroughly characteristic than
that Pocapsahe, one of the principal Mandans, visited them New
Year's day, and brought them some meat, not on his own lordly
shoulders, but on — (what doubtless seemed to him the most natural
and proper beast of burden in the world) — his wife's back. ("Lewis
and Clark," 1842 Ed., Ch. VI., p. 151.)
April 6, 1805, sending a detachment back with reports, etc., the
balance continued up the— from there — unknown river, and June
13th — first of white men — they beheld the grandeur of the Great
Falls of the Missouri.
July 19, they passed through the sublime defile which they named
The Gate of the Rocky Mountains, and, six days later reaching the
Three Forks of the Missouri, and naming them Gallatin, Madison,
and Jefferson, they paddled up the latter (because it came from the
West instead of the South, like the other two streams), till it
divided into three forks, of which they followed the middle, or
Beaverhead, till it would no longer float a canoe.
Now, late in August of their second summer, their situation was
difficult if not desperate, for they were worn down with incessant
toil, and almost constant wading in the oft-recurring shallows of
the cold, swift streams, their provisions were nearly exhausted, and
game had become scarce, and unless they should soon meet a band of
Indians and get horses to transport their luggage over none knew
how many hundreds of miles of lofty and rugged mountains, to the
navigable waters of the Columbia, they must fail in the great object
of all their toils and dangers.
Reaching the source of the stream, "One of the men in a moment
of enthusiasm, standing with one foot on either bank of the little
rivulet, thanked God that he had lived to bestride the mighty Mis
souri," (L. & C, Ch. XIV.) and soon crossing the summit they drank
of the headwaters of the Salmon River branch of the Columbia, and
in a little while came suddenly on three Shoshone squaws, who,
taking the bronzed strangers for the ever dreaded Blackfeet Indians,
expected only death or captivity; but Captain Lewis stripping up
his sleeve to show his color, and saying tabba bone, which is Sho-

46 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
shone for white man, soon calmed their fears; and giving them
presents and painting their cheeks a brilliant vermillion, "made
their hearts very good," and they soon notified the tribe, whereupon,
hastening to meet for the first time the "pale faces," the chiefs first,
and then the whole body of the warriors saluted the Captain and
his men with utmost cordiality and in most approved style of Indian
politeness, by each putting the left arm over the stranger's right
shoulder, clasping the back and applying the left cheek to the right
cheek of his white brother, vociferating "Ah-hi-e ah-hi-e!" "I am
much pleased! I am much rejoiced." (L. & C, Ch. XVI.)
It scarcely needs be said that when the ceremony ended the pale
faces had received no small share of the paint and grease with which
the Indians were freely besmeared.
Nor was pathos wholly wanting, for Sacajawea, the interpreter's
wife, was a Shoshone, taken prisoner years before by the Blackfeet,
and in Cameahwait, the Shoshone chief, she recognized her brother.
Buying horses they started across one of the most rugged of all
the Rocky Mountain regions, and suffering much hardship from
snow, and frost, and scarcity of food, after twenty-one days or
nearly four hundred miles travel, having been forced to kill two
colts and one horse for food, they came out September 21st among
the Nez Perces Indians, about six hundred miles from the Pacific,
on a stream navigable for boats.
Leaving their horses with the Nez Perces, they built canoes, and
October 7, 1805, started down the river for "the great stinking pond,"
as the Indians of the mountains called the ocean, and on November
7th their journal says : "The fog suddenly clearing away we were
at last presented with the glorious sight of the ocean — that ocean,
the object of all our labors, the reward of all our anxieties."
No holiday pastime had this month been of boating down the
unknown Koos Kooske, the Snake and the Columbia, for they have
numerous rapids where huge rocks divide their waters, and threaten
the daring boatsmen with destruction.
More than fifty of these rapids they ran with imminent hazard,
but, fortunately with no more serious consequences than frequent
wetting of cargoes and ducking of crews.
Other rapids they dared not run, but made weary portages, car
rying boats and lading on their shoulders and carefully watching to
prevent the Indians from plundering.
Provisions, too, were scarce and high priced, for westward of
the Mandans none of the Northern Indians cultivated the soil, and
our explorers were reduced to the necessity of subsisting very
largely on dogs bought from the Indians, and as the tribes on the
Columbia, unlike those on the Missouri, never ate dogs, the dema
gogues among them soon held the pale faces up to ridicule and con-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 47
tempt as "dog eaters," precisely as now, white demagogues hold the
patient, industrious Chinaman up to as ill-deserved reproach, as
eaters of cats and rats.
As the Astoria party— the next party of whites that passed
down the Columbia — were reduced to the same necessity of living
on dogs, I have often wondered what legends would have been
handed down among these tribes if it had chanced that no more
whites had visited them for a generation or two.
How the "medicine men" would have sneered whenever the pale
faces were mentioned, and savagely denounced them as "Miserable,
degraded dog-eaters — men who, by some strange freak of the Great
Spirit had been given skill to make many wonderful and useful
things but whose tastes in the matter of food were sadly debased."
Nothing speaks more eloquently of the material progress of the
past century, than the comparison of this first journey ever made
overland to the Pacific within our territory, which occupied this
well equipped and admirably managed party eighteen months of
arduous toil from St. Louis, with much hardship, and many perils
and no little risk of starvation on the way, and the present overland
journey made from St. Louis to the Pacific by any one of a half
dozen routes in three days in the luxurious ease of a palace car.
They wintered in log huts on the south of the mouth of the Co
lumbia, and March 23, 1806, started back, and when they reached
the Flathead country, turning more to the north they struck
across to and followed up the great northern branch of the Colum
bia, since then known as Clark's Fork, or the Flathead River, and
about where Missoula, Mont., now stands the party divided, Cap
tain Lewis taking an easterly route, and crossing the main range of
the Rockies on to the Dearborn River, by Lewis and Clark's Pass
(though Captain Clark never saw it), while Captain Clark, taking
a more southeasterly course, crossed the main range of the Rockies
to the headwaters of the Jefferson River, not far from where Dillon,
Mont, now is, over a pass which is sometimes called Gibbon's, but
more commonly is called — as it ought ever to be — Clark's Pass, con
cerning which their narrative says, "They had now crossed from
Traveller's Rest Creek to the head of Jefferson's River, which seems
to form the best and shortest route over the mountains during al
most the whole distance of 164 miles. It is, in fact, a very excellent
road; and by cutting down a few trees it might be rendered a good
route for wagons, with the exception of about four miles over one of
the mountains, which would require some levelling." (L. & C. Ex.
1842 Ed., p. 285. Coues' Ed. Vol. 3, p. 1128.) Of the great import
ance of this discovery of a pass so easily practicable for wagons I
shall have something to say hereafter in discussing the story of the
development of a wagon road across the continent.

48 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
After various adventures the two parties were reunited near the
mouth of the Yellowstone, on August 12, 1806, and September 23d,
two years, four months and nine days after they first entered the
Missouri River, they ran out of its mouth, and in the language of
their journal, "Rounded to at St. Louis, where we received a most
hearty and hospitable welcome from the whole village." (L. & C.
Ex., 1842 Ed., Vol. 2, p. 338.)
This expedition added priority of exploration of the valley of
Columbia's river, to discovery of its mouth in our chain of title,
Great Britain being too late in reaching its sources, as she had been
in entering its mouth, for though as soon as they heard of Lewis
and Clark's expedition, the Northwest Company sent a party to
explore it, for some unknown reason they never went beyond the
Mandan villages. (Greenhow, p. 290, Harmon's Journal, pp. 132
and 137, under dates of Nov. 24, 1804, and Apr. 10, 1805.)

CHAPTER IV.
THE FOUNDING AND CAPTURE OF ASTORIA.
American fur trading companies having their headquarters in
St. Louis quickly followed up the route of Lewis and Clark and as
early as the autumn of 1810, Mr. Andrew Henry, of the Missouri
Fur Company, following up the Madison fork of the Missouri, had
crossed the main range of the Rockies on to that beautiful branch
of the Snake or Lewis River, which has ever since been known as
Henry Fork, and established a trading post on it, which was the
first establishment of any kind made by American people in the ter
ritory drained by Columbia's river. The enmity of the savages in
its vicinity, and the difficulty of obtaining provisions, obliged Mr.
Plenry to abandon the post in the spring of 1811 (which proved very
disastrous to the overland part of the Astoria party in the autumn
of 1811). Henry's Lake is the head of Henry Fork, and is a most lovely
little lakelet covering about twelve square miles. It lies in a horse
shoe-shaped bend of the main range of the Rocky Mountains, and
upon its shores, within a semicircle of less than fifteen miles con
verge three passes, Reynolds, Tahgee and Red Rock, each so gentle
of slope that wagons could be driven across the Continental Divide
into the Oregon Territory, over any one of them with only a few
days' labor in road making, and, in fact, over two of them, Reynolds
and Tahgee — hundreds of wagons went before even a survey for a
road was made, and when the entire amount of labor expended on
the two passes was not more than the equivalent of the labor of five
men for a week. This I know from my own experience in driving
over them in 1873 and 1875.
So far as I have been able to learn there is no other place on
earth where three easy passes across a great Continental Divide con
verge within a semicircle of fifteen miles.
Meanwhile the Astoria party was organizing, whose story
through the elegant narrative of Irving, and the less known and less
fascinating but very valuable books of Franchere, of Ross Cox and
of Alexander Ross, is so well known as to need but brief mention.
Admirably planned by the keen intellect of John Jacob Astor,
the project, which would finally have settled the title of the Oregon

50 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Territory by adding actual occupancy to our claims by discovery,
and exploration, and the contiguity of territory resulting from the
Louisiana purchase failed through the war of 1812, and the treach
ery to Mr. Astor's interests of those partners in the company who
were British subjects.
The overland part of the Astoria Expedition (numbering sixty
well-armed men), fearing the hostility of the Blackfeet Indians,
struck southwest from the Missouri River at the Arickara village,
crossed the Continental Divide south of what is now the Yellow
stone National Park, and, guided by the mighty Tetons (which they
named the Pilot Knobs), came on to the headwaters of the Lewis or
Snake River, where they made the sad mistake of leaving their
horses, and trying the rest of the journey in canoes, but finding the
stream unnavigable from its numerous cataracts and rapids, they
were forced in winter to traverse on foot the (to white men) wholly
unknown, dismal, sand deserts and dreary lava beds of the central
part of the Snake River valley, where the Indians, knowing the
whole country and all its scanty resources were barely able to sub
sist. They suffered the direct extremes of hunger, so that they ate
their beaver skins, and even their old moccasins, and when, at some
miserable encampment of squalid savages they obtained a few dogs,
or a horse, they could not wait for the flesh to be cooked, but ate it
half or wholly raw.
Two perished in the raging torrent, to which the Canadian voy-
ageurs gave the name of "the accursed mad river."
Some died of hunger and cold, and several were killed by In
dians. Thus always it is true of the progress of humanity, that "'Other
men have labored," aye and suffered and died too, "and we have en
tered into their labors," and of no part of our country is it truer
than of the Oregon territory, that our title to it was finally estab
lished only by the great heroism, patient endurances, and in not a
few cases the life blood of some of the bravest, truest hearted souls
that ever lived.
That part of the Astoria party (seven in number) which re
turned overland discovered in November, 1812, that remarkable gap
in the main range of the Rockies known as the South Pass. (See
letter of Ramsay Crooks dated New York, June 20, 1856, to Anthony
Dudgeon, Esq., Detroit, Mich., and printed in Detroit Free Press in
1856. I have the clipping from the Free Press containing the letter,
but not the precise date of publication. In this letter, Crooks says
he was then the only survivor of that party of seven.)

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 51
The British hoped to forestall us in the actual occupation of the
valley of Columbia's river, but as in its discovery and exploration,
they were a little behind hand.
As soon as they learned of Mr. Astor's plans the Northwest Com
pany (the great Canadian fur company which after sixteen years of
bitter and relentless competition with the Hudson's Bay Company
was consolidated with it in 1821) started a party for "Columbia's
River," but though they did succeed in crossing the Rocky Moun
tains onto its extreme headwaters, did not descend it till a few
weeks after the foundation of Astoria on April 12, 1811. (Irving's
"Astoria," Ch. IX.; Greenhow, p. 296; Franchere, p. 101.) (The
Northwest Company, by their intrepid explorer David Thompson,
actually occupied the extreme headwaters of the Columbia in 1808,
1809 and 1810.)
On October 16, 1813 (according to Irving, but October 23, accord
ing to Franchere), all the interests of Mr. Astor in the Oregon coun
try were sold by his managing partner, McDougal, to the North
west Company of Montreal, for about one-third of their value,
for which piece of treachery to his partner's interests McDougal
was shortly afterwards rewarded with an interest in the Northwest
Company. (Cf. Irving's "Astoria," Chap. 59, Franchere, Chap.
XV.) November 30, 1813, the British sloop-of-war Raccoon of
twenty-six guns and 120 men, arrived off Astoria, its officers and
crew eagerly anticipating great profits for themselves in the prize
money they should receive for the American vessels and the rich
store of furs they expected to capture there. When they discovered
that there were no American ships there, and that their expected
fortunes had been traded away from their grasp only six weeks be
fore by the shrewd Scotch agents of that same Northwest Com
pany, one of whose partners had not only instigated their being de
spatched on their tedious cruise to capture Astoria from its Yankee
owners, but, with five voyageurs for the service of his company, had
been taken as passengers on the Raccoon, their disgust and disap
pointment were inexpressible, and at first they were inclined to re
sent what they regarded as a trick put upon them by their bargain
ing countrymen, and demanded that the property should be in
ventoried that measures might be taken to recover its value in Eng
land, from the Northwest Company. A few days' reflection, how
ever, satisfied Captain Black, Commander of the Raccoon, that
he might better make the best of the situation and not attempt any
legal contest with the sharp traders who had so cunningly jockeyed
a fortune out of his hands.
Fortunately for us, Captain Black was not content "to let well
enough alone," and sail away without going through the form of
having captured Astoria, and so, on December 12, 1813, "Attended

52 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
by his officers he entered the fort, caused the British standard to be
erected, broke a bottle of wine, and declared in a loud voice, that he
took possession of the establishment and of the country, in the name
of His Britannic Majesty, changing the name of Astoria to that of
Ft. George," and soon after sailed away. (Irving's "Astoria," Ch.
60, Chanchere, Chap. XV.)
This empty ceremonial, as we shall soon see, forged another
strong link in our complex chain of title to the vast region "Where
Rolls the Oregon."

CHAPTER V.
THE TRUE HISTORY OF THE DISCOVERY OF A ROUTE
PRACTICABLE FOR AND THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE FIRST TRANSCONTINENTAL
WAGON ROAD.
The myth-loving originators and advocates of the Whitman Le
gend have invented so many amazing and amusing fictions about
Whitman's experience with his "old wagon" that a vast majority of
those who have read anything about him regard him as the chief
factor in discovering and developing the wagon road to Oregon.
It is doubtful if about any other so wholly unimportant and in
consequential an event in our history has there ever been imagined
and printed as true so many palpably false statements, as about
Whitman's driving his "old wagon" to Ft. Boise in 1836, and hence
it becomes necessary to relate briefly, not only the true story of that
event, but also of what preceded and followed it in the discovery of
a route for and the establishment of a wagon road to Oregon. First
let us glance briefly at what is claimed for Whitman in this mat
ter. In the chapters on the varying forms of the Whitman Saved
Oregon Story, and on what Whitman himself claimed (in Part II. ),
will be found abundant proof of the extravagance of the claims
made by Atkinson in the first two forms of the Whitman Saved Ore
gon Story in 1858 and 1859, and in Whitman's own letters from No
vember 1, 1843, to October 18, 1847, as to his share in leading the
migration of 1843 to Oregon; but neither Atkinson nor Whitman
claimed that his wagon in 1836 was of any special consequence, and
though the legend had as early as 1858-9 so far developed as to ac
cuse the H. B. Co. of opposing later wagons going beyond Ft. Hall,
even Atkinson does not venture to accuse the H. B. Co. of opposing
Whitman's taking his wagon in 1836, while not a sentence has been
found in any letter or diary of Whitman, or Mrs. Whitman, or Mrs.
Spalding, or in any letter or diary of Spalding, or Gray, or C. Eells,
or Mrs. Eells, or E. Walker, or Mrs. Walker prior to the publica
tion of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story in 1865-6, that accuses
the H. B. Co. of offering any opposition to wagons going beyond Ft.
Hall, or making any effort to prevent Americans from reaching and
settling in Oregon. And though in his articles in the "Pacific," in
September, October and November, 1865, in launching the first pub-

54 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
lication of any definite and detailed form of the Whitman Saved
Oregon Story, Spalding accused the H. B. Co. of stopping wagons
at Ft. Hall to prevent the settling of the country by Americans (Cf.
"Pacific," Nov. 9, 1865), nowhere in any of those articles, nor in
his pamphlet published in 1871 (as Sen. Ex. Doc. 37, 41st Cong. 3d
Sess.), with all its wildly extravagant and baseless claims for Whit
man, and its equally unfounded denunciations of the H. B. Co. is
there one sentence about any opposition on the part of the Hudson's
Bay Co. to Whitman's driving his wagon beyond Ft. Hall in 1836.
But as the legend developed, and it became evident that it could
not obtain credence unless the belief could be created that the Hud
son Bay Co. was bitterly opposed to Americans reaching and set
tling in Oregon, the myth-lovers speedily invented statements to
that effect, and that this opposition began when Whitman drove his
old wagon up to Ft. Hall, and grew more intense year by year there
after. These statements having been often repeated and apparently
substantiated by fraudulent quotations (like that from Palmer's
Journal hereinafter examined), and by other fabricated evidence
have come to be generally accepted as true, though there exists the
most indisputable contemporaneous evidence of their total falsity.
In his article in the "Pacific" for September 28, 1865, Spalding
wrote: "The only one purpose of these consecrated women" (Mrs.
Whitman and Mrs. Spalding) "was to obey their Lord and carry
the Gospel to the Indians. God had also another, the opening the
Great Wagon Route from the Missouri to the Columbia and the
gold mines of the Pacific. They actually settled the question by
their own sacrifices and trials and dangers, that women, and wagons
and cattle could cross the mountains, a thing pronounced impossible
by hundreds of mountain men. . . Therefore to these two Ameri
can missionary heroines are the people of the United States, es
pecially the citizens of this coast, indebted more than to any other
two persons dead or alive, for the present and prospective import
ance of this Great West. . . . This vastly important emigrant
route, thus established by the personal sacrifices and hazards of
these two devoted missionaries" (Mrs. Whitman and Mrs. Spald
ing), "was saved to our country as it was about to be extinguished by
the false representations and wiles of the Hudson's Bay Co., by the
personal hazards and hardships of that devoted missionary," Dr.
Whitman, in the California Mountains in the winter of 1842 and
'43." Turn now to W. H. Gray's contemporaneous letters and state
ments and compare them with what he wrote and published in 1870
in his "History of Oregon." If the reader will turn to Chapter 3
of Part IL, infra, he will find Gray's testimony in the case of
the Hudson's Bay Co. vs. the U. S., in which he admitted not only
that he knew that Dr. Whitman reported to the American Board

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 55
that he had been treated by the officers of the Hudson's Bay Co. with
the utmost and unlimited kindness all the time he had been in Ore
gon, but that "I did the same myself when I was at home" (t. e., in
the winter of 1837-38).
January 10, 1838, Gray wrote a long letter from Fairfield, N. Y.,
to Rev. D. Greene, Secretary of the A. B. C. F. M. (from which noth
ing has yet been published as far as I know, but), from which the
following is an extract :
"You have been informed as to the very kind reception and treat
ment we have received from the Officers and Gentlemen connected
with the Honorable Hudson's Bay Company. You are also fully
acquainted with their object in the country and you also know ours.
The request we have to make is that you will forward to the Com
missioners of the Honorable Hudson's Bay Company in London a
statement of instructions that you may forward to us, requiring us
as your agents, or representatives, or servants, to have nothing to do
with the Trade of the country, so far as it relates to furs of any
kind. You will be particular and explicit on this point. We have
thus far received almost, if not quite, the unbounded confidence of
the gentlemen of the Company. We have told them that we will
have nothing to do with the Fur Trade in the country. It is not our
business nor do we mean to be troubled with it. We wish an ex
pression of the Board to be forwarded to the Commissioners in Lon
don, and also to Dr. McLoughlin at Vancouver. This will relieve
them from any apprehension of our becoming at all concerned in
the Fur Trade. If I am correctly informed as to our Methodist
friends on the Columbia, they have in this particular excited sus
picion, if nothing further, as to their object in coming to the coun
try. The Company are extremely jealous of their Trade, and as we
have no definite instructions from the Board on this particular, we
wish them to understand through the Board what our instructions
are." Accordingly, in the "Instruction of the Prudential Committee
of the A. B. C. F. M. to Rev. Messrs. E. Walker, C. Eells, A. B.
Smith and W. H. Gray, March 18, 1838," the original Mss. of which
is now among the documents of the Oregon Historical Society (and
a copy of which covers 29 pp. letter size double space type-written
Mss.), we find the following: "On your long journey and after your
arrival at the place of your destination, you will have more or less
intercourse with the gentlemen engaged in the Indian trade, es
pecially with those connected with the American Fur Company and
the Hudson's Bay Company. They will be your companions in
travel and, during the last half of your journey, you will often stop
at their trading posts. From these, your predecessors in the field
have received the most friendly and hospitable treatment, and we

56 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
have no reason to doubt that they will extend similar facilities to
you in your journeys and labors. They have in this respect laid
your brethren and the Board under great obligations, of which we
take pleasure in making this public acknowledgment. We are con
fident that you, in your turn, will be to them courteous and respect
ful, rendering them aid, meeting their wishes, and especially min
istering to them of spiritual things, as far as the accomplishment of
your work among the Indians will permit; thus showing that you
value their friendship and are grateful for their favors. You, of
course, hardly need to be reminded that you are in no manner to
interfere with their trade, but scrupulously to stand aloof from
everything which may awaken jealousy on this point. Your objects
are entirely different from theirs. Theirs are the ordinary gains of
traffic ; yours to introduce and establish Christianity."
Yet in face of this positive instruction from the American Board
to its missionaries made at the request of Whitman and Spalding
through Gray, not to have anything to do with the fur trade, in the
progress of the development of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story
we find the following on page 74 of Spalding's pamphlet (Sen. Ex.
Doc. 37) in the "Resolutions adopted by the Pleasant Butte Baptist
Church of Linn County, Oregon, October 22, 1869 :
"By the crossing of the Rocky Mountains in 1834 (four years be
fore any Romish priest set foot in Oregon), by the Protestant Lee,
the pioneer missionary, and his little band, to become permanent
missionaries and settlers on this coast. And the undaunted patriot
ism exhibited by this Christian hero in his first interview with the
governor of the Hudson's Bay Company, then a corrupt British
monopoly on this coast. The governor said to Mr. Lee : "All needed
supplies and facility in our power shall be afforded to your mission
while you confine yourselves to your work as teachers, but the day
you lay hands on beaver all supplies will be stopped, and you will
be left destitute. The trade in furs and the commerce of these seas
belong to us." The reply of this missionary, American withal, was
prompt and characteristic : "Governor, it is true I was born a Brit
ish subject; but I am now an American citizen, and as such I have
and shall claim the same right on these shores as the most favored
British subject, and that too by treaty. I shall therefore trade
beaver where and when I please." The same reply, almost word for
word, was made two years later to the same English officer, by that
faithful Christian but stern patriot, Marcus Whitman. That deter
mined the fate of both of these valuable men ; they fell martyrs to
this their country. The destruction of the one was brought about
through apostate Americans and disaffected friends employed to
misrepresent; that of the other by imported Romish agents and
Hudson's Bay interpreters worikng upon the savages." These reso-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 57
lutions contain abundant proof that they were written by Spalding
as was pretty much everything else in the pamphlet.
In 1839, Gray, having quarreled with all his associates, began
to scheme to desert the mission, which he finally did in Sept., 1842,
in a manner that Rev. C. Eells and Rev. E. Walker denounced as
dishonorable and deceptive.
His first step was to apply to the Hudson's Bay Co. for the po
sition of teacher of their school at Ft. Vancouver for his wife, and
employment for himself in some capacity, (not named in the evi
dence, but probably at his "profession" of cabinet maker or car
penter). His application was promptly declined on the ground that the
company had no satisfactory evidence that the Mission were will
ing that he should sever his connection with it. (Cf. on these points
Gray's testimony in case of the H. B. Co. vs. the U. S., Part 2, Chap
ter IIL, infra, and C. Eells' letter of Oct. 3, 1842, to D. Greene,
secretary, endorsed as correct [especially in its criticism of Gray's
course] by Rev. E. Walker, Part 2, Chapter IV., infra.)
Forthwith Gray reported to the American Board that there was
a rupture of the friendly relations that had previously existed be
tween their missionaries in Oregon and the Hudson's Bay Co., which
being reported back to Whitman, in 1840, in a letter from D. Greene,
evoked a most emphatic contradiction from Whitman in his of July
13, 1841, in which he wrote "Your fears lest our good understand
ing with the gentlemen of the Hudson's Bay Co. should have been
interrupted are not well founded, for it has remained undisturbed
up to this date, indeed we never were on better terms than at
present." And the evidence hereinafter presented in Chapter VIL,
on "The Truth About the Relation of the Hudson's Bay Co. to the
American Exploration, Occupation and Settlement of Oregon,"
demonstrates beyond dispute that this good understanding re
mained unimpaired till the destruction of the Mission by the mas
sacre in Nov., 1847. Yet, when Gray published his "History," in
1870, he declared, (p. 183) "From that time forward" (i. e., the fall
of 1839) "a marked change was manifest in the feelings of most
of the gentlemen of the company."
(P. 118) Gray says, "Whitman and his four men opened it (i. e.,
the wagon road to Oregon) as far as they could with a light wagon
and a cart. To him must be given the credit of the first practical
experiment, though Ashley, Bonneville and Bridger had taken
wagons into the Rocky Mountains and left them, and pronounced
the experiment a failure, and a wagon road impracticable. Whit
man's perseverance demonstrated a great fact — the practicability
of a wagon road over the Rocky Mountains."

58 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
(P. 133) Gray says that at Ft. Hall, "Miles Goodyear left the
Mission party," and continues, "This loss of manual strength to the
Mission party compelled the Doctor to curtail his wagon, so he
made a cart on two of the wheels, placed the axle tree and the other
two wheels on his cart, and about the 1st of August, 1836, our camp
was again in motion." Idem. (p. 140) "At this place (i. e., Ft.
Boise) "McLeod and McKay, and all the Johnny Crapauds of the
company united in the opinion that it was impossible to get the
Doctor's cart any farther without taking it all apart . . . and
packing it . . . After several consultations, and some very de
cided expressions against any further attempt to take the wagon
further, a compromise was made, that after the party had reached
their permanent location the Doctor or Mr. Gray would return with
the Hudson's Bay Company's caravan and get the wagon and bring
it through." Why neither he nor Dr. Whitman ever sent for the
cart left at Ft. Boise, Gray vouchsafes no information. In the
whole 624 pages of his History, Gray not only does not quote one
sentence from the contemporary correspondence and diaries of the
various members of the American Board Mission in Oregon, but he
gives no intimation that any such matter existed at the headquar
ters of the American Board in Boston and in the possession of the
friends and relations of the missionaries to the amount of nearly or
quite one million words.
Possibly some of his friends might urge in his defense that it
was a long and expensive journey from Oregon to Boston, in 1866-
70, more than a dozen years before there was any transcontinental
railroad into Oregon.
But what can be said in defense of Rev. Wm. Barrows, who not
only lived most of his life in and close to Boston, but for six years—
1873-79 — just before he "threw together" his "Oregon," as Secre
tary of the Massachusetts Home Missionary Society had his office
in the same building as the A. B. C. F. M., and must have known of
all the correspondence therein existing, and yet, as Prof. Bourne
says, not only "Successfully resisted the temptation" to examine
and quote any of it, but, from title page to finis of his book never
even alludes to its existence, but instead of these original sources
of the history of American Board Mission in Oregon relies on Gray's
History of Oregon, Spalding's Pamphlet (Ex. Doc. 37), and Rev. M.
Eells' Indian Missions, (which is as untrustworthy as Gray or
Spalding), and, more than all else, on his own vivid and myth-
loving imagination.
Naturally in his book the "Whitman's old wagon" myth blos
soms out in its wildest form, as witness the following quotations,
page 140, chapter XVI., "Whitman's Old Wagon": "The Oregon
question finally turned on wheels . . . Then diplomacy, civil

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 59
engineering and the two nations— all concerned— had to wait for
the wagons. The taking one through overland to the Columbia by
Dr. Whitman was the most important act in all preliminaries in
the settlement of the Oregon controversy. At first only two parties
took a proper view of a wagon for Oregon— Marcus Whitman and
the Hudson's Bay Co. In 1836, when the wagon was at Fort Hall
and Fort Boise with its two women occupants, it suggested to the
Company the family and a civilized home and permanent settle
ment in Oregon, and a highway from the Missouri to that settle
ment which others could follow. The Company therefore deter
mined to turn the wagon back, or divert it to California, or stop it
absolutely. Dr. Whitman took the same view of the wagon, and
therefore concluded to take it through to Oregon."
(P. 142) "Arrived at Ft. Hall ... all parties, mission, and
Hudson's Bay and the postmen, too, combined to say that the wagon
could be hauled no farther . . . But the iron Doctor was im
movable . . . Finally the indomitable man made a compromise,
converted the wagon into a cart, loaded in the duplicate wheels and
axletree and started again on wheels for the Columbia."
(P. 142) Speaking of what took place at Ft. Boise, Barrows
says: "Finally a compromise was effected. The wagon should be
left at Ft. Boise, till some one could come back and take it on to
the established mission . . . and soon after the 'old wagon'
went through, the first to pass the plains and the mountains so far
towards Oregon." So (on p. 145) he says: "The 'Old Wagon' of
Marcus Whitman . . . finally and later came out all right on
the lower Columbia at Ft. Walla Walla." P. 146 he says: "The
wagon and the two brides, Mrs. Whitman and Mrs. Spalding, had
won Oregon. The first wheels had marked the prairie, and brushed
the sage, and grazed the rocks and cut the river banks all the way
from the Missouri to the Columbia." As to the "two brides," it is
proper to observe that the Spaldings were married Oct. 12, 1833,
and Mrs. Spalding had borne and buried a child before Whitman
invited them to go to Oregon in February, 1836, and, except in such
romances as the Whitman Legend, a woman is supposed to cease
to be "a bride" some time before she bears a child — (Cf. on this
"Sketch of Life of H. H. Spalding in Trans. Oregon Pioneers' Asso
ciation," 1897, p. 107) — and as to the child (which none of the ro
mancers wishing to represent this as a double bridal tour have ever
alluded to), Cf. Whitman's letters to D. Greene, secretary, dated
Rushville, N. Y., January 29, 1836, as follows : "Your allusion to
Mr. Spalding is incorrect. They lost their child by death some time
since." (P. 147) Writing of the journey of the 1838 reinforcement to
the American Board Mission — consisting of Rev. C. Eells, E. Walker,

60 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
A. B. Smith and their wives, Mr. and Mrs. W. H. Gray and Mr.
Cornelius Rogers, Barrows says of their experiences at Ft. Hall:
"Impediments, perils and Indians do not seem to have been put
before them at that fur traders' Gibraltar, for they had no car
riages." "They had acted on the already well-established impression in
the East that carriages could not travel to Oregon." But W. H.
Gray in his History of Oregon, (p. 177), says: "In the winter of
1837-8 Gray is in the States giving an account of his trip across the
Rocky Mountains with Messrs. Spalding and Whitman and of . .
the fact that a wagon had been taken by Dr. Whitman and his party
to Ft. Boise, and that it could be taken to the Wallamet Settle
ment." That there was no "well-established impression in the East that
carriages could not travel to Oregon" is evident from the fact that
this party started with a wagon, as appears from the following
extract from a letter of W. H. Gray to D. Greene, secretary, (from
which nothing has yet been published), dated Rendezvous, Wind
River Mountains, July (no day), 1838. On p. 8, after explaining
that they had been compelled to dispose of a wagon in trade for a
mule at a loss of $45, because it was old and not adapted to the
trip, he says : "The wagon we purchased to supply the place of the
one sent by Dr. Weed" (which was the old one before referred to)
"we have exchanged for a horse with Capt. Fontenelle, who kindly
exchanged with us when we could bring it no further for want of
horses." This, bear in mind, was 27 years before there was any
"Whitman Saved Oregon" tale invented, and when there was no
temptation, even to Gray's mendacious mind, to falsely accuse that
awful Hudson's Bay Company of stopping the wagon, which he ad
mits they had traded off to an American fur trader at some point
more than 350 miles east of Ft. Hall, not from any opposition of
fur traders to its further progress, nor on account of the difficul
ties of the way, but because they "could bring it no further for want
of horses." This swapping of the wagon for a horse took place at
Ft. Laramie. (Cf. Mrs. Eells' Diary in Tr. Oregon Pioneers' Asso
ciation, 1889, p. 73.)
Dr. Weed kept a religious book store in Cincinnati for many
years, and was the agent there for the A. B. C. F. M. He was the
father of Geo. Ludington Weed, who has written two of the most
wildly extravagant and grotesquely fictitious newspaper articles in
support of the Whitman Legend that have ever been printed. (Cf.
Ladies' Home Journal, November, 1897, and Sunday School Times,
August 23, 1902.)
(P. 152) Barrows says: "Now such a company (i. e., the Hud
son's Bay Company) was driven into anxiety. It was confronted

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 61
and troubled and forced into strategy by an 'old wagon.' Under
this fear" (i. e., that if wagons went through they would lose Ore
gon) "they fought all its kith and kin as they drove up to Ft. Hall,
and they spread the impression through the United States from
New Hampshire to Texas, that wheels could not be driven from the
Snake River Valley to the Columbia."
(P. 153) "Not only did the Company hold this known pass by
representing it to be impassable for carriages, but they kept the
knowledge of other passes a secret."
(P. 166) Speaking of Whitman's ride to the States in 1842-3,
and his arrival at Ft. Hall, Barrows says: "If Capt. Grant and
the Hudson's Bay Co. generally made a mistake in letting Dr. Whit
man through with his old wagon six years before, they made a
greater one in letting him return on horseback to the States." I
shall present the most indisputable evidence that no Hudson's Bay
Company's officers or men made any objection to Whitman's trying
the experiment of driving his wagon to and beyond Ft. Hall, nor
did any one of them offer the slightest opposition to his return to
the States.
Furthermore, Grant was not at Ft. Hall six, nor five, nor four,
nor three, nor two years before this, but came there to take com
mand less than one year before this time, as witness the following
extract from a letter of A. McKinley (who was in command at Ft.
Walla Walla from 1841 to 1846), to Hon. Elwood Evans, quoted
by Mr. Evans in Seattle Daily Intelligencer of April 28, 1881 :
"The Red River Colony arrived at Walla Walla when the old
fort was burned, October 3, 1841. The express from Selkirk ar
rived about the 25th of October, in charge of Mr. Richard Grant,
afterwards for several years in charge of Ft. Hall.
"In 1842 not a single immigrant came from Red River to Ore
gon." So Grant had no more to do with hindering or helping Whit
man about his wagon in 1836, than Rev. Wm. Barrows himself had,
and, as we shall see later, the contemporaneous testimony of every
American who was at Ft. Hall while Grant was in command there
(i. e., from 1842 to 1851) was that Grant's treatment of all Ameri
cans who reached Ft. Hall on the way to Oregon was uniformly
kind and courteous.
Nixon, of course, accepts these fictions of Barrows about Grant
as authentic history, and gives freest rein to his own very lively
and unrestrained imagination in embellishing in the most lurid
"newspaperish" English his ideas of Grant's interview with Whit
man, in October, 1842. So much easier is it to dash down a his
tory (?) of Oregon, as one does an editorial for the Inter-Ocean
from "one's own interior consciousness," assisted by intense re
ligious prejudices, than to patiently study contemporaneous evi-

62 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
dence to learn what actually occurred. (Cf. Nixon's "How Marcus
Whitman Saved Oregon," pp. 109-110.) ,
Barrows (p. 171) says of Whitman: "The same man this is
who made the Rocky Mountains give up to a wagon."
(P. 247) Writing of the arrival of the 1843 migration at Ft.
Hall, Barrows says: "Serious troubles confronted the Doctor. He
could feed a thousand people on the plains, ford the rivers and
force the mountains, but to run the gauntlet of the Hudson's Bay
post, whose interests were so deeply involved in stopping him, was
another labor." ... (P. 246) "A desperate effort must be made"
(i. e., by the Hudson's Bay Company's officers at Ft. Hall) "to
scatter or divert or turn back the company" (i. e., the 1843 migra
tion.) . . . "At this point many immigrant companies had
been intimidated and broken up, and so Ft. Hall served as a cover
to Oregon, just as a battery at the mouth of a river protects the
inland city on its banks." (P. 249) "Here the postmen had made
the fatal mistake of allowing the 'old wagon' of the Doctor to go
through seven years before . . . Oregon was taken at Ft. Hall."
As we shall see in this chapter, and in the chapter on "The Truth
About the Relation of the Hudson's Bay Company to the American
Exploration, Occupation and Settlement of Oregon," all this about
opposition by the Hudson's Bay Company at Ft. Hall — or anywhere
else — in 1836, or 1843 ¦ — or at any other time — to wagons going to
Oregon is pure fiction, not only absolutely destitute of any support
in contemporaneous letters, diaries, reports of government officers,
and books published in 1838, 1839, 1840, 1845 and 1847, by ex
plorers, and travelers and emigrants to Oregon, but is squarely con
tradicted by all those contemporaneous documents published and
unpublished, the writers of every one of which gratefully acknowl
edge their obligations to the officers of the Hudson's Bay Company
for their most kind and hospitable reception and treatment at all
their various posts in the Oregon Territory, especially Ft. Hall, Ft.
Boise, Ft. Walla Walla and Ft. Vancouver.
Barrows, who never saw it — calls Ft. Hall "This fur traders'
Gibraltar," but Col. Wm. Gilpin — a graduate of West Point, who
accompanied Fremont to Oregon in 1843, and returned via Ft. Hall
and the Spanish Trail to Bent's Fort in 1844, and afterwards took
a prominent part in the Mexican War, and was subsequently Gov
ernor of Colorado — (and as such organized the little army that
utterly routed the Confederate army sent under Gen. Sibley to con
quer New Mexico and Colorado, and, if possible, California), on
February 8, 1867, in Washington, D. C, testified in the famous case
of "The Hudson's Bay Co. vs. the U.S." (Cf. vol. 6, pp. 330 et seq. of
report of that case) as follows: That he was at Ft. Hall several
days in 1843 on his way to Oregon, and several weeks in the sum-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 63
mer of 1844 on his return ; that it was a small quadrangular trad
ing post, about 100 feet square, built of adobies (or sun-dried bricks)
and log cabins, occupied by about eleven men, designed for mere
temporary use for the protection of stores, and trade with the In
dians; that having built such structures himself, and having once
been in treaty for the purchase of Bent's Fort, he was well ac
quainted with the value of such establishments, and that he should
consider $2,000 a liberal price to pay for all the buildings he saw
at Ft. Hall.
The magnifying by Barrows of this little $2,000 trading post
"occupied by about eleven men" into a "fur traders' Gibraltar" is a
perfectly fair example of the way Barrows' imagination swelled and
distorted every fact connected in any way with Whitman's relation
to Oregon. With the publication of Barrows' Oregon, in 1883, the "wagon
myth" concerning Marcus Whitman may be regarded as fully de
veloped, though some of the later myth loving advocates of the
Whitman Legend, notably Geo. Ludington Weed, Rev. Jonathan
Edwards, and Rev. L. H. Hallock, have added "some frills and
feathers of ornamentation" to it with which even Barrows' fervid
imagination, wholly unlimited as it was by any sense of obligation
to inquire into the truth of what his fancy impelled him to write,
did not venture to adorn his story.
We are now ready to examine the contemporaneous evidence and
learn the true story of the whole of the discovery of routes practi
cable for, and the speedy development of the first wagon road across
the continent, and to learn how very trifling was Whitman's part in
that matter.
But before we can understand with what ease many routes prac
ticable for wagons when almost or entirely in a state of nature were
discovered along the whole eastern edge of the old Oregon Territory,
from 42 degrees to 47 degrees north latitude, and the speed with
which a wagon road was developed over not only the Main Range
of the Rocky Mountains, but over all the outlying ranges as far
West as the Cascades, without any governmental expenditure even
for a survey of the route we must know a little of the peculiar geo
graphical features of the Rocky Mountain region.
The whole Appalachian system before the whites settled our
country was covered with dense forests stretching far out east and
west from their bases, and generally full of a dense undergrowth
of vines and shrubs, which rendered the exploration of their slopes
and the discovery of passes over their summits an exceedingly slow
and laborious task.
In the Rocky Mountain region, on the contrary, timber covers
but a small part of the higher slopes of the ranges, all the lower

64 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
slopes and the foothills and the plains stretching hundreds of miles
away to the east, and the great interior plateaus and basins and
broad valleys of the larger rivers west of the Main Range as far as
the Sierra Nevada and Cascade Mountains being almost entirely
destitute of trees except here and there a little grove in a moist
spot, and a narrow fringe — generally of cottonwood, and poplar,
and box elder, and alders, and willows — along the banks of the
streams. The forests of the whole Rocky Mountain region on the
borders of and within the Old Oregon Territory, as far west as the
Cascade Mountains, were almost entirely of conifers — pines, firs,
hemlocks, cedars, etc.— and in the Rocky Mountains proper rarely
began below 6,000 to 7,500 feet above the sea level, and were rarely
continuous for any great distances, but were interspersed with
great stretches of grass land, which cover generally much more than
one-half the area within the forest belt on the mountains.
Furthermore, the forests rarely have much undergrowth, and
the trees usually are so scattering that there is not the slightest
difficulty in riding on horseback where one chooses in the forests,
except as fallen timber from fires and storms sometimes blocks the
way, and very often one can drive a wagon with very little trouble
through the forests for long distances with only cutting here and
there a tree.
This openness of the country has been one of the most potent
factors in the speedy exploration and settlement of the whole region
beyond the Great Plains, since from the summit of a range one can
"read the face of the country" in the valleys on either side as easily
as one can read the pages of an open book, and often, after study
ing for an hour or two with a field glass the landscape below him,
tracing every turn and winding not only of the main stream that
drains it, but also of each of its tributaries, by the belt of trees
along the courses of all the larger streams and the ribbon of shrubs
and bushes along the smaller ones, one can make a more accurate
map of a region covering one or two or three or four hundred square
miles in which he has not even so much as set his foot, than any one
could have made of an equal area in the Appalachian system masked
with dense forests after spending many weeks in constantly travel
ing over it.
But the special feature in the structure of the Rocky Mountains
that made the opening of a transcontinental wagon road a very
easy matter is the wonderful breaking down of the whole range
between 41 degrees and 47 degrees north latitude.
The Rocky Mountains culminate in so remarkable a manner in
Colorado, that in that State between 37 degrees and 41 degrees
north latitude are some 70 peaks more than 14,000 feet high, and
no pass exists across the Main Range in that State less than about

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 65
11,000 feet above the sea, and they range up from that to more than
13,000 feet, while going northwest along the Main Range from there
to British America, a distance along the windings of the range
much more than twice as many miles as from the southern to the
northern boundary of Colorado, not a single peak rises to the height
of 14,000 feet, and very few reach even 13,000 feet, while the passes
—of which there are many — range from 5,800 feet to 8,500 feet
above the sea, or fully 3,000 to 4,000 feet lower than in Colorado,
and several of these passes are broad, grassy valleys of such gentle
slope and so flat on their summits that even those of us who have
often crossed them on horesback are always in doubt when we have
reached the top, and are only satisfied of it when we find some
little watercourse running to the other ocean.
Between 1866 and 1905 I have crossed the Main Range of the
Rocky Mountains seventy-six times over twenty-six different passes
between 35 degrees and 47 degrees north latitude, of which thirteen
led directly into the Old Oregon Territory and two others led into
what was formerly Mexican territory (now in Southwest Wyo
ming), very near the southeast corner of the Old Oregon Territory.
Over ten of these passes leading directly into the Old Oregon
Territory I have ridden twenty-eight times on horseback. All these
passes were well known to and used by our fur traders several years
before Whitman or anybody else dreamed of going missionarying
to the Oregon Indians.
It is impossible for me to recall how many times I have crossed
the various spurs and outlying ranges of the Rocky Mountain sys
tem during my continuous residence from June, 1866, to October,
1875, in the Rocky Mountains, and my extensive journeying in Colo
rado, New Mexico, Utah, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Nevada, Ore
gon, Washington and California since that time.
Why our first overland expedition in their westward journey in
1805 did not find any of the three easy passes by the entrances of
which they journeyed — the Pipestone, the Deer Lodge and Clark's
or Gibbon's — (the last of which they discovered on their return trip
in 1806) — I have not space to explain, but it was not because they
might not easily have been found had the party been mounted in
stead of in canoes, and had they not set their faces so steadfastly
to the west that they would not turn to the north or the northwest.
On their return trip the division under Capt. Clark discovered
and traversed the pass commonly known as Gibbon's, though it
ought forever to bear the name of Clark, and in the "History of the
Expedition Under the Command of Capts. Lewis and Clark," vol.
3, p. 1128, of Coues' edition and vol. 2, pp. 285-6 of the 1842 edition,
it is thus mentioned : "They had now crossed from Travelers' Rest
Creek to the head of Jefferson's River, which seems to form the best

66 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
and shortest route over the mountains during almost the whole
distance of one hundred and sixty-four miles.
"It is, in fact, a very excellent road ; and by cutting down a few
trees it might be rendered a good route for wagons, with the excep
tion of about four miles over one of the mountains, which would
require some leveling."
On this Dr. Coues prints the following note: "It seems almost
incredible that the modesty or the indifference of the great explorer
should have led him to dismiss this part of his route without fur
ther remark. A road of 164 miles across the great Continental Di
vide — we hardly realize what it meant to make that discovery in
1806." The original edition of the "History of the Expedition Under
the Command of Capts. Lewis and Clark" (of which Dr. Coues'
edition is an exact reprint) was published in Philadelphia in 1814,
and before 1818 three editions of it were also published in London,
and one in Dublin, besides which it was translated into German,
and also into Dutch, and editions were published in Germany and
Holland. In the spring of 1810 Andrew Henry, one of the leading men in
the St. Louis "Missouri Fur Co.," founded an Indian trading post
in what is now Montana, about two miles above the junction of the
Madison and Jefferson Rivers, but was so harassed by the Blackfeet
that in the autumn of 1810 he abandoned that locality, journeyed
up the Madison and crossed the Continental Divide, and established
a post called Ft. Henry on Henry Fork of the Snake River, the
stream which will ever perpetuate Andrew Henry's name. This
post was about fifty miles southwest of Henry Lake and near where
the town of Egin, Idaho, now stands.
As Ft. Henry was only about forty to fifty miles a little east of
south of the summit of Beaver Canon Pass (over which many thou
sands of the early settlers of Montana went with their wagons be
fore there was any expenditure of money in making a road, and over
which the Oregon Short Line Railroad now goes), there is every
probability that Henry traversed that pass also while occupying Ft.
Henry. This post was abandoned in the spring of 1811, an event which
had much to do with the disastrous experiences of the overland por
tion of the Astoria expedition, who occupied this abandoned post
for ten days in October, 1811. Henry Fork is a beautiful stream of
crystal water rising in Henry Lake, one of the loveliest little lakes
in all the Rocky Mountain region, of irregular outline, covering
about twelve miles, swarming with salmon trout, and the summer
home of countless water fowl— ducks, geese, brant, swans, pelicans,
cranes, herons, gulls, etc.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 67
Around its shores the Continental Divide sweeps in a very short
horseshoe shaped bend, whose opening is scarcely a score of miles
across. The basin of the lake is so flat that it is nowhere more
than fifteen feet deep, and its waters will not average more than
four or five feet in depth.
The most remarkable thing, however, about this mountain bend
and the lake that rests within it is that across the Continental Di
vide three passes, each easily practicable for wagons, converge on
the shores of Henry Lake with a semicircle of less than fifteen miles.
Reynold's Pass leads over from the Madison at a point just
below its second or middle canon, and is a broad, grassy valley of
such gentle slope that one has no idea he is crossing a mountain
range, but just as he begins to inquire, "When are we going to leave
this valley and start across the range?" he is informed that he has
just crossed the summit.
About seven miles to the southwest around the shore of the lake,
and almost at right angles to Reynold's Pass, is Tahgee Pass, com
ing also from the Madison, but starting between its middle and
upper canons, while directly opposite the mouth of Tahgee Pass is
Red Rock Pass, leading over to Red Rock Lake, the source of the
Red Rock Fork, which is the longest tributary of the Jefferson
River — the longest of the three streams which unite to form the Mis
souri—so that Red Rock Lake is the beginning of the longest river
in the world. Over all these passes I have been on horseback, and
over Reynold's and Tahgee in a two-horse wagon before any money
had been spent on the former, and less than forty dollars on Tahgee
in road making.
All three of these passes must have been perfectly well known to
Andrew Henry and his men in 1810-11. (Cf. for Henry's experience
near the junction of the Madison and Jefferson, and his founding
and abandonment of Ft. Henry, "The History of the American Fur
Trade of the Far West, by Hiram M. Chittenden, Captain Corps
of Engineers, U. S. A.," N. Y., F. P. Harper, 1902, Vol. I., 143-4, and
Vol. IIL, 974.) The next party of Americans to cross the Conti
nental Divide was the Astoria party, who, on their westward jour
ney, from fear of the Blackfeet Indians, swung so far to the south
west from where they left the Missouri River at the Arickara Vil
lages, as to cross the Continental Divide south of Yellowstone Lake
in one of its wildest and most rugged portions along the whole bor
der of the Old Oregon Territory, and so they discovered on their
outbound journey no easy pass practicable for wagons but, as we
have already seen in Chapter IV., that part of the Astoria party
who returned overland to the States discovered, in November, 1812,
the pass afterwards known as the South Pass, which for thirty

68 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
years after its rediscovery in 1824 was by far the most widely known
feature of the Rocky Mountains in Europe as well as America.
So far therefore is it from being true, as Barrows states (Ore
gon, p. 153) "Not only did the Company" (i. e., the Hudson's Bay
Co.) "hold this known pass by representing it to be impassable for
carriages, but they kept the knowledge of other passes a secret,"
that before the Hudson's Bay Co. had any post within 500 miles
of any part of the only portion of the Oregon Territory for which
we were really contending (i. e., the part south of 49 degrees), al
most before its more energetic rival, the Canadian "Northwest Co.,"
had succeeded in establishing itself at any point in the Old Oregon
Territory the Americans had certainly already discovered five passes
practicable for wagons into Oregon, viz. : Clark's, Red Rock, Rey
nold's, Tahgee and South Pass. Besides these it is altogether prob
able that John Colter (who had at his own request been discharged
from the Lewis and Clark party on its return trip, that he might
remain in the mountains and trap beaver) had before 1808 discov
ered Pipestone and Deer Lodge Passes over the Continental Divide
in Montana — the former situated a few miles south of the Home-
stake Pass, which is now traversed by the Northern Pacific Railroad,
and the latter by the Oregon Short Line — and that Henry had dis
covered Beaver Canon Pass.
One would suppose, to read Barrows and many writers who have
depended on him as an authority, that mountain passes, instead of
being great natural features of the geographical structure of the
country — often visible dozens and scores of miles away — were nice
little toys, that a Hudson's Bay Co. trader could lock up in his
writing desk, or wrap in a bit of paper and hide in his tobacco
pouch. When traveling on horseback over the mountains of Idaho, Mon
tana and Wyoming, I have often beheld these passes, like mighty
gateways in the ranges, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty and even sixty
and seventy-five miles away.
Mr. Barrows and those who have endorsed him have refrained
from telling us by what process the Hudson's Bay Co. "kept the
knowledge of other passes a secret" from the hundreds of American
trappers and traders who were constantly traveling and pursuing
their vocation on both sides of the Rocky Mountains after 1824
(when the South Pass was rediscovered). None but fearless and
resolute and hardy men attempted this life, and a most rigorous
"natural selection" soon weeded out those who were unfitted for it,
so that those who remained in it were as keen-witted, clear-eyed,
energetic, vigorous and resourceful men as ever explored new re
gions on any continent.
To suppose that from such men as W. H. Ashley, L. Maxwell,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 69
Thomas Fitzpatrick, A. Godey, Kit Carson, Milton Sublette and his
brother W. L., James Bridger, David E. Jackson, Jedediah Smith,
Joseph Walker, J. L. Meek, Caleb Wilkins, Robert Newell, and
scores of other American mountaineers, the Hudson's Bay Co. — or
any other organization on earth — could "keep the knowledge of
passes a secret" is a proposition so inane that its statement is its
sufficient refutation, and it seems to be one of the very many of the
most preposterous fictions about the Whitman myth, which Bar
rows' fancy invented.
After the treachery to Mr. Astor's interests of his partner Mc
Dougal had put the Northwest Co. in possession of Astoria, our
fur traders seem to have confined their efforts to the east side of the
Rockies, and mainly to the region along the Missouri River, till in
the winter of 1822-23, in a quarrel between some hunters and a party
of Arickara Indians, two of the latter were killed. This caused the
Arickara Indians on June 2, 1823, to attack Mr. W. H. Ashley's
party of thirty-five men, of whom they killed thirteen and wounded
ten. This resulted in Col. Leavenworth, in command of the military
post at Council Bluffs, proceeding with 200 soldiers against the
Indians, and in a battle fought August 10, 11 and 12, 1823, they
were defeated, Ashley taking part in the fight with eighty of the
employes of the Missouri Fur Co. (Cf. Niles Register, August 9,
1823, and October 11, 1823.) The result of this was that Ashley
withdrew from operations on the Upper Missouri, and determined
to follow up the valley of the Platte, and strive to cross the Conti
nental Divide where the return portion of the Astoria party had
crossed it.
This he succeeded in doing in 1824, and crossing first the Con
tinental Divide on to Green River, and next the range between
Green and Bear Rivers, he followed the latter stream down to the
Great Salt Lake, and explored the beautiful valley about that lake,
and following the Jordan River to the south established a fort on
Utah Lake, some forty miles south of where the Mormons twenty-
three years later located Salt Lake City.
How quickly the knowledge of this important discovery reached
the earnest friends of Oregon, and was by them given the widest
possible publicity, may be seen from this description of the pass
given by Floyd of Virginia in a debate on Oregon in the House of
Representatives, December 20, 1824. (Cf. Debates, not Abridgment
of Debates, in Congress, 18 Cong., 2 Sess., p. 24.)
After speaking of easy passes discovered at the headwaters of
the Yellowstone and Big Horn Rivers, and declaring, "Through
them you may pass with ease and safety, so much so that I have
the most perfect confidence that even now a wagon with the usual
freight could be taken from this capital to the mouth of the Co-

70 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
lumbia," he goes on: "Besides these passes there is still another,
which though longer to the upper part of that river, is yet better,
where even the feeble difficulties there are here almost annihilated.
This route, pursued by many now engaged in that" (i. e., the fur)
"trade, holds its course from the Missouri up the Kansas River . .
then falling on to the river Platte, thence entirely up that river to
its source, where the Oregon or Rocky Mountains sink into a bed
of sand, without water or timber for the space of eighty miles,
smooth and level."
A fuller and more exact description appeared in the Missouri
Herald in the autumn of 1826, and was widely copied throughout
the country, appearing on page 229 of Vol. 31 of Niles' Register,
December, 1826, as follows : "The recent expedition of Gen. Ashley
to the country west of the Rocky Mountains has been productive of
information on subjects of no small interest to the people of the
Union. It has proved that overland expeditions in large bodies may
be made to that remote region without the necessity of transport
ing provisions for men or beasts. Gen. Ashley left St. Louis in
March last, and returned in September. His return caravan con
sisted of upwards of 100 horses and mules, and more than that
number of men. He went to the station of the party which he had
left beyond the mountains when he came in a year ago, and thence
descended a river believed to be the Bonaventura, about 150 miles
to the Great Salt Lake. The return march to St. Louis occupied
seventy days, each horse and mule carrying nearly 200 pounds of
beaver fur, the animals keeping their strength and flesh on the grass
which they found and without losing any time on this long journey.
The men also found an abundance of food. They say there was no
day on which they could not have subsisted a thousand men, and
often ten thousand. Buffalo furnished the principal food, water of
the best quality was met with every day. The whole route lay
through a level and open country, better for carriages than any
turnpike road in the United States. Wagons and carriages could
go with ease as far as Gen. Ashley went, crossing the Rocky Moun
tains at the sources of the Platte and descending the valley of the
Bonaventura towards the Pacific Ocean."
Then follows a brief description of the Great Salt Lake, after
which the article goes on as follows: "In the whole expedition
Gen. Ashley did not lose a man, nor had any of those died whom
he left behind last year, many of whom have been out four or five
years, and are too happy in the freedom of these wild regions to
think of returning to the comparative thralldom of civilized life.
It would seem that no attempt has been made to ascertain the pre
cise latitude and longitude of the point at which Gen. Ashley
crossed the mountains. It is to be hoped that this will not be neg-

LI 1C"
I

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 71
lected on the next expedition. From all that we can learn the ele
vation is exceedingly small where the passage of the mountains was
effected, so small aw hardly to affect the rate of going of the caravan,
and forming at the most an angle of three degrees, being two de
grees less than the steepest ascent on the Cumberland road."
What happened in the discovery of routes practicable for trans
continental wagon roads, and the development of the first of those
roads in the next six years, is best stated by W. H. Ashley, Major
Joshua Pilcher, and the Rocky Mountain Fur Co. (or the firm of
Smith, Sublette & Jackson) in letters which the National Govern
ment deemed of so much importance that less than three months
after the last of them was received by the Secretary of War, in re
sponse to a resolution of the Senate asking him to communicate aj;
information in possession of the Government relative to the Brij
establishments on the Columbia, President Jackson sent to
Senate a very brief message of transmittal, dated January 24, IffS
January 25 it was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs,
and January 26 that committee reported it back with a recom
mendation that the message and accompanying documents be
printed and "1,500 copies in addition to the usual number" (which
was a liberal allowance for that time) "be furnished for the use
of the Senate." It is Sen. Ex. Doc. 39, 21st Cong., 2d Sess., covers
thirty-six pages and is very interesting. Ashley's letter is dated
Washington, March, 1829, and begins: "You request me to com
municate to you, by letter, my opinion as it regards a military force
best calculated for the protection of our western frontier, the fur
trade and our trade and intercourse direct from Missouri and Ar
kansas to the Mexican provinces, etc., etc."
He then gives his opinion on the number of troops needful to
protect our citizens west of the mountains, and on pages 6 and 7,
"in compliance with your request," he states his method of equip
ping and moving men through the Indian country "in the course of
my general excursions to the Rocky Mountains," and concludes as
follows: "In this way I have marched parties of men the whole
way from St. Louis to the vicinity of the Grand Lake, which is sit
uated about 150 miles down the waters of the Pacific Ocean, in
seventy-eight days. In the month of March, 1S27, I fitted out a
party of sixty men, mounted a piece of artillery (a four-pounder) on
a carriage which was drawn by two mules. The party marched to
or near the Grand Salt Lake, beyond the Rocky Mountains, remain
ing there one month, stopped on the way back fifteen days, and re
turned to Lexington, in the western part of Missouri, in September,
where the party was met with everything necessary for another out
fit, and did return (using the same horses and mules) to the moun
tains by the last of November in the same year."

72 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
This letter is addressed at its close "Gen. A. Macomb, Com
mander in Chief of the Army of the United States, Washington
City," and signed "W. H. Ashley."
(Cf. also for accounts of Ashley's expeditions of 1826 and 1827,
Niles' Register, p. 229, December, 1826, and p. 213, December, 1827.)
Immediately following Ashley's letter is a letter by Major Joshua
Pilcher addressed to Hon. J. H. Eaton, Secretary of War, undated,
but from its contents certainly written between July 1, 1830, and
January 20, 1831.
It describes his very extensive and fearless expedition of explora
tion and discovery between September, 1827, and June 30, 1830. I
regret that space will not permit me to quote its whole fourteen
^ges here, but part of it, as well as of the Rocky Mountain Fur
MLpany's letter, belongs more properly to Chapter VIL, on "The
With About the Relation of the Hudson's Bay Company to the
IKnerican Exploration, Occupation and Settlement of Oregon."
Pilcher says that he "engaged in the Indian trade of the Upper
Missouri eleven years ago, say 1819." . . . and "I determined
in 1827 on more extensive operations. With this view I left Council
Bluffs in September of that year with a party of men, forty-five in
the whole, and an outfit of merchandise suited to the object. My
route lay up the river Platte to its forks, and thence up its north
branch to its source in the Rocky Mountains. Here I had to make
a depot of merchandise and property, which is done by burying it
in the ground, the Indians having completed their designs upon our
horses by stealing the last of them. I had set out from Council
Bluffs with 104 of these indispensable animals, and was left to
make the transit of the mountains almost without any. The snow
was deep, but the ascent and descent easy, being a depression of the
mountains to such a degree that a carriage could cross without the
least difficulty. The depression was not only low, but wide, some
thing like a valley through the mountains, say thirty or forty miles
wide, the river Colorado taking its rise on the opposite side. I
passed the winter of 1827-28 on the Colorado." . . . "In July,
1828," his partners and most of the men having returned to St.
Louis, Pilcher, "with nine meD commenced a tour of the Northwest,
with a view of exploring the region of the Columbia River to ascer
tain the attractions and capabilities for trade." . . . "The ex
cursion occupied me till June, 1830 (a period of nearly two years),
when I returned to St. Louis." He kept along the west side of the
Rocky Mountains to Lewis River and thence to Clark's River, and
December 1, 1828, began a winter's camp at Flathead Lake.
"In the latter part of the spring" of 1829 all his men but one
were at their own request discharged to return to St. Louis with a

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 73
small party with whom they had spent part of the winter, and with
that one companion he continued his explorations.
In the summer of 1829, by invitation of the Hudson's Bay Com
pany trader among the Flatheads, he accompanied him to Ft. Col
vile, and after being hospitably entertained there for twenty days,
on September 21, 1829, having been invited to accompany the Hud
son's Bay Company's annual East-bound express, he set out up the
Columbia "with six men of the post carrying the annual export
across the mountains," recrossed the Continental Divide in 54 de
grees north latitude, and reached the Red River Settlement March
24, 1830, and after three days' hospitable entertainment there, he
struck off on snowshoes to the Mandan Indian villages on the Upper
Missouri, and from there finally returned to St. Louis June 30, ,
1830. ir^f*\
On p. 19, writing of Passes through the Mountains, he sa$p'-1'r
"The most erroneous ideas prevail upon this head. The Rocky;
Mountains are deemed by many to be impassable, and to present
the barrier which will arrest the westward march of the American
population. The man must know but little of the American people
who supposes they can be stopped by anything in the shape of moun
tains, deserts, seas or rivers, and he can know nothing at all of the
mountains in question to suppose that they are impassable."
He then says that he has known these mountains for three years
and has crossed them from 42 degrees to 54 degrees, and continues :
"I say then, that nothing is more easily passed than these moun
tains." "Wagons and carriages may cross them (i. e., the Rocky Moun
tains) in a state of nature without difficulty, and with little delay
on the day's journey. Some parts are very high, but the gradual
rise of the country in the vast slope from the Mississippi to the foot
of the mountains makes a considerable elevation without percept
ible increase, and then the gaps or depressions let you through al
most upon a level.
"This is particularly the case opposite the head of the Platte,"
(i. e., the South Pass) "where I crossed in 1827, and which has al
ready been described. I have crossed here often and always without
delay or difficulty. It is, in fact, one of the best passes, and presents
the best overland route from the valleys of the Mississippi to the
mouth of the Columbia that would follow the line of the Platte and
Lewis Rivers . . . These observations I address to you, sir, as
an organ of communication with the President. As an American
citizen anxious for the prosperity of my country, I deem it my duty
to communicate to the Government the observations which I have
made upon the state of things west of the Rocky Mountains."
The letter of Smith, Sublette and Jackson, doing business as the

74 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Rocky Mountain Fur Co., is dated St. Louis, October 29, 1830, and
addressed to Hon. J. H. Eaton, Secretary of War. It begins as fol
lows: "The business of taking furs from the United States Terri
tories beyond the Rocky Monutains has since been continued by
Jedediah S. Smith, David E. Jackson and W. L. Sublette, under the
firm name of Smith, Sublette and Jackson.
"They commenced business in 1826, and have since continued it;
and have made observations and gained information which they
think it important to communicate to the Government. The num
ber of men they have employed has usually been from 80 to 100,
and with these divided into parties they have traversed every part
of the country west of the Rocky Mountains, from the peninsula of
California to the mouth of the Columbia River. Pack horses or
rather mules were at first used; but in the beginning of the present
year it was determined to try wagons; and in the month of April
last, on the tenth day of the month, a caravan of ten wagons drawn
by five mules each, and two dearborns drawn by one mule each, set
out from St. Louis. There were eighty-one men in the party, all
mounted on mules. Our route was nearly due west to the western
limits of the State of Missouri, and thence along the Santa Fe trail
about forty miles, from which the course was some degrees north of
west, across the waters of the Kansas, and up the great Platte River
to the Rocky Mountains, and to the head of Wind River, where it
issues from the mountains. This took us until the 10th of July,
and was as far as we wished to go with the wagons, as the furs to
be brought in were to be collected at this place, which is, or was
this year, the great rendezvous of the persons engaged in that
business. "Here the wagons could easily have crossed the mountains, it
being what is called the Southern Pass, had it been desirable for
them to do so, which it was not for the reasons stated. For our
support, at leaving the Missouri settlements, until we should get
into the buffalo country, we drove twelve head of cattle, besides a
milch cow.
"Eight of these only being required for use before we got to the
buffaloes, the others went on to the head of Wind River. We began
to fall in with buffaloes on the Platte, about 350 miles from the
white settlements, and from that time lived on buffaloes, the quan
tity being infinitely beyond what we needed. On the 4th of August,
the wagons being in the mean time loaded with the furs which had
been previously taken, we set out on our return to St. Louis.
"All the high points of the mountains then in view were white
with snow; but the passes and valleys, and all the level country
were green with grass. Our route back was over the same ground
nearly as in going out, and we arrived in St. Louis on the 10th of

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 75
October, bringing back the ten wagons, four of the oxen and the
milch cow, as we did not need them for provisions. Our men were
all healthy during the whole time; we suffered nothing from Indians
and had no accident but the death of one man, being buried under
a bank of earth that fell in upon him, and another crippled at the
same time. Of the mules we lost but one by fatigue, and two horses
stolen by the Kansas Indians, the grass being along the whole route
going and coming sufficient for the support of the horses and mules.
The usual weight in the wagons was about 1,800 pounds.
"The usual progress of the wagons was from fifteen to twenty
miles per day.
"The country being almost all open, level and prairie, the chief
obstructions were ravines and creeks, the banks of which required
cutting down, and for this purpose a few pioneers were generally
kept in advance of the caravan. This is the first time that wagons
ever went to the Rocky Mountains, and the ease and safety with
which it was done prove the facility of communicating overland
with the Pacific Ocean. The route from the Southern Pass, where
the wagons stopped, to the Great Falls of the Columbia, being easier
and better than on this side of the mountains, with grass enough
for the horses and mules; but a scarcity of game for the support
of the men."
This it will be remembered was six years before Whitman went
to Oregon with his wagon; four years before any one went as a
missionary to the Oregon Indians and three years before the "high-
wrought and incorrect" account of the visit of the Flatheads to St.
Louis in the Christian Advocate and Zion's Herald started the ex
citement about sending missionaries to Oregon. These letters of
Pilcher and the Rocky Mountain Fur Co. were widely read in Docu
ment 39, and repeatedly quoted in newspaper and magazine articles,
and, as we shall see, in later Congressional reports.
In 1832 (the very next year after the publication of this Senate
Document No. 39), Capt. Bonneville of the United States Army,
having obtained a furlough for his famous fur trading expedition,
by "offering to combine public utility with his private projects, and
to collect statistical information for the War Department concern
ing the wild country and tribes he might visit" (Cf. Gen. Macomb's
Instructions to Capt. Bonneville, in Appendix to Irving's "Bonne
ville"), proceeded to demonstrate the correctness of Smith, Sublette
and Jackson's prediction by driving twenty loaded wagons across
the Rocky Mountains through the South Pass and into the Oregon
Territory as far as the fur traders' rendezvous for that year, which
was in Green River Valley, and in 1837 Irving published his account
of "Bonneville's Adventures," which was immediately republished
in England.

76 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Whitman knew about these wagons of Bonneville before he
started with his two wagons in 1836, and also that the route pre
sented no particular difficulties, for in a sixteen page letter which
he wrote in the form of a journal of his trip with Rev. Samuel Par
ker to the rendezvous on Green River, just west of the South Pass
(from which nothing has been published heretofore), he wrote, on
page 13, under date of October 20, 1835 : "If Col. Dodge should go
to the Pacific and transport cannon as he did last year, we could
cross the mountains with a wagon."
"There were twenty wagons at one time from St. Louis at the
place where the company rendezvoused last summer.
"There is no obstruction from timber except in a few instances
of willow upon the streams, which is trifling." No advocate of the
Whitman Legend has ever alluded to this letter, or given any inti
mation that Whitman had ever heard of Bonneville's wagons.
I have been unable to learn whether or not the fur traders'
annual caravans took any wagons in 1833 and 1834, but as Ft.
Laramie (589 miles from Independence, Mo., and 272 miles east
of the summit of the South Pass) was founded in 1834, it is alto
gether probable that wagons were taken that far.
In 1835 the annual caravan of the American Fur Co., with
which Rev. S. Parker and Dr. Whitman went as far as Green River,
took six wagons as far as Ft. Laramie, where they left them, not on
account of any fear of being unable to take them across the Main
Range into Oregon, but for the very obvious reason that now hav
ing a permanent fort, where Indians and white trappers could come
to trade all the year, a very large part of their goods for that trade
need not be transported any farther than Ft. Laramie. (Cf. for
these wagons, and the leaving of them, Rev. S. Parker's "Journal
of an Exploring Tour Beyond the Rocky Mountains," pp. 52 and
72.) This brings us to 1836 and Whitman's wagon, and that the reader
may know all the facts about his wagon, I will quote all of the
contemporaneous evidence known to exist that says anything about
his wagon (which is something not to be found in any book advo
cating the Whitman Legend).
As both Mrs. Whitman and Mrs. Spalding kept diaries of this
journey, and both Dr. Whitman and Mr. Spalding wrote letters in
which the facts about the wagon and its fate are explicitly stated,
we have abundance of contemporaneous evidence to enable us to
know the truth about this innocent and unimportant vehicle, and
those who have accepted as trustworthy authorities Gray's History
and Spalding's Pamphlet, and Barrows, Nixon, Craighead, Mowry,
Rev. M. Eells, Prof. Lyman, President Penrose, D. H. Montgomery's
Leading Facts (?) in American History, Prof. H. W. Parker, Geo.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 77
Ludington Weed, and all the other inventors or endorsers of the
fictions about Whitman's wagon, will be greatly surprised to read
what Mr. and Mrs. Whitman and Mr. and Mrs. Spalding wrote
while on the journey and immediately after its conclusion, and no
less so what they did not write in the next six years.
May 5, 1836, Whitman wrote to D. Greene, secretary, from "Can
tonment Leavenworth" : "We have one wagon for ladies and one
for baggage."
May 20, 1836, H. H. Spalding wrote from Otoe Agency to D.
Greene, secretary, as follows: "We have two hired men, one Nez
Perce, a faithful and valuable young man, besides Richard and
John, ten of us in all. Two wagons, thirteen horses, six mules,
seventeen head of cattle, including calves. We think it best to take
the wagons to the Black Hills with horses, then our packing animals
will be packed for the remainder of the journey with sound backs."
"We have now a very limited supply of everything. We find that
we must leave many things we consider almost indispensable. My
classical and theological books will nearly all be left. We can
take almost nothing in the line of mechanical tools and farming
utensils, but very little clothing, no seeds except a few garden
seeds." Mrs. Spalding's diary (among Mss. of Oregon Historical So
ciety) under date of Liberty, Mo., April 27, 1836, after stating that
Messrs. Spalding and Gray, and the two Nez Perces boys, and one
young man to assist them, had started that day by land from Lib
erty for Council Bluffs, continues : "It was necessary for the gen
tlemen to make the route by land on account of the wagons, horses
and cattle purchased at this place."
Mr. Spalding wrote to D. Greene, secretary, from Rendezvous,
July 9, 1836, as follows: "We have got our wagon to this place
without much difficulty, and shall probably take it through."
A postscript on margin of page 1 says: "Mr. McLeod, a di
rector of the Fur Company, arrived in camp today, 12th of July,
from Walla Walla, bringing letter from Mr. Parker. Arrangements
are made for us to return in his company. It seems the most
marked Providence in our favor of any we have yet experienced.
Now all anxieties respecting a long and dangerous route with the
Indians cease. We have now a safe convoy that will conduct us
immediately to the spot. We find Mr. McLeod very friendly, and
well disposed toward our object. He says he will render us any
assistance in his power."
Mrs. Whitman's diary (in the Transcript Oregon Pioneer Asso
ciation, 1891, on page 41) says: "We attempted to reach Loup
Fork that night (*. e., Tuesday, May 14, 1836,) "and part of us suc
ceeded. Those in the wagons drove there by 11 o'clock, but it was

78 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
too much for the cattle." . . . (P. 42) The next morning "the
Fur Company was on the opposite side of the river, which we
forded and without unloading our wagons much." . . . "Since
we came up with the camp, I rode in the wagons most of the way
to the Black Hills. It is astonishing how well we get along with
our wagons where there are no roads. I think I may say it is easier
traveling here than on any turnpike in the States."
(P. 43) Under date of July 14, 1836, she wrote: "We are now
at the Rocky Mountains, at the encampment of Messrs. McLeod and
McKay, expecting to leave on Monday morning for Walla Walla.
It seems a special favor that that company has come to Rendezvous
this season ; for otherwise we would have had to have gone with the
Indians a difficult route, and so slow that we should have been
late at Walla Walla, and not have had the time we wanted to make
preparations for winter."
Mrs. Spalding's diary under date of June 15, 1836, at Ft. Wil
liam, (i. e., Ft. Laramie), says: "We are camped near the fort and
shall probably remain here several days, as the company" (i. e.,
the American Fur Co.) "leave their wagons at this post, and make
arrangements to transport their goods the remainder of the journey
on mules." Returning again to Mrs. Whitman's diary (Trans. O. P. A. 1891,
p. 44) : "July 25, 1836. Husband has had a tedious time with the
wagon today. It got stuck in the creek this morning when cross
ing, and he was obliged to wade considerably in getting it out.
After that, in going between the mountains, on the side of one so
steep that it was difficult for horses to pass, the wagon upset twice ;
did not wonder at this at all it was a greater wonder that it was
not turning somersaults continually. It is not very grateful to my
feelings to see him wearing out with such excessive fatigue, as I
am obliged to. He is not as fleshy as he was last winter. All the
most difficult part of the way he has walked, in laborious attempts
to take the wagon."
(P. 45) "July 28. One of the axle-trees of the wagon broke
today ; was a little rejoiced, for we were in hopes they would leave
it, and have no more trouble with it. Our rejoicing was in vain,
for they are making a cart of the back wheels this afternoon and
lashing the fore wheels to it — intending to take it through in some
shape or other. They are so resolute and untiring in their efforts
they will probably succeed."
This, it will be noticed, was not at Ft. Hall (where all the ad
vocates of the Whitman Legend represent Whitman as reducing his
wagon to a cart on account of the opposition of the Hudson's Bay
Co. to its going any farther), but six days' journey east of Ft. Hall,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 79
at which place, according to Mrs. Spalding's diary, they arrived a
little after noon of August 3.
(P. 49) Friday, August 12, Mrs. Whitman's diary says : "Dear
Harriet, the little trunk you gave me has come with me so far, and
now I must leave it here alone . . . The hills are so steep and
rocky that husband thought it best to lighten the wagon as much
as possible, and take nothing but the wheels, leaving the box" (i. e.,
the rude box he made out of the wagon body on July 28, when the
breaking of the axle compelled him to make his wagon into a cart),
"with my trunk."
(P. 50) "Saturday, August 13. We have come fifteen miles
and have had the worst route in all the journey for the cart. We
might have had a better one but for being misled by some of the
company who started out before the leaders. It was 2 o'clock be
fore we came into camp." . . . Describing the crossing of Snake
River: "Husband had considerable difficulty in crossing the cart.
Both cart and mules were turned upside down in the river, and en
tangled in the harness. The mules would have been drowned but
for a desperate struggle to get them ashore. Then after putting
two of the strongest horses before the cart, and two men swim
ming behind to steady it, they succeeded in getting it across."
(P. 52) August 22. "As for the wagon, it is left at the fort,
and I have nothing to say about crossing it at this time. Five of
our cattle were left there also, to be exchanged for others at Walla
Walla. Perhaps you will wonder why we have left the wagon,
having taken it so nearly through. Our animals were failing, and
the route in crossing the Blue Mountains is said to be impassable
for it. We have the prospect of obtaining one in exchange at Van
couver. If we do not we shall send for it, when we have been to
so much labor in getting it thus far. It is a useful article in the
country." Turning now to Whitman's own letters, we find every advocate
of the Whitman Legend has failed not only to quote from, but in
any way to allude to, the existence of the following two, written
to Rev. D. Greene, secretary: "Encampment of Messrs. McCloud
and McCay" (should be McLeod and McKay, W. I. M.), "near
Green River, ten miles from Rendezvous, July 16, 1836. Our great
est difficulty was to bring our cattle up to the forced march of the
company (i. e., the American Fur Co. or Fitzpatrick and Dripps),
"and with our wagon, one of which we have brought to this place,
and expect to take it through the whole journey. Most of the diffi
culty with the wagon originated from the forced marches manner
of traveling, the company having one cart only from Ft. William to
Rendezvous. When we first met the Indians we did not know of
any other company with whom we could go, and intended to accom-

80 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
modate ourselves to their route, although we might have to go out
of our way to accommodate them for buffalo, and should be de
tained for them to kill and dry their winter's supply of meat. But
by the arrival of Messrs. McCloud and McCay we are furnished
with a safe and direct escort to Walla Walla, and have availed our
selves of their company and protection. We received the most
flattering encouragement from these gentlemen, one of whom, Mr.
McCloud, is a partner in the Northwest Fur Co." (should be Hud
son's Bay Co., W. I. M.) "that we should have every facility in our
journey, and all necessary supplies of goods, provisions, etc., at
Walla Walla."
September 15, 1836, Whitman wrote from Ft. Walla Walla . .
"We have received the kindest hospitality from those with whom
we have traveled, but more especially since we joined the camp of
Messrs. McLeod and McKay. For most of the way that we trav
eled with them we were in a country where there is but little game,
yet by their great exertion they often obtained some, and when
ever they were so fortunate we were sure to share largely with
them. We brought our wagon and all our cattle to Snake Fort"
(Ft. Boise), "about 250 miles above this post on Lewis (or, as
called here, Snake) River. The wagon we left subject to future
order." September 20, 1836, H. H. Spalding wrote a very long letter to
D. Greene, secretary, from Ft. Vancouver, from which copious ex
tracts were printed in the Missouri Herald for October, 1837, but
every advocate of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story has always
carefully refrained from quoting from it or even mentioning it.
In it he wrote: "We drove a wagon to Snake Fort, and could
have driven it through but for the fatigue of our animals; expect
to get it at some future time." From these dates, September 15,
1836, for Whitman, and September 20, 1836, for Spalding, the word
wagon does not occur again, nor one word about a wagon road in
all the voluminous correspondence of Whitman, Spalding and Mrs.
Whitman, till after Whitman had returned from Boston to Mis
souri, in May, 1843, except that Mrs. Whitman, in a letter to her
husband begun October 4, and finished October 17, 1842, describ
ing the kindness of McKinlay, the Hudson's Bay agent in command
of Ft. Walla Walla (in whose charge her husband left her when
he returned to the States), in taking her from the mission station
to Walla Walla on October 11, 1842, wrote: "I am now at Walla
Walla — came here yesterday; was too unwell to undertake the
journey, but could not refuse, as Mr. McKinlay had come on pur
pose to take me. He came in the wagon, and brought the trundle
bed, and I laid down most of the way."
This failure to even mention wagon or wagon road for more

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 81
than six years after their arrival in Oregon shows how intense was
their interest in the "desperate," or "patriotic," or "heroic," or
"resolute" "attempt" to "open up a passage on wheels to Oregon !"
(Cf. Trans. Oregon Pioneer Association, 1891, p. 166, for this letter
of Mrs. Whitman.)
There is not in all the voluminous correspondence, and the frag
ments of journals of these missionaries, not only during this jour
ney, but subsequently during the whole continuance of the mission,
and even after its destruction on account of the Whitman massacre,
during all the years to the invention of the Whitman Saved Oregon
Story, a single sentence that gives any intimation that Whitman
in trying to get his wagon through to Ft. Hall ; or the rude cart to
which it was reduced by the breaking of the axle six days' journey
east of Ft. Hall, and finally the wheels and axle only through to
Ft. Boise, was influenced by any greater or loftier motive than that
stated by Mrs. Whitman above, viz: "It is a useful article in the
country." Nor did Whitman in all the extravagant and unwar
ranted claims he made of service to the Government in letters after
his return to Oregon, in September, 1843, down to his death (Cf.
Chapter VIL, Part 2 infra) ever write one word about his driving
this wagon and its reduction to a cart and finally to a pair of
wheels driven to and left at Ft. Boise "on account of the fatigue
of the animals." The evidence in the diaries of Mrs. Whitman and
Mrs. Spalding and the letters of Dr. Whitman and Mr. Spalding is
absolutely irrefutable that from the time McLeod and McKay in
vited them to join their camp on July 9, 1836, at Green River, these
Hudson's Bay Company's officials treated them with the greatest
possible kindness, nor is there a single intimation in any of this
contemporaneous evidence that there was at any time or place the
least objection made by any Hudson's Bay Co. officer or employe
to Whitman's attempt to drive his wagon or cart or pair of wheels
through to the Columbia.
It should be remembered that none of this party of Hudson's
Bay Co. officers and men had the least acquaintance with any one
of this party of American missionaries, that there were no letters
of introduction to them, that they were not under the least con
ceivable special obligation — political, religious, fraternal, or finan
cial — to do anything whatever to help these missionaries to get over
the longest and most dreaded part of their journey, and that they
were traveling with saddle and pack animals, so that (as all of us
well know who have had experience — as the writer repeatedly has —
with a mixed cavalcade of saddle and pack animals and wagons) to
undertake to convoy a party with a wagon, even over a region
where there was a plainly marked road, would inevitably mean
some trouble and delay to them, and much more over a region

82 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
where no road had been even located, and where, consequently
(though the route was easily practicable for a wagon road), there
must necessarily be a good deal of time consumed in determining
where, and for how long distances, it was necessary to depart from
the saddle trail to find a route over which a wagon could be driven.
They would therefore have been perfectly justified had they said
to the missionary party at Green River: "We shall be glad to
have you travel with our party, if you will leave the wagon here,
since it must be no small delay to our movements to have it taken
further." And had they said this it would not have been the slightest evi
dence of any "fear of," or any "antagonism to," the development
of the wagon road further into Oregon.
There is not in Mrs. Whitman's nor in Mrs. Spalding's diaries
nor in any of the contemporaneous letters of the Spaldings, Whit
man's and Mr. W. H. Gray the least intimation that at any point
on the journey the Hudson's Bay Company people made the least
objection to the wagon, nor in any way opposed the effort to take it
through, but the opposition was chiefly on the part of Mrs. Whit
man, who, like many another bride, thought her husband was work
ing too hard, and also on that of others of the missionary party,
who evidently thought "the game not worth the candle."
Beyond Boise the fragments of Whitman's wagon never went,
though why Whitman should have so completely lost all interest
in the subject of a wagon road for six and a half years after he
left it there, as not only not to have sent for it, but never again to
have written the words wagon or wagon road in any of his letters
from September 15, 1836, to May 28, 1843, is an utterly unsolvable
mystery. Various advocates of the Whitman Legend have asserted
that Whitman's old wagon subsequently went through to the Wil
lamette or to Walla Walla, but no one of them has produced any
proof of it.
Gray in an article in the Oregonian, February 1, 1885, reprinted
in the "Whitman Controversy" (pamphlet), Portland, 1885 (p. 29),
declares that he saw Whitman's wagon at Boise in 1838, as Farn
ham did (in 1839), but even he dares not affirm that it was ever
taken beyond there, and though he says (p. 31), "The wagon was
not abandoned, but left for Gray to bring through at some future
time," he vouchsafes no information as to why he never brought it
through. He speaks of it as a wagon all through this article,
though he well knew it was but "the thills, one axle, and a pair of
wheels." In 1837, so far as appears, no wagons crossed the Continental
Divide, nor in 1838, though, as we have already seen, Gray claims
to have been telling audiences in the States in the winter of 1837-8

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 83
that "Whitman's wagon could have been taken through to the Wil
lamette" (Cf. Gray's History of Oregon, p. 177), and so far was it
from being true that the 1838 reinforcement to the American Board
Mission had, as Barrows says, no wagon, "because they had acted
on the already well-established impression in the East that car
riages could not travel to Oregon" (Cf. Barrows' Oregon, p. 147) ;
that they had acted on the precisely opposite belief, even then so
generally diffused in the States, that wagons could go to Oregon;
that Dr. Weed— the agent of the A. B. C. F. M. in Cincinnati— had
sent a wagon to the frontier for them, which, not being suitable for
their use, they had traded for another, and that they traded that
one to Capt. Fontenelle, at Ft. Laramie, 631 miles east of Ft. Hall,
when they could take it no farther "for want of horses."
On this point we have the following strictly contemporaneous
evidence: (1) Mr. W. H. Gray wrote to D. Greene, secretary, a let
ter covering four pages closely written foolscap, dated "Rendezvous
on Wind River, Rocky Mountains, July (no day), 1838." It is al
most entirely taken up with an account of the expenses of the 1838
reinforcement. On page 2, after explaining that they had been compelled before
starting from the Missouri frontier to dispose of a wagon in trade
for a mule at a loss of $45, because it was old and not adapted to
the trip, he says : "The wagon we purchased to supply the place
of the one sent by Dr. Weed" (which was the old one before re
ferred to), "we have exchanged for a horse with Capt. Fontenelle,
who kindly exchanged with us when we could bring it no further
for want of horses."
(2) Mrs. C. Eells kept a journal of this trip, which was pub
lished in Trans. Oregon Pioneer Association, 1889, pp. 54-89, and
mentions their wagon repeatedly (pp. 63, 66, 67), and (p. 73), un
der date of May 31, 1838, at Ft. William (or Laramie) she wrote :
"Give the wagon to Capts. Drips and Fontenelle."
Thos. J. Farnham, ostensibly a private traveler and explorer,
but really in the employ of the National Government (Cf. Con
gressional Globe, 27th Cong., 3d Sess., Appendix, p. 229), in 1839
led out a small migration to Oregon. He was described by an
Englishman who was a fellow passenger on the Pacific with him
as a "flamboyantly patriotic American." September 13, 1839, he
reached Ft. Boise (Travels, p. 141), and (p. 142) he says: "The
14th and 15th were spent very pleasantly with this gentleman"
(i. e., Mr. Payette) . . . "Among the curiosities of this estab
lishment were the fore wheels, axle-tree and thills of a one-horse
wagon, said to have been run by the American missionaries from
the State of Connecticut through the mountains thus far towards
the mouth of the Columbia. It was left here under the belief that

84 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
it could not be taken through the Blue Mountains. But fortunately
for the next that shall attempt to cross the continent, a safe and
easy passage has lately been discovered by which vehicles of the
kind may be drawn through to Walla Walla."
Farnham returned to the States via the Sandwich Islands, and
at Poughkeepsie, N. Y., in 1841, published the first edition of his
"Travels on the Great Western Prairies, the Anahuac and Rocky
Mountains, and in the Oregon Territory." It was so popular that
in 1843 two more editions were published in New York, and a two
volume edition in London.
Some of the advocates of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story—
notably Rev. M. Eells and W. H. Gray— have sought to make it ap
pear that Payette did not communicate this information to Farn
ham, but that he was informed of this easy pass by Whitman, de
claring that he revised his "Travels" after he was at Whitman's
mission (which was September 23 to 30, 1839). To this it is enough
to reply that: First, this paragraph appears in its regular order
under the date of his stop at Ft. Boise, without any intimation
that he had learned anything included in this paragraph at any
later time, or from any other person than Payette.
Second, it is certain that this paragraph was not revised by
Farnham after his visit at Whitman's, on account of the error it
contains about these missionaries, as follows: "American mission
aries from the State of Connecticut." Immediately preceding Farn
ham, in 1839, were Revs. J. S. Griffin and Asahel Munger and their
wives, who had been sent out as "Independent Missionaries" (i. e.,
independent of the American Board) by some churches in Con
necticut which had become dissatisfied with the management of the
A. B. C. F. M. Monsieur Payette's knowledge of the geography of
the States was limited, and he very naturally would speak of
"American missionaries from the State of Connecticut," since the
last ones who had passed were from that State, but if during his
week's stay at Whitman's station Farnham had discussed this mat
ter with Whitman, who had left these wagon wheels there in 1836,
not for the reason assigned by Farnham, nor from any opposition
of the Hudson's Bay Co., but, as stated by Spalding in his letter of
September 20, 1836, as follows : "We drove a wagon to Snake Fort,
and could have driven it through but for the fatigue of our animals,
expect to get it at some future time," certainly Whitman would
have corrected the statement that the "thills and wheels and axle-
tree" Farnham saw at Boise were left there by "American mission
aries from the State of Connecticut," since neither Whitman nor
anyone of his associates in the Mission of the American Board
was from Connecticut.
Griffin and Munger are said to have taken a wagon over the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 85
Continental Divide and as far as Ft. Hall, where they left it, as
Whitman did his axle and wheels at Boise, "on account of the
fatigue of their animals."
In 1840 Revs. Harvey Clark and A. T. Smith, and Mr. P. B.
Littlejohn and their wives, Independent Protestant missionaries to
the Oregon Indians, reached Ft. Hall with wagons, and left them
"on account of the fatigue of their animals."
What happened soon after they left Ft. Hall is best told in the
following extract from the address of Hon. Elwood Evans at the
1877 meeting of the Oregon Pioneer Association (Tr. 1877, pp. 22-
23) :
"Let me now refer to the statement of the late Dr. Robert
Newell, Speaker of the House of Representatives of Oregon, in 1846,
a name familiar and held in high remembrance by ancient Oregon
ians. It is interesting for its history, and in the present connec
tion illustrates the difficulty at that time of getting into Oregon.
It details the bringing of the first wagon to Ft. Walla Walla, Ore
gon, in 1840, the Wallula of Washington Territory. The party
consisted of Dr. Newell and family, Col. Joseph L. Meek and family,
Caleb Wilkins of Tualitan Plains and Frederic Ermatinger, a Chief
Factor of the Hudson's Bay Company. It had been regarded as
the height of folly to attempt to bring wagons west of Ft. Hall.
The Doctor suggested the experiment, Wilkins approved it and
Ermatinger yielded. The Revs. Harvey Clark, A. B. Smith (should
be Alvin T. Smith, Cf. Gray's History, p. 109, also list of members
Oregon Pioneer Association in Trans., 1877, p. 94) and P. B. Lit
tlejohn, missionaries, had accompanied the American Fur Com
pany's expedition as far as Green River, where they employed Dr.
Newell to pilot them to Ft. Hall. On arriving there, they found
their animals so reduced that they concluded to abandon their two
wagons, and Dr. Newell accepted them for his services as guide. In
a letter from the Doctor, he says : "At the time I took the wagons,
I had no idea of undertaking to bring them into this country. I
exchanged fat horses to these missionaries for their animals, and
after they had been gone a month or more for Wallamet, and the
American Fur Company had abandoned the country for good, I
concluded to hitch up and try the much-dreaded job of bringing a
wagon to Oregon. I sold one of those wagons to Mr. Ermatinger,
at Ft. Hall. Mr. Caleb Wilkins had a small wagon which Joel
Walker had left at Ft. Hall. On the 5th of August, 1840, we put
out with three wagons. Joseph L. Meek drove my wagon. In a
few days we began to realize the difficult task before us, and found
that the continual crashing of the sage under our wagons, which
was in many places higher than the mules' backs, was no joke.
Seeing our animals begin to fail, we began to light up; finally

86 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
threw away our wagon-beds and were quite sorry we had under
taken the job. All the consolation we had was that we broke the
first sage on that road, and were too proud to eat anything but
dried salmon skins after our provisions had become exhausted. In
a rather rough and reduced state we arrived at Dr. Whitman's
mission station in the Walla Walla valley, where we were met by
that hospitable man, and kindly made welcome and feasted accord
ingly. On hearing me regret that I had undertaken to bring
wagons, the Doctor said, 'Oh, you will never regret it. You have
broken the ice, and when others see that wagons have passed they,
too, will pass, and in a few years the valley will be full of our
people.' The Doctor shook me heartily by the hand; Mrs. Whit
man, too, welcomed us, and the Indians walked around the wagons,
or what they called 'horse canoes,' and seemed to give it up. We
spent a day or so with the Doctor and then went to Ft. Walla
Walla, where we were kindly received by Mr. P. C. Pambrun, Chief
Trader of Hudson's Bay Company, Superintendent of that post.
On the 1st of October we took leave of those kind people, leaving
our wagons and taking the river trail."
The simple fact that these, the first wagons to go through to the
Columbia, were not only outfitted at Ft. Hall, but that one of them
was owned, outfitted and driven by Frederic Ermatinger, the Hud
son's Bay Co. chief trader in charge of Ft. Hall in 1838, 1839, 1840
and 1841, of itself reduces to senseless drivel all the scores of pages
in Barrows, Nixon, Craighead, Mowry and the other advocates of
the Whitman Saved Oregon Story, which accuse the Hudson's Bay
Co. of opposing the passage of wagons beyond Ft. Hall.
One point should not be forgotten in reading the account of
these first wagons through to the Columbia. Unable from their
small number to keep a party of pioneers in advance to dig down
steep banks of creeks, and select the most favorable routes over
hills and mountains, they found the difficulties of the way so great
that they threw away their wagon beds, and only got the frames
and running gears through to the Columbia.
This, however, was all that was of any special importance, as
they could easily get pine or fir boards to make new bodies for the
wagons at Ft. Vancouver, but well-seasoned hardwood lumber for
wagon wheels, and axles, and framework could not be had, nor
could the iron work be easily obtained at Vancouver, or elsewhere
in Oregon at that time.
The experience of these men fully justified the advice given at
Ft. Hall to the parties of '39, '40, '41 and '42, to leave their wagons,
and go from there with pack animals, while at the same time it fully
confirmed the declaration of the Rocky Mountain Fur Co., in 1830,
that they — a party of resolute, well-disciplined men — could have

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 87
driven their wagons through to the Great Falls of the Columbia,
and would have found a better road beyond the Continental Divide
than on the east of it. Meek, Newell and Wilkins were miserably
poor, so that they had very little as a loading for their wagons.
Meek and Newell had Indian wives, who, however little they might
have been adapted to grace a drawing room, were true "helpmeets"
for such a journey, being as expert as the men in all its drudgery
and hardships, and especially in making and breaking camp. The
four men, Meek, Newell, Wilkins and Ermatinger, were all experi
enced mountaineers and trappers, vigorous, skilled in "reading the
face of the country," resourceful in any wilderness emergency, as
brave as any men ever were, able to converse freely with the In
dians, and so to obtain assistance from them if needed, and with
all the prestige of the Hudson's Bay Co. to assist them— Ermatin
ger being well known to all the leading Indians of that region as
a Hudson's Bay Co. chief trader— and they left Ft. Hall with fresh
horses. It is quite within bounds to say that, considering all these
circumstances, they were at least two or three, if not five or six
times as strong a party for the journey from Ft. Hall to the Co
lumbia by wagon as either the party of 1839 or 1840, composed as
they were of unpractical men, fresh from theological schools, with
little experience in overcoming the difficulties of the way, with no
knowledge of the Indian language, and no experience in dealing
with Indians and no prestige of the Hudson's Bay Co. to aid them,
with stock worn out by the more than 1,200 miles journey from
the Missouri frontier to Ft. Hall, with white wives who could be
of little service in pioneering a wagon road, and loaded down with
much more weighty and bulky impedimenta of various sorts than
these poverty-stricken trappers.
If Meek's party, with all their skill, and courage, and energy,
and Indian wives to help them, and with fresh stock at Ft. Hall,
were obliged to throw away their wagon bodies, what can be more
evident than that if the missionary parties of '39 and '40 had tried
it, they would have been obliged not only to wholly abandon the
wagons, but also to leave behind most, if not all, of their loading,
and so have experienced much more of hardship and discomfort,
and have reached the Columbia much poorer than they did by
taking pack animals from Ft. Hall?
Neither Whitman nor his wife nor any other of the American
Board missionaries in any letter written to the American Board,
or to their friends, even so much as mentioned the arrival of these
three wagons at his station in 1840, with their complete demonstra
tion of the easy practicability of the route for loaded wagons when
ever a party of 80 to 100 or more resolute and tolerably disciplined
men should attempt it.

88 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
The only contemporaneous account I have been able to find of
the 1841 overland migration is the very brief and vague one in
"Letters and Sketches, with a Narrative of a Year's Residence
Among the Indian Tribes of the Rocky Mountains, by P. J. De
Smet, S. J., Philadelphia, 1843."
Father DeSmet, notwithstanding his great ability, is like most
enthusiastic missionaries provokingly inexact in many of his state
ments, and so absorbed in the emotions excited by his religion that
he omits any mention of a multitude of matters that seem to the
historian of vastly more consequence than much of what he has
written. On page 64, speaking of the crossing of the Kansas River, he
wrote : "Our baggage wagons and men crossed in a pirogue, which
at a distance looked like one of those gondolas which glide through
the streets of Venice."
(P. 65) "On the 19th (May, 1841,) we continued our journey
to the number of seventy souls, fifty of whom were capable of man
aging the rifle."
(P. 104) "It was here that we left Bear River. On the 14th of
August our wagons, having proceeded ten hours without intermis
sion, arrived at the outlet of a defile which seemed to us the end
of the world."
(P. 125) Writing of the rapid current of the South Platte where
they had forded it, he writes : "It would have carried away wagons
and carts, had they not been supported on all sides while the mules
exerted all their strength to pull them onward."
(P. 126) Crossing of North Platte: "The largest wagon was
carried off by the force of the current in spite of all the efforts,
shouts and cries of the men, who did all they could to keep them
selves from being drowned. Another wagon was literally turned
over." On pages 127-8 he describes the overturn in fording Snake River
of some sort of wheeled vehicle, with which he had left Ft. Hall for
his journey with the Flathead Indians to their home in the Flat
head Valley, in northwest Montana. He twice calls it a "vehicle,"
and three times a "carriage," but in a letter to another party de
scribing the same incident (on p. 175) he twice calls it a "cart."
How far he took this vehicle he does not inform us, nor why he
abandoned it (if he did so), but by the route he traveled up Snake
River to Henry Lake, across the Continental Divide over Red Rock
Pass, down the Beaver Head, and back again across the Continental
Divide over Deer Lodge Pass, he could certainly have driven a cart
through to the Flathead Valley. How many wagons there were in
this party is unknown, but there would seem to have been six or
eight at least as far as some point well up the Platte, for in an

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 89
account (p. 129) of an alarm given at the appearance of a band
of eighty Cheyenne warriors he says, "The Colonel orders the
wagons to be drawn up in double file, and places between them
whatever may be exposed to plunder."
From page 97 it appears that that part of this migration that
had started for California did not go to Ft. Hall, but "left us a few
days before our arrival at the fort, in the vicinity of the boiling
springs which empty into Bear River" (i. e., the Soda Springs,
which are about eighty miles south of east from Ft. Hall).
Page 96 informs us that those who had joined the party merely
for information or pleasure, some five or seven in number, had
started back to the States at Green River.
Whether the California party took any wagons beyond Soda
Springs we are not informed. The only information we have as to
the relative numbers in this party for California, and those for the
settlements in Oregon, is in a letter of Mrs. Whitman to her sister
Jane, dated "Wieletpoo, Oregon Territory, October 1, 1841" (and
published in Trans. Oregon Pioneer Association, 1891, p. 139), as
follows :
"The emigrants were twenty-four in number— two families, with
small children, from Missouri. This company was much larger
when they started. About thirty went another route, to California.
The company of Jesuits were twelve in number, consisting of three
priests, three novitiates, four laborers, and their pilot, started from
St. Louis, one they found on their way. Their pilot is Fitzpatrick,
the same person that commanded the party we came with from the
States. This company came as far as Ft. Hall. They then go with
the Indians to the Flathead country, or Pend d'Oreille. It is not
known where they will settle, but it is reported that they expect to
locate themselves somewhere in that region, and in the same lan
guage that part of our mission are occupying."
That this party was too small to open a wagon road over the
Blue Mountains is obvious, and the fact that Ermatinger was still
in command at Ft. Hall is all the proof needed that there was no
opposition on the part of the Hudson's Bay Co. at Ft. Hall to
wagons going beyond there, and that the advice given this small
party to leave their wagons there and go on with pack horses was
entirely proper.
This brings us to the 1842 migration, and fortunately we have
abundant and detailed contemporaneous evidence of the movements
of this migration, and the fate of its wagons, and its treatment at
Ft. Hall, in (a) "The Emigrants' Guide to Oregon and California,"
by Lansford W. Hastings (who was one of the leaders of the party).
The first edition of this was published at Cincinnati in 1845 and
later editions in 1847 and 1849.

90 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
(b) Fremont's report of his first and second expeditions, pub
lished by the Government in 1845.
(c) The reports of Dr. Elijah White (the organizer and first
captain of the party) as Sub-Indian Agent to the Commissioner of
Indian Affairs.
(d) "White's Ten Years in Oregon," Ithaca, N. Y., 1847.
(e) "The Journal of Hon. Medorem Crawford," one of the pub
lications of the Oregon Historical Society, and Crawford's address
as President of the Oregon Pioneer Association at its 1881 meet
ing. This address is fairly entitled to rank as a contemporaneous
account because based on and agreeing with his journal. This was
the first large overland migration, numbering fifty-one men and
fifty-seven women and children.
From these strictly contemporaneous sources we learn that this
first large American overland migration started from the Missouri
frontier May 16, 1842, with seventeen or eighteen wagons. Craw
ford's Journal (p. 7) says 17, and White's Ten Years (p. 147) says
18; that at the American trading posts of Fts. Laramie and John
— rivals and competitors of the Hudson's Bay Co. — and located
more than 600 miles east of Ft. Hall, part of these wagons were
traded off, not to that wicked Hudson's Bay Co., but to American
Fur traders ; that more of them were abandoned in the Green River
Valley, about 300 miles east of Ft. Hall, and only seven wagons
reached that place, and that they, the first large overland migra
tion, were received with the utmost kindness at Ft. Hall, and fur
nished with flour at only one-half of what the American traders
had charged them at Ft. Laramie. A letter to me from Mr. Craw
ford, dated September 17, 1891, says: "Only eight wagons went
beyond Green River, one of which was abandoned, and seven
wagons arrived at Ft. Hall. . . We were very kindly treated
at Ft. Hall. Never heard the officers at Ft. Hall charged with
misrepresentations. It had been understood by all that we were
too late to take wagons farther than Ft. Hall." Hasting's Emi
grants' Guide (p. 9) says: "Upon arriving at Fts. Laramie and
John we were received in a very kind and friendly manner by the
gentlemen of those forts. . . While here several of our party
disposed of their oxen and wagons, taking horses in exchange.
This they were induced to do under the impression that wagons
could not be taken to Oregon, of which they were assured" (not
by any wicked Hudson's Bay Co. officers, but) "by the gentlemen
of these forts and other mountaineers," (i. e., by American fur
traders, who were rivals of and bitterly antagonistic to the Hud
son's Bay Co., and as thoroughly patriotic Americans as ever
lived).

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 91
HASTINGS'S ACCOUNT OF TREATMENT AT FT. HALL.
Idem, pp. 18-20, describes their arrival and reception at Ft.
Hall, and the following are extracts: "We were received in the
kindest manner by Mr. Grant, who was in charge; and we received
every aid and attention from the gentlemen of that fort during
our stay in their vicinity. We were here informed, by Mr. Grant
and other gentlemen of the company, that it would be impossible
for us to take our wagons down to the Pacific, consequently a meet
ing of the party was called for the purpose of determining whether
we should take them further or leave them at this fort, from which
place it appeared that we could take them about half way to the
Pacific without serious interruption." (This would be to the east
ern base of the Blue Mountains, W. I. M.) "Some insisted that
the great convenience of having wagons with us would amply war
rant taking them as far as we could, while others thought, as we
would eventually be under the necessity of leaving them, it would
be preferable to leave them at the fort, especially as we could there
obtain tools and all other means of manufacturing our packing
equipage, which we could not do elsewhere. Another reason which
was urged in favor of leaving them was that we could, perhaps, sell
them for something at this place, which we could do at no other
point upon the route. The vote having been taken, it was found
that a great majority was opposed to taking them any further, the
consequence of which was that there was no alternative for the
minority, as our little government was purely democratic. Mr.
Grant purchased a few of the wagons, for which he paid in such
provisions as he could dispose of without injury to himself. He
could not, of course, afford to give much for them, as he did not
need them, but bought them merely as an accommodation."
FREMONT'S ACCOUNT OF THE 1842 MIGRATION AT FTS.
LARAMIE AND JOHN.
Page 40 of Sen. Ex. Doc. 174, 28th Cong., 2d Sess., being report
of Fremont's 1842 Exploration, under date of July 13, 1842, after
describing his arrival at Fts. Laramie and John (less than 600
miles from Independence, Mo., and over an almost level country,
with a plainly marked wagon road the whole way), continues as
follows: "The emigrants to Oregon and Mr. Bridger's party met
here, a few days before our arrival. Division and misunderstand
ings had grown up among them; they were already somewhat dis
heartened by the fatigues of their long and wearisome journey,
and the feet of their cattle had become so much worn as to be
scarcely able to travel. In this situation, they were not likely to
find encouragement in the hostile attitude of the Indians and the

92 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
new and unexpected difficulties which sprang up before them.
They were told that the country was entirely swept of grass, and
that few or no buffaloes are to be found on their line of route ; and
with their weakened animals it would be impossible for them to
transport their heavy wagons over the mountains. Under these
circumstances, they disposed of their wagons and cattle at the
forts, selling them at the prices they had paid in the States, and
taking in exchange coffee and sugar at one dollar a pound, and
miserable, worn-out horses, which died before they reached the
mountains; Mr. Bondeau informed me that he had purchased
thirty, and the lower fort eighty head of fine cattle, some of them
of the Durham breed."
WHITE'S ACCOUNT OF ABANDONING WAGONS BY 1842
MIGRATION AND ITS TREATMENT AT FT. HALL.
White's "Ten Years in Oregon" (p. 147) says that they set out
from the Missouri frontier with 18 wagons. P. 154 "At this fort"
(Laramie) "they exchanged herds for fresh horses and purchased
materials for food — some at enormous rates. For flour, for in
stance, they were charged half a dollar per pint; coffee, tea, sugar,
etc., corresponding — all of which they were obliged to have, as
many of the party were by this time destitute of the articles."
P. 162 "Here" (i. e., on the Little Sandy tributary of the Green
River, more than 300 miles east of Ft. Hall) "twelve of the party,
who were extremely desirous of advancing more rapidly, divested
themselves of carts, wagons and all unnecessary encumbrances and
went on, leaving the general encampment to follow more leisurely
to Ft. Hall. This was not accomplished without a struggle with
those who remained; some being grieved, and others provoked, at
being left behind." P. 164 "Four days' longer march through an
interesting and verdant country brought them to Fort Hall. . . .
Their reception was of the kindest character, and they spent a
week very pleasantly with Mr. Grant and his worthy associate, Mc
Donald, who made advantageous exchanges of commodities and
afforded them every facility in their power for their further jour
ney. Flour cost them but half what it did at Ft. Laramie, al
though conveyed on horseback 800 miles." As it is certain that
this 1842 migration was the only one that had reached Ft. Hall
when Grant was in command of it, prior to the arrival of the 1843
migration, and as the wrongs which Gray (writing 1866 to 1870),
who was never within some 400 miles of Ft. Hall after 1838 till
after the treaty of 1846 was made, and Spalding (writing in 1858
to 1870), who was never within 300 to 400 miles of Ft. Hall after
1836, allege that this 1842 migration suffered there, at the hands

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 93
of Grant, form a large part of the basis on which they rest the
Whitman Saved Oregon Story, and as not a single advocate of
that story has ever quoted any part of this contemporaneous evi
dence of Dr. White and L. W. Hastings, the leaders of the party,
and of Fremont and Crawford as to what actually happened to
them on the road, inducing them to abandon their wagons, and as
to their treatment at Ft. Hall, it seemed to me best to quote it
fully preparatory to discussing the experiences of the 1843 migra
tion at Ft. Hall.
From what will be demonstrated in the account of the 1843 mi
gration to have been the trifling difficulties of the route from Ft.
Hall to Walla Walla it is certain that this 1842 migration, if har
monious and under any reasonable discipline, could have taken their
wagons to the Columbia. But they were inharmonious from the
start, and when only a month on the road split into two discordant
factions, which much of the way would not even camp together.
The advice Grant gave them therefore was good, for they unques
tionably could not have taken their wagons over the Blue Mountains.
Instead of referring to these strictly contemporaneous sources
for the history of this 1842 migration and the disposition made of
its wagons, Spalding when he first launched the Whitman Saved
Oregon Story wrote: "In 1840 three missionary ladies from New
York, Mrs. Smith, Clark and Littlejohn, and their husbands crossed
the mountains and brought their wagons. But on reaching Fort
Hall they were compelled to abandon their wagons by the repre
sentatives of the Hudson's Bay Co. ... In 1842 considerable
emigration moved forward with ox teams and wagons, but on reach
ing Ft. Hall the same story was told them, and the teams were
sacrificed and the emigrant families reached Dr. Whitman's station
late in the fall, in very destitute circumstances." (Cf. Pacific, Sept.
28, 1865. ) This was also used by Spalding in his "Lecture" embody
ing his version of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story. (Cf. p. 20
of his pamplet; Ex. Doc. 37, 41st Cong. 3d Sess.) Barrows with
his usual disregard of all original sources copies this from Spald
ing's pamphlet (Cf. Barrows Or., p. 148), and then on p. 149 he tells
it again in his own language as follows: "In 1842 immigrants
to the number of one hundred and thirty-seven" (should be 108),
"men, women and children, secular and missionary, had run the
gauntlet of the traders and escaped the financial steel-traps of a
monarch monopoly all along the path. But they had been forced
by alarms and dangers made to order to leave their wagons be
hind." Rev. M. Eells ("Ind. Missions," p. 156) echoes these false
statements as follows: "At Ft. Hall ... in 1842 the same
misrepresentations" {i. e., that wagons could not be driven through
to the Columbia) "were again successful with a small company of

94 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
emigrants led by Dr. E. White." Dr. Nixon as usual gives his
fervid imagination full swing on this, and (p. 190 of "How Marcus
Whitman Saved Oregon") prints the following (which is more
ridiculously false than anything anybody else has written about
Whitman's wagon, and the action of the Hudson's Bay Co. relative
to it, and all subsequent wagons) : "It is not at all strange they
made the fight they did; they had in 1836 feared the advent of Dr.
Whitman's old wagon more than an army with banners. They had
tried in every way in their power except by absolute force to arrest
its progress. They foresaw that every turn of its wheels upon
Oregon soil endangered fur. Those in command at Fort Hall and
Fort Boise were warned to be more watchful. The consequence was
that not another wheel was permitted to go beyond those forts from
1836 to 1843." As a specimen of pure fancy in direct contradiction
of the facts as established by overwhelming contemporaneous evi
dence, this is probably unsurpassed even by any other writer in
support of the Whitman Legend, and in this paragraph we doubt
less have the climax of all the absurdities about Whitman's "old
wagon." He follows this by the usual deceptive quotation made by
the advocates of the Whitman Legend from Palmer's Journal, but
shows his ignorance of the book by beginning with "Gen. Palmer
. . . says 'While at Fort Hall in 1842' " (though the title page
of Palmer's Journal shows that he was not there till 1845), and then
Nixon continues (on p. 192) : "They (i. e., the H. B. Co. at Ft.
Hall) did succeed in scaring this band of one hundred and thirty-
seven men, women and children in 1842 into leaving all their wagons
behind, but they went on to Oregon on pack-saddles."
Instead of this migration arriving at Dr. Whitman's "late in the
fall in very destitute circumstances," they arrived there very early
in the autumn, to-wit, Sept. 14 and 15. (Cf. Crawford's Journal,
p. 20, and Rev. C. Eells' letter of Oct. 3, 1842, to D. Greene, secre
tary, which says that letters brought by Dr. White were received
by Eells and Walker, five days' journey from Whitman's Station,
on Sept. 21, and no contemporaneous account has anything to say
about their being in destitute circumstances.)
This brings us to the 1843 migration— the first one which ful
filled the conditions of the Rocky Mountain Fur Co.'s letter of Oct.
29, 1830, giving an account of the first wagons to the Rockies, in
which they stated, not that any party of one, or two, or a half dozen
men could drive wagons through to the Great Falls of the Columbia,
but that they, a well armed and fairly disciplined company of
eighty-one resolute men— numerous enough to be able to keep a
small band of pioneers in advance to select the best route, and dig
down the steep banks of creeks, and cut out brush and trees where
they were in the way— could have gone through with their wagons.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 95
That Whitman's connection with the origin of that migration
was trifling and inconsequential is evident from four of his own
letters, the first from St. Louis, May 12th, the other three from
Shawnee Indian Mission, about ten miles from the rendezvous of
the migration, May 27th, 28th, 30th, 1843.
The first and last were to D. Greene, secretary, and the others
to two of Dr. Whitman's brothers-in-law.
All about the migration in the first is the following:
"I have made up my mind that it would not be expedient to
take any families across the mountains this year, except such as
can go at this time. For this reason I have found it my duty to
go on with the party myself."
On page 181, Dr. Mowry prints part of this letter, but carefully
omits the above paragraphs.
In that addressed to his wife's brother, Edward Prentiss, dated
May 27th (i. e., five days after the migration had started from its
camp near Independence, Mo., for Oregon), all that relates to it is
the following :
"I cannot tell you very much about the migration to Oregon.
They appear very willing, and, I have no doubt, are generally of
an enterprising character. There are over 200 men, besides women
and children, as it is said. No one can well tell until we are all on
the road and get together how many there are. Some have been
gone a week, and others have not yet started. I hope to start to
morrow. I shall have an easy journey, as I have not much to do,
having no one depending on me."
To this letter Dr. Mowry (though fully informed about it) never
alludes, and the same is true of every other book, magazine or news
paper article advocating the Whitman Saved Oregon Story.
I have conducted sundry excursions to the Rocky Mountain and
Pacific Coast regions myself, but while they were gathering I did
not stay ten miles from their rendezvous, nor wait for an invitation
to visit and address them, nor say — after they were fairly started —
that "I could not tell very much about them," and, still less, that
"I expected to have an easy journey, not having much to do, having
no one depending upon me," and if there were no other letter but
this — the authenticity of which is beyond dispute — it would utterly
destroy the whole story that Whitman had any special influence
on or concern about the originating or organizing of that migra
tion, or felt any responsibility for its getting through to Oregon,
with or without wagons.
In that of May 28th he wrote: "I have been, as it were, wait
ing for three weeks. When I got to St. Louis I found I had time,
and so I went to Quincy and saw sister Jane. I had a fine journey
all the way, and have been here nearly two weeks. I shall start

96 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
tomorrow or next day. Some of the emigrants have been gone a
week, and others are just going. ... I hope to be expeditious
in traveling. After we get to Fort Hall I shall try to go on rapidly,
if not before." From this Dr. Mowry (erroneously stating that it
was written from St. Louis) quotes (on pages 196-7) about 275
words, but carefully omits the last two sentences above quoted,
which show that a week after the migration had started (except the
few stragglers which always bring up the rear of such a great move
ment), Whitman intended on reaching Fort Hall (beyond which
there was no danger from Indians) to leave the migration behind,
though that was the only part where there was not a well-known
wagon road, and where he could be of any special service to it.
In that of May 30th he wrote :
"You will be surprised to see that we are not yet started. . . .
I shall start tomorrow. I regret that I could not have spent some
of the time spent here in suspense with my friends in the East. I
have only a lad of thirteen, my nephew, with me. I take him to
have someone to stay with Mrs. W.
"I cannot give you much of an account of the emigrants until
we get on the road. It is said that there are over 200 men, besides
women and children."
The proper place for this in Mowry's "Marcus Whitman" was
on page 197, after that of May 28th, but Dr. Mowry neither prints
it there nor puts a footnote of reference to it, but on pages 262-3
he puts it in the Appendix, where few of his readers will peruse it,
and fewer note its significance in refuting the claim that Whitman
was prominent in originating, organizing and leading the 1843
migration. I have specified Dr. Mowry's treatment of these four letters be
cause he is the only author who in a book or magazine article advo
cating the Whitman Legend mentions any of them, and the in
genious way in which he suppresses the conclusive evidence they
furnish of Whitman's ignorance concerning and utter lack of any
feeling of responsibility as to the organization or movements of this
migration even eight days after it had started is thoroughly char
acteristic of the deceptive methods which mark every chapter of
his book. (Cf. for the full text of the letters of May 27 and 28, Tr. Or.
Pi. Asscn., 1891, pp. 177-9, and for those of May 12 and 30, Vol. 138,
Mss. A. B. C. F. M.)
It is impossible to determine just where and when Whitman
overtook the migration, but it was probably when they were about
150 miles on their journey, as a letter published in the Burlington
Gazette of July 8, and copied into the New York Tribune of Aug.
5, 1843, says: "Dr. Whitman from Walla Walla, who is in our

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 97
company, advises that the company divide into three or four parties
for speed and convenience, as there will be no danger from Indians."
This letter was dated Kansas River, June 3, 1843, and though
unsigned was undoubtedly written by M. M. McCarver. Though
dated June 3, it is altogether probable that it was not finished for
some days afterward, as their first opportunity to send it back was
on June 10, when about 160 miles from their starting point, they
met a party of fur traders from Fort Laramie going back to the
States with furs. I am indebted to the courtesy of Prof. Shafer
for a copy of this letter.
That he was a useful member of the party after he overtook it
no one disputes, but that he was in any sense an indispensible mem^
ber of it, or that it would not have gone through with its wagons
had he not been with it, is, I think, established beyond a shadow
of a doubt by the evidence with which I shall conclude this chapter,
since this party completed the development of the transcontinental
wagon road to the Dalles of the Columbia (i. e., to the eastern base
of the Cascade Mountains), across which range the Barlow road
was built by Barlow, of the 1845 migration, in the spring of 1846,
as hereinafter stated in Chapter III. of Part II.
Unfortunately no contemporaneous book was published by any
member of that migration, nor has any such full and detailed con
temporaneous account of it in letters or journals ever been found
as every student of the history of the Oregon Expansion wishes had
been written, and we must content ourselves with a few letters from
various members of the migration as hereinafter stated, and with
very brief extracts from and not very full accounts based on the
only known journal of the movements of the migration. This journal
was kept by Peter H. Burnett (who was the first Governor of the
State of California) , and of this he says : "I kept a concise journal
of the trip as far as Walla Walla and have it now before me." ("Old
Pioneer," p. 101. ) That it was so very "concise" as to be little more
than a memorandum from which to refresh his memory is certain
from some extracts from it which he sent me in 1885. It is much
to be regretted that Governor Burnett's sons have not so far acceded
to repeated requests made by me (and presumably by others) to
publish that journal in full, excepting, of course, such parts (if there
are any) as relate to personal and domestic matters which do not
concern the public, or at least to furnish me with a transcript of
everything in it which relates in any way to Dr. Whitman. Three
accounts (one of only a small part, and the other two of the whole)
of that journey, based on that "concise journal," have been pub
lished, as follows : (A) Five letters written by Burnett in January,
February and March, 1844, and printed in the New York Herald,
Dec. 28, 1844, Jan. 5 and 6 (two letters), and 18, 1845. These let-

98 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
ters were reprinted in Or. Hist. Quarterly, December, 1902. (B)
Part II. (pp. 63-113) of George Wilkes' "History of Oregon," New
York, May, 1845. (C) Pages 97-138 of Burnett's "Recollections of
an Old Pioneer" (written between March and October, 1878), New
York, 1880.
Besides this there are some very important passages in the re
port of Fremont's 1843 exploration, as will hereinafter appear, and
a letter of Whitman, of Nov. 1, 1843, and a few other letters as here
inafter mentioned and quoted where they give any information of
consequence about the development of the Wagon Road to Oregon.
Three of the Herald letters cover the movements of the migration
in some detail only up to June 27, that is for 37 days, and for only
about 400 miles, or scarcely one-fifth of their journey, leaving them
east of the crossing of the South Fork of the Platte, and more than
400 miles east of the Continental Divide, and though the other two
letters give considerable information about the scenery, geographi
cal divisions, timber, fisheries, climate, etc., of Oregon, there is not
in all the letters published in the Herald the least information about
what took place at Fort Hall when this migration reached there,
nor about their reception at Fort Boise, Fort Walla Walla and Fort
Vancouver, nor is the Hudson's Bay Co. so much as mentioned, and
though Dr. McLoughlin's name is indeed once mentioned, it is not
"as the good angel of the migration," assisting them as if they were
his brothers, nor is there the least intimation that they were in
debted to the Hudson's Bay Co.'s good offices in any way, and for
anything which appears in the Herald letters, Dr. McLoughlin
might have been a member of this American migration. Nor is there
a word in the Herald letters about any incident of their journey
beyond the South Fork of the Platte, nor a word about their ex
perience in developing the wagon road beyond Fort Hall. The ac
count in Wilkes was undoubtedly based upon the letters written
to the Herald which Burnett (Cf. O. P., pp. 177-8) stated covered
some 125 pages of foolscap.
The Herald letters are absolutely valueless as to the develop
ment of the wagon road, though they are of value as to the organi
zation of the migration, and interesting as to its movements over
about 400 miles of level prairie, over which the Rocky Mountain
Fur Co.'s train of loaded wagons had gone without the slightest
difficulty thirteen years before, and numerous other wagons in the
intervening years.
The Herald published but a small part— probably not more than
about one-third to one-fourth — of the matter that Burnett would
naturally have written on "some 125 pages of foolscap," and in the
absence of the full text of the letters, and of any other reference
to them by Burnett than that heretofore mentioned (on pp. 177-8 of

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 99
"Old Pioneer"), it must ever remain uncertain to what extent its edi
torial force altered those which it did publish, though it is probable
(since on all material points there is a close agreement as to facts
between this part of the Wilkes Narrative and the Herald letters),
that there were no material alterations except such as would result
from a condensation of them by a New York city editor, wholly un
familiar with frontier life and manners.
Similarly it will never be possible to determine with absolute
certainty whether or not on immaterial points Wilkes rewrote some
parts of the letters in a more ornate style than that of Burnett, nor
is it of any particular consequence, since by comparison with Fre
mont's Rept. and with Whitman's letter of Nov. 1, 1843, and with
"Ford's Road Makers" (MS.), and with the letters to me herein
after quoted from Burnett, Shively, Jesse and Lindsay Applegate,
and from a comparison of the movements of the migration from the
Missouri frontier to Fort Hall, and from Fort Hall to the Columbia,
it can be proved beyond any possibility of dispute that Wilkes' state
ments are correct, even when they differ from the statements on
the same points in the "Old Pioneer," as to all the really important
points, which are :
(1) Were the difficulties of the route from Fort Hall to the
Columbia serious or comparatively trifling?
(2) What was Whitman's real relation to the party, and how
far was he its guide beyond Fort Hall ?
(3) What treatment did the migration receive at Fort Hall from
the officers of the Hudson's Bay Co.?
(4) Would the migration have gone through with wagons had
Whitman not been with it?
As Wilkes did not claim that he was presenting either a tran
script of the journal or a verbatim copy of the letters, he violated
no principle of the most rigid code of historical or literary ethics
if in preparing the "Narrative of the Migration of 1843" (which
he explicitly declared was not a copy of the journal, but was "pre
pared from the journal of a member of the recently organized Ore
gon Legislature") he rewrote a little or much of it, provided he did
not change any material statement of fact it contained, nor is its
value as an "original source" for this migration affected, when it
is admitted that in some wholly immaterial points, as for instance
the number of miles traveled May 22 and 23, the statements in
Wilkes are erroneous. That they were not intentionally so is patent
to the dullest comprehension, since Wilkes prints (p. 112) the
"Table of Distance," which proves the statements as given (on p.
72) of the distances traveled May 22 and 23 to be incorrect. The
probability is that the error relates to distances traveled the 18th
and 19, or the 20th and 21st (of which there is no record in either

100 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
the letters published in the New York Herald or in the "Old Pio
neer"), and which were misplaced by one of those printer's errors
which continually vex the souls of authors and editors.
First as to the route from Fort Hall to the Columbia.
The advocates of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story have so
enormously exaggerated the difficulties of the route from Fort Hall
to the Columbia that it is time a few plain and indisputable facts
about it should be stated. Let us consider first the relative rate of
travel of this migration over this part of the route, compared with
its travel from the Missouri frontier to Fort Hall — 1,323 miles-
over "the best natural road of its length in the world." Burnett
("Old Pioneer," pp. 116-117) says they arrived at the Great Soda
Springs on Bear River (83 miles east of Fort Hall), on Aug. 22,
and reached Fort Hall Aug. 27, and quitted Fort Hall Aug. 30,
"many of our young men having left us with pack trains." The
Wilkes Narrative (pp. 82-4) says they left the Great Soda Springs
Aug. 27, and reached Fort Hall, 83 miles distant, Aug. 30. Turn
ing to Fremont's Rept. ( Sen. Ex. Doc. 174, 28th Cong., 2d Sess., pp.
133-9), we find that Aug. 22 he rode for several miles down Bear
River by the camps of this migration, who "had been reposing for
several days in this delightful valley in order to recruit their
animals on its luxuriant pasturage after their long journey, and
prepare them for the hard travel along the comparatively sterile
banks of the Upper Columbia." He did not make a camp (which
was 42 miles east of Soda Springs) till 10 at night of the 22d, and
under date of the 23d he says: "The road in the morning pre
sented an animated appearance. We found that we had encamped
near a large party of emigrants; and a few miles below another
party was already in motion." August 26 he remained in camp at
Soda Springs, till 11 a. m., and says: "In the course of the morn
ing the last wagons of the emigration passed by." These wagons,
of course, camped the night of Aug. 26 not many miles beyond Soda
Springs, and started from there on the 27th, as stated in Wilkes,
and as there is no place named (in Wilkes or in the "Old Pioneer")
between Soda Springs and the Portneuf, Burnett naturally and
properly would say, as stated in Wilkes, that they left the Soda
Springs on the 27th, though as a matter of fact it was a camp
probably six or eight miles west of Soda Springs, where they camped
the night of the 26th. Fremont, it is true, says (p. 139), that it
was "probably fifty miles to Fort Hall from where they left the
valley of Bear River." But he did not go over that route to Fort
Hall, while Burnett, who did go over it, estimated the distance from
Soda Springs to Fort Hall as 83 miles. This would give for the
distance from where they undoubtedly camped the night of the 26th
to Fort Hall about 71 to 75 miles, which would require at least

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 101
four days' travel, and bring them to Fort Hall about August 30,
as Wilkes states, and not August 27, as Burnett wrote in "Old Pio
neer" 35 years after the event. Accepting the date given in the
Wilkes Narrative— August 30 — as the correct one for the arrival
at Fort Hall of the larger part of the migration, which it is certain
that Fremont found strung out along Bear River Valley, August
22 to 25, they had occupied 101 days in traveling 1,323 miles, or
an average rate of progress of practically 13 1-10 miles a day; and
even if we admit, what from Fremont's contemporaneous record is
proved incorrect, that they reached Fort Hall three days earlier,
as stated in the "Old Pioneer," that would only make the average
daily journey 13!/2 miles. How does this compare with their prog
ress from Fort Hall to the Columbia? Wilkes and "Old Pioneer"
agree in the statement that they came down the western slope of
the Blue Mountains and camped on the Umatilla on Oct. 6, and
from that camp to Whitman's Mission, 29 miles, and thence to Fort
Walla Walla, 25 miles, in all 54 miles, was a stretch of plains with
some sand hills. The difficult part of the road, therefore, was all
passed when they were at the Umatilla, and they had traveled 417
miles from Fort Hall to the Umatilla, in 36 days, if we accept as
correct the date of leaving Fort Hall — Sept. 1 — as given in Wilkes,
which gives an average of 11 7-12 miles a day, while even if we
accept the manifestly erroneous "Old Pioneer" date of Aug. 30 for
the departure from Fort Hall, the daily average was 10 37-38, or
practically 11 miles. But several other things must be taken into
account. First- — Their teams were all fresh when they started from Mis
souri, May 22, and it goes without saying that after 1,323 miles
travel they were much reduced in strength when they reached Fort
Hall. Second — Until they reached Fort Hall they had all the way
(except perhaps the five days, Aug. 12-17, ocupied in the detour via
Bridger's Fort to Bear River), a plainly marked road, and needed
to spend no time in finding or making a road, and had no trees to
cut to open the road, while between Fort Hall and the Umatilla, or,
more strictly, between Fort Boise and the Umatilla, they had to
lose a little time at a few points determining the best way to go,
and for a few miles (probably about 25 miles, or three days' jour
ney) they had to cut a road through the forests on the Blue Moun
tains. Third — And most important of all, from May 22 to Sept. 1, they
had an average length of day between sunrise and sunset of two
and a half hours more than between Sept. 1 and Oct. 6, i. e., 14
hours 40 minutes, against 12 hours 8 minutes. The lightening of
the loads by the consumption of provisions counterbalanced in part,

102 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
at least, the jaded condition of their teams, but (since the weight
of wagons, clothing, furniture, etc., remained unchanged) even if
we allow (what I do not think is correct) that the lightening of the
loads entirely balanced the jaded condition of the teams, the other
two conditions are not affected thereby, and the indisputable fact
remains that with some time lost in road making, and an average
of two and a half hours less daylight, this migration made an aver
age of only just about two miles a day less from Fort Hall to the
plains of the Columbia River than from the beginning of their jour
ney 1,323 miles to Fort Hall, over what Burnett ("Old Pioneer," p.
116) says "was perhaps the finest natural road of the same length
to be found in the world."
In Old Pioneer (p. 126) Burnett says: "On the 10th of October
we arrived within three miles of Dr. Whitman's mission, and re
mained in camp until the 14th." This conveys the impression that
the whole migration stopped there, but turning to Wilkes (pp. 88-89)
we finding the following: "On the 8th of October we moved on"
(i. e., from the Umatilla) "and encamped in the afternoon within
twenty miles of the Methodist mission establishment kept by Dr.
Whitman, on the banks of a little tributary of the Walla Walla;
but not finding the pasturage to our liking, we moved on the next
day a few miles farther in advance, and finding a prairie offering
us all the advantages we sought, the section to which I was at
tached, determined to make a halt for a few days, to recruit our
weary and way-worn cattle. Most of the party had advanced be
fore us, and were already at the mission, but we, in consequence of
our halt, which continued through a period of five days, did not
reach there until the 15th." Burnett's high character is sufficient
guarantee that the omission (on p. 126 of "Old Pioneer") of the fact
that only the section to which he was then attached made this five
days' halt, and so lengthened the time from Fort Hall to the Co
lumbia River, and that the larger part of the migration did not make
this halt, and so reached the Columbia Oct. 11, instead of Oct. 16, as
he did, was not intended to deceive ; but it is a striking commentary
on the claims of Prof. Schafer that the "Old Pioneer" should be sub
stituted for the Wilkes Narrative as "virtually a contemporary
source for the whole of the migration of 1843," that in this, as in
every other case in which we can compare the Wilkes account with
unquestionable contemporary documents it is found correct.
Nothing is more evident than that when Burnett wrote the "Old
Pioneer" account of this migration he followed his journal closely,
and wrote only of the movements of that part of the migration to
which he was attached. That section of the party reached Fort
Hall, as he states in "Old Pioneer," and as the extract from his
journal (published by Prof. Schafer in the Oregonian of Nov. 13,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 103
1903, states), on Aug. 27, but that the bulk of the migration could
not have arrived there before Sept. 1, as stated by Wilkes, is certain
from the extracts herein quoted from Fremont's Rept., under dates
Aug. 22-26 inclusive. How far from accurate was Burnett's memory
even about very important matters connected with the movements
of this migration 35 years afterward, when he wrote the account of
it in "Old Pioneer," is evident from the things he omits to mention
in that account, which are in both the Herald letters and the Wilkes
Narrative, and a letter of his to me fully confirms this, and also
shows that his journal was so very concise as to be — certainly on
most dates — merely a series of memoranda, with which to subse
quently to refresh his memory, and not any detailed account of the
events of the day. June 26, 1885, he wrote me as follows : "In re
ply to your third inquiry" (which was as to how long the 1843 mi
gration continued together, and where and how they divided) "I
will give the following extracts from my journal, as the entries were
'nade at the time, except a few corrections in the spelling of certain
words and names." (I quote the extracts from his journal verbatim
as they are given in his letter. )
"May 22, 1843. A general start was this day made from the ren
dezvous. "May 23. Wagons still coming in, and others yet behind.
"May 26. Camped at Kansas River. ... As yet no organi
zation and no guards put out.
"May 28. Wagons still coming in rapidly.
"May 30. The company still crossing rapidly and new wagons
arriving. "May 31. Still crossing Kansas River. . . . Many of the
company disposed to separate into two companies.
"June 1. Organized our company by electing P. H. Burnett
captain, and Mr. Nesmith orderly sergeant and nine council men.
"June 10. At night we overtook old man Zachary and some
others and formed a good corral.
"July 4. Continued crossing." (S. Platte.) . . . "Chiles
here overtook us.
"July 8. Part of the company joined Chiles and left us.
"July 14. Reached Fort Laramie about 10 o'clock. . . Here
we found Applegate and Chiles.
"July 20. Mr. Hembree belonged to Applegate's company, which
is only two or three miles ahead of us now.
"Aug. 6. Overtook Applegate's company.
"Aug. 7. Chiles' company, Cooper's and Applegate's all in
sight at 12.
"Aug. 13. Divided our company into smaller companies of
about 15 wagons.

104 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"The greater portion of the emigrants for Oregon left the ren
dezvous together on May 22, 1843, and others, who had not arrived
in time, came up later. At the time of the organization, June 1,
they had all overtaken us except a very few, and all joined in the
organization except Mr. Zachary and a few others, not exceeding
thirty persons in all, according to my best recollection. They united
with the company June 10. The first division of the company oc
curred July 6, when some of the company left with Chiles, who had
overtaken us on the 4th of July on his way to California, and while
we were crossing South Platte. But as we approached nearer to
the Rocky Mountains our people formed still smaller parties, as
shown in the extracts herein given."
Certainly one of the most important events connected with the
journey of that migration was its division into two sections, one
under the command of William Martin, and the other under Jesse
Applegate, which took place according to both the Herald letters
and the Wilkes Narrative on June 9, 1843, yet that seems to have
been omitted entirely from Burnett's "concise journal," and is not
even alluded to in the "Old Pioneer," and so completely had his long
residence in California put him "out of touch" with Oregon pioneer
affairs and dimmed his memory where there was no record in his
"concise journal" by which to refresh it, that in this letter to me
he explicitly declares (in answer to my inquiry as to when the 1843
migration first divided) that "the first division of the company
occurred July 6."
Whitman's letter of Nov. 1, 1843, hereinbefore referred to, not
only confirms this item in Wilkes' account about "most of the party"
having reached the mission before Oct. 10, but also shows that Bur
nett's statement in "Old Pioneer" (p. 116) that "Whitman was our
pilot from Fort Hall to the Grand Ronde" is incorrect, and that, as
a matter of fact, over the really difficult portion of the route (i. e.,
that west of Fort Boise), Whitman was not with the party at all,
and this fact confirms the accuracy of the only allusion made in
the Wilkes Narrative to any important service rendered to the mi
gration by Whitman at any time between its starting from the
Missouri frontier on May 22, and the time they reached his mission
station and purchased provisions of him, being charged therefor the
full market rates. Wilkes (p. 35) says: "On the 23d (Sept.) we
started off again, with the same cutting wind that had visited us
the day before, and which stayed with us over night. Our road to
day was tolerably good, and after having accomplished 16 miles
over it, we brought our day's journey to a close on the bank of a
dry creek, with no water at hand, except what was found in a sort
of puddle in its bed. Two miles further on would have taken us
to a good encampment, with plenty of fine range and water, but the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 105
Indian pilot who had been employed for us by Dr. Whitman was
ahead, and out of reach with the foremost wagons."
The following extracts from Whitman's letter of Nov. 1, 1843,
to Rev. D. Greene, secretary of the A. B. C. F. M. (which no advo
cate of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story has ever quoted, except
that Mowry, in his "Marcus Whitman and the Early Days of Ore
gon," not having quoted a word from it in the body of his book,
nor even referred to it in his Chapter XVIII. describing the journey
of the 1843 migration, prints this letter in full in his Appendix,
where few will read it, or note its significance in connection with
the claims made for Whitman as leader of that migration), show
that Whitman left the migration at Fort Boise, 100 miles east of
the Grande Ronde, and did not see any members of it again (except
perhaps some of those who went ahead on horseback and with pack
trains) until Oct. 9 or 10, at or near his mission. "By taking a
light wagon I was enabled to come ahead from Fort Boise. At
the Grand Ronde, east of the Blue Mountains, I met a letter from
Mr. Walker, written at Lapwai, urging me to come with speed to
see Mr. and Mrs. Spalding, who were both in a dangerous state of
sickness. At this point I engaged one of the Wailatpu (Kayuses)
to complete the piloting of the company across the Blue Mountains,
which he did in a most judicious and faithful manner, and I hired a
fresh horse and guide, and went direct to Mr. Spalding's, where I
arrived on Monday evening, 25th Sept. ... I did not remain
but one night, and then returned with Mr. Geiger to Wailatpu,
which had been left in the care of an Indian only, the wheat being
in chaff and out of doors and part of the corn to be gathered by them
also. In the meantime some of the advance parties of the emi
grants on horseback had reached and broke open the house, and
left it open to the Indians, although wheat, corn, potatoes, garden
vegetables, hogs and cattle were in abundance outside." He then
went to Tshimakain (i. e., Eells' and Walker's station), and re
turned to Wailatpu, Oct. 9, and the letter continues : "In the mean
time a large part of the emigrants had passed my house with their
wagons." Whitman could not have made the journey from the
Grand Ronde to Spalding's station in less than two days, so that he
must have been in Grande Ronde (69 miles in advance of the migra
tion he is stated in "Old Pioneer" to have been piloting) on the
same 23d of Sept. that, according to the Wilkes Narrative, that mi
gration, for want of a competent pilot, was obliged to make a "dry
camp," only 31 miles from Boise. As both "Old Pioneer" and
Wilkes state that the migration did not reach Fort Boise till Sept.
20, it is evident that if Whitman was with them when they reached
Boise, and did not stop there at all himself, he must have traveled
"with a light wagon" the 100 miles between Boise and Grande

106 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Ronde (including the 26 miles up Burnt River, which all authorities
agree was much the roughest stretch of road the whole journey)
in the four days Sept. 20-23, which is enough of itself to demonstrate
beyond dispute that the road offered no obstacle that these 260 reso
lute men — descendants of those who had pioneered from the Atlan
tic Coast over the Alleghanies and across the prairies to the Mis
souri — could not easily have surmounted if neither Whitman nor
"the Indian he employed" had been with them. Wilkes (p. 87) says
they might have avoided the two worst hills they encountered on
the whole route (being the ones by which they descended into the
Grande Ronde on Oct. 1, and left it on Oct. 2) "by turning to the
left on the mountain side and passing them altogether," and this
(which is not mentioned in "Old Pioneer") finds full confirmation
in Fremont's Rept, under date of Oct. 17-21, 1843 (pp. 178-81) as
follows :
"Probably with the view of avoiding a circuit, the wagons had
directly descended into the Ronde by the face of a hill so very
rocky and continuously steep as to be apparently impracticable;
and following down on their trail we encamped on one of the
branches of the Grande Ronde River, immediately at the foot of
the hill."
We have already quoted Burnett's statement in Wilkes (p. 88)
that Fremont found a much easier route over the Blue Mountains
than the one over which the migration went. Burnett in "Old Pio
neer" makes no allusion to this, though he gives considerable space
to his interviews with Fremont and travel with him from Fort Van
couver to the Dalles. (O. P., pp. 130-135.) Turning again to Fre
mont's Rept. (pp. 179-181), we find that the reason why he followed
the migration down the steep hill into the Ronde, instead of making
the circuit of the mountain side, was that he intended to go a good
ways farther to the north in the Ronde, and cross the Blue Moun
tains by an easier pass. (P. 179.) "Oct. 18. We resumed our
journey somewhat later than usual, traveling in a nearly northerly
direction across this beautiful valley; and about noon reached a
place on one of the principal streams, where I had determined to
leave the emigrant trail, in the expectation of finding a more direct
and better road across the Blue Mountains. At this place the emi
grants appeared to have held some consultation as to their further
route, and finally turned directly off to the left, reaching the foot
of the mountain in about three miles, which they ascended by a
hill as steep and difficult as that by which we had yesterday de
scended to the Ronde. Quitting, therefore, this road, which, after
a very rough crossing, issues from the mountains by the heads of
the Umatilah River, we continued our northern course across the
valley, following an Indian trail which had been indicated to me

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 107
by Mr. Payette, and encamped at the northern extremity of the
Grande Ronde on a slough-like stream of very deep water, without
any apparent current. . . . Elevation 2,600 feet above the sea.
Oct. 19. We passed out of the Grande Ronde by a fine road along
the creek, which for a short distance runs in a kind of rocky chasm.
Crossing a low point, which was a little rocky, the trail conducted
us into the open valley of the stream — a handsome place for farms.
(p. 180.) . . . We halted for a few minutes in the afternoon
at the foot of the Blue Mountains, on a branch of the Grand Ronde
River, at an elevation of 2,700 feet. Resuming our journey, we com
menced the ascent of the mountain through an open pine forest of
large and stately trees, among which the balsam pine made its ap
pearance; the road being good, with the exception of one steep
ascent with a corresponding descent, which might both have been
easily avoided by opening a way for a short distance through the
timber. Oct. 20. . . . The instrument carriage occasioned
much delay, it being frequently necessary to fell trees and remove
fallen timber. The trail we were following led up a long spur with
a very gradual and gentle rise. . . . After traveling occasionally
through open places in the forest, we were obliged to cut a way
through a dense body of timber, from which we (p. 181) emerged
on an open mountain side, where we found a number of small
springs, and encamped after a day's journey of 10 miles. Our ele
vation here was 5,000 feet." "Oct. 21. . . .We continued to
travel through the forest, in which the road was rendered difficult
by fallen trunks, and obstructed by many small trees which it was
necessary to cut down. But these are only accidental difficulties
which could easily be removed, and a very excellent road may be
had through this pass, with no other than very moderate ascents
and declivities." This pass was undoubtedly the same one of which
Payette had informed Thomas J. Farnham, as stated by Farnham
in that passage from his "Travels" (quoted on p. 83 ante), which,
as hereinbefore stated, Wilkes quoted (on p. 52) as demonstrating
beyond question the feasibility of the route for a national railroad
to the Pacific. As there is not a shadow of doubt that Payette
would as readily have informed the leaders of the 1843 migration
of this "easy pass" as he had informed Farnham, in 1839, and as
he informed Fremont 18 days after the migration had passed, it is
plain that if the migration, instead of depending on Whitman's
Indian guide Isticus, had consulted Payette, they would have learned
of a much easier route over the Blue Mountains than the one over
which Isticus led them. That the difficulties of that one, however,
were by no means great will appear from the simple fact that both
Wilkes (pp. 87-88) and "Old Pioneer" (pp. 125-126) agree that the
migration left the Grande Ronde Oct. 2, and crossed the Blue Moun-

108 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
tains 43 miles, to the Umatilla River, during Oct. 2 to 6 inclusive.
That is, with a day from sunrise to sunset of only 11% hours, with
considerable forest through which they were compelled to cut their
way, and with teams pretty thoroughly worn out, they traveled
across this range at an average of 8 3-5 miles a day, which was
only about 4% miles less than they had traveled on an average from
the Missouri frontier, 1,323 miles, to Fort Hall, over "the best nat
ural road of its length in the world," starting with fresh teams,
with no forest through which to cut their way, and having an aver
age length of day from sunrise to sunset of 14 hours and 40 minutes.
Whoever will read Fremont's Rept. of his 1843 exploration with
care will find in it ample confirmation of the positions herein ad
vanced as to the slight difficulties of the route beyond Fort Hall,
for though he says the road up Burnt River was very bad, he men
tions no other very bad road except a few hills, and several times
he declares of other portions of this part of the road that they
were "very good." The Or. Hist. Quarterly for December, 1902
(pp. 395-8), publishes a letter of Tallmadge B. Wood, "written about
April, 1844," from Willamette Falls, Oregon. He states that he
was second in command of one of the divisions of the 1843 migra
tion, but does not say which division it was, and his letter gives a
very brief and vague account of the movements of the migration,
covering only about 700 words. Though he intended, undoubtedly,
to be accurate, it is curious that two of the three dates he gives
are erroneous, as he says they started April 25, 1843, instead of
May 22, and that they arrived at Fort Hall the last of September
instead of the last of August or first of September. He also says
there were 320 wagons, whereas J. W. Nesmith, who was the orderly
sergeant of the company, says "there were 111 wagons of all kinds."
(Tr. Or. P. Asscn. 1875, p. 53). (P. 396) Wood's letter says:
"We arrived at Fort Hall the last of September. Here (though
two-thirds of the distance was passed) the difficulties of the journey
just commenced, though not so difficult as had been represented, yet
the roads from this place were very rough and grass in many places
very scarce." So far as yet appears, besides these forty-eight words
in Wood's letter, the only contemporary accounts of the difficulties
of the way beyond Fort Hall except what is in the Wilkes Narrative
and in Fremont's Rept. are:
First — In a letter published in the Ohio Statesman, Sept. 11,
1844, dated Willamette, Nov. 6, 1843, Mr. M. M. McCarver (who was
one of the Council of Nine and one of those who went ahead of the
migration on horseback from Fort Hall) wrote as follows: "We
have had less obstacles in reaching here than we had a right to
expect, as it was generally understood before leaving the States
that one-third of the distance — to-wit, from Fort Hall to this place—

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 109
was impassable with wagons. Great credit, however, is due to the
energy, perseverance and industry of this emigrating company, and
particularly to Dr. Whitman, one of the missionaries at the Walla
Walla Mission, who accompanied us out. His knowledge of the
route was considerable, and his exertions for the interest of the
company were untiring."
Second — In the Or. Hist. Quarterly for September, 1903, are
two letters from members of this migration.
(1) (On pp. 274-6) A letter from John Boardman to J. Wells,
Esq., dated at Sandwich Islands, July 17, 1844, and published in
the Western (Mo.) Journal, Jan. 4, 1845, and space only permits
the following extracts: "I left the Shawnee Mission on the 29th
of May; our route was through the Caw Indian country, which is
good, has considerable timber, and is well watered. It is a bad
country for wagons to travel through, having so many sloughs and
bad creeks ; the teams were often stalled, and made very slow prog
ress. ... On the 13th of July we arrived at the crossing of
Laramie's Fork, at the fort of the American Fur Co. . . . After
we left Laramie we came to the Black Hills, the worst of all travel
ing — hilly, sandy and full of wild sage — 'tis death on a wagon.
The country is all of this barren, sandy kind, until we reach Fort
Hall, and destitute of timber. Arrived at Fort Hall the 13th of
September, after experiencing some cold rains, snow, hail, etc. The
country down Snake River is hilly, rocky, sandy, no timber, but an
abundance of sage, until we get to the Blue Mountains. Here is
plenty of pine, the country very broken, and bad traveling, though
the wagons went through. ... I hardly know what to write
about Oregon, or what you would like to know; though if I were
where you are, and should see someone from Oregon, I could ask
him a hundred questions, as you could me. The report of Wilkes
that you had is very correct." (This is, of course, the 14 pages of
Lieut. Charles Wilkes' Special Report, published in the 2d edition
of Pendleton's Report, of which 5,000 copies were ordered printed
by the House Jan. 4, 1843. [Ho. Ex. Doc. No. 31, 27th Cong., 3d
Sess. J— W. I. M.)
It will be noticed that Boardman gives the time of arrival at
Fort Laramie as July 13, whereas the Wilkes Narrative gives the
date as July 9, and says they left there July 11, while "Old Pioneer"
says they arrived July 14, and remained two days repairing the
wagons. Boardman also did not arrive at Fort Hall till Sept. 13.
(2) On pp. 280-84 is a letter from Mr. S. H. Gilmore dated Fort
Vancouver, Nov. 11, 1843. He does not give a date when they were
at any point between May 27 and the arrival of the party he was
with at Fort Hall, Aug. 25, two days in advance of the party Bur
nett was with, and 19 days before the party with whom Boardman

110 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
was traveling. All that Gilmore (who was later a prominent man
in Oregon) says about the difficulties of the road is the following
extracts: "We left Westport on the 27th of May, and crossed the
Kansas River near the old village; thence up the north side of
the Kansas, where we had a great deal of rain and stormy weather
to encounter. . . . We came to a small stream, called Sweet
water, one of the streams of the northern branch of Platte; we
traveled up this until we passed through the Rocky Mountains,
which we found to be as good as any part of our road." . . .
(This plainly refers only to the stretch of road up the Sweetwater
and over the South Pass to Green River — W. I. M.) . . . "We
traveled several days down this river (Bear River), then crossed
over to the Snake River, and arrived at Fort Hall on the 25th day
of August. Here I found some of the best beef I ever saw. . . .
From here we traveled down Snake or Lewis River, crossing and
recrossing the same to Fort Bosie (Boise) ; thence to Fort Walla
Walla, crossing the Blue Mountains in our route. We passed them
much easier than I expected. . . . The road from Independence
to Fort Hall is as good a road as I would wish to travel ; from Fort
Hall there is some bad road and some good."
(3) Prof. Schafer, in a letter to me, quotes the following from
"a letter from one of the emigrants" published in the New York
Herald of June 3, 1843: "We had a very good road to the fort
(Hall), from there the worst in the world." There seems to be
some mistake as to either the paper or the date as to this, for in
response to a request for a copy of the whole letter, the librarian
of the Wisconsin Historical Society informs me that the Herald
of that date contains no letter from anyone referring to the Oregon
migration. Assuming that in the Herald (or some other paper), such an
anonymous letter was published, it amounts to nothing in view of
the indisputable figures hereinbefore given showing the rate of prog
ress of the migration. The expression "the worst road in the world"
is merely an exaggerated statement of one's impatience with a rough,
uncomfortable road, and I have heard that precise expression used
about stretches of highway in Ohio, Kentucky, Vermont and New
Hampshire which had been traveled continuously for from 60 to 200
years. Whitman's letter of Nov. 1, 1843, does not contain one word
about the difficulties of the route, nor do any of his subsequent
letters give any information about any difficulties of the way, but
only assertions that the opening of the wagon road was due to his
being with the party.
Wilkes (p. 86) : "On the 28th (Sept.) the road got worse, if
anything, than before, and after floundering through the hills and
hollows for six miles, we struck a hill of most difficult ascent that

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 111
required us to double our teams. Yet even this hill, as well as an
other still more difficult which we descended, might have been
entirely avoided by an advance of 200 yards farther up the stream,
where nature had furnished an easy ascent round the sides of both.
This, however, was not discovered until all the wagons had passed.
The above hill is the first that we have met in our road, which
obliged us to double our teams." This was at the head of Burnt
River, and in H. H. Bancroft's "Oregon," Vol. I., p. 401, we find the
following: "The first grading required on any part of the route
from the main Platte to the Columbia was at the crossing of the
ridge at the head of Burnt River; and this, too, was the first occa
sion on which it had been necessary to double teams." (Ford's
Road Makers, Ms. 10.) This first hill requiring any grading or
the doubling of teams was 350 miles west of Fort Hall, and 1,673
miles from their starting point, and only 131 miles east of Fort
Walla Walla.
As Prof. Schafer (in Oregonian for Nov. 13, 1903) still insists
that Wilkes deliberately deceived his readers as to the difficulties
of the road west of Fort Hall, and as he does not quote one word
of what Fremont says about that stretch so that his readers can
judge whether his condemnation of Wilkes is warranted by the
facts, I will now quote every word in Wilkes, and in Fremont's
Rept., and in "Old Pioneer" as to the road from Fort Boise to the
Grande Ronde, where Fremont's route diverged from that of the
migration, that he might follow Payette's direction and cross the
Blue Mountains by an easier route, as hereinbefore stated.
There is no use in wasting any time on the road from Fort Hall
to Fort Boise, since that offered no difficulties worth considering,
as this migration traveled that 274 miles at almost exactly the same
average daily rate as they did the 1,323 miles from the Missouri
frontier to Fort Hall, though their day was an average of almost two
and a half hours shorter from Hall to Boise than from Missouri to
Fort Hall. No one's opinion is of any consequence on historical mat
ters except as it agrees with "the weight of evidence" after examin
ing all the valid evidence, and unlike Prof. Schafer in this matter, I
prefer to put all the evidence before my readers, that they may judge
for themselves as to whether there is any warrant for his accusations
against Wilkes.
Fort Boise to Burnt River occupied the migration Sept. 22, 23
and 24 according to Wilkes, and 21, 22, 23 and 24 according to "Old
Pioneer." The distance is given in the "Table of Distance" in both
Wilkes and the Herald letters as 41 miles, and by Fremont, who
went over it Oct. 11 and 12, as 47 miles. Fremont's distances (where
his route was identical with that of the 1843 migration) are almost
always considerably greater than those given by Burnett, and prob-

112 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
ably more accurate, but as his route was very different from that
of the migration from the crossing of the Kansas River to the Sweet
Water, from Soda Springs to Fort Hall, and from the place where
the migration started out of the Grande Ronde over the Blue Moun
tains to Whitman's station, it seems necessary to use Burnett's
"Table of Distances" for the whole journey.
Let us compare what Wilkes says as to the quality of the road
with what Fremont says. We cannot compare with "Old Pioneer"
for this stretch, for all Burnett says of this journey from Fort Boise
to Burnt River is the following (on p. 124) : "On the 21st we re
crossed the Snake River by fording, which was deep but safe. On
the 24th we reached Burnt River."
Turn now to Wilkes (p. 85) : "On the 22d we left Fort Boise,
and after traveling over an excellent road for fifteen miles we came
to a creek in the latter part of the afternoon. This we crossed
without serious difficulty, and encamped upon its western bank.
. . . On the 23d we started off again with the same cutting wind,
etc. . . . Our road today was tolerably good.
"On the 23d we had to encounter a very hilly road which re
tarded our progress most seriously. The hills, however, were not
high, neither were they rugged or abrupt, but they were frequent,
and thence our difficulty."
Now let us see what Fremont reported of this precise stretch
of road. On p. 174 of his report of his 1843 expedition (Sen. Ex. Doc.
174, 28 Cong., 2 Sess.) we find, under date of Oct. 11, 1843. . . .
"At 11 o'clock we resumed our journey. . . . About sunset we
reached the Riviere aux Malheurs. . . . With the exception of
a bad place of a few hundred yards long, which occurred in rounding
a point of a hill to reach the ford of the river, the road during the
day had been very good."
Oct. 12 (p. 175). "Leading for five miles up a broad, dry branch
of the Malheurs River, the road entered a sandy hollow, where the
surface was rendered firm by the admixture of other rock; being
good and level until arriving near the head of a ravine, where it
became a little rocky, and we met with a number of sharp ascents
over an undulating surface. Crossing here a dividing ridge, it be
came an excellent road of gradual descent down a very marked
hollow." Oct. 13 (p. 176). "Leaving entirely the Snake River ... we
ascended a long and somewhat steep hill ; and crossing the dividing
ridge came down into the valley of Burnt River."
Up Burnt River all accounts — Wilkes, Fremont and "Old Pio
neer" — agree was the roughest road of the whole journey, but it
was only 26 miles, and it was not so bad but what they made the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 113
26 miles in three days (Sept. 25, 26 and 27), or an average of eight
and two-thirds miles a day, with only 11 hours 53 minutes between
sunrise and sunset. A careless reading of Wilkes under date of
Sept. 27 would lead one to think that the migration left Burnt River
on the morning of the 27th, but a careful reading and a footing of
the miles traveled on the 25th, 26th and 27th shows that it was only
the more difficult part of the road up Burnt River that they left
behind them on the morning of the 27th, and that they did not
finally leave its valley till the 28th, which agrees exactly with "Old
Pioneer" (p. 124).
Let us now compare the "Old Pioneer," the Wilkes and the Fre
mont accounts of this — admitted by all to be — the worst stretch of
road on the whole route.
All that "Old Pioneer" says (p. 124) is: "It hardly deserves to
be called a river, being only a creek of fair size. The road up this
stream was then a terrible one, as the latter runs between two tall
ranges of mountains, through a narrow valley full of timber, which
we had not the force or time to remove."
Wilkes (p. 85) : "Sept. 25 we started up the line of Burnt River.
The valley of the stream is very narrow, at some points being not
more than 20 yards across, and it is hemmed in by mountains on
either side.
"Though it abounds in timber, quite a safe and passable road
could be made through it by clearing out the space for a track, but
to do this effectually several crossings of the stream would have to
be made. "This could easily be performed in consequence of its low banks
and firm bottom, but we had no time to clear out the way, but of
late the tortuousness of the roads had so scattered and divided our
company that we proceeded helter skelter along in separate detach
ments, each following, as best it could, the careless lead of those
who went before. We were thus betrayed into many difficulties
that might have been avoided, if an orderly arrangement had been
preserved. Sometimes the turn of only a few yards would have
saved us the most obstructive hills and hollows, and I am informed
that the course of the river could have been avoided altogether by a
turn to the left, which strikes the trail near Powder River, running
in an extensive plain, remarkable for a solitary tree in its midst,
known as the "Lone Pine." But if this should not be the case (Foot
note by Wilkes, 'It is the case').
"I would advise future emigrants to select some eight or ten
good men to send on ahead to search for the most eligible route, and
if necessary to clear one.
"This will save them much trouble. . . . The range from this
spot to the end of the journey is most excellent ; the bunch grass is

114 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
plenty in the valleys and on the sides of the hills, and there is plenty
of rushes along the banks of the stream. We made but eight miles
today. "On the 26th the road got worse, if anything, than before, and
after floundering through hills and hollows for six miles we struck
a hill of most difficult ascent, that required us to double our teams.
Yet even this hill, as well as another still more difficult, which we
descended, might have been entirely avoided by an advance of 200
yards farther up the stream, where nature has furnished an easy
ascent round the sides of both. This, however, was not discovered
till all the wagons had passed. The above hill is the first that we
have met in our road, which obliged us to double our teams.
"Sept. 27. . . . This morning we emerged from our troublous
passage through the immediate valley of the river, and struck a
beautifully undulating valley . . . and after completing 12
miles over a good road, halted for the night."
This is every word in the Wilkes Narrative as to the road, and
the movements of the migration over the 26 miles up Burnt River.
It is interesting to compare what he says about the ease with which
they could have avoided the two worst hills had they gone 200 yards
further up the stream, "where nature had furnished an easy ascent
round the sides of both," with their experience as stated in both
Wilkes (p. 72) and in the Herald letters (N. Y. Herald, Jan. 6, 1845,
Or. Hist. Quart., Dec, 1902, p. 409) on May 24 at the crossing of the
Wakarusa River, a small branch of the Kansas. (The Herald calls
it Walkalusia, and Wilkes Walpalusia.)
They reached this stream May 23, and Wilkes says: "As soon
as we had fallen into our regular disposition for the night and staked
our horses, several of us turned out with nets and fishing tackle
to sweep and tickle the river. But though we were successful in
furnishing ourselves with some amusement, we were not so success
ful in the object of our endeavors, being only fortunate enough to
secure a few trout, most of which fell to the share of the female
department of the expedition.
"On the morning of the 24th we made preparations for crossing
the stream, but in consequence of the steepness of its banks were
obliged to let our wagons down with ropes, and to draw them up in
the same way. . . . We might have avoided all the delay and
trouble of this crossing if we had searched a hundred yards farther
up the stream, for there we would have found a practicable ford."
The Herald letter says: "We let our wagons down the bank
(which was very steep) with ropes. There was, however, a very
practicable ford unknown to us about 100 yards above. . . . We
found very few fish in this stream."
If in the open prairie of Eastern Kansas, "a very practicable

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 115
ford" within 100 yards of where they spent the time and labor needed
to let their wagons down with ropes and draw them up the steep
banks of this "little stream of clear water, only about 60 feet wide
and with a pebbly bottom," escaped the observation of all the mem
bers of this great party, though they had not only camped there
over night, but had fished along the stream, how entirely credible is
the statement in Wilkes that had they gone 200 yards farther up
this canon of Burnt River they might have found a side valley which
would have given them an easy ascent out of the canon, and avoided
these two difficult hills.
The Herald letters make no mention of this stretch of road up
Burnt River except the following : "You see no stumps on the road
until you get to Burnt River, and very few there." (N. Y. Herald,
Jan. 6, 1845, reprinted in O. H. Quart., Dec, 1902, p. 418.)
This appears on p. 68 of the Wilkes Narrative as follows : "You
meet with no stumps on the road until you come to Burnt River, and
there they are very few."
Let us see now what Fremont says of this road up Burnt River.
Under date of Oct. 13 (p. 176) : "We now traveled through a
very mountainous country, the stream running rather in a ravine
than a valley, and the road is decidedly bad and dangerous for single
wagons, frequently crossing the stream where the water is some
times deep; and all the day the animals were fatigued in climbing
up and descending a succession of steep ascents, to avoid the pre
cipitous hill sides; and the common trail, which leads along the
mountain side at places where the river strikes the base, is some
times bad even for a horseman. . . . Oct. 14. . . . After
traveling about three miles up the valley, we found the river shut
by precipices in a kind of canon, and the road makes a circuit over
the mountains. In the afternoon we reached the river again, by
another little ravine; and after traveling along it for a few miles,
left it enclosed among rude mountains. I have never seen a wagon
road equally bad in the same space as this of yesterday and today.
I noticed where one wagon had been overturned twice, in a very
short distance, and it was surprising to me that those wagons which
were in the rear, and could not have much assistance, got through
at all. Still, there is no mud, and the road has one advantage, it
being perfectly firm."
Surely no fair-minded, unprejudiced person can read these two
contemporaneous accounts, in the Wilkes Narrative and in Fre
mont's Rept, without saying that they are substantially the same
as to the difficulties of the 26 miles up Burnt River — the real diffi
culties seem to have been in the first 14 miles, as the third day's
travel of 12, miles indicates a fair road.
There remains to be considered only the road from the divide

116 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
between Burnt and Powder Rivers to Grande Ronde, as we have
already discussed the 43 miles over the Blue Mountains, which the
migration traveled, and the somewhat longer route — just how much
longer we cannot determine, as the "Table of Distance" on p. 292
of Fremont's Rept. omits Oct. 23, doubtless by printer's mistake —
which Fremont traveled in crossing the Blue Mountains by the
"much easier route" of which the Hudson's Bay Co.'s officer in
charge of Fort Boise had informed him.
Of the character of this stretch of road there is not one word in
"Old Pioneer." Wilkes (pp. 86-7) only says of the first two days
after leaving Burnt River that Sept. 28 "our road led through a
beautiful valley," Sept. 29 "we left the plain . . . and in the
middle of the day entered another valley."
"Sept. 30. Traveled nine miles over an excellent road, with
the exception of the last half mile, which was rocky and perplexed;
but this might have been escaped, as we afterward found, had we
turned down an opening to our right, which led through a smooth
and easy passage directly to the place where we finally encamped."
We have already shown that Fremont's Rept. fully confirms
Wilkes' statement under date of Oct. 2, that they might have avoided
the two worst hills they encountered on the whole route, being
those by which they descended into and ascended from the Grande
Ronde, by keeping around on the side of the mountain.
Fremont's record of precisely this same stretch of road from
the head of Burnt River to the edge of the Grande Ronde is on
pp. 177-8 of his report, as follows: "Oct. 15. The trail did not
much improve until we had crossed the dividing grounds between the
Brule (Burnt) and Powder Rivers. . . . From the dividing
grounds we descended by a mountain road to Powder River, on an
old bed of which we encamped."
"Oct. 16. . . . We made today but a short journey of 13
miles, the road being very good, and encamped in a fine bottom of
Powder River."
"Oct. 17. . . . We traveled this morning across the affluents
to Powder River, the road being good, firm and level ; and the coun
try became constantly more pleasant and interesting. . . . From
the waters of this stream the road ascended by a good and moderate
ascent to a dividing ridge, but immediately entered upon ground
covered with fragments of an altered siliceous slate, which are in
many places large, and render the road racking to a carriage."
All else that Wilkes says about the road beyond Fort Hall to
the Valley of the Columbia is the following (on p. 88) :
"Let me remark for fear that I may overlook it, that while travel
ing on the Burnt River, and while passing through the Blue Moun
tains, we had much trouble in finding our stock in the morning, as

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 117
they wandered off in the bushes during the night, and often strayed
out among the hills after the bunch grass. We found the road along
this river, and through these mountains, the worst of the whole
route, and indeed, nearly all the bad road we saw at all. Lieutenant
Fremont, who came behind us, and who had Mr. Fitzpatrick for a
guide, went further down the Grande Ronde to the right, came out
at a different point, and made his way through the Blue Mountains
by a route which he states to be more safe and easy by far than the
one by which we came. Our route, at any rate, can be so improved
with a small amount of labor as to be quite practicable, and even
as it was we came through it with our wagons in perfect safety,
without even unloading them at a single point. Many, if not most,
of the bad hills we had passed could have been avoided or over
come with a very little labor."
Every candid reader having before him in this all that is said
in the two contemporaneous accounts of the Wilkes Narrative and
Fremont's Report, and also all that Burnett says (in "Old Pioneer")
about the quality of the road from Fort Boise to Grande Ronde, can
see for himself how totally unfounded is Prof. Schafer's persistent
assertion that Wilkes strove to mislead the public as to the diffi
culties of this portion of the route in the interest of his railroad
project — the fact being that Wilkes' whole purpose was to convince
his readers that neither he, nor any of his political or personal
friends, nor any other private person or corporation, should be per
mitted to build, own or operate a transcontinental railroad, but that
it should be built and owned and operated by the nation, and that
he almost assumed the feasibility of the route, devoting to that only
about 1,200 words, or scarcely one per cent, of his book.
I think his scheme was visionary, but the fact that it was one
that cut off all possibility of private gain for not only himself, but
all others, certainly removed from his mind all temptation to inten
tionally misrepresent the facts concerning the feasibility of the route.
But Prof. Schafer, having started out with the erroneous notion
that Wilkes' purpose was to prove the feasibility of the route, can
not consent to admit his mistake, which would be evident to all his
readers if he would only quote the passages in which Wilkes himself
states his ideas about "a national railroad across the continent."
(Cf. Wilkes Preface, p. 4, and Part L, pp. 47 and 62, and especially
the passages on pp. 58-60, beginning, "There are many and insur
mountable reasons why it should be a national undertaking, and
not left to the mercy of a band of speculators, whose narrow objects
would be private gain," and ending with "lastly, it should be
national, because its vast revenues would not only enable the gov
ernment, after paying off the cost, to relieve the country of the bur
den of almost every tax, whether impost or otherwise, but afford a

118 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
surplus, which might be expended to advantage in the gradual in
crease of the navy, and in strengthening our seaboard and harbor
defenses to a state amounting to impregnability.")
Never once alluding in his discussions of the Wilkes Narrative
to this thoroughly unselfish and patriotic (though very visionary)
purpose of Wilkes in his advocacy of a "national railroad" to Ore
gon, Prof. Schafer calls him "a railroad projector," and character
izes his "History of Oregon" as a "promoter's pamphlet, nothing
more nor less," (Cf. Oregonian, Nov. 13, 1903), and in the same
paper after declaring that Wilkes "at all points shows the greatest
concern to avoid admitting difficulties, or to explain them away
when admitted," he continues :
"The following quotations will illustrate Wilkes' method of deal
ing with them :
" 'On the 24th we had to encounter a very hilly road, which re
tarded our progress most seriously. The hills, however, were not
high, neither were they rugged or abrupt.' " Here Prof. Schafer in
serts the following parenthetical note : ( "so as not to interfere with
a railroad"). Let us see what Fremont says of this same succession of short
hills (p. 175) :
"The road entered a sandy hollow, where the surface was ren
dered firm by an admixture of other rock ; being good and level until
arriving near the head of the ravine, where it became a little rocky,
and we met with a number of sharp ascents over an undulating sur
face." Surely "a number of sharp ascents over an undulating sur
face" conveys precisely the same meaning as "the hills, however,
were not high, neither were they rugged or abrupt," and doubtless
Prof. Schafer would not venture to accuse Fremont "of deliberately
falsifying" the facts about the difficulties of this stretch of road.
Prof. Schafer follows this with what has been hereinbefore
quoted from Wilkes as to the road up Burnt River, and as to all
of the accounts he quotes of the actual difficulties of this, the worst
road of the whole journey, he says : "So far Wilkes may be giving
us a free rendering of Burnett." Then he quotes what the Wilkes
account says about the possibility of avoiding some of the most
obstructive hills and hollows, and about the possibility of avoiding
the line of Burnt River altogether, as heretofore quoted by me, and
then continues: "Here is an evident attempt to mislead the un
wary. While Burnett probably suggested that the road could be
improved, there is scarcely a possibility that he should have hinted
at a way of avoiding the valley of the river. Fremont, who followed
the emigrants, used the road they made, and nowhere intimates the
existence of another possible route. I am personally convinced that

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 119
Wilkes had not the slightest authority for suggesting a new route,
or for the note asserting its existence."
Could determined prejudice go farther than this ?
George Wilkes was an honorable man through all his long life —
a man who would have scorned the petty deceptions with which
Prof. Schafer accuses him and concerning which, if Prof. Schafer
would have only quoted Wilkes' own statements of his interest in a
national railroad to Oregon, everyone would see at once that he
had no "axe to grind" nor any temptation to in any way misstate
the difficulties of the route.
Considering the constant efforts to find easier routes as exem
plified in the records of many a transcontinental migration, both to
Oregon and California, what conceivable ground is there for the
assertion that "there is scarcely a possibility that Burnett should
have hinted at a way of avoiding the valley of this river" ?
Pray, why did it not occur to Prof. Schafer that if Wilkes were
such an unprincipled knave as he represents him to be, he would
have avoided all necessity of a footnote by altering Burnett's letter,
and simply omitting "but if this should not be the case" ?
Prof. Schafer continues: "At the Grande Ronde the case is
somewhat different." It is indeed somewhat different, for I had
quoted from Fremont (Cf. Oregonian, Sept. 20, 1903), the passage
which proves beyond question that the Wilkes Narrative is exactly
correct. "He had the authority of Fremont for declaring that the
two worst hills could have been avoided, and it is even possible
that Burnett quotes Fremont here."
On this it is enough to remark :
First — That it is not easy to see how Burnett, writing in Janu
ary, February and March, 1844, a full year before Fremont's Report
of this expedition was published, and while he was still exploring
in the present states of California and Nevada, could have "quoted
Fremont here."
Second — That it is certain that Burnett did not even obtain this
information from Fremont orally, while with him Nov. 7 to 18, 1843
("Old Pioneer," pp. 130-135; Fremont's Report, pp. 192-195), be
cause, instead of crediting Payette with furnishing the information
about the easy pass over the Blue Mountains, as Fremont's Report
does, the Wilkes account credits it to the fact that Fitzpatrick was
the guide to Fremont's party. But, as a matter of fact, Fitzpatrick,
though guide most of the way, not only was not with Fremont's
party over the Blue Mountains, but he was not with it from Sept.
27, 1843—12 days before reaching Fort Boise— till Nov. 21, 1843,
three days after Burnett and his family, and Mr. William Gilpin
had started from the Dalles for Fort Vancouver, in the boats in
which Burnett had accompanied Fremont from Vancouver to the

120 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Dalles, as witness the following extracts from Fremont's Report:
"Sept. 27. . . . Our progress with 12 or 14 wheeled carriages,
though light and made for the purpose, in such a rocky country was
extremely slow; and I again determined to gain time by a division
of the camp.
"Accordingly, today the parties again separated, constituted
very much as before — Mr. Fitzpatrick remaining in charge of the
heavier baggage" (p. 166). . . Idem (p. 197) "Mr. Fitzpatrick
with Mr. Talbot and the remainder of the party arrived on the
21st" (Nov.).
Prof. Schafer continues as follows :
"But when (p. 88) Wilkes dexterously combines the Burnt River
stretch with the Grande Ronde road, and uses Fremont to prove
the feasibility of the latter" (he probably means the former, W. I.
M.) "he is clearly trying to throw dust in the eyes of his reader.
He" (Wilkes) "says, 'We found the road along this river' (i. e.,
Burnt River, W. I. M.) 'and through these mountains' (Blue Moun
tains) 'the worst of the whole route, and, indeed, nearly all the bad
road we saw at all. Lieut. Fremont, who came behind us, and
who had Mr. Fitzpatrick for a guide, went further down the Grande
Ronde to the right, came out at a different point, and made his way
through the Blue Mountains by a route which he states to be more
safe and easy by far than the one by which we came. Our route,
at any rate, can be so improved with a small amount of labor as to
be quite practicable, and even as it was, we came through it with
our wagons in perfect safety, without even unloading them at a
single point. Many, if not most, of the bad hills we passed could
have been avoided or overcome with a very little labor.'
"In such ways as these Wilkes tried to bolster up his railroad
scheme, for which he had sad need of support."
"How desperate are the shifts of a confirmed theorist" has rarely
received so strong a verification as in this attempt by Prof. Schafer
to make Wilkes appear a dishonest "railroad promoter," deceiving
the public by this perfectly fair statement of the difficulties of the
only really bad stretches of road they had found.
Furthermore, Wilkes did not, "dexterously" or otherwise, "com
bine the Burnt River stretch with the Grande Ronde road" (for
he says not one word about the road in the Grande Ronde, which
was a level prairie-like valley), but with the road over the Blue
Mountains, which was an altogether different thing.
How completely baseless is this vision which Prof. Schafer has
evolved from "the mysterious depths of his own inner conscious
ness," of Wilkes as a rascally railroad promoter, striving to gull
the public by wickedly altering Burnett's letters, so as "to minimize
the difficulties of the way," is shown not only by what has been

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 121
hereinbefore quoted as to the disinterested and purely patriotic
aims he sought to advance in advocating a national railroad to Ore
gon, and by the comparison of what he says of the difficulties of
the road with Fremont's Report of it, and with what the "Old
Pioneer" says of it; but also by the fact that even the word rail
road does not once appear in the 50 pages, or nearly 40,000 words,
of his "narrative of the migration of 1843," although so greatly is
the usual fairness of Prof. Schafer's mind warped by this curious
theory of his about Wilkes, that he actually declares (Oregonian,
Nov. 13, 1903) that "the very next sentence reveals him" (Wilkes)
"from another angle as the railroad projector." That next sentence
consists of the following mere truisms (the italics used to show
"Wilkes as a railroad projector" being Prof. Schafer's, and not
Wilkes'), viz: "Liberty and enterprise are inseparable qualities,
and were it not for the obstacles of inadequate means of travel, no
corner of our country would be left unpeopled."
What a curious state of mind must possess one who finds in
this simple and appropriate statement of a general truth proof of
the wiles of a "railroad projector," seeking to deceive the people of
the country as to the feasibility of a transcontinental railroad.
Having disposed of the matters of the real difficulties of the
route from Fort Hall to the Columbia and of the extent to which
Whitman was the guide of the 1843 migration, let us now finish
the story of the development of the first transcontinental wagon
road with an examination of the other two important points, which
are, What was the treatment of the migration at Fort Hall? and
Would it have gone through with wagons if Whitman had not been
with it? These are so closely connected that it is best to consider
them together.
The advocates of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story all allege
that at Fort Hall the Hudson's Bay Co.'s chief trader, Mr. Richard
Grant, contrived to frighten all parties of Americans migrating to
Oregon with such dreadful stories as to the difficulties and dangers
of the route from there to the Columbia, and the absolute impossi
bility of getting through with wagons, that they all prior to 1843
had there left their wagons, and that he tried by exaggerations and
misrepresentations to prevent the 1843 migration from going on
with wagons, and would have succeeded had not Whitman been
there and made them a speech, which alleged speech most of the
advocates of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story print in quotation
marks (as if its authenticity is undoubted). (Cf. for this, "Spald
ing's Lecture," in Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 37, 41st Cong., 3d Sess, p. 21;
Barrow's "Oregon," pp. 166-7 and 247-8; Gray's "History of Ore
gon," p. 289; Nixon's "How Marcus Whitman Saved Oregon," pp.
140-41; Craighead's "Story of Marcus Whitman," p. 76; Mrs. Eva

122 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Emery Dye's "McLoughlin and Old Oregon," pp. 253-4; M. Eell's
"Indian Missions," pp. 156 and 177-8 ; Mowry's "Marcus Whitman,"
p. 205.) All of these give substantially the same account of what
they allege took place at Fort Hall, but no one of them quotes a
single contemporaneous book, government document, newspaper or
magazine article, letter or diary in support of this story, which
appears first, as far as has yet been discovered, in the two recently
found letters written in 1858 and 1859 by Rev. Geo. Atkinson, a
man who had never been within 400 miles of Fort Hall, having
gone to Oregon by sea, after the Whitman massacre. These two
letters contain the first two versions (so far as known) of the
Whitman Saved Oregon Story, but the first or 1858 version was
so palpably false that the 1859 one dropped several of the lead
ing and easily proved false statements of the first. These letters
are herein printed for the first time. (Cf. Part IL, Chapter III.)
False and widely variant as are both these versions of the Whit
man Saved Oregon Story, they are admittedly derived from Rev.
H. H. Spalding and Rev. C. Eells. In their anxiety to make a
strong case against Grant, Barrows (pp. 166-7 and 247-8), and
Nixon (pp. 110 and 139-41), represent him as having been in
charge of Fort Hall from 1836 onward, and as having striven to
prevent Whitman from taking his wagon beyond Fort Hall in
1836, and as having prevented all others in later years from going
with wagons beyond Fort Hall, whereas, the fact is, that he was
not at Fort Hall till after the migration of 1841 had passed there,
so that but one migration — that of 1842 — had ever passed Fort
Hall after Grant had charge of it until the 1843 migration reached
it. Mrs. Whitman's Diary (Tr. Oregon Pioneer Association, 1891,
p. 46) says (speaking of the arrival and reception of the Whitman-
Spalding party at Fort Hall on August 3, 1836, a little after noon) :
"We were hospitably entertained by Capt. Thing, who keeps the
fort." This should be Thyng. He was one of Wyeth's 1834 party,
and was left in charge of Fort Hall by Wyeth, on its erection in
1834. (Cf. Lee and Frost's Ten Years in Oregon, p. 114.) Who
was in charge of Fort Hall in 1837 I have been unable certainly
to determine, but think Mr. Thyng continued in command there
till Ermatinger was sent to take charge, which was certainly as
early as 1838, as witness the following extracts from Mrs. C. Eells'
diary (in Trans. Oregon Pioneer Association for 1889, p. 83) :
"Friday, July 27th, 1838, arrive at Fort Hall . . . Sunday,
July 29th, about 10 o'clock, Mr. Ermatinger comes to invite us to
breakfast, says he has just got up. After breakfast he comes again
to invite us to have preaching at the fort. Afternoon Mr. Eells
preached in the dining room . . . Tuesday, July 31, find^ our

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 123
provisions and four mules and one fresh horse sent by Dr. Whit
man and Spalding. Ermatinger gives ten pounds sugar." While
there is here no explicit assertion that he was in command, the
inference that he was in charge is irresistible.
That Frederick Ermatinger was in command at Fort Hall in
1839 is distinctly stated by Farnham (Travels, p. 153), (under
date of September 27th, when he was at Whitman's Mission), as
follows: "In the afternoon the arrival of Mr. Ermetinger (should
be ma instead of me, W. I. M.) the senior clerk at Fort Hall from
Fort Walla Walla, created quite a sensation. His uniform kind
ness to the missionaries has endeared him to them." . . "28th
Mr. Ermatinger started for Fort Hall." While Ermatinger was
absent from Fort Hall on this trip to Vancouver, Farnham's party
had arrived at Fort Hall, on September 1st, and had been most
kindly received there, as every other party of Americans was who
ever were at Fort Hall on their way to Oregon, as long as it was
a Hudson's Bay Company's post, according to all the contemporary
letters, and diaries, and books, and reports to the government of
all the members and leaders of those parties who have left any con
temporaneous written or printed record of their reception and
treatment at Fort Hall. Mr. Walker, an American, was tempo
rarily in charge of Fort Hall while Ermatinger was on this trip,
and Farnham (Travels, p. 136) says: "We spent the 2d and 3d
most agreeably with Mr. Walker in his hospitable adobie castle,
exchanged with him our wearied horses for fresh ones, and ob
tained dried buffalo meat, sugar, cocoa, tea and corn meal, a guide
and every other necessary within that gentleman's power to fur
nish for our journey to Walla Walla; "and at 10 o'clock a. m., of
the 4th of September, bade adieu to our very obliging country
man." That Ermatinger was in charge of Fort Hall in 1840 is evi
dent from the account of the outfitting there of three wagons by
Newell, Wilkins, Meek and Ermatinger himself in August, 1840,
and the driving them through from there to Fort Walla Walla.
(Cf. Tr. Oregon Pioneer Association, 1877, p. 22, also pp. 85-87
ante) .
That Ermatinger was in command there when the 1841 migra
tion passed there, and received and treated them with utmost kind
ness, is distinctly asserted by the famous Father P. J. De Smet,
who was of that party, as follows :
(Under date of August 16, 1841) "But I feel bound before all
to pay Mr. Ermatinger, the captain of Fort Hall, the tribute of
gratitude which we owe him. Although a Protestant by birth, this
noble Englishman gave us a most friendly reception. Not only did
he repeatedly invite us to his table, and sell us, at first cost, or at
one-third of its value in a country so remote, whatever we required,

124 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
but he also added as a pure gift many articles which he believed
would be particularly acceptable." (Cf. "Letters and Sketches,
etc.," P. J. De Smet, S. J., Philadelphia, 1853.)
We have already quoted (on pp. 90-94 ante) the strictly con
temporary evidence of White's report to the government as Sub-
Indian agent, dated April 1, 1843, and his "Ten Years in Oregon"
(Ithaca, N. Y., 1848), and L. W. Hasting's "Emigrant's Guide to
Oregon and California" (Cincinnati, 1845), and of Fremont's Re
port of his 1842 expedition, and of Hon. Medorem Crawford's ad
dress, as president of the Oregon Pioneer Association at its 1881
meeting (the latter contemporaneous because based on and strictly
agreeing in all its facts with his Journal, since published verbatim
by the Oregon Historical Society) that this 1842 migration — the
first large overland migration — were received with the utmost kind
ness at Fort Hall, and furnished with flour at only one-half of what
the American traders had charged them at Fort Laramie.
Whether Spalding or Gray first invented these charges against
Grant will probably never be known, but it is certain that they have
never been found in print, or in unpublished letters or diaries till
after the Whitman Saved Oregon Story began to be circulated, and
Gray is chiefly responsible for their wide circulation, by publishing
them in his History of Oregon (1870), as follows:
Page 321. "Grant at Fort Hall with the Indians along the route
had combined to deceive and rob the naked and starving immi
grants." Page 521. "So far as McBean was concerned, he obeyed orders
as implicitly as Grant of the Hudson's Bay Co. did, when he sent
forty families in 1846 into the mountains of California to perish in
the snow with cold and hunger." The italics are Gray's. (This
relates to the Donner party, who were never within hundreds of
miles of Fort Hall, they having left the regular Oregon trail on the
Little Sandy tributary of Green River, to go via Bridger's Fort and
the Hastings' Cut-Off, south of the Great Salt Lake, directly to Cali
fornia. [Cf. in Trans. Oregon Pioneer Association, 1878; address
of Hon. J. C. Thornton on the migration of 1846, p. 51 ; also Thorn
ton's "Oregon and California," Vol. IL, pp. 95-240. J The last named
is the best and fullest account of the Donner party.) It is certain,
therefore that for the dreadful fate which befell the Donner party
neither Grant nor any other Hudson's Bay Co.'s employe was any
more responsible than "the man in the moon" was, or than Gray
himself was. (Had that party gone by Fort Hall they doubtless
would have reached California safely, as did all of the other Cali
fornia emigrants that year who declined to go with them by Hast
ings' Cut-Off, and went by Fort Hall; and all the authorities are
agreed that it was the time the Donner party lost finding and mak-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 125
ing a new road between where they left the Oregon trail, in Green
River Valley, and the time they reached the eastern base of the
Sierra Nevadas, which caused them to be too late to cross the
Sierras. W. I. M.)
Page 360. Speaking explicitly of the 1843 migration, he says:
"An immigration of 875 persons arrived in the fall, notwithstanding
that deceitful servant of the Hudson's Bay Co., Grant, at Fort Hall,
did all he could under the instructions of the company to induce as
many as possible to go to California, by telling them all the fright
ful stories he and his men could invent of their danger, and of the
difficulties they must encounter in getting through to the settlements
on the Wallamet."
Page 367. "Grant, of the Hudson's Bay Co., must occupy Fort
Hall, and do all he can to turn immigrants to California, and rob
such as persist in coming to Oregon. General Palmer says in his
journal (p. 43) : "While we remained at this place (Fort Hall)
great efforts were made to induce the immigration to pursue the
route to California. The most extravagant tales were related re
specting the dangers awaiting a trip to Oregon, and the difficulties
and trials to be surmounted. The perils of the way were so magni
fied as to make us suppose the journey to Oregon almost impossible.
For instance the two crossings of Snake River, and the crossings
of the Columbia and other smaller streams were represented as
being attended with great danger. Also, that no company hereto
fore attempting the passage of these streams succeeded but with
the loss of men, from the violence and rapidity of the current, as
also that they had never succeeded in getting more than fifteen or
twenty head of cattle into the Willamet Valley.
"In addition to the above, it was asserted that three or four
tribes of Indians in the middle regions had combined for the pur
pose of preventing our passage through their country. In case we
escaped destruction at the hands of the savages, that a more fearful
enemy — famine — would overtake us before making the Cascade
Mountains. On the other hand, as an inducement to pursue the
California route, we were informed of the shortness of the route
when compared with that to Oregon, as also of the many other
superior advantages it possessed." The italics in this quotation
are Gray's, not Palmer's. 'Although Gray knew perfectly well that
Palmer never was at Fort Hall till 1845, and although the title page
to Palmer's book is "Journal of Travels over the Rocky Mountains to
the mouth of the Columbia River in the years 1845 and 1846," he not
only here gives his readers no hint of the date, but nowhere in his
"History of Oregon" gives the date of Palmer's first overland jour
ney, and he prints the above quotation in such connection that all
except those tolerably well acquainted with Oregon history are sure

126 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
to suppose that Palmer was with the 1842 or 1843 migration. Nat
urally, Rev. William Barrows, O. W. Nixon and Rev. Myron Eells
fell into this trap, Barrows (p. 148) printing the above quotation
between two paragraphs relating to the 1842 migration (though not
asserting that it related to that migration), and Nixon (p. 191)
beginning a condensation of the above quotation with "General
Palmer, in speaking of this, says, 'While at Fort Hall in 1842 the
perils of the way to Oregon were so magnified'," etc. ; and Rev. M.
Eells ("Indian Missions," p. 177) in the middle of his account of
the 1843 migration, introducing this quotation with " 'For instance,'
says General Joel Palmer, of that year's emigration," and this
though he had in his house the Trans. Oregon Pioneer Association
for 1877, giving an alphabetical roster of the members of the asso
ciation, which states that Palmer was a pioneer of 1845. The result
has been that all giving credence to these books think that there is a
strictly contemporaneous account from a man of the highest char
acter, sustaining the accusation that the 1842 and 1843 migration
(and, presumably, if either, then both of them) encountered decep
tion and misrepresentation from Grant, evidencing opposition from
the Hudson's Bay Co. to wagons going beyond Fort Hall. Finding
some twenty years ago that this was in 1845, I became suspicious
that somehow the quotation must be otherwise dishonest, as Grant
was admittedly an able man, and it seemed to me utterly incredible
that after the two great migrations of 1843 and 1844 had gone
through with their wagons, even if he was as bad a man as Gray
claimed, he should be foolish enough to try to deceive this 1845
migration with the statement that they could not easily and safely
go where more than 2,000 of their countrymen had gone, and had
reported far and wide in the States that the road was plainly
marked and offered little difficulty.
At the earliest possible opportunity, therefore, I examined
Palmer's Journal (which is a rare book), and found that this is a
sample of that kind of misquotation — as ancient as it is disrep
utable — which consists in stopping a quotation when the imme
diately following context completely changes the impression con
veyed by the part quoted. The next paragraph in Palmer's Journal
after the above quotation from it is as follows : "These tales, told
and rehearsed, were likely to produce the effect of turning the tide
of emigration thither" (i. e., to California). Mr. Greenwood, an
old mountaineer, well stocked with falsehoods, had been dispatched
from California to pilot the emigration through, and assisted by a
young man by the name of McDougal, from Indiana, so far suc
ceeded as to induce 35 or 36 wagons to take that trail; about 15
wagons had been fitted out expressly for California, and joined by
the aforementioned, completed a train of 50 wagons. What the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 127
result of their expedition has been I have not been able to learn."
There is not one sentence in Palmer's Journal which, honestly
quoted in connection with its context, furnishes the least support to
the charges of Gray against Grant, nor to any charge that the treat
ment of Americans migrating to Oregon was unkind or uncourteous
either at Fort Hall or at any other Hudson's Bay Co. post, nor one
sentence censuring Grant for anything whatever, and what little
he says of Grant is entirely favorable to and commendatory of him.
Having shown from the contemporaneous records of Fremont,
White, Hastings and Crawford how the 1842 migration came to
leave part of their wagons at Fort Laramie, part at Green River,
and the last seven at Fort Hall, and that they had only words of
praise for Grant and his treatment of them, and having by quoting
the immediate context disproved the claim that Palmer's Journal
supports the charge that Grant attempted to prevent Americans
from going beyond Fort Hall with wagons, and sought to send them
to California, we are now prepared to examine the question of what
treatment the 1843 migration met at Fort Hall.
Burnett's letters, as printed in Part II. of Wilkes, furnish as
far as yet appears the only strictly contemporaneous account of their
reception and treatment by Grant, as follows: "We arrived in
the afternoon at Fort Hall, a trading post belonging to the Hudson's
Bay Co., on the Snake or Saptin River, and encamped in a fine
piece of timber land, under cover of its wooden battlements. We
passed a most pleasant evening, in exchanging civilities with its
inmates, who were not a little surprised at this tremendous irrup
tion in their solitude. Some of the members told us that they could
scarcely believe their eyes when they saw the immense stretch of
our line, the number of our lowing herds and our squads of prancing
horsemen, and they inquired laughingly if we had come to conquer
Oregon or devour it out of hand. They treated us, however, with
every attention, and answered with the utmost patience, and par
ticularly all our inquiries in relation to the country. We paused
here a day to recruit our cattle, and when we set out in the morning
following (1st Sept.) we received a parting salute from one of the
guns of the fort, and answered it with a volley from our small
arms." Since the foregoing was written in the Oregonian of Nov. 13,
1903, Prof. Schafer has printed a few extracts from Burnett's Jour
nal recently obtained from the Burnett family by Prof. Young, sec
retary of the Oregon Historical Society, as follows :
"27th (Aug.). Came to Fort Hall. This being Sunday, no
business was done. Mr. Grant very hospitable. Fort Hall stands
in a wide plain of bottom land formed by Snake River. The com-

128 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
pany have a great many horses and cattle, made by trading, etc.,
and good range.
"28th. Remained at Fort Hall and many trades were made.
Price of provisions : Flour, 25c a pint ; coffee, 50c a pound ; sugar,
25c a pint; rice, 33 l-3c; for powder, 56c a pound.
"29th. Still remained at Fort Hall.
"30th. Left Fort Hall and came 11 miles to the Portneuth
(neuf). Good range, wood and water."
These extracts, like those hereinbefore quoted by me, show how
very "concise" was this journal; but, as far as it goes, its state
ment about the treatment this immigration received from Mr. Grant
fully supports the statements in the Wilkes Narrative.
So far as yet appears, no other contemporaneous evidence has
been found in support of the accuracy of this extract from Burnett's
Journal, but this statement in Gilmore's letter of Nov. 11, 1843:
"We found the Hudson's Bay Co. at all their posts very accommo
dating" (Cf. Or. Hist. Quarterly, Sept., 1903, p. 281) except the very
strong negative evidence, that not a sentence has yet been discov
ered in any contemporaneous letter from that migration which in
any manner censures Grant's conduct, or complains of any treat
ment the migration received at Fort Hall, and it is quite incredible
that if this account were not a correct one of the treatment they
received there, some one or more of this migration would not have
complained of wrongs inflicted and that the first accusation against
Grant's treatment of this migration should appear in a letter writ
ten 15 years afterward, not by any member of this or any other
migration that was ever at Fort Hall, but by Rev. G. H. Atkinson, a
Congregational clergyman, who was in 1843 a youth at school in
New England, and never went to Oregon till the summer of 1848,
and then by sea, and whose ideas were plainly derived from Spald
ing, and Gray, and C. Eells.
Having settled that the use made by Gray, Rev. William Bar
rows, Rev. M. Eells and others of the quotation from Palmer's Jour
nal was deceptive, and that it had nothing to do with the 1842 or
1843 migration, as far back as 1884, failing to find any contempo
raneous evidence of the experience of the 1843 migration at Fort
Hall, except that in the Wilkes Narrative, in accordance with the
fundamental principles of scientific historical investigation, I sought
the next best evidence, to-wit, the carefully considered subsequent
statements, not of the boys like William Waldo, P. B. Whitman,
John Hobson and John Zachary, who were in that migration, nor
of other people in it, who, however honest and well intentioned they
might have been, were not its leaders, and so had no sense of respon
sibility for its movements to impress upon their memories what took
place there, nor were likely to have come directly in contact with

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 129
Captain Grant as the leaders of the party did, but from the five
survivors of the six men who are universally admitted to have been
the real originators, organizers and leaders of that migration, to-wit :
Hon. J. M. Shively, the three Applegates, Jesse, Charles and Lind
say ; Gov. P. H. Burnett and Hon. J. W. Nesmith. Of these Charles
Applegate died in 1877, before any thorough investigation of the
Whitman Saved Oregon Story was made, and, unfortunately, I did
not learn of Mr. Nesmith's address in time for my letter to reach
him till after he was attacked with the softening of the brain that
clouded the last few months of his long and honorable life, so that I
never heard from him. Nesmith, in his address to the Oregon Pio
neer Association (Trans. 1875, p. 47), gives the following account of
what took place at Fort Hall (but with no claim that he had any
contemporaneous written account of it to assist or refresh his mem
ory as to what happened 32 years before) : "Captain Grant, then
in charge of the Hudson's Bay Co. at Fort Hall, endeavored to dis
suade us from proceeding further with our wagons, and showed
us the wagons that the emigrants of the preceding year had aban
doned as an evidence of the impracticability of our determination.
Dr. Whitman was persistent in his assertions that wagons could
proceed as far as the Grand Dalles of the Columbia River, from
which point he asserted they could be taken down by rafts or bat
teaux to the Willamette Valley, while the stock could be driven by
an Indian trail over the Cascade Mountains, near Mount Hood. Hap
pily, Whitman's advice prevailed, and a large number of the wagons,
with a portion of the stock, did reach Walla Walla and the Dalles,
from which points they were taken to the Willamette the following
year. Had we followed Grant's advice and abandoned the cattle
and wagons at Fort Hall, much suffering must have ensued, as a
sufficient number of horses to carry the women and children of
the party could not have been obtained, besides wagons and cattle
were indispensable to men expecting to live by farming in a country
destitute of such articles." There is nothing in this at all contrary
to what is stated in the Wilkes Narrative. No one even moderately
acquainted with the true story of that 1843 migration has ever
doubted that at Fort Hall there was a discussion as to the advisa
bility of wagons going farther, nor that Grant thought it doubtful
if they could get them across the Blue Mountains, and that Whit
man thought they could. The only question is, was this an honest
opinion of Grant, and was he candid in stating it? and upon that
point the evidence here adduced is overwhelmingly and unanswer
ably in favor of Grant, nor has any other opinion been found written
in letter or diary till some 15 years after the event, when it became
necessary, as an indispensable postulate of the Whitman Saved
Oregon Story, to create the impression that the Hudson's Bay Co.

130 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
was opposed to wagons going beyond Fort Hall, and that Grant
wrongfully strove to prevent them from going on. This correspond
ence with Burnett, Shively, Jesse and Lindsay Applegate began in
1884, a dozen years before I began an investigation of the Wilkes
Narrative, and before I paid any attention to that narrative Gov.
Burnett had died, which explains why I did not obtain any state
ment from him as to the authorship of that narrative and the
faithfulness with which it reproduced his letters to the Herald.
I put to each of these four men very definite and comprehensive
questions as to Whitman's true relations to the migration gener
ally, and as to what actually took place at Fort Hall, and the fol
lowing are their replies.
Oct. 14, 1884, Gov. P. H. Burnett wrote me as follows :
"In answer to your first question I will say that, basing my
judgment upon my individual knowledge of the conduct and lan
guage of Captain Grant, and also upon what I heard from reliable
persons at Fort Hall in 1843, I do not believe that he made any
efforts to prevent the emigration of 1843 from going through to
Oregon by exaggerating the difficulties of the remainder of the
journey or by attempting to persuade them to go to California in
stead of to Oregon."
"In answer to your second inquiry, I have to state that, found
ing my opinions upon the circumstances above mentioned, Captain
Grant did not strive to prevent the emigrants from going farther
with wagons by any statements of the difficulties of the way which
I, as I subsequently passed over it, deemed exaggerated. While at
Fort Hall, in 1843, I neither saw nor heard of anything objection
able in the conduct or language of Captain Grant, then in charge of
that post. He seemed to speak and act with candor and with
reasonable caution under all the then existing circumstances."
April 14, 1887, Gov. Burnett, in answer to my question, "Who,
if anyone, in the migration of 1843, so far as you know, was in
duced to join it by Dr. Whitman?" replied as follows: "I have no
present recollection of any person who was induced to join that
migration by Dr. Whitman."
Hon. J. M. Shively wrote me from Astoria, Ore., Oct. 20, 1884,
that in the autumn of 1842 he was living in St. Louis, and decided
to try and organize a migration to Oregon for 1843, and had hand
bills printed and posted and held several public meetings, and had
a list of about 300 names of those who agreed to join the party.
That at the request of the party he took a petition to Congress ask
ing for military protection at least through the Pawnee country,
being furnished with letters from leading men in St. Louis to many
members of Congress.
En route to Washington he held public meetings at Louisville,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 131
Cincinnati and Pittsburg, on the subject of migrating to Oregon.
He did not give the precise date when he reached Washington, but
says he left only a few days before Congress adjourned and returned
to St. Louis.
He says: "I was received in Washington with marked defer
ence, but failed to get the desired escort of troops. I had a number
of conferences with Mr. Spencer, then Secretary of War, and Presi
dent Tyler and many other executive officers, and Senators Linn
and Benton and Caleb Cushing, but none of them ever mentioned
Dr. Whitman to me, and I never saw nor heard of him until he over
took the migration on the plains. . . . The party was made up
of hardy frontiersmen, and anything Grant might say on one side or
Whitman on the other would not have deterred or encouraged them.
They had started to take their wagons and stock through, and
they did.
"I heard a number ask Captain Grant at Fort Hall about the
route down Snake River. His reply was that he knew only the
pack-trail, and that wagons could not go that trail. You ask when
I first heard the" (Whitman Saved Oregon) "story, as told by Gray
in his History of Oregon. Answer: I never heard it spoken of till
the publication of that history by Gray. I never saw any pamphlet
or letter ever published by Dr. Whitman at any date."
"The part I took in 1842-3 is evidence that Dr. Whitman never
made a public speech or had anything published at that time."
. . . "A few words of inference: Were Dr. Whitman alive you
would never have heard of his being the Savior of Oregon. It is
all a fabrication; nor did Dr. Whitman ever claim to have any
influence in getting up the emigration of 1843 — when he overtook
us the magnitude of the train took him by surprise."
June 19, 1885, Mr. Shively wrote me again, denying pointblank
what Hon. John Hobson (who was a boy of 18 in 1843) wrote to
Rev. M. Eells, under date of Jan. 30, 1883, as to Whitman inducing
Mr. Shively, and the Hobson family, and Miles Eyars (or Ayers) to
join the 1843 migration. (Cf. M. Eells' pamphlet, "Did Dr. M.
Whitman Save Oregon," p. 30.)
He says: "I don't know how to reconcile Mr. Hobson's state
ments that I was prevailed upon to come to Oregon by Whitman,
for I had no knowledge of Dr. Whitman till he overtook the migra
tion on the Platte, in 1843." . . . "About the 1st of November,
1842, in St. Louis, Mo., I first of all had bills printed and posted to
make up a party to migrate to Oregon. About this time arrived from
England William Hobson and family, and they joined the migra
tion. So did Miles Ayers, another English family, and hundreds of
others. Mr. John Hobson was a boy at that time, and is laboring
under a great mistake when he says Whitman influenced me to come

132 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
to Oregon. Six hundred and forty acres of land is what induced
me to come to Oregon, and I got it. Dr. Whitman passed St. Louis
after I had left, and brought me documents from my friends there.
I do not remember any advice on the part of Captain Grant to leave
the wagons; he told the questioners that they could not go the
pack-trail, but says he, "You Americans can do anything." I do
not think that what Grant or Whitman said had a shade of influ
ence; the party had started for the Willamette with wagons, and
they were going through with them or 'bust'."
In April, 1887, I sent Mr. Shively the following questions:
"From all your experience of pioneer life, do you think that the ser
vices of Dr. Whitman to the migration of 1843 were any other than
or any greater than those which any vigorous, energetic and reason
ably public spirited pioneer physician would have rendered, and
ought to have rendered, to any party of emigrants largely composed
of women and children, with whom he was traveling toward his
present and their future home?" To which, on May 2, 1887, he re
plied : "Dr. Whitman was in the noonday of life, and was of great
service to the immigrants the fore part of the route, but he soon
grew weary, and finally he grew very cross, and quarreled with Mr.
Lovejoy, his traveling companion, on arriving at his station."
When the migration divided into two bands, on June 9, 1843,
William J. Martin was elected captain of one band and Jesse Apple-
gate of the other. At Fort Hall, Mr. Martin, with Captain John
Gantt, Mr. Joseph Childs and 14 other men took the road to Cali
fornia. (Cf. Tr. Oregon Pioneer Association, 1875; Nesmith's ad
dress, p. 53.) Mr. Jesse Applegate went to Oregon and spent the
rest of his long and honorable life there and in California, much
the greater part in Oregon.
June 22, 1885, he wrote me from Yoncalla, Ore., as follows:
"Your" (my) "questions are :
" 'First. Did you at any time hear Dr. Whitman claim to have
any interviews with Webster and Tyler about Oregon matters?'
"Ans. I have no recollection of any such interviews."
" 'Second. Did you at any time hear him claim that the pos
session of Oregon by the United States was in any sense dependent
on that migration of 1843 going through with wagons?'
"Ans. I did not."
" 'Third. Do you remember whether or not from the letters
of Robt. Shortess and others or from any other source you had
learned that wagons could be taken through the Blue Mountains
before you left Missouri?'
"Ans. No."
" 'Fourth. Had you heard of Dr. Whitman before you left
Missouri ?'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 133
"Ans. Through a letter from Robt. Shortess I heard of Dr.
Whitman as a missionary in the Walla Walla country."
(Robert Shortess was one of the Oregon migration under Thos.
J. Farnham in 1839, and was hired by Dr. Whitman to work at
Wailatpu for a short time in 1839-40, W. I. M.)
" 'Fifth. Would your party have gone through with wagons
all the way in any event, whether Dr. Whitman had been with you
or not?' "Ans. Dr. Whitman had nothing to do with our outfit or mode
of travel. From the time he joined us on the Platte River he was
a valuable addition to our party, but not indispensable to it."
" 'Sixth. Did you hear Capt. Grant at Fort Hall make any
representations about the difficulty of taking wagons beyond Fort
Hall, which you, from your subsequent experience and observation
in going over the route, deemed unfair or unwarranted by the facts
of the case ?'
"Ans. There were none such made."
" 'Seventh. Was Dr. Whitman in any sense regarded by that
migration after he joined it as its leader?"
"Ans. He was not so regarded."
" 'Eighth. When did you first hear this story about Whitman
having saved Oregon to the United States substantially as told by
Rev. H. H. Spalding and Mr. W. H. Gray?'
"Ans. About the time those gentlemen convinced themselves
that such was the case."
"Having answered your questions categorically I will simply
state that Dr. Whitman was an energetic, intelligent and useful
man, who did well his part, but his part was not a high one. He
was not one to become a leader of men or a mover in any great
enterprise." Jesse Applegate had two brothers in that migration, Charles
and Lindsay. That all three, like Burnett, Shively and Nesmith,
were natural leaders of men is evident from their subsequent
prominent records as citizens of Oregon.
In September, 1888, I sent to Hon. Lindsay Applegate at Ash
land, Ore., a letter containing questions, to which he replied Octo
ber 7, 1888, as follows :
"My answers to your questions are as follows :
" 'Question 1. Was Dr. Whitman considered by you or by that
migration generally as in any sense the organizer or one of the
organizers or the leader of the migration of 1843?'
"Ans. No one ever heard of such a man until we were hun
dreds of miles on the way."
" 'Question 2. Did you at any time while that migration was
on the way hear him say or hear any one else say that they had

134 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
heard him say that his object in going to the States had been to
lead an emigration to Oregon with wagons?'
"Ans. No. He uniformly explained that his expedition was
in the interest of his mission. He rushed back to prevent his Mis
sion Board from discontinuing his mission and to urge upon the
attention of that Board the necessity of not only continuing his
mission, but that he should be provided with more means that he
might resist the encroachments of the Catholics. He traveled with
us until the most dangerous tribes of Indians had been passed,
which brought us to the Burnt River Hills, and then he left us
and went on to his mission station and we had our way to explore
and cut through the Blue Mountains forest after that. And he
took off with him a lot of our young men that we fed across the
plains, whose desertion greatly weakened our force in cutting
through the forests."
"At the Pacific Springs, our first camp west of the Rocky
Mountains and first day's travel into Oregon, the Oregon question
came up. It was in this form : What should we do in case Oregon
should some time become a British province? Various determina
tions were expressed, many saying they would return to the States.
But Whitman said that the question of the jurisdiction of any
earthly prince, potentate or power was of but small consideration.
What he was concerned about was the jurisdiction of the Lord
Jesus Christ."
" 'Question 3. Did you at any time while that migration was
on the way hear from Dr. Whitman any declaration that the Amer
ican title to Oregon was in any way dependent on that migration
going through with wagons?'
"Ans. No. But when he overtook us on the plains he did say
that he had never heard that any migration had started until he
got to St. Louis."
" 'Question 4. Did you then or at any later time hear Dr.
Whitman claim that he had had any interviews with Secretary
Webster and President Tyler about Oregon matters, and if not
then, when did you hear this claim made for him, substantially as
stated by Spalding and Gray?'
"Ans. No. He never pretended to any such thing. I never
heard of any such claim being set up until long after the Doctor
was dead."
" 'Question 5. In your judgment would that migration have
gone through to Walla Walla with wagons if Dr. Whitman had
not been with it?'
"Ans. We did not depend upon the Doctor at all for any course
or direction. We depended and relied upon the instructions which
we had received from Robert Shortess of Oregon."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 135
"'Question 6. Did you hear Capt. Grant at Fort Hall make
any representations about the difficulty of taking wagons beyond
Fort Hall, which you from your subsequent experience and obser
vation in going over the route deemed unfair or unwarranted by
the facts of the case?'
"Ans. He was glad to see us and he was kind. He said that
considering what we had done and what he knew of the country
we could go with wagons anywhere."
" 'Question 7. Did Captain Grant make any effort to induce
the migration of 1843 to go to California instead of Oregon by ex
aggerated statements about the difficulties of the route to Oregon,
or in any other way or by any other means as far as you know?'
"Ans. He did not undertake to advise us in any way."
" 'Question 8. Before starting from Missouri did any fear of
not being able to get through with wagons disturb you or influence
you in any way?'
"Ans. We understood what we were about. We had instruc
tions from Shortess — a careful account of the country all the way.
We were able to make roads, boats or do anything, were prepared
with all manner of tools. We were not starting out in a helpless
condition. We had bands of cattle and horses with us. We could
have left our wagons and gone on, or we could have wintered and
taken another season for it. No, we had no doubt about being able
to go through."
" 'Question 9. Were the services of Dr. Whitman to the migra
tion of 1843 any other than or any greater than those which any
vigorous, energetic and reasonably public-spirited pioneer physi
cian ought to have rendered to a migration composed largely of
women and children, with whom he was traveling towards what
was his and was destined to be their future home?'
"Ans. As far as Dr. Whitman's being of any service to the mi
gration of 1843 is concerned, I consider it a misfortune that we
ever saw him, from the fact that he left us at Boise, taking with
him a portion of our young men, and leaving us to cut our way
through the Burnt River and Blue Mountain forests without their
aid." " 'Question 10. In your judgment would anything that Capt.
Grant or any other officers of the Hudson's Bay Co. might have
said about the difficulties of going further with wagons have
influenced any considerable number of the 1843 migration to have
left their wagons at Fort Hall, if Whitman had not been with
you?' "Ans. No."
" 'Question 11. Did you notice or hear of anything in the con
duct of Capt. Grant while the migration of 1843 was at Fort Hall

136 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
which seemed to you then, or subsequently as you thought about it
and about the actual difficulties of the route, as being otherwise
than candid and honorable, and reasonably cautious and prudent
in view of all the facts of the case?'
"Ans. No."
From Nesmith I never heard, as the mild insanity which
clouded the last few months of his long and honored life had at
tacked him just before my letter reached him, but in a letter to
Rev. M. Eells (published on pp. 28-9 of the before mentioned pamph
let entitled "Marcus Whitman, M. D., Portland, Ore., 1883,"), he
wrote : "Dixie Station, Polk County, Oregon, Jan. 22, 1883.
"Rev. M. Eells,
"My Dear Sir: In answer to your first question, Where did
you first see Dr. Whitman?' I am not able to reply as definitely as
I could wish to do, but will give you the best of my recollections.
Our party of immigrants assembled at a point near Fitzhugh's
Mill, a few miles west of Independence, Missouri, on the 20th of
May, 1843, for the purpose of organizing. I will not be certain
whether it was at this meeting or a day or two after, on the line
of march, that I first met the Doctor. I had never seen or heard
of him before, consequently nothing that he said or wrote had any
influence in inducing me to go to Oregon. In fact, I had started
from Iowa in 1842 to come to Oregon with Dr. White's party of
that year, but I arrived at Independence seventeen days after Dr.
White's party had left, and as the Pawnee Indians were hostile,
I did not dare venturing alone to overtake the party, and remained
at Fort Scott, 110 miles south of Independence, in the then Kansas
territory, until the party of 1843 rendezvoused as above stated.
"I know of no person who was induced to come to Oregon in
consequence of Dr. Whitman's representations, and I think that
the rest of the immigration were as ignorant of Dr. Whitman, his
speaking and writing, as I was.
"I am, respectfully, your obedient servant,
"(Signed) J. W. NESMITH."
And certainly nothing further is needed to show that in 1883
(when the Whitman Saved Oregon Story had been pretty thor
oughly discussed on the Pacific Coast) he took no stock in any
"Whitman Saved Oregon" tale.
As conclusive proof of just how that wicked Hudson's Bay
Co., through their agent Grant, sought "to deceive and rob the
naked and starving immigrant," I submit the following statement
of the prices charged the 1843 migration by the American Fur Co.,
at Fort Laramie, only 589 miles from the Missouri frontier, and

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 137
with a good wagon road over a level country all the way to it, and
at Tort Hall, 1,323 miles from the Missouri frontier, and 700 miles
east of its base of supplies at Vancouver (of which 475 miles was
pack trail transportation), and at Fort Boise. At Fort Laramie,
according to "Old Pioneer" (p. 112), "coffee was $1.50 a pint;
brown sugar, the same; flour, unbolted, 25 cents a pound; powder,
$1.50 a pound; lead, 75 cents a pound; percussion caps, $1.50 a
box; calico, very inferior, $1 a yard." Contrast this with the fol
lowing in a letter to me from Gov. P. H. Burnett, dated San Fran
cisco, Dec. 4, 1888:
"I find the following entries in my journal: At Fort Hall,
prices of provisions, etc. — Flour, 25 cents a pint; coffee, 50 cents;
sugar, 50 cents ; rice, 33 1-3 cents ; powder, 56 cents per pound. At
Fort Boise, nothing in the provision line to sell but butter, 25
cents, and coffee, 50 cents a pint. Everything mentioned was sold
by the pint except powder. I suppose this usage was based upon
the fact that Indians understood measure better than weight.
"Yours truly,
"PETER H. BURNETT."
Yet Mrs. Eva Emery Dye, in "McLoughlin and Old Oregon,"
published as late as 1900, writes (p. 255) of the experiences of this
migration at Fort Hall as follows :
"Flour at Fort Hall was selling at mountain prices — a dollar a
pint," — which is as close to the truth as any of her statements in
support of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story.
If it is asked why Grant did not know as much about passes
over the Blue Mountains as Payette did, the answer is that Payette
had been then at Fort Boise (only 100 miles east of the Blue
Mountains) for nearly nine years, while Grant had been less than
two years at Fort Hall, 375 miles east of the Blue Mountains. It
is very curious if Whitman had any special interest in the opening
up of a wagon road from the States to Oregon, that he had lived
for six years — 1836-1842 — only twenty-nine miles from the western
base of the Blue Mountains, and less than fifty-five miles from the
summit of that range, and only seventy-two miles by the route the
1843 party traveled from the Grande Ronde, and in all that time
had learned nothing of this "easier pass" that Farnham learned
about from Payette at Fort Boise in September, 1839.
From Walla Walla part of the migration of 1843 drove their
wagons down the south side of the Columbia (keeping back a few
miles from the river so as to have good grass) to the Dalles, and
so completed the development of the wagon road to the eastern
base of the Cascade Mountains.

138 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Various advocates of the Whitman Legend, including Mowry (p.
209), Craighead (p. 76), Rev. M. Eells, "Ind. Missions" (p. 79),
have asserted that Whitman furnished the migration with a guide
for this part of their journey, but all the evidence is to the con
trary. The Wilkes Narrative says (pp. 89-90) : "While pausing at this
place (Whitman's Mission), we were agitated and perplexed in the
extreme what course to take in relation to the arrangements we
should make for the successful conclusion of our expedition. We
were assailed with various opinions from every one we met, and
in the general indecision were for a time brought to a dead stand.
Most of the residents of the mission agreed in advising us to leave
our cattle and wagons at this point, or if we did take them to the
Dalles or narrows (a point on the Columbia, 120 miles in advance)
to send them back here to winter. Others told us that we could
not reach the Dalles with our teams, as jaded as they were, as we
would find no range along the course of the Columbia. All, how
ever, seemed to think that it would be impossible for us to get our
wagons or our cattle to the Willamette this fall. But we had
already overcome too many difficulties to admit the word impos
sible as a part of our vocabulary. We could not remain where we
were for a number of reasons. The pasturage in the immediate
vicinity was too scanty; the width of range would not allow us to
keep our stock together, and we suffered an additional danger of
their loss from the dishonest practices of the Indians, who, if they
did not steal them outright, led them off for the purpose of being
paid to bring them in. Many of us were obliged to pay a shirt (the
price uniformly charged by the Indians for every service) for three
or four successive mornings, to get back the same animal, and this
was a kind of tribute that if kept up would make fearful inroads
upon our wardrobe. The majority of the emigrants therefore re
solved to attempt the threatened dangers" (rather than continue
subject) "to the actual evils that now beset us. Accordingly they
set out in squads, on successive days, and before the end of the
month all had reached the Dalles in safety. What surprised them
most, after the representations which had been made, was the fine
pasturage they met with all along the way, and especially at the
Dalles, where, we had been led to believe, the cattle could not sub
sist at all during the winter. As the parties to which I now
allude preceded me, I may as well continue this anticipatory ac
count of the route as far as it concerns their progress. They
struck off in a southwesterly direction, leaving the sterility of the
river's bank, and instead of perishing for want of range, their cat
tle even improved all along the way. Some of them left, their
wagons at the Dalles and drove their cattle through the Cascade

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 139
Mountains, conveying their baggage and families on pack horses
through the mountain paths ; and some went down the river by the
boats. But the greatest portion of them constructed rafts of dead
pine timber, a few miles below the Dalles, large enough to carry
six or eight wagons, and upon these floated safely down to the Cas
cades on the Columbia. Their cattle were driven down the river's
bank about thirty miles, then swam across and were driven down
the other bank to Vancouver. Here the party obtained boats from
Dr. McLaughlin, the Governor of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s estab
lishments in Oregon, and returned to the Cascades for such of
the families, wagons and baggage as had been left behind. This
method was found to be of all the most successful. By the first of
December, all the emigrants had arrived at Vancouver, but the
greatest portion of them had reached there as early as the 15th of
the preceding month."
H. H. Bancroft's "Oregon," Vol. I. (p. 405), says: "Neither
Whitman nor McKinlay at Fort Walla Walla knew anything of
the country back from the Columbia River (This is McKinlay's own
statement, given in a letter to Elwood Evans, which Evans has
kindly sent me), or whether there could be found crossings for
the wagons at the John Day and Des Chutes Rivers, and both ad
vised the immigrants to leave their wagons and cattle in the Walla
Walla Valley to be brought down in the spring, and to make them
selves boats in which to descend the Columbia. One of the argu
ments used in favor of this plan was that no grass would be likely
to be found on the route, as the natives were accustomed at this
season of the year to burn it off — a statement which sufficiently
proved the Doctor's ignorance of the country, and which was con
strued to his disadvantage by those who traveled through it. (Says
Waldo, who did not take the advice offered: 'Whitman lied like
hell. He wanted my cattle, and told me the grass was burnt off
between his place and the Dalles. The first night out I found the
finest grass I ever saw, and it was good every night.' Critiques,
Ms., 16.)"
Idem (p. 406) : "At the mission they received one fat bullock
of Spanish stock for two poor emigrant oxen. Those who did not
distinguish the difference between Spanish and American cattle
consented willingly to pay this price for fat beef. Without any
expense to the missionaries they had in the spring two fat Ameri
can work-oxen for their one bullock."
This road, about 1,845 miles long, thus developed without a
dollar of expenditure by either the national or any local govern
ment, or by any private corporation in either surveying or con
structing it, continued to be used for many years with only such
improvements in clearing out rocks, trees and stumps, and making

140 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
detours to avoid the worst hills, as successive yearly migrations
made of their own volition. Over the Cascade Mountains a road was
made to the Willamette Valley in the Spring and Summer of 1846
by Mr. S. K. Barlow, one of the 1845 migration, under a grant for
a toll road made him by the provisional government of Oregon, at
a total cost of $2,500 ; and after two years, when the amount it had
cost for original construction and needful repairs had been repaid
to Barlow in the tolls collected, he donated the road to the Terri
tory of Oregon. (Cf. Elwood Evans' "History of the Pacific North
west," Vol. IL, p. 203.)
With the building of this road over the Cascades neither Whit
man nor any other missionary had anything whatever to do.

CHAPTER VI.
GOVERNMENTAL ACTION RELATING TO OREGON.
(a) Diplomacy of the Oregon Question.
(b) Congressional Debates and Committee Reports on Oregon.
(c) Executive Action About Oregon.
An absolutely indispensable postulate for the Whitman Saved
Oregon Story is that the National Government at Washington was
ignorant as to the value of and indifferent concerning the acquisi
tion of Oregon, and that in this they merely reflected the condition
of mind of the people of the country; and as the Whitman Legend
has been so widely circulated in the past twenty-five years that not
merely popular writers caring nothing for truth if fictions would
better sell their books, like Coffin in "Building of the Nation," Eva
Emery Dye in "McLoughlin and Old Oregon," but some really emi
nent historians — without investigating original documents them
selves — have imposed these fictions on their readers, it seems neces
sary to present the facts on this phase of the Oregon question in
some detail.
Up to 1821 it is almost purely a question of diplomacy, from
1821 to 1831 diplomatic and congressional action were both much
in evidence, from 1831 to October, 1843, it was congressional and
executive action without diplomacy, and after October, 1843, di
plomacy and congressional action were again both active; but di
plomacy was the chief factor in the final settlement of the bound
ary at 49 degrees.
The first diplomatic action in any way affecting the acquisition
of Oregon was the Louisiana purchase, in 1803 ; not that Louisiana
ever covered any part of the old Oregon Territory, or anything else
west of the summit of the Rocky Mountains, but that the acquisi
tion of the Louisiana Territory carried our possessions to the east
ern verge of Oregon, and so gave us as strong a claim by con
tiguity to that part of Oregon south of 49 degrees as England had
by contiguity to that part north of 49 degrees.
It is utterly inconceivable that we should have ever cared to
possess Oregon if we had not first acquired the Louisiana Terri
tory. As we have seen, while negotiations for the purchase of Louisi
ana were in progress and before it was certain that any part of
Louisiana could be bought, Jefferson sent his famous message of

142 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
January 18, 1803, to Congress, recommending that an expedition
be fitted out and sent up the Missouri and across the "Stony
Mountains," and down the Columbia to the Pacific, and this recom
mendation was adopted, and $2,500 appropriated, and the expe
dition actually under way before the news of the cession of Louis
iana was received, though when that news arrived the expedition
was halted east of the Mississippi till the spring of 1804, that the
formal transfer of the territory might be made before the expedi
tion entered it.
The story of this expedition, which forged so strong a link in
our chain of title to the Oregon Territory, has already been briefly
stated in Chapter III.
When the Astoria expedition was organizing the project was
submitted to the National Government, and according to Gallatin,
"met with its full approbation and best wishes for its success."
(Cf. letter of Albert Gallatin to John J. Astor, dated August 5,
1835, in appendix to Irving's "Astoria.") Astor himself goes much
further in his letter to Benton, dated New York, January 29, 1829,
saying: "I was promised by the Administration the protection of
the Government, and in fact more, but I regret to say, hitherto
nothing has been done." (Cf. Benton's Report on the Fur Trade,
being No. 67 of Sen. Ex. Doc, 20 Cong., 2d Sess.)
So far as yet appears, however, there are no contemporaneous
documents showing any action by our Government in connection
with this expedition.
Though the total results of the war of 1812 (prior to the battle
of New Orleans, which was fought after the treaty of peace had
been signed,) were so unsatisfactory to us that our Government
was willing to end it with the Treaty of Ghent, which did not even
mention the impressment of our sailors, the right of search, the
inciting of Indians to attack our frontiers, nor the Orders in Council,
which the President had announced as the causes of the war, yet so
far-sighted were the statesmen of that time and so determined to
secure for us at least the greater part of the valley of Columbia's
River, that on March 22, 1814, James Monroe, Secretary of State
under President Madison — not knowing whether or not Astoria
had been captured — gave the following instructions to our pleni
potentiaries to negotiate the treaty (who were John Quincy Adams,
J. A. Bayard, Henry Clay, Jonathan Russell and Albert Gallatin) :
"Should a treaty be concluded with Great Britain and a reciprocal
restitution of territory be agreed on, you will have it in mind that
the United States had in their possession at the commencement of
the war a post at the mouth of the river Columbia, which com
manded the river, which ought to be comprised in the stipula
tions should the possession have been wrested from us during the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 143
war. On no pretext can the British Government set up a claim to
territory south of the northern boundary of the United States. It
is not believed that they have any claim whatever to territory on
the Pacific Ocean. You will, however, be careful should a definition
of boundary be attempted, not to countenance in any manner, or in
any quarter, a pretension in the British Government to territory
south of that line." (Berlin Arbitration, p. 56.) (For the whole
subject of Treaty of Ghent, Cf. American State Papers, Foreign
Relations, Vol. IIL, Docs. 269 and 271, and Idem, Vol. IV., Doc
325.) The capture of Astoria by the British was not known to our
plenipotentiaries at Ghent when the treaty was signed December
24, 1814 (Cf. Greenhow, 1845 Ed., p. 306).
Forty-nine degrees was proposed as the boundary from the
Lake of the Woods to the summit of the Stony Mountains, but the
British would not grant it unless we would consent to relinquish
what we deemed "our rights in the fisheries within the jurisdiction
of Great Britain," and so our plenipotentiaries refused to make any
concessions on that subject. The treaty said nothing about bound
aries, but provided that "all territory, places and possessions what
soever, taken by either party from the other during the war, or
which may be taken after the signing of this treaty, excepting the
islands hereinafter mentioned (in the Bay of Fundy) shall be re
stored without delay."
February 7, 1838, Henry Clay, then Senator from Kentucky,
said in a debate on Oregon in the Senate, that he himself had in
troduced the word possessions in this stipulation for mutual sur
render, for the express purpose of securing the restoration of As
toria. (Cf. Cong. Globe, 25th Cong., 2d Sess., p. 169.) Thus be
gan that diplomatic struggle with Great Britain for 49 degrees as
our northern boundary to the Pacific, which continued thirty-two
years to the Treaty of Washington in 1846.
The unswerving tenacity with which through all those years
every administration insisted on that line, constitutes one of the
most remarkable chapters in, and one of the most brilliant
triumphs of our diplomacy, and although the advocates of the
Whitman Legend claim that Webster and Tyler were ready to re
cede from it, and were only prevented by the opportune arrival of
Whitman, we shall see that there is the most positive contempo
raneous evidence of the entire falsity of this claim, and that Web
ster — to use his own precise language, in January and February,
1843, when Whitman (of whose existence even there is no evidence
that Webster and Tyler were then aware) was still far west of the
Missouri frontier — had "never meditated any line south of 49 de
grees as a negotiable boundary line for the United States."

144 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
July 18, 1815, Mr. Monroe, Secretary of State, informed Mr.
Baker, the charge d'affaires of Great Britain at Washington, that
"the President intended immediately to reoccupy the post at the
mouth of the Columbia. . . ," But no measures were adopted
for the purpose until September, 1817, when Capt. J. Biddle, com
manding the sloop of war Ontario, and Mr. J. B. Prevost were
jointly commissioned to proceed in that ship to the mouth of the
Columbia and there "to assert the claim of the United States to
the sovereignty of the adjacent country, in a friendly and peace
able manner, and without the employment of force." (Greenhow,
Ed. 1845, p. 307.)
The British Plenipotentiary at Washington, being informed of
the mission of Biddle and Prevost, protested versus the contem
plated action, on the ground that Astoria had not been captured,
but bought by the North West Co., and further that "the ter
ritory itself was early taken possession of in His Majesty's name
and had since been considered as forming part of His Majesty's do
minions," though without specifying when or by whom this pos
session had been taken, nor on what grounds it was claimed as
British territory. The matter was referred to London and dis
cussed between the British Foreign Office and Richard Rush, our
Minister there, and on his clear and vigorous presentation of our
rights in the premises the British Government admitted that we
might rightfully claim its restoration, and instructions were issued
under which Mr. Prevost, then at Valparaiso, Chile, was offered
passage in the British frigate Blossom to the Columbia, and on
October 6, 1818, the British flag was hauled down and the United
States flag hoisted over Astoria, and the following act of delivery
was presented by the British Commissioners: "In obedience to the
commands of His Royal Highness the Prince Regent, signified in a
dispatch from the Right Honorable the Earl Bathurst, addressed to
the partners or agents of the North West Co., bearing date the 27th
of January, 1818, and in obedience to a subsequent order dated the
26th of July, from W. H. Sheriff, Esq., captain of His Majesty's
ship Andromache, we, the undersigned, do, in conformity to the
first article of the Treaty of Ghent, restore to the Government of
the United States, through its agent, J. B. Prevost, Esq., the set
tlement of Fort George on the Columbia River. Given under our
hands, in triplicate, at Fort George, Columbia River, this 6th day
of October, 1818. "(Signed) F. HICKEY,
"Captain of His Majesty's Ship Blossom.
"J. KEITH,
"Of the N. W. Co."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 145
This restoration formed, as we have already seen and shall see
in further examination of the long struggle for the Oregon Terri
tory, a strong link in our chain of title, and the British Govern
ment, promptly realizing into what a difficult position it had been
placed by Capt. Black's folly in "capturing" Astoria, instead of
sailing quietly away when he found it in the undisputed possession
of the great Canadian fur company, endeavored to minimize the
effect of this restoration by claiming that certain dispatches which
the British Foreign Office sent to its own agents, but which those
agents did not communicate to our Government, either through Mr.
Prevost or any other of its officers, and which were never published
till the negotiations of 1826, and in which they claimed that though
willing to surrender up the possession to the United States, "they
are not prepared to admit the validity of the title of the Govern
ment of the United States to this settlement" rendered nugatory the
claim of the United States that this entirely unlimited restoration
"in conformity to the first article of the Treaty of Ghent" was a rec
ognition of our right to the sovereignty of the country. As though
the private opinion of one litigant in a court expressed to his own
counsel, but not stated even to the opposing counsel, much less to
judge or jury, till eight years afterwards, could affect the title to
property delivered without protest or reserve to the other party in
pursuance of the judgment of the court ! Mr. Prevost made not only
an exact report of the restoration ceremonies, but also a brief but
very favorable report on the value of the country, saying: "It
appeared to me that by exhibiting the importance of the position
only, I should not have fulfilled the object of the President, but
that it was equally incumbent upon me to present a view of the
country, of its inhabitants, of its resources, of its approach, and
of its means of defense."
James Keith wrote Prevost October 6, 1818, asking the inten
tions of the United States Government towards the North West
Co., to which Prevost replied under date of October 6, 1818 :
"In answer to your note of this morning I have the honor to
state that the principal object of the President in sending me thus
far was to obtain such information of the place, of its access and
of its commercial importance, as might enable him to submit to the
consideration of Congress measures for the protection and exten
sion of the establishment."
(All who care to read the whole report, which is valuable, and
was often quoted in later congressional reports and in debates in
Congress, will find it, with accompanying papers, in Doc No. 112,
Vol. 8, Ex. Papers, 17th Cong., 1st Sess.)
(The document covers thirty-eight pages and it begins with a
message of President James Monroe dated April 15, 1822, which

146 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
was read in the House of Representatives April 17, 1822, so that
the message is sometimes referred to as the message of April 15th
and sometimes as of April 17, 1822.)
May 22, 1818. Albert Gallatin and Richard Rush had been ap
pointed as Envoys Extraordinary and Ministers Plenipotentiary
to negotiate a treaty with Great Britain on five subjects, about
which proposals had at intervals been passing between the two
governments nearly all the time since the Treaty of Ghent was
proclaimed and October 20, 1818, only two weeks after the restora
tion of Astoria, they signed the convention which is generally
called the first Treaty of Joint Occupancy of Oregon, though at
that time and for nearly a dozen years afterwards the region in
question was not generally spoken of as Oregon, but as the "Co
lumbia River Country," or "the northwest coast of America," and
is so indexed in "Annals of Congress" and "Debates in Congress"
down to 1828-9. Article 1 of the treaty gave us the right to take,
cure and dry fish on certain parts of the coast of British America.
Article 2 fixed the boundary between the United States and
British America as the 49th parallel of north latitude from the
Lake of the Woods westward to the Stony Mountains (the name
Rocky Mountains not being commonly used till many years later).
Article 4 extended for 10 years "all the provisions of the Con
vention of 1815 to regulate commerce between the United States
and the British dominions."
Article 5 provided for submitting to arbitration the claims of
the United States for slaves captured by the British in the War
of 1812-14. Each of these provisions doubtless seemed to everybody except
a few far-seeing statesmen of more consequence than Article 3,
which was as follows:
"Article 3. It is agreed that any country that may be claimed
by either party on the northwest coast of America westward of
the Stony Mountains shall, together with its harbours, bays and
creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same, be free
and open, for the term of 10 years from the date of the signature
of this convention to the vessels, citizens and subjects of the two
powers. "It being well understood that this agreement is not to be
construed to the prejudice of any claim which either of the two
high contracting powers may have to any part of the said coun
try; nor shall it be taken to affect the claims of any other power
or state to any part of said country, the only object of the high
contracting parties in that respect being to prevent disputes and
differences among themselves." (American State Papers, Foreign

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 147
Relations, Vol. IV., pp. 406-407; or Doc. 306, 15th Congress, 2d
Session. )
Why our plenipotentiaries did not insist then on the extension
of the 49th parallel as our northern boundary to the Pacific is
clearly stated by Hon. George Bancroft in the "Memorial of the
United States" which he presented to the Emperor William of
Germany as the arbitrator of the San Juan Island question, on
December 12, 1871, as follows : "On the 29th of October, 1818, the
parallel of 49 degrees was adopted as the boundary line between
the two countries as far as the Stony, or, as we now more com
monly call them, the Rocky Mountains.
"From that range of mountains to the Pacific, America, partly
from respect to the claims of Spain, was willing to delay for ten
years the continuance of the boundary line." (Berlin Arbitration,
p. 6.) The negotiations relating to this treaty are often spoken
of as of 1817-18, but as we have seen, our plenipotentiaries were
not appointed till May 22, 1818, and the first protocol of the nego
tiations was not presented till August 27, 1818.
No little confusion exists in the public mind as to the grounds
advanced by our plenipotentiaries, several of the advocates of the
Whitman Saved Oregon fiction (notably Burgess in Chapter XIV.
of "The Middle Period") claiming that the main contention was
that the Louisiana purchase extended to the Pacific.
None of the statesmen who negotiated about the subject ever
attached much importance to the claim that Louisiana extended to
the Pacific.
On the day this treaty was signed Messrs. Gallatin and Rush
wrote a letter from London to John Q. Adams, Secretary of State,
stating the history of the negotiations, and the part relating to
Article 3, is as follows:
"3. Columbia River.
"This subject was during the whole negotiation connected by
the British Plenipotentiaries with that of the boundary line. They
appeared altogether unwilling to agree to this in any shape, unless
some arrangement was made with respect to the country westward
of the Stony Mountains.
"This induced us to propose an extension of the boundary line
due west to the Pacific Ocean. We did not assert that the United
States had a perfect right to that country, but insisted that their
claim was at least good against Great Britain. The 49th degree
of north latitude had, in pursuance of the Treaty of Utrecht, been
fixed indefinitely as the line between the northern British Possess-
sions and those of France, including Louisiana, now a part of our
territories. There was no reason why, if the two countries ex-

148 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
tended their claims westward, the same line should not be con
tinued to the Pacific Ocean.
"So far as discovery gave a claim, ours to the whole country on
the waters of the Columbia River was indisputable. It had de
rived its name from that of the American ship commanded by Capt.
Gray, who had first discovered and entered its mouth.
"It was first explored from its sources to the ocean by Lewis
and Clark, and before the British traders from Canada had
reached any of its waters; for it was now ascertained that the
river Tacoutche Tesse, discovered by McKenzie, and which he had
mistaken for the Columbia, was not a branch of that river, but
fell into the sound called the Gulf of Georgia. The settlement at
the place called Astoria was also the first permanent settlement
made in that quarter." (Am. State Papers, Vol. V., p. 381.)
It is plain that this was not a claim that Louisiana extended
to the Pacific, but only an application of the principle of con
tiguity of territory, making it proper that if the two nations "ex
tended their claims beyond the Stony Mountains," the parallel of
49 degrees (which it was then supposed had been fixed in pur
suance of the Treaty of Utrecht as the boundary of Louisiana on
the north) should be extended with the extension of their claims.
As to whether any boundary was ever actually run as the
Treaty of Utrecht provided should be done (Cf. Greenhow, 2d Ed.,
Boston, 1845, pp. 140, 281, 436-7-8-9; also George Bancroft's "His
tory of the United States," Vol. IIL, p. — ; also Caleb Cushing's
"Treaty of Washington," p. 208; also a lecture on the Oregon
Question by Caleb Cushing, delivered in Boston in November,
1845, p. 10; also Gallatin's Letters on the Oregon Question, 1846,
p. 20) there certainly seems in these authorities a great prepon
derance of evidence that as Greenhow says, "If commissioners ever
were appointed, there is no evidence that the line was ever run by
them," though several treaties were made based on the supposition
that commissioners appointed in pursuance of that treaty had
fixed 49 degrees as the line.
All doubt upon the question is, however, now ended, and Green
how's position that "If commissioners were appointed there is no
evidence that any line was ever run by them," is proved correct
by Chapter XVII. of "The Great Company, Being a History of the
Honorable Company of Adventurers Trading Into Hudson's Bay,"
by Beckles Willson, Toronto, 1890.
From this it appears that for several years there was a persist
ent exchange of letters between the two governments, and finally,
September 3, 1719, Daniel Pulteney and Martin Bladen, Lords of
Trade, were appointed commissioners by England to meet the
Mareschal Comte D'Estrees, and the Abbe Dubois, Minister and

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 149
Secretary of State, who had been appointed commissioners by the
French King. Pulteney and Bladen went to Paris, and Sir Bibye
Lake, Governor of the Hudson's Bay Co., soon after followed them,
and was permitted to take a silent part in the conference.
At the end of six months only three conferences had been held,
and nothing having been accomplished, the English Commission
ers, thoroughly discouraged, returned to London, and thus ended
the only attempt ever made to run the boundary line between the
French and English possessions according to Article X. of the
Treaty of Utrecht.
In the negotiations of 1818 the British did not claim any ex
clusive right of sovereignty over any part of the Northwest Coast
of America, but only that the whole region was open to settlement
by them or by any other civilized nation, and suggested the line of
the Columbia as a convenient boundary, to which our plenipoten
tiaries responded with the offer of the line of 49 degrees to the
Pacific Of course the British Government knew perfectly well that the
line of 49 degrees had never been fixed as the northern boundary
of Louisiana "according to the tenth article of the Treaty of
Utrecht," but as it was much to their interest to have our negotia
tors believe that it had been so fixed, they very naturally said
nothing about the true state of the case, and, so far as I have been
able to ascertain, Beckles Willson's "History of the Great Com
pany" contains the first publication of the facts in the case.
Only forty-six days after this first Treaty of Joint Occupancy
was signed, John C. Calhoun, then Secretary of War, sent to the
House of Representatives his famous report on "The Trade With
the Indians," recommending radical changes in the methods there
tofore in use. (This report covers pp. 2455 to 2466 of Vol. II. of An
nals of Congress, 15th Cong., 2d Sess.)
• On pp. 2462-66 he takes up "The trade with the Indians who
occupy the vast region extending west to the Pacific Ocean," and
recommends "the formation of a company with sufficient capital
to be divided into shares of $100 each, and to be limited to twenty
years," and after stating the advantages of such a project, says:
"The mere objection that it would create a monopoly ought not
to outweigh so many advantages. The trade with the Indians has
never been opened without restrictions to our citizens. Licenses
from the Government have at all times been required, and the Gov
ernment has itself through its factories to a considerable extent
monopolized the trade, and by an extension of its capital only
might engross the whole of it. All of these provisions, however
necessary in the Indian trade, would be absurd in any other branch
of commerce.

150 * ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Besides the profit of the trade with the Indians has at all
times been confined to a few individuals, and it is highly probable
that a greater portion of the community would participate in it
by carrying it on in the manner proposed than in any other mode.
In fact, absurd as commercial monopoly would be where law and
authority exist to repress the mischievous effects which might
spring from unbounded rivalry, and to give to such rivalry salu
tary consequences, just in the same degree would it be wise and
advantageous to carry on the trade under consideration by an in
corporated company. A nation discovers its wisdom no less in de
parting from general maxims where it is no longer wise to adhere
to them than in adhering to them in ordinary circumstances. In
fact it evinces a greater effort of reason. The first advance of a
nation is marked by the establishment of maxims which are deemed
universal, but which further experience and reflection teach to be
only general, admitting of occasional modifications and excep
tions." He also declares that in this case a monopoly is a necessity if
we would compete successfully with the North West Co., which
then controlled absolutely the fur trade of the country west of the
Stony Mountains, and says "the success of such a company prop
erly conducted scarcely admits of a doubt.
"Our position in regard to this trade, the facility which the
navigation of our great and numerous rivers in that quarter would
afford, the protection from our military posts would speedily de
stroy all foreign competition, and would in a few years push our
trade to the Pacific Ocean. The most profitable fur and peltry
trade in the world would be ours, accompanied with a decided in
fluence over the numerous and warlike tribes inhabiting those ex
tensive regions."
Whether such a company as Calhoun proposed would have
succeeded, as he prophesied, in a struggle versus the North West
Co., with its many years of experience, and its carefully trained
force — most if not all of whose leaders had risen from the ranks
through long apprenticeship which had made them adepts of the
first rank in every detail of the Indian trade, is by no means cer
tain, but it is certain, as 20 years of subsequent experience fully
demonstrated, that successful competition with the North West
Co. or the Hudson's Bay Co. (after their consolidation in 1821)
was not possible in any other way, and the fact that Calhoun as
Secretary of War under Monroe proposed such a measure imme
diately after joint occupation was agreed on, shows how far-sighted
and clear of vision were the members of the first American admin
istration which had been brought face to face with the question
of how to secure our claim against the adverse claim of Great

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 151
Britain to what some years later came to be known as the Oregon
Territory, but was still generally described either as "The Columbia
River" or "The Northwest Coast of America," for it must be remem
bered that though our negotiators at Ghent were instructed to
consent to no claim of Great Britain to territory south of 49 de
grees, nothing was said at Ghent about any claim of Great Britain
on the Pacific Coast, and the restoration of Astoria was provided
for by the insertion by Henry Clay of the word "possessions" in a
general provision for mutual restitution of territory, so that 1818
was the first time there was any formal official denial by the British
Government of our claim to the valley of the Columbia River.
Whatever might have been the outcome of a struggle between
the North West Co. and the Hudson's Bay Co., representing
British interests and such an American fur trading monopoly as
Calhoun proposed, had the measure been adopted, the spirit of
opposition to such monopolies was so determined that not even
Calhoun's strong argument, albeit it was plain that in it he was
merely the mouthpiece of Monroe's administration, was sufficient
to carry the measure through Congress, and so the plan was never
tested. Negotiations had been going on with Spain since 1816 regard
ing certain claims for indemnity which our citizens had against
Spain, and similar claims which Spain advanced on behalf of her
citizens against the United States, and certain complaints which
Spain made against us for violations of neutrality laws in the
wars which Spain was waging upon her revolted American colonies,
and concerning the southern and western boundaries of Louisiana,
and concerning East and West Florida, which we desired to
purchase. The interests involved were vast in extent, and so complicated
with various considerations involving the pride and honor of the
two nations that the formulating of a satisfactory treaty was only
reached after negotiations whose record covers 506 pages of the
Annals of Congress and Appendix (15th Congress, 2d Session, 1818-
1819, Vol. IL, pp. 1630-2136), or 203 of the large folio pages of
American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. IV., pp. 422-625.
February 1, 1819, Don Luis de Onis, the Spanish Minister, wrote
Secretary of State J. Q. Adams as follows:
"Upon this view, therefore, of the subject, and considering that
the motive for declining to admit my proposal of extending the
boundary line from the Missouri to the Columbia and along that
river to the Pacific appears to be the wish of the President, to in
clude within the limits of the Union all the branches and rivers
emptying into the said river Columbia. I will adapt my proposals

152 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
on this point so as fully to satisfy the essential object, namely, that
the boundary line shall as far as possible be natural and clearly
defined, and leave no room for dispute to the inhabitants on either
side." The Secretary of State thereupon made a proposition to fix the
boundary from the source of the Arkansas River along the 41st
parallel of north latitude to the Pacific, to which De Onis responded
proposing the 43d parallel, and finally the treaty established the
parallel of 42 degrees north latitude as the boundary from the
Rocky Mountains to the Pacific.
The treaty ceded us East and West Florida, and we agreed to
pay therefor certain claims made for indemnity by our citizens
against Spain to an amount not exceeding ($5,000,000) five mil
lion dollars, and to release Spain for any responsibility therefor,
and in Article 3 Spain defined the south and west boundary of
Louisiana as follows: "The boundary line between the two coun
tries west of the Mississippi shall begin on the Gulf of Mexico at
the mouth of the river Sabine in the sea, continuing north along
the western bank of the river to the 32d degree of latitude; thence
by a line due north to the degree of latitude where it strikes the
Rio Roxo of Natchitoches, or Red River; then following the course
of the Rio Roxo westward to the degree of longitude 100 west from
London and 23 from Washington ; then crossing the said Red River,
and running thence by a line due north to the river Arkansas ; then
following the southern bank of the Arkansas to its source in lati
tude 42 north ; and thence by that parallel of latitude to the South
Sea. The whole being as laid down in Melish's map of the United
States published at Philadelphia, improved to the 1st of January,
1818. But if the source of the Arkansas River shall be found to
fall north or south of latitude 42, then the line shall run from the
said source due south or north, as the case may be, till it meets the
said parallel of 42, and then along the said parallel to the South
Sea; all the islands in the Sabine and the said Red and Arkansas
Rivers throughout the course thus described to belong to the United
States ; but the use of the waters and the navigation of the Sabine
to the sea, and of the said Rio Roxo and Arkansas throughout the
extent of the said boundary on their respective banks shall be com
mon to the respective inhabitants of both nations. The two high
contracting parties agree to cede and renounce all their rights,
claims and pretensions to the territories described by the said line ;
that is to say, the United States hereby cede to His Catholic
Majesty, and renounce forever all their rights, claims and pre
tensions to the territories lying south and west of the above de
scribed line, and in like manner His Catholic Majesty cedes to
the said United States all his rights, claims and pretensions to any

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 153
territory east and north of the said line, and for himself, his heirs
and successors renounces all claim to the said territories forever."
The treaty provided for a commission to run this boundary line
and mark it where needful, but Mexico so soon won her independ
ence that this provision was never carried into effect. This treaty
was ratified by the Senate Feb. 24, 1819, and proclaimed by the
President Feb. 25, 1819, but for some reason Spain did not ratify
iill Oct. 24, 1820, and the account of that ratification by Spain, and
the concurrence therein of our government, with all the correspond
ence between the two governments about the subject between Feb.
24, 1819, and Oct. 24, 1820, was communicated to the Senate Feb.
14, 1821, and printed as Doc 321, 16th Congress, 2d Session, and
it covers 53 of the large folio pages of American State Papers,
Foreign Relations (Vol. V., pp. 650-703.)
The full text of this "Treaty of Amity, Indemnification and
Limits" in Spanish and English is also to be found as Doc. 347,
16th Congress, 2d Session, in American State Papers, Foreign Re
lations (Vol. V., p. 127, et seq.)
This treaty ceding to us all of Spain's claims to the valley of
Columbia's river removed the only cloud on our right to it, and
gave us at last a complete title to it on paper.
Had we made and concluded this treaty with Spain, say in
1817, there is no reason to suppose that Monroe's Administration
would have consented to any form of Joint Policy about Oregon,
but at the very time that the negotiations were progressing in Lon
don which resulted in the first Joint Policy treaty, these negotia
tions with Spain were in a very critical condition, which explains
why our diplomats — not desiring to offend Spain and so fail to
obtain the Floridas and a settlement of the south and west bound
ary of the Louisiana Territory did not claim, at London, that we
had "an absolute title" to the Columbia River country, but only
that "our title was absolute as against Great Britain."
Within a year after Spain ratified this treaty her dominion
was finally overthrown over all the territory contiguous to the
boundary therein fixed.
Had the line of 41 degrees which our government proposed west
of the Rocky Mountains been adopted, it would have included in
our country all the land drained by the southern branches of the
Columbia, but the line of 42 degrees left the extreme head waters
of a few of the small southerly branches of the Snake River, in
what is now Northwestern Utah and Northern Nevada in Spanish
Territory. There has been much discussion as to whether or not the Louisi
ana Purchase included the Oregon Territory, and several who have
taken the affirmative have depended entirely or mainly on this

154 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
treaty to sustain their opinion, but it seems a very weak support
for their conclusion.
Had this treaty been negotiated merely to define the limits of
Louisiana it would furnish strong if not conclusive evidence in
favor of the contention that Oregon was included in Louisiana. But
it was a treaty covering the cession of Florida, the question of claims
of Spain versus the United States, of the United States versus
Spain for a long term of years, and about various acts which each
claimed as wrongful on the part of the other, and of the amount of
compensation due for such wrongs, and of payment for the cession
of Florida, and for the defining of the limits of all of the territories
of the two nations which were then contiguous, and it nowhere de
clares that the limit fixed is only the limit of the Louisiana Pur
chase, and I think whoever will read carefully the whole of the
negotiations preceding the treaty in so far as they relate to the
questions of territory ceded, and limits defined, and compensation
to be paid, and will examine with care the instructions given to
our negotiators in '23-'24 and '26-'27, will be satisfied that in the
opinion of Monroe and J. Q. Adams, who certainly ought to know
the truth about the matter better than any one else, no part of
Oregon was included in the Louisiana Purchase.
Consult especially on this point the letter of J. Q. Adams, as
Secretary of State under Monroe, to Gallatin and Rush, our Envoys
to Great Britain, dated July 22, 1823, in Doc. 417, Vol. V., American
State Papers, Foreign Relations, pp. 790-793. The letter covers two
folio printed pages, and is devoted to the subject of our title to
Oregon, which it declares to depend on Gray's discovery and en
trance of the mouth of Columbia River, the exploration of the river
from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific by Lewis and Clark,
and farther exploration and the occupancy of its valley by the
Astor party, the restoration of Astoria by England in accordance
with the Treaty of Ghent, and the acquisition of the claims of Spain
by this "Treaty of Amity, Limits and Indemnification" (more com
monly known as the Florida Treaty), but does not so much as men
tion the Louisiana Purchase.
After most exasperating delays Spain finally delivered Florida
to us on July 17, 1821, and the correspondence relating to it makes
67 more folio pages in American State Papers, Foreign Relations,
Vol. V., Doc 324.
Before the delivery of Florida was made, Dr. Floyd of Virginia
began Congressional action on the Oregon question (though the
region was not yet called Oregon, but the Columbia River country)
by moving on Dec. 19, 1820, for the appointment of a committee
of three to "inquire into the settlements on the Pacific Ocean, and
the expediency of occupying the Columbia River," and on Jan. 25,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 155
1821, the committee made a report of 15 pages, accompanied with
a bill to authorize "the occupation of the Columbia River and to
regulate trade and intercourse with the Indian tribes thereon." The
report is No. 45, Reports of Committees, House of Representatives,
16th Congress, 2d Session, 1820-21, and was a very able document,
replete with valuable statistics and urging that our government
should take possession of the region, and "the fur trade, the Asiatic
trade and the preservation of our own territory were the advan
tages proposed." (For a full account see Annals of Congress, 16th
Congress, 2d Session, and Reports of Committees, as above; also
Chapter V. of "Benton's Thirty Years' View." (Benton says: "Mr.
Ramsay Crooks of New York" (who discovered the South Pass in
1812) "and Mr. Russell Farnham of Massachusetts, who had been
in the employment of Mr. John Jacob Astor in founding Astoria
. . . had their quarters at the same hotel where Dr. Floyd and
I had ours . . . and their conversation full of information
upon a new and interesting country was eagerly devoured by the
ardent spirit of Floyd." Floyd's Report (p. 11) says: "The prac
ticability of a speedy, safe and easy communication with the Pacific
is no longer a matter of doubt or conjecture ; from information not
to be doubted, the Rocky Mountains at this time in several places
is so smooth and open that the labor of 10 men for 20 days would
enable a wagon with its usual freight to pass with great facility
from the navigable waters of the Missouri to that of the Columbia."
The bill was referred to the committee of the whole House.
July 2, 1821, less than six months after Floyd's First Report, and
only 15 days before Spain finally executed the treaty of Feb. 22,
1819, fixing 42 degrees as the north boundary of California and
the south boundary of the "Columbia River country," an Act of
Parliament was passed which resulted in the consolidation of the
North West Co., the great Canadian fur company, with its older
and wealthier and less enterprising rival, the Hudson's Bay Co.
Of the long contentions, with no little bloodshed — the plots and
counter plots, the ruinous expenditure of the resources of both com
panies, and the resulting demoralization of the Indians, which re
sulted in the consolidation of these companies, I shall treat some
what in detail in the chapter on "The Truth About the Relation of
the Hudson's Bay Co. to the American Exploration, Occupation and
Settlement of Oregon," and it only needs to be said here that though
the union was one of equality as to capital and as to treatment
of the owners of each company, the North West Co.'s name van
ished, and thenceforth the Hudson's Bay Co., which had never before
-had any posts west of the Stony Mountains, occupied all the North
West Co.'s posts, not only in Oregon, but everywhere else west of
the Continental Divide, and, as against British subjects, had an

156 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
absolute monopoly of the trade with Indians, over a region larger
than the United States then possessed. In Oregon its legal mon
opoly was only as to British subjects, Americans by the treaty of
1818 having there exactly the same rights as British subjects, but
outside of Oregon their monopoly was absolute over all of what
is now British America that is situated north and west of the
provinces of Quebec and Ontario.
December 10, 1821, at the beginning of the first session of the
17th Congress, Floyd, Baylies and Scott were appointed a commit
tee of the House of Representatives to "inquire into the expediency
of occupying the Columbia River and the territory of the United
States adjacent thereto, and of regulating the trade with the Indian
tribes, and that they have leave to report by bill or otherwise." They
reported a bill (p. 744, Annals of Congress, 17th Congress, 1st Ses
sion) which was referred to the committee of the whole, and at
the 2d Session it was debated with great ability and vigor, the re
port of the debates covering 60 columns in the House and 5%
columns in the Senate. (Cf. Annals of Congress, 17th Congress,
2d Session, 1822-23.)
Pages 396-409 contain a speech of Floyd of Virginia, in which,
after entering fully into the great advantages we should derive by
the control of the fur trade, the benefit to the whaling industry
then and long after carried on extensively in the Pacific, and the
great profits of the China trade, all of which he was sure would be
promoted by the passage of the bill, he proceeds to answer the
bugbear of the inaccessibility of the Oregon country as follows:
"The route to the mouth of the Columbia is easy, safe and expedi
tious. We all recollect distinctly the delays, dangers and difficulties
which attended the merchant on his first opening the trade to Ken
tucky; in those days much preparation was necessary, and from
30 to 35 days were exhausted in getting to market ; his goods were
then transported to Fort Pitt (now Pittsburg) or to Wheeling by
wagon, creeping on with appalling slowness ; if there was a freshet
in the Ohio he arrived in season, but sorrow and ruin attended him
if his goods did not arrive in time for this advantage, his spring
supplies arrived in the fall, and his fall goods detained sometimes
until the spring. Even now, an intelligent friend from Tennessee,
who usually sits on the other side of the House, tells me that the
merchants of Nashville take their wagoners' receipts to deliver their
goods at that place in from 30 to 50 days. From Louisville in
Kentucky down to New Orleans formerly required a voyage of from
30 to 40 days, and using on the voyage up the river what they
called a barge, it required them 90 days to make the trip in what
they called good time. Now, however, by steamboat navigation,
they make the voyage down in seven days and up in 16 days. This

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 157
I believe is the average voyage between the places. Now, Mr. Chair
man, we cannot be mistaken when we apply the same calculations
to the route to the mouth of the Oregon, as steamboat navigation
we all know to be safe and sure. Wherefore it will take a steam
boat 24 days to arrive at the Falls of the Missouri, thence I allow
a wagon 14 days to travel 200 miles to the mouth of Clark's River,
thence 7 days to the mouth of the Oregon, making the time nec
essary for the trip 44 days. To return the boat would reach
Clark's Fork in 14 days, double the time she would go down; the
wagon would return to the Falls of the Missouri in 13 days, thence
the boat would arrive at St. Louis in half the time necessary for
her upward voyage, which would be 12 days, making the whole time
39 days. If there were any doubt existing in the mind of any gen
tleman, surely it might be done away when we recur to the fact of a
wagon having already passed from St. Louis to Santa Fe and re
turned in the course of the last summer, bringing with it the sum of
$10,000 as the profit of the trip." . . . "As to distance, I have
already shown that in point of time the mouth of the Oregon or
Columbia is not farther distant than Louisville was 30 years ago
from New York, or St. Louis was 20 years ago from Philadelphia."
Baylies of Massachusetts, on Dec. 18, 1822, made a strong argu
ment for the bill, and showed that within the recollection of mem
bers who heard him the whole course of westward migration
— first to Berkshire County, in Massachusetts, next to the Genessee
Valley in New York, then to the eastern side, and later to the west
ern side of the Mississippi Valley — had met with the same opposi
tion and prophecies of disaster. On January 25, 1823, the bill was
laid on the table by 76 to 61, that is, a change of eight votes would
have passed the bill through the House.
Undoubtedly there was no intention of passing the bill, as it
would have been a plain violation of the treaty of 1818 (which
did not expire till October 20, 1828), and the real object aimed at
was to keep the subject before the public, and inform the nation
as to the merits of the case in anticipation of the time when either
the expiration of the convention of 1818, or the negotiation of a
new treaty in advance of that date should give us the right to oc
cupy the Columbia River country.
Why Floyd chose the Missouri River route and overland to
Clark's Fork of the Columbia is evident, when we remember that
our fur traders all at this time went up the Missouri, Ashley not
leading his first party up the Platte and over the "Stony Moun
tains," through South Pass into the southeast corner of the Ore
gon Territory, till the summer of 1824 — eighteen months after this
speech was made.
Turning to Annals of Congress, 18th Cong., 1 Sess., 1823-24,

158 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Vol. I., p. 890, we find that December 29, 1823, on motion of Mr.
Floyd, another select committee on the occupation of the Colum
bia River was appointed, consisting of Floyd, Gurley, Scott, Hay-
den, Bassett, Frost and Baylies. They reported a bill January 19,
1824, which was read twice, and referred to the committee of the
whole. This bill passed the House by 113 to 57, but as it was in plain
violation of the convention of October 20, 1818, it was finally laid
on the table in the Senate by 25 to 14, having served its obvious
purpose of keeping alive the interest of the people in the Columbia
River country, and spreading before them a great deal of informa
tion in the debate on the bill, (the report of which fills 26% col
umns in "Debates in Congress," not "Benton's Abridgments of
Debates," which should never be depended on by any student of
American history,) and in the report of the committee made April
15, 1824, commonly known as Floyd's second report. This report
(which was made merely to place before the public General Jesup's
letter) is to be found on p. 2345 of Vol. II. of "Debates in Con
gress" for this session, and is very brief, saying in substance that
so much had previously been submitted for the information of the
country that although the subject was of great importance they
now only deemed it necessary to present a view of the difficulties
which would probably present themselves in an attempt by us to
occupy the country, and the manner in which they can be over
come. To obtain information on these points they had written to
Brigadier General T. S. Jesup, Quartermaster General of the army,
and his reply they printed, and declared that they had adopted it
as part of their report.
Jesup wrote: "I should consider a line of posts extending from
Council Bluffs entirely across the continent necessary.
"A post should be established at the Mandan village, because
there the Missouri approaches within a short distance of the Brit
ish territory, and it would have the effect of holding in check the
Hudson's Bay and North West Cos., and controlling the Ricka-
rees, Mandans, etc. ... A post at or near the head of naviga
tion on the Missouri would control the Blackfeet Indians, protect
our traders, enable us to remove those of the British companies
from our territories, etc. ... On the latter river" (i. e., the
Columbia) "and its tributaries there should be at least three posts.
"They would afford protection to our traders, and on the expira
tion of the privileges granted to British subjects to trade on the
waters of the Columbia, would enable us to remove them from our
territory, and to secure the whole to our own citizens."
These declarations about using the troops on the Missouri to
"immediately remove the British traders from our territories," and
to use them to remove the British traders in the Columbia River

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 159
country "on the expiration of the privileges granted them" (*. e.,
after October 20, 1828), were the things to which the British pleni
potentiaries objected, as stated by Rush (on p. 556, Vol. V., Am.
State Papers on For. Rel.). They also objected to the Monroe
Doctrine as applied to the non-colonization of the northwest coast
by them. Jesup says further that "the expenses of the posts might
be greatly diminished by cultivating as at Council Bluffs, and build
ing mills and keeping cattle for labor and for subsistence," and
urges that operations should commence at once, saying: "The
British companies are wealthy and powerful; their establishments
extend from Hudson's Bay and Lake Superior to the Pacific, many
of them within our territory. It is not to be supposed they would
surrender those advantages without a struggle, and though they
should not engage in hostilities themselves, they might render all
the Indians in that extensive region hostile. . . . That the
route from the Council Bluffs is practicable has been proved by
the enterprise of more than one of our citizens. It, no doubt, pre
sents difficulties, but difficulties are not impossibilities. We have
only to refer to the pages of our history to learn that many opera
tions, infinitely more arduous, have been accomplished by Ameri
cans. The march of Arnold to Quebec, or of Gen. Clark to Vin-
cennes, during the Revolutionary war, exceeded greatly in fatigue,
privation, difficulty and danger the proposed operation, and I be
lieve I may say without fear of contradiction that the detachment
might be supplied, during the whole route, with less difficulty than
in the war of 1756 was experienced in supplying the forces operat
ing under Gen. Washington and Gen. Braddock, versus the French
and English on the Ohio."
In that brief sentence, "difficulties are not impossibilities," is
the key to the whole question of a wagon road to Oregon, and in
this letter, written in April, 1824, is everything of any importance
about establishing a line of posts to Oregon, and having them raise
provisions and stock, which the advocates of the Whitman Saved
Oregon Story have for years urged as proof of Whitman's great
ability and foresight, because 19% years later, in a letter to the
Secretary of War, he enclosed a draft of a bill, which Nixon and
Mowry say was for the "Organization of Oregon," though, in fact,
from beginning to end it said nothing about "the organization of
Oregon," and was by him properly entitled "A bill to promote safe
intercourse with the Territory of Oregon, to suppress violent acts
of aggression on the part of certain Indian tribes west of the In
dian Territory, Neocho, better protect the revenue, for the trans
portation of the mail, and for other purposes" (Cf. for this letter
and draft of the bill, Tr. Oregon Pioneer Association, 1891, pp. 69-
78, where it first appeared in print without the false claim of Nixon

160 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
and Mowry that it suggested a plan for the "Organization of Ore
gon.") Jesup in 1824, clearly recognizes (what all our statesmen
perfectly well understood) the unwillingness of the British to sur
render Oregon, the hold the Hudson's Bay Co. had upon its fur
trade — then its only valuable resource — the need of a line of posts,
and the possibility of cultivating, and grazing about them, to sub
sist their garrisons, and his letter did not contain the various im
practicable crochets of Whitman's scheme, which were so patent to
the Government that his letter and draft of a bill were promptly
pigeon-holed in the archives of the War Department, and, so far
as can be ascertained, never even read by any one for more than
forty years thereafter, till some advocates of the Whitman Legend
looking in vain for any proof in the archives of the Government
that any act of Whitman's had in any way affected governmental
action about Oregon unearthed this letter, somewhere about 1885;
while it is certain that not a single one of his recommendations
was ever even submitted in a bill for discussion in Congress, much
less enacted into law. There is much of interest in the extended
debate on this bill in the second session of the 18th Congress, but
space will only permit the following extracts:
December 30, 1824, Floyd, after describing some easier passes
than those over which Lewis and Clark went, which had been found
by later adventurers, continues: "Through these you pass with
ease and safety, so much so that I have the most perfect confidence
that even now a wagon with the usual freight could be taken from
this capital to the mouth of the Columbia. Besides these passes
there is still another, which, though longer to the upper part of
that river, is yet better, where even the feeble difficulties there en
countered are here almost annihilated. This route, pursued by
many now engaged in that trade, holds its course from Missouri
up the Kansas River, continuing some distance up the Republican
fork of that river, then falling on to the river Platte; thence en
tirely up that river to its source, where the Oregon or Rocky Moun
tains sink into a bed of sand, without water or timber, for the
space of sixty miles smooth and level."
This fairly accurate description of the route up the Platte Val
ley and across the Stony Mountains, and over the South Pass into
the Oregon Territory, given in Congress in December, 1824, only
a few weeks after news had reached St. Louis of Ashley's success
in leading the first party of fur traders from the States by that
route to the Great Salt Lake and back to Missouri, shows how
speedily the National Government was informed of the discoveries
of the fur traders in exploring the Rocky Mountain regions, while
the fact that it was not till the summer and autumn of 1824 that
Ashley thus rediscovered the South Pass (the discovery of which

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 161
by Ramsay, Crooks and Company in 1812 had not then been pub
lished) shows why Jesup, in his letter written in April, 1824, pro
posed a line of posts and the sending of troops up the Missouri,
and thence across the Stony Mountains and down Clark's Fork of
the Columbia.
Benton's great speech, March 1, 1825, on this bill in the Senate,
at the very end of this second session of the 18th Congress, I pre
fer to discuss in connection with his opposition to the treaty of
August 6, 1827, renewing the third section of the treaty of 1818.
Before taking up the action of the 19th and 20th Congresses on
this question, it seems best to return to the field of diplomacy and
consider the negotiations of 1823-24 with both Russia and Great
Britain. It was at first hoped by our Government that there might be
joint negotiations between the United States and Great Britain
with Russia, but it soon became evident that Great Britain was
unwilling to unite with us, and so that effort was abandoned and
each nation negotiated separately with Russia.
The result of our negotiations with Russia was the treaty of
April 5, 1824, Article 3 of which is as follows: "It is moreover
agreed that hereafter there shall not be formed by the citizens of
the United States or under the authority of said States, any estab
lishment upon the northwest coast of America, nor on any of the
islands adjacent, to the north of 54 degrees and 40 minutes of
north latitude; and that in the same manner there shall be none
formed by Russian subjects or under the authority of Russia south
of the same parallel." (Cf. Vol. V., Am. State Papers, For. Rel.,
Doc. No. 384.) This fixed finally the utmost northern limit of
what soon after came to be called the Oregon Territory at 54 de
grees and 40 minutes.
No agreement could be arrived at with Great Britain as to a
boundary for our territory on the northwest coast, but the record
of the negotiations shows that very substantial progress was made
in that direction by the offer of Great Britain to surrender all
claim to more than four-fifths of the territory south of 49 degrees,
by offering us the line of 49 degrees from the "Stony Mountains to
the most northeasterly branch of the Columbia, known as McGilli-
vray's River" — and thence that stream and the Columbia — to the
Pacific, thus limiting the real contest from this time on to that
part of what is now the State of Washington, which is north and
west of the Columbia River.
Another very interesting and important feature of these nego
tiations is that at the very beginning of them, in two letters of
Secretary of State John Q. Adams, dated July 22, 1823, one ad
dressed to Henry Middleton, our Minister to Russia, and the other

162 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
to Richard Rush, our Minister to London, was the first statement
of so much of the Monroe Doctrine as declared the American conti
nents no longer open to colonization by European governments.
As no advocate of the Whitman myth has ever stated those
points with any such clearness and detail as to inform his readers
of the great importance of these negotiations, and their signifi
cance as showing the inflexible determination of our Government
in 1824 — twelve years before the Whitman Mission was established,
and not only at a time when not a single American citizen was re
siding at any point in the Oregon Territory, but eight years before
the first overland migration under Wyth went there — to insist on
no line south of 49 degrees as the northern boundary of our terri
tory on the Pacific, it seems necessary to quote from the official
record of this negotiation at some length.
Am. State Papers, For. Rel., Vol. V., Doc 384, contains "Corre
spondence and Convention with Russia Relative to Navigation and
Trade on the Northwest Coast of America, Communicated to the
Senate December 15, 1824," covering pp. 432 to 471. Pages 436-7
contain "Letter of instructions to Henry Middleton, our Minister
to Russia, from John Q. Adams, Secretary of State, dated Wash
ington, July 22, 1823, from which the following are extracts: (P.
436) "So far as prior discovery can constitute a foundation of right,
the papers which I have referred to prove that it belongs to the
United States so far as 49 degrees north latitude, by the transfer
to them of the rights of Spain. There is, however, no part of the
globe where the mere fact of discovery could be held to give weaker
claims than on the northwest coast." ... (p. 437) "The right
of the United States from the 42d to the 49th parallel of latitude
on the Pacific Ocean we consider as unquestionable, being founded,
first on the acquisition by the treaty of February 22, 1819, of all
the rights of Spain ; second, by the discovery of the Columbia River,
first from the sea, at its mouth, and then by land by Lewis and
Clark; and third, by the settlement at its mouth in 1811.
"This territory is to the United States of an importance which
no possession in North America can be of to any European nation,
not only as it is but the continuity of their possessions from the
Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean, but as it offers their inhabitants the
means of establishing hereafter water communications from the
one to the other."
(P. 445) Among the papers communicated with the foregoing
letter of instructions is "(No. 3 k.) Observations on the claim of
Russia to territorial possessions on the continent of North Amer
ica." (pp. 443 to 446 inc.)
On p. 445 Mr. Adams wrote: "The only object of present in
terest for which all these settlements on the northwest coast have

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 163
been made, whether by Russians, English or Americans, has been
to traffic with the natives for furs and for the China market.
"This trade has, in point of fact, not only been enjoyed by the
citizens of the United States, but has been prosecuted by them to
a greater extent than by all the others together.
"It has been combined with a trade in sandal wood from the
Sandwich Islands to China; and during the long wars in which
Europe was involved, from 1790 to 1815, it was left almost entirely
to them. "In 1818 a Russian settlement was made at Atool, one of the
Sandwich Islands, and another near the coast of California, within
a few leagues of San Francisco, the most northern Spanish settle
ment. "If the motive of these establishments was to lay the foundation
for an exclusive territorial claim of Russia to the northwest coast,
down to the very borders of California, and founded thereon to
assert exclusive rights of trading with the natives of the north
west coast, and to navigation and fishery in the Pacific Ocean, it
is time for the nations whose rights and interests are affected by
this project effectually to interpose.
"There can perhaps be no better time for saying frankly and
explicitly to the Russian Government that the future peace of the
world, and the interest of Russia herself, cannot be promoted by
Russian settlements upon any part of the American continent.
"With the exception of the British establishments north of the
United States the remainder of both the American continents must
henceforth be left in the management of American hands. It can
not possibly be the purpose of Russia to form extensive colonial
establishments in America.
"The new American republics will be as impatient of a Russian
neighbor as the United States."
Of this Doc 384, Papers V., and Nos. 11 and 12, pp. 469-471, are
about negotiations with Great Britain resulting from the negotia
tions with Russia. No. 11 is a letter of Richard Rush to J. Q.
Adams, Secretary of State, dated London, December 19, 1823, in
which he reports a conversation with Mr. Canning, in which he
had told Mr. Canning that "the United States were willing to stipu
late to make no settlements north of the 51st degree of north lati
tude on that coast, provided Great Britain stipulated to make none
south of the 51st degree or north of 55 degrees, and Russia to make
none south of 55 degrees ... we were willing to forbear all
settlements north of 51 degrees, as that limit might be sufficient to
give us the benefit of all the waters of the Columbia River."
Doc. 396, pp. 510-582, contains the "Correspondence with Great
Britain on the Various Topics of Discussion between the United

164 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
States and Great Britain (in 1823-24), communicated to the Senate
January 20, 1825."
The sixth of these topics was "The North West Coast of Amer
ica." For some reason J. Q. Adams' letter of instructions to Richard
Rush, of July 22, 1823, was not printed with the other papers
in Doc. 396, but January 31, 1826, (Adams having become Presi
dent) in response to a resolution of the House, he sent a brief mes
sage enclosing this letter, and it appears as Doc. 417, of Vol. V.,
pp. 790-793.
It is especially interesting and valuable for its statement of
the Monroe Doctrine, because if any man ever knew exactly the
grounds on which we claimed "the Columbia River country" (for
it was not yet called Oregon) it was J. Q. Adams, and he in this
letter stated those grounds with great precision, as follows (p.
791) (after reciting the restoration of Astoria, on October 6, 1818) :
"The right of the United States to the Columbia River, and to the
interior territory washed by its waters, rests upon its discovery
from the sea and nomination by a citizen of the United States,
upon its exploration to the sea by Capts. Lewis and Clark; upon
the settlement of Astoria made under the protection of the United
States and thus restored to them in 1818, and upon the subsequent
acquisition of all the rights of Spain, the only European power
which prior to the discovery of the river had any pretensions to
territorial rights on the northwest coast of America."
(P. 792) . . . "It is not imaginable that in the present
condition of the world any European nation should entertain the
project of settling a colony on the northwest coast of America;
that the United States should form establishments there with views
of absolute territorial rights and inland communication is not only
to be expected, but is pointed out by the finger of nature, and has
been for years a subject of serious deliberation in Congress.
"A plan has for several sessions been before them for estab
lishing a territorial government on the borders of the Columbia
River. "It will undoubtedly be resumed at their next session, and
even if then again postponed, there cannot be a doubt that, in the
course of a very few years, it must be carried into effect. As yet,
however, the only useful purpose to which the northwest coast of
America has been or can be made subservient to the settlements
of civilized men are the fisheries on its adjoining seas and trade
with the aboriginal inhabitants of the country. These have hith
erto been enjoyed in common by the people of the United States
and by the British and Russian nations.
"The Spanish, Portugese and French nations have also parti-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 165
cipated in them hitherto, without other annoyance than that which
resulted from the exclusive territorial claims of Spain so long as
they were insisted on by her. . . .
"Previous to the restoration of the settlement at the mouth of
the Columbia River in 1818, and again upon the first introduction
in Congress of the plan for constituting a territorial government
there, some disposition was manifested by Sir Charles Bagot and
Mr. Canning to dispute the right of the United States to that es
tablishment; and some vague intimation was given of British
claims on the northwest coast. The restoration of the place and
the convention of 1818 were considered as a final disposal of Mr.
Bagot's objections, and Mr. Canning declined committing to paper
those which he had intimated in conversation." ... "A neces
sary consequence of this state of things will be that the American
continents, henceforth, will no longer be subject to colonization.
"Occupied by civilized independent nations, they will be access
ible to Europeans, and to each other, on that footing alone, and
the Pacific Ocean, in every part of it, will remain open to the navi
gation of all nations in like manner with the Atlantic 
(P. 793) "Mr. Middleton is authorized by his instructions to
propose an article of similar import" (i. e., to the 3d Article of the
convention of October 20, 1818, for Joint Occupancy of Oregon)
"to be inserted in a joint convention between the United States,
Great Britain and Russia for a term of ten years from its signa
ture. You are authorized to make the same proposal to the British
Government, and with a view to draw a definite line of demarca
tion for the future, to stipulate that no settlement shall hereafter
be made on the northwest coast, or on any of the islands thereto
adjoining, by Russian subjects, south of latitude 55 degrees; by
citizens of the United States, north of latitude 51 degrees, or by
British subjects either south of 51 degrees or north of 55 degrees.
I mention the latitude of 51 degrees as the bound within which we
are willing to limit the future settlement of the United States, be
cause it is not to be doubted that the Columbia River branches as
far north as 51 degrees, although it is most probably not the Ta
coutche Tesse of Mackenzie. As, however, the line already runs
in latitude 49 degrees to the Stony Mountains, should it be earn
estly insisted upon by Great Britain, we will consent to carry it in
continuance on the same parallel to the sea."
Returning now to Doc. 396, we find Rush's statement respect
ing the negotiations on pp. 553-558. On p. 556 he says the British
plenipotentiaries complained of Gen. Jesup's letter in a report of
a select committee of the House of Representatives "adopted in
April last," and he goes on: "Yet I was bound unequivocally to
reassert, and so I requested the British plenipotentiaries would

166 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
consider me as doing, the full and exclusive sovereignty of the
United States over the whole of the territory beyond the Rocky
Mountains washed by the river Columbia, in manner and extent
as I had stated, subject, of course, to whatever conventional ar
rangements they may have formed with regard to it with other
powers. Their title to this whole country they considered as not
to be shaken. It had often been proclaimed in the legislative dis
cussions of the nation and was otherwise public before the world."
At the 12th Conference, April 2, 1824, Rush proposed to con
tinue the Convention of 1818 for ten years more, but with stipu
lation that during that term no settlement should be made by citi
zens of the United States north of the 51st degree or by British
subjects south of the 51st or north of the 55th degree, on either the
main land or any of the islands thereunto adjoining.
At the 20th Conference, June 29, 1824, the British plenipoten
tiaries offered 49 degrees to the most northeastern branch of the
Columbia, and thence down the middle of that stream to the
Pacific. "The American plenipotentiary in remarking upon this bound
ary declared his utter inability to accede to it; but finding that
the line offered in his former proposal was considered wholly in
admissible by the British plenipotentiaries, said that, in the hope
of adjusting the question, he would so far vary his former line to
the south as to consent that it should be the 49th instead of the
51st degree of north latitude."
The British negotiators being unwilling to accept this last offer
of Rush, the negotiations of 1823-24 with Great Britain terminated,
with no extension of our northern boundary west of the Stony
Mountains, but with these two important gains for us, that the
Monroe Doctrine had been announced and that Great Britain, by
the offering of 49 degrees from the Stony Mountains to the north
eastern branch of the Columbia and thence down the middle of the
stream to the ocean, had finally relinquished all claim to the terri
tory south and east of that stream, and so left in dispute, after
1824, only about 58,000 square miles, being that part of the present
State of Washington north and west of the Columbia, and compris
ing a little less than one-third of the "Columbia River country" or
the Old Oregon territory south of 49 degrees.
There is the most abundant evidence in later negotiations and
in the debates in Congress that this was the general understand
ing of the statesmen of both nations, as will appear hereinafter by
abundant citation of authorities.
So certain were the British of this that, as appears in the "Copy
of a Document Found Among the Papers of the Late Dr. John
McLoughlin" (published in Tr. Oregon Pioneer Association, 1880,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 167
and quoted herein in full in Chapter VIL), "The Hudson's Bay
Co. officially informed him in 1825 that in no event could the Brit
ish claim extend south of the Columbia, and that he so informed
the few Canadian employes of the company, who on finishing their
term of service wished to settle in the Willamette Valley, instead
of being returned to Canada, as provided by their contracts with
the company."
Am. State Papers, For. Rel., Vol. V., pp. 245-250, contains Presi
dent Monroe's Message to the 18th Congress at its 1st session, date
December 2, 1823, in which (on p. 246), after stating that, at the
request of the Russian Emperor, our Minister to St. Petersburg
and the British Minister there have been empowered to arrange an
amicable settlement of the respective rights and interests of Rus
sia and the United States and Russia and England on the north
west coast of America, the whole of the famous Monroe Doctrine
was stated to all the world, its non-colonization part being as fol
lows: "In the discussions to which this interest (i. e., the title to
the Oregon Territory) has given rise, and in the arrangements by
which they may terminate, the occasion has been judged proper for
asserting as a principle in which the rights and interests of the
United States are involved, that the American Continents, by the
free and independent condition which they have assumed and main
tain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future col
onization by any European power."
At the first session of the 19th Congress a select committee was
appointed on "so much of the President's message as respects the
establishment of a military post at the mouth of the Columbia
River and the more perfect exploring of the northwest coast of
America," of which Baylies of Massachusetts was chairman, and
it made two unanimous reports, commonly known as Baylies first
and second reports. The first (No. 35, Vol. I., Repts. of Corns. H. of
R., 1st Sess., 19th Cong., p. 26) was made January 16, 1826.
The second (No. 213, Repts. of Corns. H. of R., 19th Cong., 1st
Sess., Vol. IL, p. 22) was made May 15, 1826. These reports were
repeatedly referred to and quoted not only by Representatives and
Senators in debates in later years from 1828 to 1843, but also in
other committee reports to both houses of Congress, and in news
paper and magazine articles.
Those who still labor under the delusion that our National Gov
ernment and the people of the country were ignorant of the fertility
of the soil, the geniality and healthfulness of the climate, and the
great resources in timber and fish of the Columbia River country,
till the missionaries furnished information on those points in their
letters (the first of which were not received in the States till
1835), and that as late as March, 1843, the Government and the

168 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Nation in general were ignorant about Oregon and indifferent to
its acquisition till Whitman informed them about it, are respect
fully invited to peruse the following extracts from these two unani
mous reports, unanimously adopted by the House of Representa
tives in January and May, 1826, more than ten years before Whit
man and Spalding established their mission, and more than eight
years before the Methodist Mission was established. (Rept. No.
35) After describing in very favorable terms the country between
the Cascade Mountains and the Pacific, it speaks thus (on pp. 3
and 4) of the region between the Cascade Mountains and the Rocky
Mountains — the very region in which the Whitman-Spalding-Eells
mission stations were established in 1836-38:
"Beyond and between this chain and the Rocky Mountains the
country for several hundred miles in length, and about fifty wide,
is described by Lewis and Clark as a high, level plain, in all its
parts extremely fertile. 'Nearly the whole of this widespread tract'
(say they) 'is covered with a profusion of grass and plants, which
were at this time' (May 16) 'as high as the knee. Amongst them
are a variety of esculent plants and roots, acquired' (p. 4) 'with
out much difficulty, and yielding not only a nutritious, but a very
agreeable food. The air is pure and dry, the climate quite as mild
if not milder than the same parallels of latitude in the Atlantic
States, and must be equally healthy. In short, this district affords
many advantages to settlers, and if properly cultivated would yield
every object necessary for the subsistence and comfort of civilized
man. . . .'
"(P. 16) As to subsistence, the great variety and abundance
of game, both beasts and birds, and the prodigious quantities of the
finest and most nutritious species of fish that throng the waters of
this noble river, can leave no doubt on that subject, even if sup
plies from home were wholly withheld. We learn from Lewis and
Clark that the multitudes of salmon in the Oregon are inconceiv
able, and they ascend to its remotest sources, to the very ridge of
the dividing mountains. . .
"(P. 20) The great but undeveloped capacities of this region
on the northwest coast for trade must be obvious to every one who
inspects its map.
"A vast river, with its tributaries and branches, waters its
whole extent through seven degrees of latitude, and even penetrates
beyond into the territories of other nations.
"It abounds in excellent timber, and in spars equal to those of
New Zealand, unsurpassed by any in the world. Its waters are
navigable for vessels through half its extent, and for boats (saving
a few short portages) through half the remainder.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 169
"The water power for moving manufacturing machinery is un-
equaled and commences where the navigation terminates.
"It is bounded on the south by a country which abounds in
cattle and wheat, the two great sources of subsistence for a new
colony, and which can be reached by sea in less than ten days. . .
"On one side it approaches a country where coal in prodigious
quantities has already been discovered, and, on the other, the bor
ders of a sea, which, for a space of 76 degrees, is seldom ruffled by
a storm, and which, in all probability, can be traversed in every
direction by steamboats.
"These advantages, great as they now are, will be trifling in
comparison to what they will be whenever a water communication
between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, through the isthmus di
viding North and South America shall have been effected. Of the
practicability of this communication there is no doubt. If Hum
boldt is to be believed the expense at one place would not exceed
that of the Delaware and Chesapeake canal. Should it be done, a
revolution in commerce will be effected, greater than any since the
discovery of America; by which both the power and the objects of
its action will be more than doubled. The Indian commerce of
Europe will pass through the Americas, and more commercial
wealth will be borne upon the ample bosom of the Pacific than ever
was wafted over the waves of the Atlantic in the proudest days of
the commercial greatness of Spain, Portugal, France, Holland and
England. "If it were given to a civilized, commercial and manufacturing
people where to choose their place of rest, the world affords no po
sition equal to this, and it requires no prophetic spirit to foresee
the wealth and grandeur of that fortunate race whose happy des
tiny shall have placed their ancestors in this beautiful region."
(Rept. No. 213) On p. 2 they describe the remarkable journey
of Samuel Adams Ruddock, who, in 1821, with a party of fur
traders went from the Missouri frontier up the Platte some 200
miles, thence southwest to Santa Fe, New Mexico, thence north
west to the head of the Willamette (or Multnomah) River, and
down the Columbia, reaching the mouth of the Columbia August 1,
1821, seventy-nine days after leaving the Missouri River at Council
Bluffs. After describing (on p. 10) the founding of Astoria (on p. 13)
the report says: "The American title is founded on occupation,
strengthened (as the committee believe) by purchase, by prior dis
covery of the river, and its exploration from some of its sources
in the Rocky Mountains to the Ocean. Great Britain can have no
title so strong as this. This occupation, it is true, was not author
ized originally by the Government of the United States, but they

170 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
subsequently sanctioned it by demanding and receiving the sur
render of the Fort; and the posts of the United Northwest and
Hudson's Bay Co., for all national and legal purposes, are now,
and have been for several years, in the possession of the United
States." (P. 20) "After a careful examination of the British claim, the
committee have unanimously come to the conclusion that it is
wholly unfounded, and that the navigators of Great Britain were
not the original discoverers of any part of the region which is in
cluded between the Mexican and Russian boundaries. Neverthe
less, the minute examination which has been made by them of
parts of this coast ought, perhaps, to secure to the nation who pa
tronized them something more than could be claimed as a positive
right; but we think the offer of Mr. Rush to continue the bound
ary along the 49th parallel of latitude from the Rocky Mountains
to the ocean was as great a concession as would be compatible with
our interests, our honor, or our rights."
Then discussing for something more than a page Great Britain's
policy of world-wide dominion, the report continues (p. 21) as fol
lows: "What then remains to enable her to encompass the globe?
Columbia River and De Fuca's Strait. Possessed of these she will
soon plant her standards on every island in the Pacific. Except
the Columbia there is no river which opens far into the interior
on the whole western shore of the Pacific Ocean. There is no se
cure port or naval station from 39 degrees to 46 degrees. The pos
session of these waters will give her command of the North Pacific,
enable her to control the commerce and policy of Mexico, Central
America and South America.
"These rich nations will be her commercial colonies.
"She will then gather to herself all nations and her ambition
will span the earth. The committee entertain no disposition to
risk controversy with Great Britain on a question of doubtful
right; neither have they any disposition, in defense of an incon
testable right, to avoid it."
In the 2d session of the 19th Congress no action was taken on
the Columbia River country, because the negotiations with Great
Britain which resulted in the treaty of August 6, 1827, were then
in progress. The correspondence relating to these negotiations is
in Ex. Doc, H. of R., Vol. V., 20th Cong., 1st Sess., Doc. No. 199,
and also in Am. State Papers, For. Rel., Vol. VI., Doc. No. 458. I
quote from Doc. 458.
It began with a letter from George Canning of the British For
eign Office to Rufus King, then our Minister to England, dated
April 20, 1826, announcing the desire of Great Britain to reopen
negotiations on the title to the northwest coast of America, and

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 171
ended August 7, 1827, with a letter from Albert Gallatin to Henry
Clay, Secretary of State.
Remembering not only the very brilliant intellect and the in
tense Americanism of each of the three men who conducted all of
this negotiation, John Quincy Adams, as President, Henry Clay, as
Secretary of State, and Albert Gallatin (who had been associated
with Rush in the negotiations of 1818, and who was sent, as En
voy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to England, on
purpose to carry on this negotiation in London), but also that they
were the leading three of the five men who negotiated for us the
Treaty of Ghent, and by the word "possessions" in its first article
secured to us the restoration of Astoria, it goes without saying
that all our interests would be carefully safeguarded, and that the
negotiations would show a full acquaintance with every phase of
the subject.
The outcome of these negotiations was the convention signed
August 6, 1827, which in its first article continued in force indefi
nitely the 3d Article of the Convention of October 20, 1818< making
the territory and waters claimed by both the United States and
Great Britain westward of the Stony Mountains "free and open to
the vessels, citizens and subjects of the two powers ;" but in its 2d
Article provided that either party might after October 20, 1828, at
any time terminate the treaty by giving the other party twelve
months' notice; and its 3d Article provided that "nothing con
tained in this convention, or in the 3d Article of the convention of
the 20th of October, 1818, hereby continued in force, shall be con
strued to impair, or in any manner affect, the claims which either
of the contracting parties may have to any part of the country
westward of the Stony or Rocky Mountains."
The significant change in this third article is that the reserva
tion of "the claims of any other power or state," which was in
serted in the 3d Article of the Convention of 1818, was omitted, as
we had bought the Spanish claim in February, 1819, and limited
the Russian claims at 54 deg. and 40 min. by the treaty of April
5-17, 1824.
The following extracts from the correspondence show how thor
oughly our negotiators understood the value of the Oregon Terri
tory to us, and how carefully they guarded our interests, and with
what unswerving tenacity they adhered to the line of 49 degrees as
the utmost we would concede to Great Britain. Three times with
in less than two months Gallatin was instructed by the President
that 49 degrees from the Stony Mountains to the Pacific Ocean
was our "ultimatum," that precise word being used in one case, and
expressions equivalent to it the other two times, as follows: H.
Clay, Secretary of State, on June 19, 1826, wrote a letter of in-

172 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
structions to A. Gallatin, in which, after declaring that "it is not
thought necessary to add much to the argument advanced on this
point in the instructions given to Mr. Rush" (i. e., in 1823) "(a
copy of which is herewith communicated), and that which was em
ployed by him in the course of his negotiation to support our title
as derived from prior discovery and settlement at the mouth of the
Columbia, and from the treaty with Spain concluded on the 22d of
February, 1819, he said :
"That argument is believed to have conclusively established
our title on both grounds. Nor is it conceived that Great Britain
has or can make out even a colorable title to any portion of the
Northwest Coast. . . You are then authorized to propose the
annulment of the third article of the Convention of 1818, and the
extension of the line on the parallel of 49 degrees from the eastern
side of the Stony Mountains, where it now terminates, to the Pa
cific Ocean, as the permanent boundary between the territories of
the two powers in that quarter. This is our ultimatum, and you
may announce it. We can consent to no other line more favorable
to Great Britain."
Only four days later, June 23, 1826, Clay again wrote to Gal
latin as follows : "Mr. Crook's information adds little to what was
previously possessed. If the land on the Northwest Coast between
the mouth of the Columbia and the parallel of 49 degrees be bad,
and therefore we should lose but little in relinquishing it, the same
consideration will apply to the British. The President cannot con
sent to vary the line proposed in your instructions."
August 9, 1826, Mr. Clay again wrote to Mr. Gallatin as fol
lows: "The President cannot consent that the boundary between
the territories of the two powers on the Northwest Coast should
be south of 49 degrees.
"The British Government has not been committed by a positive
rejection of a line on the parallel of 49 degrees; but if it had been
its pride may take refuge in the offer which for the first time you
are to propose of a right in common with us to the navigation of
the Columbia River."
Although this "ultimatum" letter of Clay seemed so important
to Congress that, as we shall see later, the Senate and the House
of Representatives by unanimous votes ordered it printed in 25,000
copies of four reports in 1838, 1839, 1842, and January, 1843, no
advocate of the Whitman Saved Oregon tale has ever even alluded
to the letter, nor to anything else of vital significance in this great
negotiation as showing how thoroughly every phase of the subject
was discussed, and how inflexibly Adams, Clay and Gallatin stood
for our rights to the Oregon Territory south of 49 degrees.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 173
The following extracts from Gallatin's letters to Clay are so
very significant of the real position of the parties that it seems to
me essential that they should be quoted, and I only regret that
space will not permit quoting much more from them.
Under date of London, November 16, 1826: "Mr. Huskisson,
amongst the reasons for taking up that subject" (i. e., the north
west boundary), "first mentioned that it had for several sessions
occupied the attention of Congress, and that it was not possible to
foresee the effect which the measures they might adopt would have
on the question and on the friendly relations of the two countries.
In a subsequent part of the conversation he said that the joint
occupancy would cease in 1828 unless renewed; and that the re
moval of any settlement made by British subjects would be con
sidered as an act of aggression.
"This having been already intimated in the course of the nego
tiations of 1824, I asked whether he would consider as an aggres
sion the removal of such British subjects from Astoria, or such
other of our settlements as were directed to be restored by the
Treaty of Ghent.
"To which it was answered that these were considered as in
our possession. Mr. Addington added that the British had removed
from Astoria to the opposite side of the river, where I understood
they had now a fort called Vancouver.
"Protocol of seventh Conference of the British and American
plenipotentiaries held December 19, 1826.
"Present Mr. Gallatin and Mr. Addington."
In the course of his argument Mr. Gallatin said: "If the pres
ent state of occupancy is urged on the part of Great Britain, the
probability of the manner in which the territory west of the Rocky
Mountains must be settled belongs essentially to the subject.
"Under whatever nominal sovereignty that country may be
placed, and whatever its ultimate destinies may be, it is nearly
reduced to a certainty that it will be almost exclusively peopled
by the surplus population of the United States.
"The distance from Great Britain and the expense incident to
emigration forbid the expectation of any being practicable from
that quarter but on a comparatively small scale."
Under date of London, December 22, 1826 : "Mr. Huskisson, in
the course of the discussion, several times repeated that there was
no intention on the part of Great Britain to colonize the country.
They have certainly no other immediate object than that of pro
tecting the North West Co. in her fur trade.
"In every other respect the question appeared to be with them
rather one of national pride than anything else. Not only from
them, but from several other distinct quarters, it is certain that

174 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
that pride was sorely wounded by that part of the late President's
message which declared that America was no longer open to Euro
pean colonization.
"This was new doctrine and was considered as dictatorial, and
as hinting, too, with no favorable intentions to the existing British
colonies. Those parts of the second report of a committee of the
House of Representatives at the last session of Congress, (that is
Baylies' second report) to which I have alluded in a former dis
patch, gave great, fresh and additional offense, awakening anew
the feelings which had been excited by the former passage in the
President's message.
"I think it not improbable that we might have come to an ar
rangement had it not been for these causes. The North West Com
pany is also very inimical, and has no inconsiderable weight."
Under date of June 27, 1827 : "The British plenipotentiary de
sired to insert in the protocol a declaration that neither party
should establish any military posts in the Oregon Territory. 'Great
Britain,' they said, 'had no wish to establish such posts and would
do it only in self defense.' . . . 'There was no intention on the
part of Great Britain to colonize the country, or to impede the
progress of our settlements.' ... 'It appeared from that ex
position that Great Britain denied, indeed, their' (i. e., the United
States') 'exclusive right to any part of the territory in question,
but made no exclusive claim herself, and considered it open to the
first occupant.'
"Although the United States asserted and would not abandon
her exclusive right, yet, in fact, the country must necessarily be
come ultimately theirs, even according to the British doctrine. In
that view of the subject all that the United States declared to be
hers, viz., the preservation of peace until (if no arrangement should
previously take place) the whole country was occupied; and I had
myself no doubt that it would be entirely occupied and settled by
citizens of the United States."
Under date of July 10, 1827: "Whatever change may hereafter
take place in the views of the British Government concerning that
country, I may with confidence say that there is not at present any
wish to colonize it ; that they view it rather with indifference ; that
they do not believe that it will when once settled long remain either
a British colony or a part of the United States; that they do not
think it therefore a matter of great importance whether it shall re
ceive its inhabitants from Great Britain, Canada or the United
States ; and that they are willing to let the settlement of the coun
try take its natural course."
August 7, 1827: "But in addition to the reasons which were
assigned in the course of the negotiation in favor of continuing it"

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 175
(i. e., joint occupancy) "in force, there is still one peculiar to the
United States. They claim exclusive sovereignty over a territory a
considerable portion of which is occupied by British traders whom
they could not dispossess without engaging in a war, and whom
from their distance and other causes they are not at this time pre
pared to remove.
"It is certainly more eligible that those persons should remain
on the territory of the United States by virtue of a compact and
with their consent, than in defiance of their authority."
After stating that the British from their system of government
could govern the Oregon country in its then condition by a monop
olistic trading company, Gallatin continues: "But in order to at
tain the same ends the United States would be obliged to resort to
different means. The establishment of an exclusive company ap
peared incompatible with their habits and institutions. They
could not govern the country and preserve the peace through that
medium." Benton bitterly opposed the ratification of this treaty of August
6, 1827, but could only rally against it six other Senators (only
one of whom, Cobb of Georgia, was from a seaboard State) — the
vote being 31 for and 7 against, with no record of the opinions of
the eight Senators who did not vote.
Fifteen years later Benton opposed with equally bitter invective
the ratification of the Ashburton treaty, largely because it had not
included a settlement of the Oregon question, and could only rally
9 against to 39 for it, with no record of the opinions of the two1
Senators who did not vote.
The injunction of secrecy seems not to have been removed from
the discussion of the 1827 treaty, but in Appendix to Congressional
Globe, 3d Sess., 27th Cong., pp. 1-26, will be found Benton's speech
(covering 76 columns) against the Ashburton Treaty, delivered in
secret session of the Senate, August 18, 1842; the injunction of
secrecy having been removed.
So overwhelmingly was the judgment of the Senate against
Benton on both of these treaties, that on each the friends of rati
fication could have granted leaves of absence to as many as were
required to ratify and then have had remaining three more than
the two-thirds necessary to ratify; or, in other words, instead of
having merely twice as many in favor of ratifying as were opposed
to it, they had in each case three more than four times as many
as voted against ratification.
It is doubtful if any other politician in our history ever suc
ceeded in acquiring so widespread a reputation as a chief factor
in accomplishing a great national work, upon which his real in
fluence was never decisive, as Benton acquired in connection with

176 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
the Oregon acquisition, by merely writing newspaper articles and
incessantly making speeches about it, though of the real construc
tion work which secured us Oregon he not only did absolutely noth
ing, but bitterly opposed what such statesmen as Madison, Monroe,
J. Q. Adams, Albert Gallatin, Richard Rush and Henry Clay did
do, which secured us Oregon without war and without expense.
A very ambitious young lawyer, already well experienced in
politics, Benton, at 35, migrated in 1817 from Tennessee to St.
Louis, in the then Territory of Missouri, which it was certain must
soon be admitted as a State.
The Convention of 1818 about "the Columbia River country"
had been ratified unanimously by the Senate, but St. Louis being
then the headquarters of the fur trade, Benton was astute enough
to see that a violent opposition to that convention, on the ground
that "the Columbia River country" was ours, and that we should
never have made a convention allowing the British fur traders the
same rights there as our own traders had, would be so very popu
lar as to land him in the position he coveted of Senator from Mis
souri ; and so in the St. Louis Enquirer he attacked it with utmost
vehemence of language, declaring that it should not have been
made, and that it would result in the British acquiring the Valley
of the Columbia.
That in the judgment of all our statesmen who ever negotiated
on the Oregon question that treaty was the best that could then be
made, that its renewal in 1827 was equally wise, that the omission
of Oregon from the Ashburton treaty was also equally wise, and
that the treaty of 1818 and its renewal in 1827 by their very terms
made it impossible (in the opinion of such men as Albert Gallatin,
George Bancroft, Edw. Everett, James Buchanan, John C. Calhoun,
John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren and
many other of our ablest statesmen) that Great Britain by found
ing trading posts or establishing settlements could, while those
treaties remained in force, in the least degree strengthen her claims
to any part of the Columbia River country; that every British
diplomat who negotiated with us on the question, from Huskisson
and Canning in 1823 to Pakenham in 1844-46, had tacitly endorsed
the correctness of this position by never making any claim that
anything done by Great Britain subsequent to October 20, 1818,
had in any way affected the title to any part of the region in dis
pute; and that Lord Aberdeen (head of the British Foreign Office
from 1841 till after the treaty of 1846 was concluded) explicitly
assented to the correctness of our position on this policy — all this
counted for naught with Benton.
Nor did the fact that Rush and Gallatin both pointed out that
we could not expect to remove the Hudson's Bay Co. by force in

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 111
1823, nor in 1827, and that it was therefore better for us to con
tinue the joint occupancy condition till the unequaled and majestic
westward movement of our population should so change the then
existing conditions as to make it desirable for us to insist on imme
diately fixing our boundary at 49 degrees, and so acquiring the
right coincidently with the development of the unquestionable
power to take undisputed control of the Oregon country, in the
slightest degree affect Benton's constant clamor for immediately
abrogating the treaty and taking possession of the country ; and in
the later years of the struggle from insisting that in contemptuous
disregard of our own freely executed treaty obligations we should,
by granting lands to settlers and assuming full control of Oregon,
do that which the "correspondence" in Doc. 458 shows it was dis
tinctly agreed by both parties in 1826-27 should not be done by
either, without first giving the twelve months' notice required to
abrogate the treaty.
Benton was never intrusted with any share in conducting any
negotiations about Oregon, nor was he made chairman of either of
the special committees of the Senate on Oregon, which in 1838 and
1842 made extensive and very valuable reports on Oregon, though
as chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs he made a report
on the fur trade in February, 1829, which, like Calhoun's in 1818,
was chiefly connected with Oregon matters, as, indeed, any valu
able report on the fur trade in those days must have been.
He was also chairman of the Military Committee of the Senate
in January, 1831, when it reported back President Jackson's mes
sage enclosing the letters of Ashley, Smith, Sublette and Jackson,
Major Pilcher and Lewis Cass and Gen. William Clark, with a
recommendation that the documents be printed and 1,500 copies
extra be furnished for the use of the Senate.
But when all proper deductions have been made from the
greatly exaggerated reputation of Benton as a chief factor in se
curing Oregon, these indisputable facts remain: That he was al
ways, after 1818 (three years before the commencement of his term
as United States Senator from Missouri), an extremely ardent if
sometimes not a specially wise friend of Oregon; that he not only
never uttered or wrote a single sentence depreciatory of the value
of Oregon to the United States, but uniformly used the most ex
travagant language about the soil, the climate, the fisheries and
the commercial possibilities of the Oregon Territory, and the im
mense importance of our asserting our title to it and occupying it;
and that the steadfastness and persistence with which upon every
possible occasion he thus spoke and wrote about it from 1818 to
1846 made him an important factor, though by no means the chief
one in securing Oregon to us.

178 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Like Jefferson, and Jackson, and probably a large majority of
the members of his party, Benton for a quarter of a century after
he began his open and constant advocacy of the acquisition of Ore
gon did not expect that it would permanently remain a part of the
United States, but expected that when, by migration overland from
the States it should become populous, it would separate from us
and establish a new republic on the Pacific, with the Rocky Moun
tains as a natural boundary between the two nations.
This view, often expressed by him (the last time, as far as I
have been able to learn, in the Senate, August 18, 1842) did not,
however, in the least diminish the intensity of his conviction, nor
the ardor of his speech in favor of the right of the United States
to the Oregon Territory and the duty resting upon us to assert that
right and drive the British out, and occupy and settle it ourselves.
One looks in vain through his "Thirty Years' View" and his
"Abridgment of Debates in Congress" for any intimation that he
had ever held any such opinion about the final destiny of Oregon,
he having carefully "abridged out" of the debates all the things he
wished he had not uttered, and with equal care omitted to include
in the field of vision of his "Thirty Years' View" anything which
showed that he was not as wise at the beginning, or the middle of
his career, as at the end.
Personally, outside of politics, Benton was probity itself, but
like many politicians he had two codes of honesty, one to be fol
lowed in matters outside of politics and another and very different
one inside of politics, the consequence of which is that his "Thirty
Years' View" and his "Abridgment of the Debates in Congress"
are both so intensely partisan, and so often distort the history they
ostensibly illuminate that no careful student dares depend on them
about any matter affecting the political struggles which filled so
much of Benton's life, or on any other matter on which he had seen
occasion to change his opinions with the lapse of years.
In view of this record of Benton's uniform and enthusiastic
advocacy of the acquisition of Oregon from 1818 to 1846, and his
persistent denunciations of Great Britain's claims to it, one would
suppose that not even the most reckless of the myth-loving advo
cates of the Whitman Legend, seeking to find support for the in
dispensable postulate of that story that our leading statesmen
were ignorant about Oregon and indifferent to its fate, and even
anxious that it should be yielded up to England, would have the
hardihood to misquote Benton's great speech of 1825 and represent
him as one of those who derided Oregon and was rather anxious
than otherwise that it should be yielded to Great Britain. Yet
precisely that has happened.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 179
In this, as in most of the misquotations by which the public has
been completely befogged about the Oregon acquisition, Barrows'
"Oregon" seems to have been the "original sinner," with Nixon's
"How Marcus Whitman Saved Oregon" as a close second.
In his chapter entitled "Is Oregon Worth Saving?" after some
four pages packed full of misstatements of facts and several quo
tations from the Edinburgh Review and the London Examiner,
which are so ingeniously garbled as to convey to the minds of his
readers the precise opposite of the ideas which the articles hon
estly quoted would convey, Barrows (on p. 193) continues as fol
lows: "Their" (i. e., the Hudson's Bay Co.'s) "trappers and
traders, in a gossipy way, were undervaluing Oregon, as the stately
quarterlies were doing in a more dignified manner. This depre
ciating view of that country came to possess our own literature
and popular speech. Captain William Sturgis, who had trafficked
on the Northwest Coast and at the English posts there, uses this
language in a lecture before the Mercantile Library Association of
Boston, two years after the arrival of Whitman : 'Rather than have
new States formed beyond the Rocky Mountains, to be added to our
present Union, it would be a lesser evil, as far as that Union is
concerned, if the unoccupied portion of the Oregon Territory should
sink into Symmes' Hole, leaving the western base of those moun
tains and the borders of the Pacific Ocean one and the same.' "
The plain meaning and purpose of this paragraph is that in this
statement Sturgis was merely echoing the general sentiment of the
American public concerning the Oregon Territory, and (not being
able to get hold of a copy of Sturgis' lecture) for some years after
I became fully satisfied that that was untrue, I assumed that Bar
rows had quoted fairly in this instance, and that Sturgis had made
the statement quoted, supposing that in that opinion he was in ac
cord with the general sentiment of his countrymen. But finding
in the Wisconsin State Historical Society's splendid library a copy
of Sturgis' lecture, it was speedily evident that Barrows had delib
erately deceived his readers in this quotation.
Sturgis' lecture was delivered January 22, 1845, avowedly to
combat the "54 deg. 40 min. or fight" craze, and to persuade the
American people that we should be satisfied with 49 degrees as the
northern boundary of Oregon, and referring to pp. 37, 42 and 44
of the "Berlin Arbitration," we find that "it exercised quite an in
fluence" on some leading English statesmen.
On p. 22 of Sturgis' lecture he says: "Our Government, on the
contrary, seeks the acquisition of the region west of the Rocky
Mountains as an extension of the territory of the United States,
to be used hereafter in the same manner as any other portion of
our territory for the formation of new States; for this purpose the

180 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
country south of the 49th parallel of latitude is most conveniently
situated. Being the portion best adapted to agriculture and (p.
23) manufacturing purposes, it might be reasonably expected that
we should be content with this division, but I am not quite sure
that our Government will so readily accede to it. The people of
this country are both covetous and ambitious in regard to terri
tory. They covet and are ready to grasp at all that lies upon their
borders, are ambitious of extending their empire from sea to sea,
from the shores of the Atlantic to the borders of the Pacific.
"I do not participate in this feeling and have little sympathy
with those who cherish it. Settlements scattered over a vast ex
tent of territory — very likely to be badly governed in time of peace
and certain to present remote and exposed points to be defended
in times of war — will not, in my belief, add to the power or pro
mote the prosperity of the United States."
Then, after quoting from Presidents Jackson and Jefferson, Mr.
Sturgis goes on (p. 24) as follows: "I will add as my own views,
that rather than have new States formed beyond the Rocky Moun
tains to be added to our present Union, it would be a lesser evil so
far as that Union is concerned if the unoccupied portion of the
Oregon Territory should sink into Symmes' Hole, leaving the
western base of those mountains and the borders of the Pacific
one and the same. But as this consummation, however devoutly it
may be wished, can hardly be expected, I deem it very desirable
that the question of boundary (p. 25) should be speedily adjusted,
and that the limits of the rights of each party be so closely estab
lished and defined as to prevent all danger of collision hereafter.
In this opinion I doubt not that the distinguished statesmen,
Messrs. Pakenham and Calhoun, who now have charge of the nego
tiation, will cordially concur; and it seems to me that each party
will attain their object, and justice be done to both, by adopting
as the boundary a continuation of the parallel of 49 degrees across
the Rocky Mountains to tidewater, say to the middle of the Gulf
of Georgia, thence by the northern most navigable passage (not
north of 49 degrees) to the Straits of Juan de Fuca, and down the
middle of those straits to the Pacific Ocean, the navigation of the
Gulf of Georgia and the Straits of Juan de Fuca to be forever
free to both parties ; all the islands and other territory lying south
and east of this line to belong to us, and all north and west to
Great Britain. . . . (P. 27) Very different and conflicting
representations have been made by different writers in regard to
the general aspect of the whole territory, and its adaptation to
agricultural purposes ; some have described, it as a perfect paradise,
while by others it has been represented as wild and sterile. Ac
cording to my observation both are exaggerated. (P. 28) The

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 181
climate, however, is altogether milder and the winter less severe
than on this side of the continent, and more nearly resembles the cli
mate of Europe."
Could human ingenuity more completely mislead the readers
of a book as to the true opinion of the American Government and
people about the value of Oregon than Barrows did in this gar
bled quotation from Sturgis' lecture?
The very next sentence on p. 193 of Barrows' "Oregon," after
this garbled quotation from Sturgis' lecture, is the following: "A
similar view of Oregon's value probably led Benton to make that
remarkable utterance in 1825: 'The ridge of the Rocky Moun
tains may be named without offense as presenting a convenient,
natural and everlasting boundary. Along the back of this ridge
the western limits of this Republic should be drawn, and the statue
of the fabled god Terminus should be raised upon its highest peak
never to be thrown down.' "
But when we turn to the speech of Benton, from which these
two brief sentences are taken, we find it covers 14 pages of the
"Debates in Congress" (not Benton's Abridgment, but the full offi
cial Debates in Congress), 18th Congress, 2d Session, Vol. 1, pp.
699-713, and is an impassioned plea for the immediate occupation
of Oregon, and that instead of any depreciatory view of Oregon,
it expressed a higher opinion of it than any candid and well-
informed resident of that Territory would today say is fully justi
fied by the facts, as appears from the following, which Barrows
does not quote: "It is a country too great and too desirable to
remain longer without civilized inhabitants. ... In extent,
soil and climate it is superior to the old thirteen United States."
Then (immediately following the two sentences which Bar
rows quotes) Benton goes on as follows: "In planting the seeds
of a new power on the coast of the Pacific Ocean, it should be well
understood that when strong enough to take care of itself the new
government should separate from the mother empire as the child
separates from the parent at the age of maturity. The heights of
the Rocky Mountains should divide their possessions, and the
mother Republic would find herself indemnified for her cares and
expenses about the infant power in the use of a port on the Pacific
Ocean, the protection of her interests in that sea, the enjoyment
of the fur trade, the control of the Indians, the exclusion of a
monarchy from her border, the frustration of the hostile schemes
of Great Britain, and above all in the erection of a new republic
composed of her children, speaking her language, inheriting her
principles, devoted to liberty and equality, and ready to stand by
her side against the combined powers of the Old World. Gentle
men may think this is looking rather deep into the chapter of

182 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
futurity, but the contrary is the fact. The view I take is both
near and clear. Within a century from this day a population
greater than that of the present United States will exist on the
western side of the Rocky Mountains."
Plainly then, instead of "similar view of Oregon's value" caus
ing Benton to utter this sentiment about the western boundary of
the United States being the crest of the Rocky Mountains, it was
his belief (in which doubtless all sensible men even now will agree
with him), that, as the world then looked, when the first mile of
railroad had not been built, when the telegraph was not even
dreamed of, and the successful application of steam to ocean navi
gation was a very doubtful problem, the government by the United
States of colonies on the Pacific Coast when they should become
populous from the migration thither of our citizens, would be im
possible. Benton continued to hold this view certainly as late as
August 18, 1842, for in that part of his famous speech against the
Ashburton treaty which denounced it because it did not settle the
Oregon boundary, he most vehemently reiterates all these senti
ments of his speech of March 1, 1825. (Cf. App. to Cong. Globe,
27th Cong., 3d Sess., pp. 1-26.) Just when and why he changed
his opinions (not on the immense value of the Oregon Territory to
the United States, and the duty of the Government to at once oc
cupy and colonize it — for on that his opinions were constant from
1818 [i. e., before he entered public life] down to the date of the
treaty of 1846 — and Cato was no more persistently insistent that
Carthage should be destroyed than Benton was during all those
years that we should occupy Oregon; but as to the possibility of
our continuing to hold it after we should have populated it enough
for statehood) it seems impossible certainly to determine. But in
his two long speeches in the Senate on the great debate on Ore
gon in 1842-3, the first on January 12, 1843, and the second on
February 2, 1843, he says nothing about Oregon ever separating
from the United States, so that the time of the change would seem
to have been between August 18, 1842, and January 12, 1843, but
I know of no clue as to the cause. (Cf. App. to Cong. Globe, 27th
Cong., 3d Sess., pp. 74-78 and 116-117.)
Nixon is so delighted with these two sentences that Barrows
misquotes from Benton, that he not only quotes them on p. 40
of his "How Marcus Whitman Saved Oregon," at the beginning
of his attempt to show what he is pleased to call (on p. 41) "the
educating power of the Hudson's Bay Co. on the United States,
and the ignorance of our statesmen as to the extent and value of
the territory" (i. e., the Oregon Territory), but quotes them twice
more on pp. 170 and 186, of course with no reference to the rest of
Benton's speech, or the place where his readers can find it, and

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 183
utterly oblivious of the fact that the only "ignorance" displayed
in the matter is his own total ignorance concerning the real posi
tion of Benton and all our other leading statesmen from 1814 to
1846 on the Oregon question.
Having carefully compared every quotation in Barrow's "Ore
gon" and Nixon's "How Marcus Whitman Saved Oregon" with the
original book, Government document, magazine or newspaper to
which it is credited — so far as any such source really exists, for
some of their alleged quotations are pure fabrications, never hav
ing appeared in the sources from which they are claimed to have
been quoted — I can assure the reader that on any important dis
puted point there is not in either book from title page to finis a
single quotation that is not as false and misleading as these two
from Sturgis' lecture and from Benton's 1825 speech.
Returning now to the record of governmental action on the
Oregon question. The Senate having ratified the Convention of
August 6, 1827, during the first session of the 20th Congress, it
was proclaimed May 15, 1828. (Cf. Doc. 492, Am. State Papers,
For. Rel., Vol. VI., p. 1000.)
The Senate, in the first session of the 20th Congress, 1827-8,
having debated every phase of the Oregon question in executive
sessions during the discussions on the ratification of the second
Treaty of Joint Occupancy, did not take the subject up again for
any extended discussion till the second session of the 25th Con
gress, 1837-38, though in the mean time two reports were made
to it — Benton's on the Fur Trade, February 9, 1829, and the report
of the Military Committee, January 26, 1831, which were very valu
able — the latter especially so.
No record of Benton's report is to be found in the official re
port of "Debates in Congress," but turning to the "Journal of the
Senate" we find (p. 47) that on December 23, 1828, on motion of
Mr. Benton (chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs), and
by unanimous consent, it was "Resolved: That the Committee on
Indian Affairs be instructed to inquire into the present condition
of the fur trade within the limits of the United States, and to re
port what measures, if any, are necessary to the safe and success
ful prosecution of that trade by citizens of the United States."
February 9, 1829, (p. Ill) "Mr. Benton, from the Committee
on Indian Affairs, who were instructed by a resolution of the Sen
ate on the 23d of December last to inquire into the present condi
tion of the fur trade, made a report, accompanied by a bill for the
encouragement of the fur trade, which was read, and ordered that
it pass to a second reading, and that the report be printed."
The bill provided only for a duty on foreign furs imported into
this country, but no legislation was effected, as the same com-

184 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
plaints were made as to the disabilities under which the fur trade
suffered in the letters of the Rocky Mountain Fur Co. and of Major
Pilcher, and of Gen. William Clark and Hon. Lewis Cass, in Sen.
Ex. Doc. 39, date January 26, 1831.
The report is No. 37, Sen. Ex. Doc, 20th Cong., 2d Sess., and
covers 19 pages.
Benton wrote only about two pages of the report, the rest be
ing extracts from a message of Gov. Miller of Missouri to the Gen
eral Assembly of that State, dated November, 1828; a memorial of
the General Assembly of Missouri to Congress, dated December
1828; a statement by Senator Benton to the Committee on Indian
Affairs, and letters as follows: One each from Thomas L. McKen-
ney, Commissioner of Indian Affairs; John Jacob Astor, Hon. C.
C. Cambreling, and one signed by Gen. William Clark of Missouri
and Gov. Lewis Cass of Michigan, and two from W. H. Ashley, the
whole concluding with a page from the "History of the Fur Trade"
(London, 1801) by Alex. McKenzie, the sturdy Scotchman, long
a leader of the "North Westers," who was the first white man to
go overland in North America to the Arctic Ocean, which he
reached in 1789, and the first to cross North America north of
Mexico, reaching the Pacific July 22, 1793, in latitude 52 deg. 20
min. and 48 sec.
The committee urge that the joint occupancy treaty be termi
nated and a boundary line established, and the traders of both
nations confined to their own respective territories, and suggested
three things as necessary for the prosperity of the fur trade, viz. :
"(1) A reduction of duty on the blankets, shrouds and scarlet
cloths used in the trade.
"(2) A drawback of duties upon these articles when carried
into the Indian countries for the purposes of trade.
"(3) A duty on foreign furs."
The letters published in the report endorsed its conclusions and
recommendations. McKenzie seems to have been the first to suggest the consoli
dation of the North West Co. and the Hudson's Bay Co. (Cf. p.
408 of his "Journal of a Voyage Through the Northwest Conti
nent of America") as a means of monopolizing that trade in Brit
ish North America and in the Columbia River country, and as a
necessary part of that plan urges (in the page which Benton
quotes from him) that the British should insist on having the line
between their North American possessions and the United States
so run as to insure them the control of the Columbia, as being the
only stream on the Pacific Coast by which it would be possible to
obtain the cheap transit of goods from the interior of the mountain
regions to the ocean.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 185
To this extract from McKenzie Benton appends the following
characteristic note: "(N. B. This is the origin of all the British
claims on the Columbia, of all the robberies and murders now go
ing on there, of the 500 men killed and the $500,000 worth of prop
erty plundered from them in the last twenty years.) T. H. B."
This false accusation that the recommendations by McKenzie
were the origin of all the British claims to territory on the Colum
bia, and of all the losses of life and property by our citizens en
gaged in the fur trade in and beyond the Rocky Mountains, were
constantly reiterated by Benton to the end of the Oregon contro
versy in 1846.
The "Memoirs of John Quincy Adams" (Vol. XL, p. 37, under
date of December 10, 1841), say of Caleb Cushing, what might
quite as appropriately have been written of Benton, as follows :
"Cushing thought that inflammatory declamation against Eng
land upon all possible topics was the short cut to popularity, and
he speechified accordingly."
Though the Senate did not care to farther debate the Oregon
question at the second session of the 20th Congress, it was taken
up in the House and debated vigorously and at great length, the
report filling 85 columns, or one-tenth of the whole volume of the
official report of "Debates in Congress," being more space than was
accorded to Oregon in any other session till the third session of
the 27th Congress, 1842-43.
This great debate, in which the sentiment was as overwhelm
ingly in favor of the great value of Oregon to us, and of our duty
to hold it at least up to 49 degrees, as it was at every other session
which discussed the subject, has either been ignored or misrepre
sented by every advocate of the Whitman Legend, since a fair pre
sentation of it would utterly overthrow that fundamental postu
late of the Legend, that as late as 1843 our Government and people
were ignorant about and indifferent as to the political destiny of
Oregon, and that it was the establishment of missions to the Ore
gon Indians in 1834 by the Methodist and 1836 by the American
Board which wakened the nation to an appreciation of the value
of Oregon. The fact is that as early as the autumn of 1828, before there
was a mile of railroad on this continent, and five years before there
was any move to send any missionaries to Oregon, and eight years
before Whitman established his mission there, there was such wide
spread interest in Oregon that in regions as widely separated as
Massachusetts, Ohio and Louisiana there was a wholly inexplicable
craze to migrate to Oregon, there being organizations from Boston,
New Orleans and Ohio seeking grants of large tracts of land in
Oregon from this second session of the 20th Congress.

186 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
The Massachusetts Association undoubtedly was mainly the re
sult of the untiring efforts of Hall J. Kelly, ever since 1817, to
start a migration to Oregon, but I have never been able to discover
what caused the New Orleans and the Ohio organizations.
Barrows is chiefly responsible for the widespread opinion that
the nation was indifferent about Oregon, and his treatment of this
great debate is a fair sample of the disingenuous treatment he
gives to the whole subject.
On p. 76 of his "Oregon" he says: "This renewal of the ar
rangement of 1818 was confirmed by Congress, but immediately a
great and protracted debate arose in that body. A bill was re
ported in the House authorizing the President to survey the terri
tory west of the mountains between the parallels of forty-two and
fifty-four forty, occupy the same by military posts and garrisons
and extend the laws of the United States over it. The bill was
lost, and very little interest on the subject showed itself again in
Congress for many years."
To the ordinary mind it would seem evident that if there was
that profound ignorance about Oregon till Whitman reached the
States in 1843 which his book continually asserts, "a great and
protracted debate about it" in Congress in 1828-29 would not have
occurred, but such self-stultifications as that are common in this
most worthless and misleading book, whose success in completely
deceiving the public about the whole history of the Oregon acquisi
tion does little credit to the historians who, without investigating
original sources, accepted it as authority, and copied its shameful
slanders alike of American statesmen and of the Hudson's Bay
Co., and its garbled and fabricated quotations, and printed them
even in our school histories, till the circulation of my manuscripts
in 1895 and 1900 drove these fictions out of all of them whose
authors cared to have their books accurate.
Perhaps the most striking example of the pernicious influence
of Barrows on a really great historian, who had accepted him as
authority without investigation, is seen in McMaster's treatment
of this debate, in Vol. V. of his "History of the People of the United
States," pp. 477-83, as follows : "The debate which followed richly
deserves to be read, as a fine illustration of how little the men of
that day understood the marvelous growth of their country, which
in less than twenty years was to found two States in the region
they did not think worth having."
To support this assertion that "the men of that day" did not
think Oregon "worth having," McMaster quotes 84 lines, or nearly
three pages, from the speeches of Mitchell of Tennessee and Bates
of Missouri, although their speeches only covered one-fifth of the
report of the discussion; and from the speeches of those who fa-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 187
vored the acquisition of Oregon (though some of the ablest of them
opposed the pending bill as in violation of the treaty of 1827), he
only quotes 11 lines, or, counting his own abstracts of their speeches
with the quotations he makes from them, he only prints 20 lines
from those who favored the Oregon acquisition, and does not name
a single one of them!
But Mitchell and Bates were two absolute political nonentities,
both having been repudiated by their constituencies at the elections
the preceding autumn — Mitchell after two terms and Bates at the
end of one term as Representatives in Congress — and but for these
ridiculous speeches on Oregon, resurrected to seem to support the
Whitman Legend, they would both have rested forever in the po
litical oblivion to which those who knew them best had consigned
them in the autumn of 1828, for neither of them ever again was
able to achieve an election to any office as important as Member
of Congress, though a whole generation afterwards Lincoln, in
1861, finding it desirable to have a Cabinet officer from a border
State, called Bates, who was a good lawyer, into his Cabinet as
Attorney-General, where he served two and a third years. These
two men from whom McMaster quotes nearly three pages to sup
port the theory that "the men of that day did not think Oregon
worth having," served therefore an aggregate of eight and one-third
years in positions as important as or more important than a Rep
resentative in Congress; and the name of neither one is associated
with the initiation of any measure of the slighest consequence in
our political, or economical, or social condition.
But the men who in this same debate favored the acquisition
of Oregon included two who were subsequently Presidents, Polk
and Buchanan; two who were subsequently Secretaries of State,
Buchanan and Everett; two who were subsequently Speakers of
the House, Taylor of New York for 3 years and Polk of Tennessee
for 4 years; two who were subsequently Senators, Buchanan for
12 years, and Everett for 1 year, when ill health compelled his res
ignation; two who were subsequently Ministers to England, Bu
chanan for 3 years and Everett for 4 years; three who were sub
sequently Governors, Everett of Massachusetts for 4 years, Floyd
of Virginia for 4 years, Polk of Tennessee for 2 years; and three
who were subsequently Ministers to Russia, Buchanan for 2 years,
Cambreling for 4 years, and Ingersoll of Connecticut for 2 years
when he resigned.
In the list were also the following elected over and over again
to the House: Buchanan, Pa., 10 years; Cambreling, N. Y., 18
years; Drayton, S. C, 8 years; Everett, Mass., 10 years; Gurley,
La., 8 years; Floyd, Va., 12 years; Ingersoll, Conn., 8 years; Reed,
Mass. (from his long service often called "the life member"), 24

188 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
years; Storrs, N. Y., 10 years; Strong, N. Y., 10 years; Taylor, N.
Y., 20 years; Polk, Tenn., 14 years.
Against the aggregate of eight and one-third years of service of
Mitchell and Bates in public stations as important as or more im
portant than Representative, those of whom McMaster does not
mention one name, and from whose speeches he only quotes and
abstracts less than one-quarter of what he quotes from Bates and
Mitchell, served as Representatives, Senators, Secretaries of State,
Presidents, Ministers to England and Russia and Governors of
States an aggregate of more than 200 years.
These plainly were the strong men of the House — the men whose
speeches showed whether or not the "men of that day thought Or-
gon worth having."
Let us see what a few of them said, as stated in "Debates in
Congress," 20th Cong., 2d Sess. :
Gurley of Louisiana (p. 145) "He was decidedly opposed to the
exploration of the country before the occupation of it, as was sug
gested by the gentlemen from Missouri and New York. They
should be simultaneous. He could see no possible object in it un
less we were prepared to surrender it if it did not equal our ex
pectations, which he presumed all would disdain.
"If it was as barren as the deserts of Siberia we should never
surrender it, and he would do nothing that could be so construed,
as would necessarily be such a proposition. He said we could not
surrender the territory if we would.
"We were already committed on this subject, having long since
made and published to the world that no foreign power should
plant a colony on this continent. We could not, therefore, without
violating our own honor, truth and sincerity voluntarily surrender
this territory to any foreign power."
Cambreling of New York (p. 171) : "But, sir, it is vain to talk
of surrendering the country beyond the Rocky Mountains. The
gentleman from Missouri asks 'If we will fight for it.' Yes, sir, if
it was as frightful in every feature as that gentleman has described
it; if it was barren as the Arabian sands; nay, sir, if it was bleak
and desolate as an iceberg, the American people would never yield
it, they would never allow themselves to be dispossessed of it by
the Hudson's Bay Co.; they would never surrender it to Great
Britain. "They ought not. A people who would be governed by such a
policy — who would not go to war in defense of the national do
minion and honor — should withdraw from the society of nations."
Drayton of South Carolina (p. 142) "The British settlers in
what I shall term the territory of Oregon (for the want of a known
appellation distinguishing the territory upon the northwest coast

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 189
of America in dispute between Great Britain and ourselves) are
already protected." ... (p. 143, 1st col.) "From the distance
of the territory of Oregon, and from the natural barriers and ob
stacles by land which are interposed between it and the United
States, I have never dreamed of its becoming a State.
"I believe it will never be organized as a territory. I much
doubt the benefits of possessing it; but we have it, and whether we
be influenced by national honor and policy or less meritorious mo
tives, we shall never voluntarily relinquish it; it will never be
yielded, should the title be found to be in us, but to superior physi
cal power. Considering ourselves as rightfully entitled to the
country, we should conduct ourselves towards it as wise and poli
tic sovereigns; as such we ought, in the most economical and effi
cient manner which is practicable, to secure its adherence to us,
to protect, in their persons and in their property, those of our citi
zens who inhabit it, or who may occasionally resort to it in the
pursuit of their lawful occupations, and to derive from it all the
advantages we can. The measures which I have advocated will, it
seems to me, produce these results. I am, therefore, for adopting
them." Ingersoll of Connecticut (p. 188) "But, when, although he en
tertained these opinions, still, when the question was put and turn
it as you may, it will come to this, whether we shall surrender this
vast territory into the hands of the British or maintain our own
jurisdiction there, he was ready to give a positive and decisive
answer. It should not with his consent go into the hands of a
foreign power."
Buchanan (p. 126) "He was not unfriendly to the bill, but
thought its language ought to be studied with care lest the nation
should inadvertently compromise its own rights. He disliked the
feature in the amendment which proposed a monopoly to one com
pany of forty miles square ; and believing that the subject required
more mature consideration moved that the committee rise, and it
rose accordingly."
Everett of Massachusetts (p. 126) "Mr. Edw. Everett stated
that in that part of the country from which he came there was an
association of 3,000 individuals, respectable farmers and indus
trious artisans, who stood ready to embark in this enterprise, so
soon as the permission and protection of the Government should
be secured to them, and expressed a doubt whether an exclusive
grant of forty miles square to the Louisiana company would have
a just and proper bearing upon other settlers equally enterprising
and meritorious."
Polk of Tennessee (pp. 129-32) showed that he had carefully
studied the record of the negotiations of 1826-7 and urged caution,

190 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
lest the bill then proposed by Floyd of Virginia, as chairman of the
committee on the Oregon Territory, should conflict with the treaty
of August 6, 1827, and so involve us in war with Great Britain and
perhaps result in loss of the whole territory in dispute. On p. 130
he says that in the discussion of the question between Mr. Gallatin
and the British plenipotentiaries in 1827 the question of exclusive
occupancy was taken up. "Mr. Gallatin, our Minister, in a letter
dated at London, June 27, 1827, addressed to his Government, gives
the views entertained by the respective parties. He says: 'The
British plenipotentiaries had it in contemplation to insert in the
protocol a declaration purporting either, that, according to their
understanding of the agreement, either party had a right to take
military possession of the country, or, that, if the United States
did establish any military posts in the country Great Britain
would do the same.' They preferred the first mode, as the other
might be construed by the United States as having the appearance
of a threat. Great Britain, they said, had no wish to establish
such posts, and would do it only in self-defense."
"Again they say, as stated by Mr. Gallatin in the same letter,
'Occasional disturbances between the traders of the two countries
might be overlooked; but any question connected with the flag of
either power would be of a serious nature, and might commit them
in a most inconvenient and dangerous manner.' " (P. 132, col. 1)
"We ought, he said, to pause before we pass this bill ; not that he
would, for a moment, think of abandoning our title (for he be
lieved it to be the better one), or of permitting any foreign power
to become the owner of the country.
"We should not act now; but as the question of title is left to
future adjustment by negotiation, until we ascertain that there is
no hope for regulating it by the Executive, let us postpone any
measure on the subject. In the meantime, he would not permit
Great Britain, or any other power, to take exclusive possession of
it. By delay we can lose nothing. By acting now, we may hazard
much." Early in the debate Floyd (pp. 125-129) "Adverted to a peti
tion now before Congress of a company of persons in New Orleans
offering to commence a colony at their own expense; on the leader
of which company, a former schoolfellow of his own, he bestowed
the highest praise."
Gurley of Louisiana moved as an amendment to the bill that
the New Orleans Co. be granted forty miles square of land.
The next day this amendment of Gurley's was modified by
striking out that part of it which provided that our Government
should extinguish the Indian title to forty miles square of land in
favor of John M. Bradford and his associates (a company of ad-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 191
venturers proposing to set out from New Orleans) ; and also by
inserting the names of Paul and J. Kelley (doubtless meant for Hall
and J. Kelley) and his associates (a similar company from Massa
chusetts) ; and Albert Town and his associates (a company from
Ohio), as entitled to the permission granted by the bill for the
erection of a fort on certain conditions.
Later Floyd said: (p. 192) "On all occasions the Government
seem to have taken upon themselves to think for the people; and
in all instances have been behind the enterprise of private indi
viduals — so true is it they perceive their own interests long before
Government can be prevailed upon to co-operate, or permit them
to pursue what would seem to be manifest to all. At an early day
Britain attempted to arrest this wave of emigration, which was
rolling to the West ; and by proclamation prohibited any from set
tling beyond the Alleghany Mountains, which was at that time a
part of Louisiana, according to the claims of the French King. Nor
was private enterprise more successful in obtaining the approba
tion of Government in the settlement of Tennessee. Gov. Sevier,
one of their most enterprising and respectable citizens, was out
lawed for making the attempt.
"It is true that all the western part of Virginia, which at that
day comprised the country on the southern bank of the Ohio River
from its mouth to the Great Kanawha, was settled by private en
terprise, and was approved by that State, which has always acted
with liberality to her citizens. Even this Government, hardly re
leased from British rule, thought, or acted as though it thought,
the people ought to be directed and controlled in the pursuit of
happiness, as they attempted to arrest or prevent the settlement
of Boone's Lick, the finest and most fertile portion of the State of
Missouri. The result was a complete failure. The people in the
pursuit in their own way persisted, disregarding these efforts, and
did that which all now acknowledge would have been injurious to
the country to have failed to do."
Richardson of Massachusetts (one of the committee who re
ported the bill), (on p. 138) said: "But the descriptions given yes
terday by gentlemen (i. e., Bates and Mitchell) on the opposite
side, of the Oregon Territory have almost shaken my confidence in
the correctness of the judgment I had formed. They have de
scribed the territory as a region of desolation, the river unnavi
gable, the whole claim as worse than worthless, and, as it would
seem, even reproachful to its author.
"How are these contradictory statements to be accounted for?
Those who have navigated the river and traversed the region from
the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific have represented the country
as luxuriant and beautiful.

192 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Sir, I am old enough to remember having read the speeches in
Congress on the question of the acquisition of Louisiana, when
that question was pending. The most horrible pictures of that
country were drawn in Congress and spread before the Union to
deter the Government from the acquisition.
"And, sir, I have read accounts published by foreign travelers,
and which were spread through Europe, describing the whole of
the United States as country fit to be inhabited by none but wild
beasts and savages. Of such accounts there were latent causes
which time has unfolded. Before the face of the world events have
contradicted those accounts. Surely the statements of gentlemen
on all sides of what they have not seen are to be received with
caution." As the provisions of the bill plainly violated the terms of the
treaty of 1827, it is evident that it was not designed that it should
be enacted, but only that as a part of the campaign of education
and stimulation about Oregon it should be thoroughly debated,
and the fact that our Government — like that of Great Britain —
could not grant land to any one in Oregon while that treaty re
mained in force, should be so emphasized that those infected with
the Oregon migration fever even at that early date, might under
stand that although our Government was inflexibly determined to
hold Oregon, at least as far north as 49 degrees, it could grant no
title to lands in Oregon until that treaty should be abrogated and
a boundary line should be established between Oregon and the
British possessions on the north of it.
The bill was finally defeated by 75 to 99.
It is an amusing commentary on the claims made by Benton
and L. G. Taylor and some others that Oregon was saved to the
United States by the action of Western and Southern men against
the indifference about or the opposition to its acquisition of the
statesmen from the Northeastern States, and especially New Eng
land, that in this, the most extensive and thorough debate ever
had on Oregon prior to that of the winter of 1842-3 in the Senate,
the only two Representatives who denounced Oregon worthless and
inaccessible were Mitchell of Tennessee and Bates of Missouri,
while of the fourteen who declared in most emphatic terms its
great value and insisted that we owned it, and sooner or later would
certainly assert our title to it, and maintain that title at all haz
ards, three — Everett, Reed and Richardson represented Massachu
setts districts; one — Ingersoll, a Connecticut district; and four —
Cambreling, Storrs, Strong and Taylor represented New York dis
tricts, while Gurley, though representing a Louisiana district, was
born and reared in Connecticut and graduated from Yale College,
and Strong was also a native of Connecticut.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 193
Ten years passed before there was another considerable debate
on and committee report about Oregon in the House of Representa
tives. In the first session of the 21st Congress there was no discus
sion about Oregon, but early in the session a resolution was passed
requesting the President to transmit any information in his pos
session respecting the British establishments on the Columbia and
the state of the fur trade.
January 24, 1831, Jackson wrote a very brief message, trans
mitting letters of Gen. W. H. Ashley, Maj. Joshua L. Pilcher,
Smith, Sublette and Jackson, or the Rocky Mountain Fur Co., and
Lewis Cass and Gen. William Clark. January 25, 1831, it was read
and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs, and January
26 it was reported back from that committee, and 1,500 copies or
dered printed besides the usual number for the use of the Senate.
It is Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 39, Vol. I., 21st Cong., 1st Sess. (p. 34), and
with its descriptions of Ashley's method of conducting his fur trad
ing expeditions, and Pilcher's simple, straightforward and graphic
story of his remarkable explorations, and his descriptions of passes
over the Continental Divide by which wagons could be easily driven
into the Oregon Territory; and the Rocky Mountain Fur Co.'s re
cital of their extensive operations and explorations (with from 80
to 100 men divided into small parties) of "all the country beyond
the Rocky Mountains from the Gulf of California to the mouth of
the Columbia," and the story of their successful experiment in
driving 10 five-mule wagons and two Dearborns or light wagons
from St. Louis to the foot of the South Pass and back to St. Louis,
between April 10 and October 10, 1830, and their declaration —
based not on conjecture, but on the knowledge derived from their
own explorations — that they could have driven the wagons to the
Great Falls of the Columbia if they had cared to do it, make this
one of the most valuable documents ever printed concerning the
Rocky Mountain and Pacific regions, and one which is still and
must ever be full of interest to all who care to know the true his
tory of the development of the region beyond the Missouri.
I have quoted from it at some length in Chapter V., and must
quote more from it in Chapter VIL, and will only say here that
it was repeatedly referred to and its essential portions not only re
printed in later Government reports and in debates in Congress,
but also in newspapers and magazine articles.
On the 1st of August, 1831, Jackson's Administration took up
again the diplomatic phase of the question, but England not caring
to settle the matter then, no farther offer was made by our Gov
ernment to negotiate upon it for more than a dozen years there
after

194 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
The only record I have found of this 1831 effort is on pp. 29-30
of Sen. Ex. Doc 489, 29th Cong., 1st Sess., in a letter from James
Buchanan, Secretary of State, to Louis McLane, then our Minister
to England, dated July 12, 1845, in a resume of the diplomacy of
the Oregon question up to that time, as follows : "The next notice
of this question will be found under the administration of General
Jackson. It is contained in the instructions of Mr. Livingston
(Secretary of State), to Mr. Van Buren (our Minister to England),
dated on the 1st of August, 1831. . . . After stating that the
term of joint occupation was indefinitely continued for the pur
pose, in the language of the treaty, 'of giving time to mature meas
ures which shall have for their object a more definite settlement
of the claims of each party to the said territory,' they go on to
remark that 'this subject, then, is open for discussion; and until
the rights of the parties can be settled by negotiation, ours can
suffer nothing by delay.' From the 1st of August, 1831, the date
of Mr. Livingston's instructions to Mr. Van Buren, until the 9th
of October, 1843, no further notice of the Oregon question was
taken in any instructions from this department. On that day Mr.
Upshur, then the Secretary of State under Mr. Tyler's administra
tion, addressed instructions to Mr. Everett on that subject."
But as we shall speedily see there was abundance of executive
and Congressional action in these twelve years to acquire and dis
seminate far and wide, not only in this country, but in England
also, full and very valuable information about Oregon, and to in
form not only our own citizens, but the English people and Govern
ment as well, that we were determined at all hazards to hold Ore
gon as far north as the 49th degree.
May 21, 1831, Capt. B. L. E. Bonneville wrote to Maj. Gen.
Alex. Macomb, commanding the United States Army, asking leave
of absence for his famous expedition to the Rocky Mountains,
partly for fur trading and trapping and partly for geographical
exploration, and observation of the British and American trading
establishments beyond the Rocky Mountains. (Cf. Bonneville's
[unpublished] Application for Furlough in War Dept. archives.)
August 3, 1831, Gen. Macomb wrote him that his application
had been submitted to the War Department and approved, and
leave of absence granted him until October, 1833, and after enum
erating many things which it was desired he should observe and
report to the Government, he concluded with "in short, every in
formation which you may conceive would be useful to the Govern
ment." (Cf. App. to Irving's Bonneville.)
May 1, 1832, with 110 men and 20 wagons, he set out from the
Missouri frontier. Unforeseen delay caused him to overstay his
furlough, and he did not reach the frontier settlements of Missouri

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 195
on his return till August 22, 1835, and meanwhile, as very full dis
patches which he had confided to Mr. Cerre in 1833 had failed to
reach Washington, by the order of President Jackson his name was
stricken from the army rolls, and it was with very considerable
difficulty that he secured its restoration. He subsequently was in
command of Fort Vancouver, after the United States Government
took the old Hudson's Bay Co. post there as a military reservation,
and served faithfully in the civil war, rising to be Colonel and
Brevet Brigadier General, and remained an army officer till his
death, June 12, 1878, after being an officer in the army 62% years.
We have already learned that he developed the first transconti
nental wagon road from where the Rocky Mountain Fur Co.
stopped in 1830, at the east end of the South Pass, by driving his
twenty loaded wagons through that broad, grassy valley over the
summit of the Continental Divide and into the Oregon Territory
some sixty miles to Green River.
Irving's "Bonneville" (published in both New York and Lon
don in 1837, as his "Astoria" had been in 1836) — and ever since
one of the most widely read books of western travel and adven
ture — stimulated interest in and determination to hold Oregon in
all parts of our land, as "Astoria" had done.
Bonneville's unpublished dispatches, and still more his personal
interviews, undoubtedly gave much valuable information about the
operations of the Hudson's Bay Co., the face of the country, the
resources and the climate of Eastern Oregon — for he did not get
as far west as the Cascades, turning back from the Columbia at a
point about midway between Fort Walla Walla and the Dalles.
(Cf. Bonneville, Chapter 46.)
No sooner had Bonneville reported in Washington than Presi
dent Jackson determined to have a report from a competent man
of the then existing conditions in Western Oregon, and selected
Lieut. William A. Slacum of the Navy for the task, and (for some
reason unknown), issued through the State, and not the Navy De
partment, the following letter of instructions to him:
"State Dept., Washington, Nov. 11, 1835.
"Lieut. William A. Slacum,
"Sir: Having understood that you are about to visit the Pa
cific Ocean the President has determined to avail himself of the
opportunity thus afforded to obtain some specific authentic informa
tion in regard to the inhabitants of the country in the neighbor
hood of the Oregon or Columbia River. In the belief that you will
willingly lend your services in the prosecution of this object, I now
give you, by the President's direction, such general instructions as

196 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
may be necessary for your guidance in the execution of the pro
posed commission.
"Upon your arrival on the northwest coast of America you will
embrace the earliest opportunity to proceed to and up the river
Oregon, by such conveyances as may be thought to offer the great
est facility for attaining the end in view.
"You will, from time to time, as they occur in your progress,
stop at the different settlements of whites on the coast of the
United States, and on the banks of the river, and also at the
various Indian villages on the banks or in the immediate neighbor
hood of that river; ascertain as nearly as possible the population
of each; the relative number of whites (distinguishing the nations
to which they belong) and aborigines; the jurisdiction the whites
acknowledge; the sentiments entertained by all in respect to the
United States and to the two European powers having possessions
in that region; and, generally, endeavor to obtain all such informa
tion, political, physical, statistical and geographical as may prove
useful or interesting to this Government. For this purpose it is
recommended that you should whilst employed on this service keep
a journal in which to note down whatever may strike you as worthy
of observation, and by the aid of which you will be enabled, when
the journey is completed, to make a full and accurate report to the
Department of all the information you may have collected in re
gard to the country and its inhabitants.
"Your necessary and reasonable traveling expenses will be paid
from the beginning of your journey from the coast of the Pacific to
the Columbia River and till your return to this city.
"(Signed) JOHN FORSYTH,
"Secretary of State."
Slacum's report is to be found in Sen. Ex. Doc. 24, 25th Cong.,
2d Sess., Vol. I. (p. 31), read December 18, 1837, and ordered
printed and referred to Committee on Foreign Relations, consist
ing of Buchanan, Clay, Tallmadge, Rivers and King of Alabama.
He left Guaymas, Mexico, June 1, 1836, had much difficulty in
reaching the Sandwich Islands, but arrived there November 5, 1836,
and chartered the brig Loriot, and on November 24 set sail for the
Columbia River, and arrived there December 22, 1836.
On the 10th of February, 1837, he sailed out of the Columbia
and towards Bodega and the Russian Settlement in California.
His "Report" proper begins on p. 3 of his memorial, and is
dated "American Brig Loriot, off San Bias, March 26, 1837," and
is very valuable and was repeatedly quoted in later committee re
ports to both the Senate and the House, and referred to in debates
in both Houses as of the highest value.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 197
Its most important parts are: (1) The account of the forma
tion of the company which went to California and purchased a
large band of cattle. (2) The statements concerning the agri
cultural and stock raising value of the Oregon country. (3) The
enthusiastic argument for our insisting on holding the Puget Sound
region, as follows:
(P. 12) "In the course of conversation with Mr. Lee, Young
and other settlers, I found that nothing was wanting to insure
comfort, wealth and every happiness to the people of this most
beautiful country but the possession of neat cattle, all of those in
the country being owned by the Hudson's Bay Co., who refuse to
sell them under any circumstances whatever. I then proposed to
give as many of the settlers as chose to embark in the Loriot a
free passage to California, where they might procure cattle at $3.00
a head." (P. 13) "I advanced Mr. Lee $500. This sum, added to the
contributions of the settlers, produced $1,600, a sum sufficient to
purchase 500 head of cattle in California." . . . "At a public
meeting that took place at 'Camp Maud De Sable' on the subject
of the expedition to California the liveliest interest appeared to be
felt when I told the 'Canadians' that, although they were located
within the territorial limits of the United States, their pre-emption
rights would doubtless be secured to them when our Government
should take possession of the country."
It is plain that without this initiative by Slacum there would
have been no cattle company, and as appears from the "Copy of a
Document by Dr. McLoughlin, 'He subscribed in behalf of the Hud
son's Bay Co. for one-half the stock of the cattle company.' "
Yet the writers who seek to make it appear that everything
good in the early settlement of Oregon was due to the Methodist
and American Board missionaries ascribe this entire project to
Rev. Jason Lee, and those of them who are most malignant to
wards the Hudson's Bay Co. accuse that company of having bit
terly opposed the cattle company, Gray even going so far as to
accuse the Hudson's Bay Co. of inciting the Rogue River Indians
"to destroy the expedition." (Cf. Gray's "History of Oregon," p.
156; Spalding's pamphlet, [Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 37, 41st Cong., 3d
Sess.], p. 75.)
(P. 16 "I consider the Willhamet" (Willamette) "the finest
grazing country in the world. Here there are no droughts, as on
the pampas of Buenos Ayres or the plains of California, whilst the
lands abound with richer grasses, both in winter and summer."
(P. 17) "It may be fairly estimated that the valleys of the
rivers certainly within the limits of the United States (exclusive
of the Columbia and Willamette) contain at least 14,000,000 acres

198 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
of land of first quality, equal to the best lands of Missouri or Illi
nois. ... I beg leave to call your attention to the topography
of 'Pugitt's Sound,' and urge in the most earnest manner that this
point should never be abandoned. If the United States claim, as
I hope they ever will, at least as far as 49 degrees of north lati
tude, running due west from the 'Lake of the Woods' on the above
parallel we shall take in 'Pugitt's Sound.' In a military point of
view, it is of the highest importance to the United States. . . .
I hope our claim to 54 degrees of north latitude will never be
abandoned; at all events, we should never give up Pugitt's Sound,
nor permit the free navigation of the Columbia, unless, indeed, a
fair equivalent was offered, such as the free navigation of the St.
Lawrence." It is a very significant fact that less than eight months after
this earnest plea by this naval officer for holding on to the Puget's
Sound region was read in Congress, the Navy Department, on Au
gust 11, 1838, in its "instructions" to Lieut. Charles Wilkes, when
setting sail in command of by far the most extensive exploring ex
pedition this Government has ever sent out, consisting of six ships
and nearly 600 men, specifically directed him to spend six months
of the three years that it was then supposed would be required for
the whole exploration, as follows: "Thence" (i. e., from the Sand
wich Islands in April) "you will direct your course to the north
west coast of America, making such surveys and examinations, first
of the territory of the United States on the seaboard and of the
Columbia River, and afterwards along the coast of California, with
special reference to the Bay of San Francisco, as you can accom
plish by the month of October following."
How faithfully Wilkes carried out these instructions in the
summer of 1841 and of what great value not only Congress but the
nation at large deemed his "Special Report" of his work in Oregon,
filed in the Navy Department June 13, 1842, we shall see a little
later, but we must first consider what was done about Oregon in
the Senate and House of Representatives in 1838-1842.
At the first (or special) session of the 25th Congress the House
of Representatives, on October 9, and the Senate, on October 16,
1837, unanimously adopted resolutions requesting the President:
"If not incompatible with the public interests, to communicate
to each body at the next session of Congress information as to
whether any, and if so, what portion of the territory of the United
States west of the Rocky Mountains and bordering on the Pacific
Ocean is in the possession of any foreign power, and if so, in what
way, by what authority and how long such possession or occupancy
has been kept." The Senate resolution also asked that there should
be communicated any correspondence between our Government and

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 199
any foreign Government relative to the occupation of said terri
tory. These resolutions were referred to the State Department for a
report, and December 22, 1837, to the Senate, and December 26,
1837, to the House of Representatives, President Van Buren sent
two line messages of transmittal of the two reports of John For
syth, Secretary of State, in response to these resolutions. To each
body the Report stated that the Astoria establishment had passed
into the hands of the British North West Co. by sale of Astor's
interest, during the war of 1812, and on the consolidation of that
company with the Hudson's Bay Co. it had passed to and remained
in possession of that company, and that its retention by them, and
the establishment of other trading posts by them within the Ore
gon Territory was not deemed incompatible with the provisions of
the treaties of 1818 and 1827. The Senate was also informed that
no correspondence had been had on the occupation of the said ter
ritory with any foreign government since the convention of August
6, 1827, was made. (Cf. Messages and Papers of the Presidents.
Richardson, Vol. IIL, pp. 397-8.)
At the second session of the 25th Congress (December 11, 1837,
to July 9, 1838), on February 7, 1838, Senator Lewis F. Linn of
Missouri introduced a bill to establish Oregon Territory. (Cf.
Cong. Globe, p. 168.)
This was debated by Clay of Kentucky, Buchanan of Pennsyl
vania, Linn and Benton of Missouri and Lyon of  , and in
the course of the debate Clay declared (p. 169) that he had intro
duced the word "possessions" into the Treaty of Ghent for the pur
pose of securing (as it did) the restoration of Astoria to the United
States. February 13, 1838, the Senate unanimously adopted a motion
calling on the Secretary of War to send to the Senate all informa
tion in his Department relating to the Oregon Territory and to
have a map of the territory made for the use of the Senate. (Cong.
Globe, p. 179.)
June 6, 1838, Linn, as chairman of the Select Committee on the
Oregon Territory, presented a report (Sen. Ex. Doc. 470, 25th
Cong., 2d Sess.) covering 23 pages, with a copy of the famous Ul
timatum Map.
It begins with : "The attention of the Government has been, on
several occasions, called to this important subject by bills and reso
lutions, through able and elaborate reports from committees of
Congress, and in various Executive communications."
On the question of our right to the Oregon Territory it says:
(p. 3) "This question has been so ably argued by the late Gov
ernor Floyd, who was the first to urge on Congress the use and

200 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
occupation of the Oregon Territory, by Mr. F. Baylies, in two re
ports to the House of Representatives, and in the diplomatic cor
respondence of our Government with Great Britain, and in various
other public documents, as to make it unnecessary for us to go at
large into this subject."
On p. 2 it quotes in full the letter of instructions from the State
Department to Lieut. Slacum (as hereinbefore given), and on later
pages quotes freely from Slacum's Report, not forgetting to include
(on p. 10) his eulogy of Puget's Sound (hereinbefore quoted), and
from the Reports of Lewis and Clark, and J. B. Prevost, and from
Irving's "Astoria," and also quotes (pp. 20-23) Gray's "Log Book
of the Columbia," May 7-21, 1792.
On p. 31, after briefly reciting that Col. Dodge, between May
29 and September 16, 1835, had marched three companies of the
Second Regiment of Dragoons (with two pieces of artillery and two
wagon loads of flour, and 25 head of beef cattle), from Fort Leav
enworth up the Platte River to the Rocky Mountains, and after a
month's stay there had continued south to the Arkansas River, and
thence back to Leavenworth, a distance of 1,600 miles, and had
only lost one man on the whole trip, the report continues: "Col.
Dodge is decidedly of the opinion that an army could march with
ease from our western confines to the Pacific Ocean, taking with it
all its artillery, munitions of war and provisions."
On p. 11, speaking of the Continental Divide, it says: "This
line of continuous mountains, when viewed at a distance, every
where seems impassable; the mind shrinks or recoils from such
frowning and forbidding obstacles. But within ten or fifteen years
passes of such gentle ascent have been discovered that loaded
wagons easily traverse them."
Though the 23 pages of text is valuable, it contains absolutely
nothing new, and the chief importance of this report is that it is
the first one of four Congressional reports on Oregon to use the
map prepared by the War Department "for use of the Senate" in
accordance with its unanimous resolution of February 13, 1838.
Of this, and Slacum's Chart of the Columbia (which was also
used) the committee said: (P, 19) "The map of the Territory of
Oregon, and chart of the Columbia River, which accompany this
report, are believed to be the most correct, and furnish the most
recent and authentic information, of any yet published, and were
prepared by Colonel Abert, of the Topographical Bureau, with
much care and labor. The chart was made by Mr. Slacum, after
his recent visit to Oregon."
This map showed our line as 49 degrees through to the Pacific,
and bore, in plain type out in the "Pacific Ocean," where no bound
ary line, or mountain chain, or stream, or anything else in the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 201
slightest degree obscured it, the following legend: "The prolonga
tion of the 49th parallel from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific
has been assumed as the northern boundary of the United States
possessions on the Northwest Coast, in consequence of the follow
ing extract from the Hon. H. Clay's letter to Mr. Gallatin, dated
June 19, 1826 (see Doc. 199, 20th Cong., 1st Sess., H. of R.) : 'You
are authorized to propose the annulment of the third article of the
Convention of 1818, and the extension of the line on the parallel
of 49 degrees from the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains where
it now terminates to the Pacific Ocean as the permanent boundary
between the two powers in that quarter. This is our ultimatum,
and you may so announce it.' "
Of this, which may properly be called the "Ultimatum Map" of
Oregon, Congress ordered 20,000 copies in three other Reports, viz. :
10,000 in Cushing's Report (1839) ; 5,000 in Pendleton's first Re
port (May, 1842) ; and 5,000 in Pendleton's second Report (Janu
ary, 1843).
As these were "besides the usual number for the use of Con
gress" (which was 1,500 copies) the entire number on the four Re
ports was about 26,000.
How was it possible for our Government more emphatically to
announce to all the world its inflexible determination to adhere to
its ultimatum of 1826, and insist on 49 degrees as the northern
boundary of Oregon, than by thus publishing, in four Reports — in
1838, 1839, 1842 and 1843 (all unanimous by the committees, and
all unanimously adopted by the Senate or the House) — 26,000
copies of this "ultimatum map," a map not published by some irre
sponsible publisher, but prepared by the War Department at the
unanimous request of the Senate, which is a part of the treaty
making power in our Government?
No advocate of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story seems ever
to have heard of our 1826 "ultimatum instructions" to Gallatin
hereinbefore quoted, nor of this "Ultimatum Map," and, so far as
I have been able to ascertain, I am the first writer on Oregon his
tory who has mentioned either President Adams' "Ultimatum in
structions" to Gallatin in 1826, or this "Ultimatum Map" of 1838-
1843. At this second session of the 25th Congress the Message of
President Van Buren of December 26, 1837, relating to Oregon
was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, of which Caleb
Cushing of Massachusetts (one of the ablest lawyers of the land)
was a member (Cf. Cong. Globe, 25th Cong., 2d Sess., p. 401), and
May 17, 1838, Cushing delivered a very able speech covering 12%
columns. (Cf. App. to Cong. Globe, 25th Cong., 2d Sess., p. 565,
for verbatim report of this speech.) In this speech he appealed to

202 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
ex-President John Q. Adams, then a member of the House, for con
firmation of the accuracy of his statements of the facts as to our
right to Oregon, characterizing Mr. Adams as "A living record of
the diplomatic history of the country."
In this speech (App., p. 567, 2d col.) Cushing said: "Mr. Astor
offered to renew his enterprises on the Columbia, provided the
Government would establish a military post there with the most
trifling force, even a lieutenant's command; needing only the coun
tenance and flag of the United States. If his advice had been
adopted the question would have been settled then before the Hud
son's Bay Co. had struck root in the Territory."
No report on Oregon was made to the House at this session,
but at the third session Cushing, from the Committee on Foreign
Affairs, on January 4, 1839, made a report of 51 pages, of which,
on motion of John Q. Adams, 10,000 extra copies were ordered
printed (a number fully equivalent to 50,000 copies at the present
time), and on February 16, 1839, he made a supplemental report
of 61 pages, of which also 10,000 copies were ordered printed.
The two were printed together as "Report No. 101, House of
Representatives, 25th Cong., 3d Sess.," with the "Ultimatum Map."
It discusses all phases of the Oregon question very thoroughly, for
few men in America had so carefully studied that question or writ
ten so much upon it as Cushing. In the North American Review —
then by far the most influential magazine published in the United
States, and the only one which exercised any influence on opinion
in England — he had published three long articles on the Northwest
Coast of America: October, 1828 (36 pp.); January, 1837 (37
pp.) ; January, 1839 (34 pp.) ; and these were followed January,
1840, by an article of 70 pp.
On p. 15 of his Report, discussing the various (and as the Eng
lish diplomats and writers had claimed conflicting) grounds under
which the United States claimed Oregon, he says: "Though their
several claims" (i. e., under Capt. Gray's discovery; the Louisiana
Purchase ; the explorations of Lewis and Clark ; the Astoria settle
ment, and the Florida Purchase) "conflicted with each other orig
inally, they acquired mutual strength in the same hands; as if
three persons claim the same estate, one by deed or devise, another
by inheritance, and a third by possession, the union of all in one
person by purchase or otherwise would result in the best of titles."
On p. 16 he gives the following splendid description of the re
sistless westward movement of our population: "Who shall under
take to define the limits of the expansibility of the United States?
Does it not flow westward with the never ceasing advance of a ris
ing tide of the sea? Along a line of more than a thousand miles

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 203
from the Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico, perpetually moves forward
the westward frontier of the United States.
"Here, stretched along the whole length of this line, is the van
guard as it were of the onward march of the Anglo-American race,
advancing, it has been calculated, at the average rate of about one-
half a degree of longitude each succeeding year. Occasionally an
obstacle presents itself, in some unproductive region of country or
some Indian tribe; the column is checked; its wings incline to
wards each other ; it breaks ; but it speedily reunites again beyond
the obstacle, and resumes its forward progress, ever facing, and
approaching nearer and nearer to the remotest regions of the West.
This movement goes on with the predestined certainty and the un
erring precision of the great works of Providence, rather than as
an act of feeble man. Another generation may see the settlements
of our people diffused over the Pacific slope of the Rocky Mountains.
It is idle to suppose any new colony to be sent out by Great Britain
will or can establish itself in the far West, ultimately to stand in
competition with this great movement of the population and power
of the United States."
As to the unanimity with which all our leading statesmen had
supported our claim to Oregon, this Report says: (on p. 22) "The
committee beg leave to subjoin, that in the course of this Report
they have not undertaken to raise any novel pretensions in behalf
of the United States. They have relied on the grounds of right
alleged by every American statesman who has had occasion to ex
amine the subject from the time of Mr. Jefferson to the present
day; referring more especially to the instructions, correspondence
and despatches of Mr. Monroe, Mr. Adams, Mr. Rush, Mr. Clay,
Mr. Gallatin and Mr. Lawrence and the reports of Mr. Floyd, Mr.
Baylies and Mr. Linn, and superadding only such further illustra
tions, facts and arguments as the personal research of the com
mittee has brought to their knowledge."
It quotes fully from the previous reports of Baylies, Linn and
Slacum, including Slacum's enthusiastic endorsement of the Pu
get's Sound region (which Linn had quoted), and N. J. Wyeth's
Memoir ; also the Memorial of 36 settlers in the Willamette ; also a
letter from J. K. Paulding, Secretary of the Navy, stating that he
had directed "the commander of the squadron in the Pacific to em
ploy a sloop of war in making a close and accurate survey of this
part of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, with a view to ascertain its
advantages as a station or harbor for ships of war over the Co
lumbia ;" also a letter from Rev. Mr. Tracy of Lynn, Mass., contain
ing an exposition of the views and objects of the "Oregon Provis
ional Emigration Society" formed in August, 1836, and having for
its object 'the planting of Christian American Settlements in Ore-

204 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
gon, and enclosing a copy of the Oregonian, a monthly periodical
devoted to the interests of the society, and saying that "Not less
than 200 men will compose our first migrating company."
At this third session of the 25th Congress in the Senate on De
cember 11, 1838, Linn introduced a bill for the occupation of the
Columbia or Oregon Territory, which was read twice and referred
to a Select Committee consisting of Linn (chairman), John C. Cal
houn, Henry Clay and Franklin Pierce. (Cf. Cong. Globe, p. 22.)
January 28, 1839, Linn reported a bill for the occupation of
Oregon, which after brief debate was referred to the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, of which James Buchanan was chairman and H.
Clay a member.
Twenty-sixth Cong., 1st Sess., December 9, 1839, to July 21,
1840. December 18, 1839, Linn "Introduced a joint resolution de
claring that our title to the Oregon was indisputable, and will
never be abandoned," and that the Government should give the
requisite twelve months' notice that we desired to terminate the
Convention of August 6, 1827, for extending the laws of the United
States over Oregon, for raising soldiers to protect immigrants to
Oregon; and for giving 640 acres of land in Oregon to each white
male of 18 years of age, resident of the Territory, who would live on
and cultivate it for five years. January 8, 1840, these resolutions
were referred to a Select Committee consisting of Linn, Walker,
Preston, Pierce and Sevier.
By far the most important action on the Oregon question of
this session of Congress was the publication of the first or Gov
ernment edition of "Greenhow's History," as Sen. Ex. Doc. No.
174, 26th Cong., 1st Sess. — a document of immense significance in
this discussion, and of which no advocate of the Whitman Saved
Oregon Legend seems ever to have heard, till my manuscripts with
their criticisms of Barrows, and Nixon, and Craighead for omitting
to mention this — caused Mowry and M. Eells in 1901 to mention
its existence, but without quoting from it or otherwise giving their
readers any idea of its importance.
It is the only official history of any of our territorial acquisi
tions which our Government has ever printed while the title was
still in dispute, and the account of its origin given in its preface
is full of interest when we remember not only that the Senate Se
lect Committee on Oregon adopted it as their report, but that the
Senate unanimously accepted the report and ordered 2,500 copies
of it printed in addition to the usual number — which was a very
liberal number for the time. It was also immediately published
in New York City, and also in London by Wiley and Putnam, as
a book for general sale, without a word of change except striking
off from the title page the fact that it was a Government docu-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 205
ment. The English charged that the publication of the London
edition was paid for by the United States Government, and un
doubtedly some of the Secret Service fund was used for that pur
pose. The work covered 228 pages, with a map and a good index,
and was highly commended not only by Senators and Members of
the House of Representatives, but also by the Edinburgh Review.
Its preface begins as follows:
"The following correspondence between the chairman of the
Committee of the Senate on the Oregon Territory and the Secre
tary of State, together with extracts from the Journal of the Sen
ate, will serve to show the circumstances under which this Memoir
has been written and published: "Washington, January 25, 1840.
"Sir: I am informed that your department is in possession of
much information relating to the Territory of Oregon, its geog
raphy, resources, and the title of the United States to the same.
If consistent with your duty, I would be pleased to be put in pos
session of such papers and documents as you may think proper
to send me, requesting that you will mark such as you would rather
not have printed or made public. "Your obedient servant, "L. F. LINN,
"Chairman of the Select Committee on the Territory of Oregon.
"Hon. John Forsyth, Secretary of State."
"Answer. "Department of State,
"Washington, January 25, 1840.
"Sir: I have had the honor to receive your letter of this day's
date, asking for information relative to the Territory of Oregon, its
geography, and resources, and the title of the United States to the
same. Mr. Greenhow, the translator and librarian of this depart
ment, has been for some time past, by my direction, employed in
collecting and arranging historical information on the subject of
the northwestern coasts of America; I send you the result of his
labors, and submit it to the discretion of the committee to be
printed or not, as they may think most advisable. Not having had
the leisure to compare the statements in the Memoir with the
various works and documents upon which they are founded, I can
vouch for the zeal, industry and good faith of Mr. Greenhow, by
whom they were prepared.
"I am, sir, your most obedient servant,
"JOHN FORSYTH,
"Hon. Lewis F. Linn, "Secretary of State.
"Senator of the United States."

206 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"From the Journal of the Senate of the United States :
"Monday, February 10, 1840. On motion of Mr. Linn, 'Ordered,
that a History of the Northwest Coast of North America and the
adjacent territories, communicated to the Select Committee on the
Oregon Territory, be printed, with the accompanying map, and that
two thousand five hundred copies, in addition to the usual number,
be printed for the use of the Senate."
How perfectly well known were the facts about the easy accessi
bility of the Oregon Territory by wagon and its value for agri
culture and grazing will be apparent from the following extracts
from this Government Edition of Greenhow.
(P. 12) "Near the place of union of these chains is a remark
able depression of the Rocky Mountains, called the Southern Pass,
affording a short and easy route for carriages, between the head
waters of the south branch of the Platte, on the east, and those of
the Colorado, in the west; from which latter is another pass
through the mountains, northward, to the Lewis River. There are
other depressions on the great chain farther north, between the
Yellowstone, on the one side, and the Salmon River and Flathead
branches of the Columbia, on the other ; but they offer much greater
difficulties to the traveler than the Southern Pass, which is, and
will probably continue to be, the principal avenue of communica
tion between the United States and the territories of the Far
West." Instead of misinformation from English sources, Mr. Greenhow
copies mostly from the sturdy American, Nathaniel J. Wyeth (who
in 1832 had led out the first party of American settlers to Oregon),
as follows: (P. 15) After describing "the Multnomah or Wallamet" as
flowing for more than 200 miles "through a valley which is said
to be the most delightful and fertile spot in North America," and
going on to speak of all of Oregon west of the Cascade Mountains,
he continues : " 'This country,' says Mr. Wyeth, 'is well calculated
for wheat, barley, oats, rye, pease, apples, potatoes, and all the
roots cultivated in the northern States of the Union; Indian corn
does not succeed well, and is an unprofitable crop. The yield of
wheat, with very poor cultivation, is about fifteen bushels of the
best quality to the acre. Horses and neat cattle succeed tolerably
well; the winter being mild, they are enabled to subsist upon the
produce of the open fields. Hogs live and multiply, but cannot be
made fat on the range of the country. The agriculture of this
region must always suffer from the extreme dryness of the sum
mer. The products which ripen earliest sustain the least damage,
but those which come late are often injured.'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 207
"Of the soil of this region the same acute observer says: 'The
uplands are tolerably good, but the cost of clearing the enormous
growth of timber on them would be beyond their worth; it is too
thick and heavy to allow of crops being obtained by girdling the
trees, and it must be removed or burnt; the labor of which is be
yond the conception of those acquainted only with the forests of
the United States. There are, however, prairies sufficiently numer
ous and extensive for the cultivation of the next century, which,
being chiefly on the second bottoms of rivers, are extremely fertile
and above inundation.' "
On p. 16, after a general description of Middle Oregon (i. e.,
the region between the Cascade Mountains and the Blue Moun
tains), he continues: "Few attempts at cultivation have been
made in this region, and they have not been, upon the whole, suc
cessful. Wyeth conceives that 'the agriculture of this territory
must always be limited to the wants of a pastoral people, and to
the immediate vicinity of the streams and mountains; and irriga
tion must be resorted to if a large population is to be supported
in it. This country, which affords little prospect for the tiller of
the soil, is perhaps one of the best for grazing in the world. It has
been much underrated by travelers who have only passed by the
Columbia, the land along which is a collection of sand and rocks,
and almost without vegetation; but a few miles from the Colum
bia, towards the hills and mountains, the prairies open wide, cov
ered with a low grass of a most nutritious kind, which remains
good throughout the year. In September there are slight rains, at
which time the grass starts; and in October and November there
is a good coat of green grass, which remains so until the ensuing
summer; and about June it is ripe in the lower plains, and, drying
without being wet, is like made hay; in this state it remains until
the autumn rains again revive it. The herdsman in this extensive
valley (of more than one hundred and fifty miles in width) could
at all times keep his animals in good grass, by approaching the
mountains in summer, on the declivities of which almost any cli
mate may be had; and the dry grass of the country is at all times
excellent. It is in this section of the country that all the horses
are reared for the supply of the Indians and traders in the in
terior. It is not uncommon that one Indian owns some hundreds
of them. I think this section, for producing hides, tallow and beef,
is superior to any part of North America ; for, with equal facilities
for raising the animals, the weather in winter, when the grass is
best, and consequently the best time to fatten the animals, is cold
enough to salt meat, which is not the case in Upper California.
There is no question that sheep might be raised to any extent, in
a climate so dry and sufficiently warm and where very little rain

208 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
or snow falls.' ... (p. 199) The first emigrations from the
United States for the purpose of settlement, without any special
commercial views, in the countries of the Columbia, appear to
have been made in 1832. Two years afterward a small colony of
Americans was established on the Wallamet, about seventy miles
from its mouth, under the direction of Mr. Jason Lee and other
Methodist clergymen; and since that period the number of citizens
of the United States permanently residing beyond the Rocky Moun
tains has been much increased. With regard to the condition of
these settlements no information has been recently obtained. In
1837 they were all prospering; and it may be supposed that they
are continuing to do well, inasmuch as a large number of emigrants
sailed for the Columbia from New York in the autumn of last year,
under the superintendence of one of the founders of the Wallamet
colony; and other persons are said to be now in that city prepar
ing for a similar expedition.
"It is not, however, by means of such long and dangerous voy
ages that citizens of the United States are to effect settlements in
Northwest America ; and it will doubtless be the care of their Gov
ernment to render smoother and more secure the routes across the
continent to those countries lying entirely within the undisputed
limits of the Republic. In the possession of these routes the Amer
icans have infinite advantages over the British, and all other na
tions, for occupying the regions in question; and nothing more is
required to render the journey through them safe and easy than
the establishment of a few posts, at convenient distances apart, on
a line between the Missouri and the passes of the Rocky Mountains,
which may serve as forts to overawe the savages, and as caravan-
series for the repose, and possibly even for the supply, of travelers.
When this has been done, the American settlements on the Colum
bia will soon acquire that degree of extent and stability which will
render nugatory all claims on the part of other nations to the pos
session of those countries.
"Within the last five or six years the Government as well as
the people of the United States have begun to devote their atten
tion seriously to matters connected with the northwest regions of
this continent. Numerous petitions have been presented, and mo
tions have been made and discussed, in both Houses of the Federal
Legislature, for the annulment of the existing arrangement with
Great Britain, the military occupation of those territories, and the
extension of American jurisdiction over them; and the Executive
has been sedulously engaged in collecting the information which
may be necessary in order to place the subject in a proper light,
and to render movements effective at the proper time. These pro
ceedings are all so recent, and so well known, that details respect-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 209
ing them would be needless. Suffice it to say, that no resolution
has been taken on any of the plans proposed; and that the posi
tion of the American Government with regard to the territories
claimed for the United States on the Pacific continues as fixed by
its conventions with Great Britain, Russia and Mexico.
"The writer has now completed the task assigned to him.
"He has, as he conceives, demonstrated that the titles of the
United States to the possession of the regions drained by the river
Columbia, derived from priority of discovery and priority of occu
pation, are as yet stronger and more consistent with the principles
of national right than those of any other Power, from whatsoever
source derived. That those regions must be eventually possessed
by the people of the United States only, no one acquainted with
the progress of settlement in the Mississippi Valley during the last
fifteen years will be inclined to question; but that Great Britain
will, by every means in her power, evade the recognition of the
American claims, and oppose the establishment of an American
population on the shores of the Pacific, may be confidently ex
pected, from the disposition evinced by her Government in all its
recent discussions with the United States."
This first edition of Greenhow is to be found bound in with all the
other Senate Executive Documents of the first session of the 26th
Congress. Greenhow revised and much enlarged the book and in 1845 a
second edition was published by Little & Brown of Boston, and
John Murray of London, (499 pp. with a map).
From this later edition the things I have quoted from the first
edition about the easy accessibility of Oregon by wagons over the
low passes of the Rocky Mountains and the account of the first
wagons to the Rocky Mountains in 1830 (Greenhow gives the date
as 1829, but 1830 is the correct year), and the infinite advantages
we had over the British in facilities for settling Oregon overland
on account of these easy passes are omitted, because the rapid
progress of events in developing the overland wagon road had made
any farther publication of these things unnecessary.
Dr. W. Mowry and Rev. M. Eells, having been driven by my criti
cisms to mention the 1840 edition, the following is the treatment
they accord to it (Mowry's "Marcus Whitman," p. 190) :
"In 1840 the Senate ordered 'Greenhow's Memoir, Historical and
Political, on the Northwest Coast of North America,' to be printed
and directed that 2,500 extra copies should be struck off for distri
bution by the Senate.
"This order passed the Senate February 10, 1840. The memoir
contained 228 pages of valuable information concerning our title
to Oregon and concerning the value of that country."

210 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Not a word does he print about the New York and London edi
tions of 1840, and not a word does he quote showing the origin of
the book, or about the position of its scholarly and accomplished
author as for years translator and librarian of our State Depart
ment, nor does he give his readers any idea that this Government
edition contained matter of most vital significance concerning and
utterly destructive of the theory that our people as late as the
spring of 1843 thought Oregon inaccessible by wagons. Quite as
disingenuous is M. Eells' treatment of the subject.
In his "Reply" (p. 15) he quotes from Prof. Bourne's Legend of
Marcus Whitman the following sentence: "Greenhow's exhaustive
history was being distributed as a public document early in 1843
(p. 85) but (80) he says Greenhow's preface was 'dated February
1844'," then Mr. Eells prints the following footnote:
"The fact was that the preface was thus dated, and the book
published in 1845, but a smaller edition of less than half the size,
not the exhaustive history, had been circulated as a public docu
ment." Not a word has Rev. M. Eells ever written to inform his readers
about this Government edition of Greenhow, except this evidently
intended to be a disparaging criticism of it, as "less than half the
size" of the 1845 edition.
Not the least intimation does he anywhere give of the pecu
liarity of its origin, as prepared by special direction of the Secre
tary of State, and by him turned over to a Committee on Oregon
consisting of Linn, Calhoun, Clay and Franklin Pierce, and by
them unanimously reported to the Senate, and unanimously
adopted by the Senate, and not only published as a Government
document, but immediately published unchanged in New York and
London as a book for general sale, and so furnished not only in
all parts of this country, but also in England, more than three
years before Whitman could have reached the East full informa
tion as to the fertility of soil and the geniality of climate of Ore
gon and its easy accessibility by wagon from the States — the very
things about which it is an essential postulate of the Whitman
Saved Oregon Story that the people and the National Government
were profoundly ignorant when Whitman reached the States more
than three years after this Government edition of Greenhow was
published. This is only one of scores of examples in his "Reply"
of Rev. M. Eells' very curious ideas of the "candor" and "fairness"
and "earnest search" for "the truth of history wherever found"
which he claims have animated him at all times.
At the second session of the 26th Congress, December 17, 1840,
to March 3, 1841, nothing was done about Oregon in the House of
Representatives.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 211
In the Senate December 31, 1840, Linn gave notice of introduc
tion of a joint resolution relating to Oregon, and January 8, 1841,
he introduced his bill for the occupation of Oregon, which was re
ferred to a Special Committee consisting of Linn, Walker, Pierce,
Preston and Sevier.
In the Appendix to the Congressional Globe for this session,
pp. 105-106, Linn's speech is given in full, followed by copy of
bill which provides for a line of military posts from Fort Leav
enworth to the Rocky Mountains and for donating 1,000 acres of
land instead of 640 to every white male 18 years of age and up
wards who will cultivate and use the same for five consecutive
years. "Mr. Linn said that when this bill was before the Senate
for discussion during the last and preceding session of Congress,
his political friends, as well as opponents, earnestly pressed him to
forbear urging the subject to a final vote, as it might prove em
barrassing at that time in the settlement of the long pending and
important question of the northeastern boundary. ... He had
been censured in letters received from gentlemen residing in all
parts of the Union for not having pressed his bill to a final decis
ion, which delay was caused by the opinion of others that it might
be considered as a new element of discord pending the settlement
of the northeastern boundary."
Twenty-seventh Congress, first (or special) session, May 31 to
September 13, 1841. In the Senate, Monday, August 2, 1841 (Con
gressional Globe, p. 276), Mr. King of Alabama presented petition
of citizens of Alabama wishing to migrate to Oregon by way of the
Isthmus and asking that arrangements may be made by the Gov
ernment to protect them under the laws of the United States when
they reach there.
"Mr. King said many of the memorialists were personally known
to him and were men of worth."
On same day (Globe, p. 278,) Mr. Linn submitted a resolution
on Oregon as follows : "Resolved, that the President of the United
States be requested to give the notice to the British Government
which the treaty of 1827 between the two Governments requires in
order to put an end to the treaty for the joint occupation of the
territory of Oregon west of the Rocky Mountains, and which ter
ritory is now possessed and used by the Hudson's Bay Co. to the
ruin of the American Indian and fur trade in that quarter, and
conflicting with our inland commerce with the internal provinces
of Mexico." This resolution was discussed briefly by Linn, Benton, Sevier
and Preston, August 12, (Globe, p. 325,) and by Benton during the
whole morning August 17, (Globe, p. 341,) and, on August 21, after
being amended so as to direct the Committee on Foreign Relations

212 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
to inquire into the expediency of requesting the President to give
the notice, the amended resolution was referred to the Foreign Re
lations Committee.
Second session of 27th Congress, December 6, 1841, to August
31, 1842. President Tyler in his Message at the beginning of this
session said (speaking of the report of John C. Spencer, Secretary
of War), "I recommend particularly to your consideration that
portion of the Secretary's report which proposes the establishment
of a chain of military posts from Council Bluffs to some point on
the Pacific Ocean within our limits. The benefits thereby destined
to accrue to our citizens engaged in the fur trade over that wil
derness region, added to the importance of cultivating friendly re
lations with savage tribes inhabiting it, and, at the same time, of
giving protection to our frontier settlements, and of establishing
the means of safe intercourse between the American settlements
at the mouth of the Columbia River and those on this side of the
Rocky Mountains, would seem to suggest the importance of carry
ing into effect the recommendations upon 'this head with as little
delay as may be practicable."
Only ten days later, December 16, 1841, Linn introduced his
bill for the occupation and settlement of Oregon, and the granting
of land to settlers there, and it was referred to a special committee
of five. (Congressional Globe, p. 22.)
April 13 and 15. Linn spoke at length on the bill, and said:
"There could be no dispute about the right of the United States to
all the region south of the Columbia River, a right which Great
Britain had fully conceded. The only question was as to the right
of the United States to the territory north of the Columbia River."
(Congressional Globe, p. 426.)
August 3, 1842. Linn said : "Besides this bundle of memorials
praying Congress to take steps to assert our title to the Territory
and to enact measures to encourage emigration, he said the Leg
islatures of two or three States had passed resolutions asking Con
gress to assert our rights to the country we claimed on the Western
Ocean, and to take such steps as the urgency of the case seemed
to demand. He had also in his possession hundreds upon hundreds
of letters, from every quarter of the Union, making anxious inquir
ies as to what was likely to be done by Congress relative to this
long agitated and long deferred question." (Congressional Globe,
p. 336.) August 31, 1842. Linn made a long speech on his Oregon bill
(printed in full in Appendix to Congressional Globe, 27th Cong., 2d
Sess., p. 736), in which he said: "The preamble to the bill reads
thus: 'Whereas, the title of the United States to the Territory of
Oregon is certain and will not be abandoned.' This declaration

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 213
was important to the citizens of the United States who reside in
the Territory, now amounting to 1,500 or 2,000 persons. To many
on the road to the Territory and to thousands who were preparing
to move to that region it was an assurance that although upon the
extremest verge of this republic the Government of the United
States would not abandon them to any foreign power. . . .
"Hitherto the British Government — or rather its agents, the
Hudson's Bay Co. — have had unlimited control over the Territory
and its resources.
"The committee unanimously instructed their chairman to re
port this bill back to the Senate with the recommendation that it
pass. It was then placed in its order on the calendar, but before
it came up for consideration as a special order Lord Ashburton
arrived from England to enter upon a negotiation touching all
points of dispute between the two countries — boundaries as well as
others — Oregon as well as Maine.
"In that posture of affairs it was considered on all hands in
delicate (not to say unwise) to press the bill to a decision whilst
these negotiations were pending. They are now over, and a treaty
is published to the world in which it seems that the question of the
Oregon Territory has been referred to some more remote or auspi
cious period for ultimate decision. He said he was confident that
there were majorities in both Houses of Congress in favor of this
bill ; and he felt equally certain that it would have passed this ses
sion but for the arrival of Lord Ashburton, and the pending of the
negotiations which terminated a short period since. He would
deem it his imperative duty at an early day of the coming session
to bring in the same bill and press it to a final decision."
At this session there was no debate on Oregon in the House
of Representatives, but on May 31, 1842, the Military Committee
of the House, to whom had been referred so much of the President's
Message as relates to the establishment of a chain of military posts
from Council Bluffs to the Pacific Coast, submitted a report cover
ing 64 pages, with the "Ultimatum Map," of which 5,000 copies
"besides the usual number" were ordered printed.
It is No. 830, Reports of Committees, House of Representatives,
27th Cong., 2d Sess., and is commonly called Pendleton's first Re
port — N. G. Pendleton of Ohio being chairman of the committee.
The first 24 pages contain a statement of the voyages of dis
covery of Spanish and British navigators and our seamen along the
northwest coast of America and the origin and grounds of our
claims to Oregon.
Of Lieut. Charles Wilkes' explorations of Oregon (April to Oc
tober, 1841), this report says (p. 24): "The report of Lieut.
Wilkes, based upon actual observation and surveys by competent

214 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
officers, will certainly give more recent, probably more accurate,
information than any now within reach of the committee upon
the several points involved in this inquiry. In the mean time, the
committee presents for the consideration of the House the follow
ing geographical and statistical account, selected and abridged
from the Memoirs of Messrs. Wyeth, Slacum, Kelly and Greenhow.
The three former gentlemen visited the territory and give us the
results of their own observations in clear and concise narratives.
As their observations were made at different periods, and their ac
counts prepared without concert, we may with great confidence re
ceive and act upon those facts and opinions wherein they agree.
The points of difference between them on matters of importance
are very few, and these will be noted as they occur. Mr. Greenhow's
Memoir carries internal evidence of the diligence and fidelity with
which he performed the duty assigned to him."
Undoubtedly had this committee expected that Lieut. Wilkes'
fleet would drop anchor in New York harbor on June 10, 1842, and
that June 13, 1842 (only two weeks after this report was presented
to the House of Representatives), Lieut. Wilkes would file in the
Navy Department his very enthusiastic "Special Report" on Ore
gon, they would have held back this report till they could have in
corporated in it the essential parts of that "Special Report" of
Wilkes, as they did in a second edition of this report in January,
1843. The rest of the report to p. 56 is filled with this "Account com
piled from Wyeth, Kelly, Slacum and Greenhow," and with sta
tistics about the whale fishery — then a very important industry in
the North Pacific — and with letters from the Secretary of War,
J. J. Abert, Colonel of Corps of Topographical Engineers, and J.
G. Totten, Colonel and Chief Engineer, and N. Towson, Paymaster
General, and George Gibson, Commissary General of Subsistence,
as to cost, etc., of establishing and maintaining a line of mili
tary posts to the Pacific, and a draft of a bill for the establishing
of such posts.
This is followed by an Appendix consisting of six pages of
Extracts from the Journal of Capt. Spaulding of the ship Lau
sanne, which carried out the great reinforcement to the Methodist
Mission in 1839-40 (upon which I shall comment in the next chap
ter) ; and a letter from Mr. H. A. Pierce, of Boston, to Senator
Linn, dated May 1, 1842 ; and a letter from Thomas E. Bond, Secre
tary of the Methodist Missionary Society, dated New York, Janu
ary 22, 1842, in which he wrote (p. 63) : "I fear we are not pos
sessed of any information that will be of any material use to your
committee." "The mission families now contain some 68 persons,
men, women and children; but a considerable proportion are not

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 215
of the ministry proper, and are employed in mechanical and agri
cultural labors necessary to the mission. . . ." (p. 64). He then
gives a brief statement of the stations occupied by the mission, but
it furnishes no information not already well known to the public
and the Government, and continues:
"It will occur to you and to the committee, that missionaries
among savages, so far from home, and at a point from which they
have so few opportunities to write to their friends or to their
church authorities, would not be likely to deal in statistics, fur
ther than immediately connected with the duties assigned them;
and hence, as we have not directed their attention to the country
with any political or commercial objects, we would not be likely to
come into possession of much information on such subjects. They
all agree in representing the Indian tribes inhabiting the country
as far more degraded and destitute than those in our borders ; yet
nowhere have our missionary efforts among savages been more suc
cessful. Indeed, the very misery of these people seconds the preach
ing and advice of the missionaries."
Yet only two years after the date of this letter, this mission,
which Mr. Bond declared to be among the most successful they had
ever established among savages, was abandoned. He concludes
with, "I am sorry I can be of so little use to the committee; but
any inquiries which you may suggest I will forward to the mis
sionaries in Oregon, who I am sure will readily furnish the Gov
ernment with any information in their power, and which might
be useful on a subsequent occasion."
Having written this letter, which contains absolutely nothing
of the slightest importance about Oregon which was not already
well known to the Government, and to the public — he held it till
April 11, 1842, and then enclosed it with the following brief note:
"New York, April 11, 1842.
"Sir: I have delayed to return the enclosed letter, with the ex
pectation of being able to add to it some important information
from Oregon; but our latest despatches from Mr. Lee afford noth
ing which could be of use to you. I regret that my letter is so de
fective; but such as it is, you are authorized to make such use of
it as you may think proper.
"I am, Sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
"THOMAS E. BOND.
"Hon. N. G. Pendleton."
Neither in this, nor any other committee report about Oregon
while the A. B. C. F. Mission to Oregon existed, was there any
intimation that any member of any such committee had sought for

216 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
or received any information from any official of the American
Board about anything in Oregon, or had received from Marcus
Whitman or any other of the American Board missionaries there
any information that in the least degree affected the political des
tinies of any part of the Oregon Territory.
The Ashburton treaty was negotiated and ratified during this
second session of the 27th Congress.
The letter of Edw. Everett, our Minister to England, to D.
Webster, Secretary of State, announcing the appointment of Lord
Ashburton as Special Plenipotentiary was dated London, Decem
ber 31, 1841. Ashburton arrived April 4, 1842 (Cf. Webster's
Works, Vol. V., p. 98).
Informal negotiations went on till June 13, 1842 (the very day
Lieut. Wilkes filed his Special Report on Oregon in the Navy De
partment), when a letter from Ashburton to Webster opened the
formal negotiations, which eventuated, August 9, 1842, in the sign
ing of the Treaty of Washington, or the Webster-Ashburton Treaty,
which was submitted to the Senate August 11, 1842, by President
Tyler with a message which was written by Secretary D. Webster.
(Cf. on this, note on p. 347, Vol. VIL, Webster's Works.)
The treaty was debated very vigorously, Benton offering four
amendments, which were rejected by votes of more than 3 to 1, and
on August 20, 1842, it was ratified by 39 to 9 ; the full membership
of the Senate being 50. Yet Prof. H. W. Parker, D. D., in Homi-
lectic Review for July, 1901, in an article designed to bolster up the
Whitman Legend on "How Oregon was Saved to the United
States," says: "Daniel Webster was no fool. His unpopular Ash
burton treaty of 1842 must have quickened his caution."
Certainly we ought to be thankful to the Rev. Doctor for mod
estly announcing to the world that "Daniel Webster was no fool,"
and that "The Ashburton Treaty was unpopular."
They are both as important, and the last one as trustworthy, as
any and everything else in the article in which they appear.
The injunction of secrecy on the Senate's action on this treaty
was removed by vote of the Senate, and the whole published in the
Congressional Globe, 27 Cong., 3d Sess. — the general report at
the beginning of the volume and the leading speeches in the Ap
pendix. Both Benton and Buchanan opposed its ratification and de
nounced it with special bitterness because of its failure to include
the Oregon boundary.
Ashburton came over with "specific and detailed instructions"
to treat on the Oregon boundary, as well as the other subjects of
difference between the two Governments, and this fact was pub
lished by our Government as early as December, 1845 (Cf. p. 139 of

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 217
Ex. Doc. No. 2, 29th Cong., 1st Sess., being correspondence accom
panying President Polk's Annual Message), yet Barrows— with his
usual ignorance of everything of any real importance about the di
plomacy of the Oregon question — declares twice that Ashburton
was not authorized to treat on the Oregon boundary, and this has
been copied by some of the really able historians who have ac
cepted Barrows for an authority; thus Prof. J. W. Burgess, in
Chapter XIV. of his "Middle Period," says : "Mr. Webster sounded
Lord Ashburton on the Oregon question and found that the Queen's
agent had received no power to deal with the matter."
(Cf. Barrows' "Oregon," p. 185) "Indeed, the two negotiators
had paused at the Rocky Mountains, because, as the President
stated, any attempts to carry the line farther would not offer hope
ful results. It does not appear, moreover, that the Secretary was
under any executive instructions to go into the Pacific side of the
business, and certainly Lord Ashburton was not."
(Ibid. pp. 232-3) "First, Oregon was not a matter of negotia
tion between Ashburton and Webster. . . . Indeed, Lord Ash
burton was not prepared, by his papers of instruction, to take up
the question and was not authorized to do it."
What these specific and detailed instructions were, and why the
Oregon boundary was not made a subject of negotiation, and Web
ster's determined stand for 49 degrees to the Pacific, and the utter
demolition of the Whitman Saved Oregon Legend resulting from
a statement of these facts, will appear a little later in considering
the action of the third session of the 27th Congress.
Third session, 27th Congress, December 5, 1842, to March 4,
1843. President Tyler's second Annual Message, sent to this ses
sion of Congress December 7, 1842, says: "It would have fur
nished additional cause for congratulation if the treaty could have
embraced all subjects calculated in future to lead to a misunder
standing between the two Governments.
"The territory of the United States commonly called the Ore
gon Territory, lying on the Pacific Ocean north of the 42d degree
of latitude, to a portion of which Great Britain lays claim, begins
to attract the attention of our fellow citizens ; and the tide of popu
lation which has reclaimed what was so lately an unbroken wilder
ness in more contiguous regions is preparing to flow over those vast
districts which stretch from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific
Ocean. In advance of the acquirement of individual rights to these
lands, sound policy dictates that every effort should be resorted to
by the two Governments to settle their respective claims.
"It became manifest at an early hour of the late negotiations
that any attempt, for the time being, satisfactorily to determine
those rights would lead to a protracted discussion, which might

218 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
embrace in its failure other more pressing matters, and the Execu
tive did not regard it as proper to waive all the advantages of an
honorable adjustment of other difficulties of great magnitude and
importance because this not so immediately pressing stood in the
way. "Although the difficulty referred to may not for several years
to come involve the peace of the two countries, yet I shall not
delay to urge on Great Britain the importance of its early settle
ment." December 22, 1842, the Senate passed Linn's resolution calling
on the President for the "informal communications" between Web
ster and Ashburton on the Oregon boundary and the reasons why
that subject was not included in the Ashburton treaty.
To this the President replied as follows, in a message dated
December 23, 1842 :
"To the Senate of the United States: I have received the reso
lution of the 22d inst., requesting me to inform the Senate of the
nature and extent of the informal communications which took
place between the American Secretary of State and the British
Special Minister, during the late negotiations in Washington City
upon the subject of the claims of the United States and Great
Britain to the territory west of the Rocky Mountains; and also to
inform the Senate what were the reasons which prevented any
agreement upon the subject at present, and which made it expe
dient (query, inexpedient?) to include this subject among the
subjects of formal negotiation.
"In my message to Congress at the commencement of the pres
ent session, in adverting to the territory of the United States on
the Pacific Ocean north of the 42d degree of north latitude, a part
of which is claimed by Great Britain, I remarked that, in advance
of the acquirement of individual right to these lands, sound policy
dictated that every effort should be resorted to by the two Gov
ernments to settle their respective claims; and also stated that I
should not delay to urge on Great Britain the importance of an
early settlement.
"Measures have been already taken, in pursuance of the purpose
thus expressed, and under the circumstances I do not deem it con
sistent with the public interest to make any communication on the
subject." Forthwith Benton, (in the great debate on Linn's Oregon bill,
which began in December, 1842, and ended February 3, 1843, by
the passage of the bill in the Senate by 24 to 22,) denounced Tyler
and Webster, and declared that the President's refusal to furnish
the Senate with the report of the informal communications with
Ashburton on the Oregon boundary, and the reasons why it was

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 219
not deemed wise to attempt to include that subject in the Ashbur
ton treaty, was because its disclosure would disgrace the Admin
istration, by showing that the President and his Secretary of State
were recreant to our national interests and ready to sacrifice our
national honor on the question of the Oregon boundary, and were
willing to yield — not all of Oregon, for even Benton dared not
claim that — but that part north and west of the Columbia, by
making the Columbia the boundary line, instead of 49 degrees to
the Pacific.
Undoubtedly vague recollections of newspaper accounts of this
wholly unwarranted accusation of Benton against Webster and
Tyler suggested to Spalding's unbalanced and naturally very imag
inative mind the basis on which he built up his mythical account
of the interview of Marcus Whitman with Webster and Tyler.
To Benton's baseless partisan accusation the President could
not with propriety reply, nor could Webster answer it in person
on the floor of the Senate, but fortunately for the establishment of
the truth of history in this matter he found a way to crush this
slander into the dust of oblivion, where it remained forgotten of
men till 23 years afterward Spalding and Gray resurrected it to
support the "Whitman Saved Oregon" story. If the reader will
turn to the Congressional Globe, 27th Congress, 3d Session, he will
find in the Senate Proceedings for Wednesday, January 18, 1843,
pp. 171 and 172, a speech by Senator Choate on the Oregon Terri
tory, and in it on p. 172, first column, occurs the following: "In
commenting upon the speech of the Senator from Missouri (Mr.
Benton), who had preceded him in the discussion when the subject
was last up, he took occasion to remove an erroneous impression
which he conceived was calculated to do great injustice to a dis
tinguished man (Mr. Webster) who could not there defend him
self. He alluded to the fears expressed by the Senator from Mis
souri that the President's message declining to furnish the corre
spondence or informal communications relative to the pending ne
gotiation about the Oregon Territory implied grounds for conclud
ing that propositions had been made by our Secretary of State
which the Administration was ashamed or afraid to avow; that,
in fact, the rumor must be correct which had got abroad that a
proposition had been made or entertained, by the Secretary of
State, to settle down upon the Columbia River as the boundary
line. Now, he was glad to have it in his power to undeceive the
Senator, and to assure him, which he did from authority— for he
had been requested by the Secretary himself to do it for him— that
he never either made or entertained a proposition to admit of any
line south of the 49th parallel of latitude as a negotiable boundary
line for the territory of the United States. After Mr. Choate had

220 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
considerably more at large and in his own words (the purpose of
which it is only attempted to give in this sketch) fully explained
this matter, he next turned to so much of the remarks of the Sena
tor from Missouri as condemned the late treaty with Great Britain
in relation to the northeastern boundary line."
Ibid, Appendix, pp. 222-229, contains a verbatim report of an
other speech by Choate delivered February 3, 1843, and on p. 223,
3d column, he says: "I desired chiefly to assure the Senator and
the Senate that the apprehension intimated by him that a dis
closure of these informal communications would disgrace the Amer
ican Secretary, by showing that he had offered a boundary line
south of the parallel of 49, is totally unfounded. He would be glad
to hear me say that I am authorized and desired to declare that
in no communication, formal or informal, was such an offer made,
and that none such was ever meditated."
As we have seen, the fact that Ashburton came over with "spe
cific and detailed instructions" to treat on Oregon was declared
by Lord Aberdeen, head of the British Foreign Office, in a letter
to Mr. H. S. Fox, British Minister at Washington, published by
our Government among the documents accompanying President
Polk's first Annual Message, but precisely why Oregon was not
included in the Ashburton treaty could not be stated with due re
gard to the diplomatic proprieties, either by Choate in 1843, or
Webster in his great speech in defense of the Ashburton treaty in
1846, nor (in 1851) by Everett, his life-long friend (and our Min
ister to England in Tyler's Administration), in his brief biography
of Webster, in which all he says on this point is, "Had he sup
posed an arrangement could have been effected on this basis" (i. e.,
49th degree to the coast) "with Lord Ashburton, he would gladly
have included it in the treaty of Washington" (Cf. Webster's
Works, Vol. I., Intro., p. 148), because Ashburton's instructions
from the British Foreign Office were not published till 1871-2 (in
Berlin Arbitration, pp. 218-19). These instructions directed Ash
burton to offer us: (1st) The line of the Columbia River from its
mouth to the Snake River, and thence due east to the summit of
the Rockies. This would have given us about nine-fourteenths of
the territory south of 49 degrees. If he could not secure that line
he was authorized (2d) to renew the offer made us in 1824, and
again in 1827 by England, of the line of 49 degrees from the sum
mit of the Rocky Mountains to the most northeastern branch of the
Columbia, and thence the river to the Pacific. (3d) If he could
not secure this line (which would have surrendered to us consider
ably more than four-fifths of all the territory south of 49 degrees),
he was positively forbidden to accept of the line of 49 degrees to

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 221
the coast, which we had always insisted upon, and as early as 1826
had announced to England as "our ultimatum."
Until the writer found these "specific and detailed instructions"
to Lord Ashburton he often wondered why Webster did not "au
thorize and request Choate to say that no proposition for a line
south of 49 degrees" had been received by him, but as soon as these
instructions were found it was evident why "received" was not
used. Nothing is plainer than that in those informal communica
tions Ashburton proposed one or both of the lines he was author
ized to offer, and when Webster met the propositions with the
offer of our "ultimatum of 1826," Ashburton informed him that his
instructions would not allow him to accept that line, and so they
attempted no formal negotiations on Oregon, though both of them
would gladly have settled it if it had been possible. Webster there
fore could not truthfully say that no such proposition had been
"received," but only that he had not made, nor entertained, nor
meditated, any proposition to admit any line south of 49 degrees
as a negotiable line for the United States.
In view of the fact that these explicit statements of Webster's
inflexible adherence to our "ultimatum" of 49 degrees to the Pa
cific were made when Whitman (of whose existence even there is
no evidence that Webster or Tyler were then aware) was riding
over the prairies of what is now Kansas, what becomes of that
fundamental postulate of the "Whitman Saved Oregon" fiction that
Webster was ready to trade off Oregon on account of his deplor
able ignorance about it, when that great patriotic hero, Marcus
Whitman, arrived in the nick of time to dispel the ignorance and
save Oregon, Barrows assuring us (p. 188) that "If Dr. Whitman
could have created all the circumstances and ordained his own
time, his arrival in Washington could not have been more apt for
seizing the conditions of things and saving Oregon. Its destiny
he had brought over on his own saddle, and now held it in his soli
tary hand." Such stilly stuff do alleged historians write when
instead of studying contemporaneous authorities to know the truth
they evolve what they call history from their imaginations!
Choate's statements which he was "authorized and requested
to make by Webster" agree exactly with all Webster's subsequent
course on the Oregon question, as hereinafter stated.
Benton on this as on many another occasion could not refrain
from making unwarranted accusations against the British in gen
eral and the Hudson's Bay Co. in particular, and as was his wont,
being from Missouri — a State which in the event of a war with
England was by its geographical position secure against any Eng
lish army getting anywhere near its borders — he made light of any
possibility of injury to us if war should result from our wantonly

222 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
and inexcusably breaking the treaty of 1827, and "made the Eagle
scream" after the following fashion:
"No one defended the title of the British to one inch square of
the valley of the Oregon. . . . He undertook to show that their
possession of the valley of the Columbia was intrustive and tor
tious; a trespass and a fraud upon our pre-existing possession of
the same river; and a wrong and aggression which the Govern
ment of the United States should resist and repulse. . . . And
now what has been the conduct of the British under this article?
(i. e., the 3d article of the treaties of 1818 and 1827.)
"They have crossed the 49th degree, come down upon the Co
lumbia, taken possession of it from the head to the mouth, fortified
it and colonized it, monopolized the fur trade, driven all our
traders across the mountains, killed more than a thousand of them
(by their Indians) and used the Columbia as a free port, through
which they bring goods free of duty into our territories, up into
the Rocky Mountains, and across them. This is what they have
done by their agent, the Hudson's Bay Co. In its own name, and
by an Act of Parliament immediately after the Convention, the
British Government has extended its jurisdiction over the whole
country, taking no notice at all of our claims, and subjecting all
our citizens and their property to British judges, British courts
and appeals to Canada. . . . They have taken possession of
our claimed territory, of our harbor, our river, colonized the coun
try and killed and expelled our traders. . . . Our traders, left
to contend single-handed against the organized Hudson's Bay Co.,
against their Indians, against their free goods, have all been driven
in — forced not only out of the valley of the Columbia, but out of
the Rocky Mountains, and ruin has overtaken many of them. Even
the strong and rich company of Mr. Choteau can no longer ap
proach the Rocky Mountains. The Hudson's Bay Co. are the mas
ters there. Every American that approaches that region does so
at the peril of his life. Many were killed there this summer. . .
and now, if after all this, any proposition has been made by our
Government to give up the north bank of the Columbia, I for one
shall not fail to brand such a proposition with the name of treason.
. . . We fear war ! As if the fear of war ever kept r+ off. We
fear war while Great Britain is systematically preparing for war
with us. All her encroachments upon us show that she is prepar
ing for this result. She is preparing for war, and the late treaty
(the Ashburton treaty) is the largest of her preparations. . . .
As a nation Great Britain despises and hates our nation. . . .
There may be individual Englishmen who have regard for indi
vidual Americans, but as it concerns nation and nation they
despise and hate us! They want war with us, and count upon its

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 223
being short and triumphant. . . . We should count upon ex
pelling them from our continent, giving freedom to Ireland and
aiding the English people to reform their government. . . .
Sooner or later the war will come, for Great Britain is determined
upon it, and we should roll back the thunder upon her own shores.
"Thirty thousand friends of Ireland landed on her coast, and
forming the rallying point for a million of patriots, would make
'the devoted island' free, and shake Old England to her center.
These are my sentiments, and I neither dissemble nor deny them.
Peace is our policy. War is the policy of England, and war with
us is now her favorite policy. Let it come rather than dishonor!
"The man is alive and with a beard on his face, (though it may
not be I) who will see an American army in Ireland, and an Amer
ican general in the streets of London." (Cf. Appendix to Con
gressional Globe, 27th Cong., 3d Sess., pp. 74-78, Jan. 12, 1843.)
It is doubtful if in all the hundreds of thousands of pages of
the official reports of debates in Congress there is to be found a
worse and a more mischievous specimen of demagogic rant than
this, which was evidently uttered not to influence votes in the Sen
ate on the pending bill, but as pure "buncombe" to strengthen his
hold on the voters of Missouri, the headquarters of the fur trade.
He well knew that the presence of the Hudson's Bay Co. in Ore
gon was not "intrusive, and tortious, a trespass and a fraud. . .
a wrong and an aggression," but that they were there by precisely
the same right that our citizens were, viz., by virtue of two freely
executed treaties, that of October 20, 1818, and August 6, 1827,
negotiated by some of the most patriotic, and able, and skilled in
diplomacy of all the men who have ever been numbered among our
Presidents, Secretaries of State, and Ministers to England, and
that the treaty of 1818 was unanimously ratified by the Senate,
and that of 1827 — after he himself had opposed it with utmost
bitterness — so commended itself to the judgment of the Senate
that it was ratified by 31 to 7.
He also knew that as both those treaties made it impossible
for Great Britain to strengthen her claims to any part of Oregon
by establishing trading posts or founding settlements therein,
while they remained in force, there was no motive for any attempt
at colonization of Oregon by Great Britain, and that the Hudson's
Bay Co. had not "taken possession of the Columbia," nor "forti
fied," nor "colonized it," nor "driven all our traders across the
mountains," and he equally well knew that whenever our Govern
ment chose to end the "joint policy" towards Oregon, it could by
simply giving twelve months' notice abrogate the treaty. He well
knew that what had so seriously damaged the fur trade— that there
was no annual rendezvous of American fur traders after 1838 — was

224 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
not any wrongful act of the Hudson's Bay Co., but the extensive
substitution at that time of silk for beaver fur in making hats,
which reduced the value of beaver skins to about one-quarter of
what it had previously been, and he equally well knew that the
Hudson's Bay Co. had not killed, or caused to be killed, 1,000, or
100, or 10, or 1 of our fur traders.
He also knew that the Hudson's Bay Co. had a perfect right to
use "the Columbia as a free port," since neither Government had
established or could have established any custom house there while
the treaty of "joint policy" remained in force, and he equally well
knew that the Act of Parliament to which he referred was only in
tended to apply to British subjects, and had never been applied to
any American citizen, and that while it had been a most salutary
check on any tendency to lawlessness among the Hudson's Bay
Co.'s employes scattered over that vast wilderness, hundreds of
miles from any organized government, not a single American citi
zen had ever suffered any injury from it, and that no honest Amer
ican ever had the slightest reason to fear anything from its en
forcement. When he said that "every American that approaches that re
gion does so at the peril of his life," he well knew that as chair
man of the Military Committee of the Senate, in January, 1831,
he had reported and the Senate had printed in Ex. Doc. No. 39 the
letters of his two friends, Jedediah S. Smith, and Josiah Pilcher,
the first American fur traders who, so far as known, had encoun
tered the Hudson's Bay Co.'s officers and employes at their posts
in the Oregon Territory, and that both of them had written in the
warmest terms of the kindness and courtesy with which they had
been received and treated by them, and Pilcher, at the end of his
letter, had explicitly denied the accusation that the Hudson's Bay
Co. excited the Indians to kill and rob our citizens."
Instead of his statement that "every American that approaches
that region does so at the peril of his life" being true, he well
knew that small parties of Americans had been going to Oregon
to explore, or to establish missions, or to begin farming settle
ments each year since 1832 (except 1833 and 1837), and that every
one of them had reported that they had been most courteously
and kindly received, and most hospitably treated at each and every
one of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s posts which they had visited, and
had been helped to establish themselves in Oregon as missionaries
or settlers, or to explore the territory and learn of its resources
and possibilities, and he very well knew that among those sent by
the National Government expressly to explore Oregon, and to re
port everything about it that our Government ought to know, were

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 225
Lieut. W. A. Slacum of the Navy, sent by President Jackson in
1835, and whose report was read in the Senate in 1837, and Lieut.
Charles Wilkes of the Navy, who from April to October, 1841,
"with a sloop of war, a brig of war, two launches, ten boats and
upwards of 300 men" had made a much more extensive exploration
of Oregon by both land and water than any other single expedition
has ever made even to this day, and had filed a Special Report on
Oregon in the Navy Department June 13, 1842, and that both of
these officers had not only gratefully acknowledged their obliga
tions to the Hudson's Bay Co. for the kindest treatment accorded
to themselves, but had explicitly declared that all honest Ameri
cans in Oregon had been assisted by the Hudson's Bay Co. (Cf.
p. 197 ante and Chapter VII. infra for Slacum's, and for Wilkes'
Reports.) Soon after the war of 1812 our Government had bought land
at Rouse's Point (which is by far the best place to protect the
entrance to Lake Champlain), and had expended about $200,000 in
fortifying it, it being south of what had then always been accepted
as the location of the parallel of 45 degrees north latitude, and so
well within our territory ; but in 1818 a joint commission of Amer
ican and British officers surveyed the boundary, and found that
the parallel of 45 degrees north latitude instead of being north of
our works at Rouse's Point is about two miles south of them, and
that consequently our fort belonged to Great Britain (Cf. Gallatin
to Clay, date London, October 30, 1826, being No. 17, Doc. No. 458,
Am. State Papers, For. Rel., Vol. VI.) ; and as one of the most im
portant provisions of the Ashburton treaty changed the boundary
between Vermont and New York, and Canada, from the true loca
tion of 45 degrees north latitude to the line where 45 degrees had
been supposed to be prior to 1818, for the express purpose of re
storing to us our fortifications at Rouse's Point, and as all this
was thoroughly discussed when the Ashburton treaty was before
the Senate in August, 1842, and as Benton took a very active part
in the debate on the ratification of that treaty, and most virulently
opposed it, it is simply impossible to imagine that he really be
lieved his assertion that "Great Britain is systematically prepar
ing for war with us. . . . and the late treaty is the largest of
her preparations."
Language fails with which to fittingly characterize the folly of
Benton's talk about our sending "30,000 friends of Ireland to Ire
land" in the event of a war with Great Britain, and about an
"American army in Ireland," and an "American general in the
streets of London."
Had this speech been delivered by some beardless and inexperi
enced youth, anxious to make a reputation as a "stump speaker,"

226 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
at a frontier barbecue in all the heat and fury of a closely con
tested political campaign, it might justly be cited as a most ridicu
lous sample of "spread eagle" bombast.
But this, it must be remembered, was uttered not "on the
stump" by a foolish "boy orator," in the heat and fury of a politi
cal campaign, but by Benton within two months of his 61st birth
day, in what should have been a serious and rational debate on a
great public question — in the United States Senate, one of the
most dignified legislative bodies in the world — and when Benton
had been a Senator 22 years.
Though this speech seems to have been hailed with rapture
in "Pike County," Missouri, and in other "rooral deestricts" of
that then extreme frontier State as evidence of the possession by
Benton of such fearless and transcendent statesmanship, and such
dauntless patriotism as insured his re-election for another six years
to the Senate, and though he was evidently so proud of it at the
time as to revise it, and furnished it for publication in full in the
Appendix to the Cong. Globe, he carefully abridged every word of
it out of his "Abridgment of Debates in Congress," and
failed to bring any of it into his field of vision in his "Thirty Years'
View." The report of the great debate on Linn's bill fills 165 columns
of the Cong. Globe and its Appendix, 3d Sess., 27th Cong., and of a
total membership of 50 Senators 27 took part, including almost
every great name of both parties.
The slavery question was not yet much entangled with Oregon
affairs, nor did it become so to any considerable extent till after
the treaty of 1846 had settled the Oregon boundary, and the at
tempt had been made, in 1846, to pass the Wilmot Proviso.
Repeatedly during the debate it was declared alike by the
friends and the opponents of the bill that the Senate was unani
mous in the opinion that our title to Oregon, at least as far north
as 49 degrees, was incontestable — even McDuffie said this — while
Benton said "No one defended the title of the British to one square
inch of the valley of the Oregon," and the chief opposition to the
bill was from Senators who were warm friends of the Oregon ac
quisition, but who held that several of the provisions of Linn's bill
were such plain violations of the treaty of 1827 that to enact them
into law without first giving the requisite 12 months' notice of our
desire to abrogate that treaty would be such a wanton and inex
cusable affront to Great Britain as to provoke a war, which might
imperil our chance of holding any of Oregon.
On February 3, 1843, by a vote of 24 to 22, the Senate passed
the bill, and of the four absentees it was stated that two favored
and two opposed the bill.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 227
But when we come to analyze the vote we find that of the 22
Senators voting against the bill nine had declared in the course of
the debate that they would gladly support it, if its provisions in
violation of the treaty of 1827 were stricken out, so that without
knowing why the 13 others who voted against it were opposed to
it, or for what reason two of the absentees were opposed to it, it
is certain that (24 and 9 and 2) equal 35, or one more than two-
thirds of the whole Senate were ready on February 3, 1843, to vote
for any bill about Oregon that we had a right to pass without first
abrogating the treaty.
The number and character of the Senators who took part in
the debate and the fact that only four Senators were absent on
the final vote is proof of the great and general interest of the
people in the Oregon question.
But one Senator— McDuffie of South Carolina— spoke dispar
agingly of the value of Oregon, and he had then been a Senator
only 22 days, having been elected to fill four years of an unexpired
term, and he was never able to achieve a re-election and was so in
consequential a figure in our national history that but for the quo
tation of some extracts from this unwise speech of his on Oregon
by the advocates of the Whitman Legend, in their futile attempts
to make it appear that "our leading statesmen were constantly de
riding Oregon," it is doubtful if one person in 20,000 of our popu
lation outside of the Carolinas and Georgia would ever have known
that such a person as McDuffie ever sat as a Senator from South
Carolina. The instructions to Lieut. Wilkes to explore "our territory on
the seaboard and the Columbia River," etc., have already been
quoted. April 28, 1841, Wilkes with part of his squadron sighted
the mouth of the Columbia, and "with a sloop of war, a brig of
war, two launches, ten boats and upwards of 300 men" (Cf. Wilkes'
testimony in Hudson's Bay Co. and Puget's Sound Co. vs. the
United States, Vol. VIII., p. 228), and he was diligently engaged till
October 10, 1841, in a far more extensive exploration of the Oregon
Territory by land and water than has ever been made by any other
one party even to this day, surveying and mapping the Puget's
Sound country and the navigable part of the Columbia River, send
ing a party overland east from Puget Sound to the Columbia River
and back to Puget Sound through the center of north Oregon,
the only part of the territory which was really in dispute with
Great Britain, and another party up the Willamette Valley over
land to San Francisco, and visiting all the Hudson's Bay Co.'s per
manent posts south of 49 degrees except Boise and Hall, and all
the mission stations of, the A. B. C. F. M. and the Methodists.
Sailing away from the Columbia October 10, 1841, on November

228 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
24, 1841, Wilkes sent dispatch No. 98 from Honolulu to the Navy
Department, and in that he explains that he has not made the full
report he intended to send on the condition, value, etc., of the Ore
gon Territory for lack of time to fully digest the great mass of
matter he has obtained so as to prepare such an accurate and con
cise report as is desirable; and announces his intention to do so
immediately on his return to New York; and says, on p. 2 of this
dispatch, "This course is also necessary, as many inquiries would
naturally arise to the fair understanding of the subject that would
render verbal information of much importance to its full compre
hension. Having been well aware of the little information in pos
session of the Government relative to the northern section of this
country, including the Strait of Juan de Fuca, with its extensive
sounds and inlets, I thought it proper, from its vast importance in
the settlement of the boundary question, though not embraced in
my instruction, to devote a large portion of my time to a thorough
survey and examination, without, however, overlooking or neglect
ing any part of that which was distinctly embraced in them."
Wilkes reached New York June 10, 1842, and June 13, 1842,
filed this promised report, covering 44 closely written foolscap
pages, in the Navy Department. It has never been published in
full, though "demanded" by the House of Representatives, and
though a resolution equally peremptory was offered in the Senate
by Linn, but subsequently withdrawn, as appears from the follow
ing: (Cf. Journal of the House of Representatives, 27th Cong.,
3d Sess., January 13, 1843) "Mr. Pendleton, from the Committee
on Military Affairs, reported the following resolution: Resolved,
That the Secretary of the Navy be required to furnish to this House
a copy of the report heretofore made to him by Lieut. Wilkes rela
tive to the examination of the Oregon Territory. The resolution
was read and agreed to."
Id. January 24. "On motion of Mr. Pendleton from the Commit
tee on Military Affairs, it was ordered that extracts from the re
port of Lieut. Wilkes to the Secretary of the Navy of the examina
tion of the Oregon Territory, and communicated to the Military
Committee by Mr. Wilkes with the permission of the Secretary of
the Navy, be printed with the report heretofore made by said com
mittee on the Oregon Territory."
Id. February 1. "On motion of Mr. Pendleton from the Com
mittee on Military Affairs it was
"Resolved, That the resolution heretofore adopted, requesting
the Secretary of the Navy to furnish to the House of Representa
tives a copy of Lieut. Wilkes' report on the Oregon Territory, be
rescinded."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 229
Senate Journal, 27th Cong., 3d Sess., Jan. 3, 1843, page 67,
Linn submitted a resolution to print report of Lieut. Wilkes to
Secretary of Navy relating to the Territory of Oregon, and on
January 5, on Linn's motion, it was laid on the table.
Reading these records, and conjecturing that this Special Re
port must have contained things which in the then existing condi
tion of the Oregon question the Government deemed it impolitic
to publish, I went to Washington in March, 1887, and carefully ex
amined this and all the other unpublished dispatches from Lieut.
Wilkes, and found that it contained the following matter which it
was not proper then to print, viz.: (1) An earnest argument for
54 deg. 40 min. instead of 49 degrees. (A similar argument was
also in dispatch No. 98 from Honolulu.) (2) That the officers of
the Hudson's Bay Co. would be much averse to any war on account
of their flocks and herds and investments in farming operations.
(3) Information as to the strategic value of Walla Walla.
The following extracts from the 14 pages which were taken
from this Special Report of Wilkes and published in the second
edition of the Report of the Military Committee of the House of
Representatives (Repts. of Com. No. 31, H. of R., 27th Cong., 3d
Sess.), commonly known as Pendleton's Second Report in January,
1843, will show how enthusiastic Wilkes was as to the value of
Oregon. Of Puget's Sound he says : "No part of the world affords
finer inland sounds, or a greater number of harbors than can be
found here, capable of receiving the largest class of vessels, and
without a danger in them that is not visible. From the rise and
fall of the tides (18 feet) all facilities are afforded for the erection
of works for a great maritime nation."
Of the Oregon Territory generally he says: "In comparison
with our own country I should say that the labor required in this
territory for subsistence and to acquire wealth is in the proportion
of one to three, or in other words, a man must work three times as
long in the States to gain a like competence."
Of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s posts, which various advocates of the
"Whitman Saved Oregon" fiction represent as strong forts, he says :
"All the posts of the Hudson's Bay Co. are small settlements, con
sisting of a palisade or picket with bastions at their corners around
the stores and houses of the Company sufficient to protect them
against Indians, but in no way to be considered as forts, and
would not count in any war which might arise between the na
tions." . . . "To conclude: Few portions of the globe, in my
opinion, are to be found so rich in soil, diversified in surface or
capable of being so easily rendered the happy abode of an indus
trious and civilized community. For beauty of scenery and salu
brity of climate it is not surpassed. It is peculiarly adapted for

230 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
an agricultural and pastoral people, and no portion of the world
beyond the tropics is to be found that will yield so readily to the
wants of man with moderate labor."
Could anything be printed that would more greatly stimulate
migration to Oregon than such statements as these, coming from
the commander of the greatest national exploring expedition our
country has ever sent out, whose progress around the world had
been watched with the intensest interest by the whole people from
1838 to 1842?
How closely the progress of the expedition was watched and
reported may be judged from the following two articles from Niles'
Register, May 7, 1842, p. 150 : "Exploring Expedition. The Wash
ington correspondent of the New York Commercial Advertiser
gives the following information: 'Dispatches were received over
land a fortnight since from the exploring expedition. . . . The
researches and surveys made by them on the northwest coast (i. e.,
the Oregon Territory) are of such value as will more than com
pensate the nation for the whole cost of the expedition.' "
June 25, 1842, p. 261 : Nearly two and a half columns are de
voted to an account of the "South Sea Exploring Expedition."
"The Expedition have also examined and surveyed a large portion
of the Oregon Territory, a part of the Upper California, including
the Columbia and Sacramento Rivers with their various tributar
ies. Several exploring parties from the squadron have explored,
examined and fixed those portions of the Oregon Territory least
known. A map of the Territory, embracing its rivers, sounds, har
bors, coasts, forts, etc., has been prepared, which will furnish the
Government with a mass of valuable information relative to our
possessions on the northwest coast and the whole of Oregon."
As one of the absolutely indispensable postulates of the Whit
man Legend is that until Dr. Whitman — an unknown man of no
special intellectual ability and who up to that time had never writ
ten so much as one short sentence expressing the least interest in
or concern about the political destinies of any part of the old Ore
gon Territory — arrived in Washington (according to the Whitman
Legend on March 3, but, in fact, not earlier than late in March,
or more likely about April 10 or 12, 1843) — our Government and
the people of the country at large were deplorably ignorant about
Oregon and had been deceived by the Hudson's Bay Co. into think
ing it worthless and inaccessible; all the advocates of that legend,
from Gray to Mowry, either malign Wilkes or utterly ignore his
work, and not a single one of them — Gray, Rev. M. Eells, Barrows,
Nixon, Craighead, Mowry, Mrs. Dye, Laurie, Hallock, Edwards or
Penrose — has ever allowed any one to know anything from their
writings about the extent and value of Wilkes' explorations, or

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 231
that he reached Washington and filed this report June 13, 1842,
or that Tyler's Administration had had before it not only this Spe
cial Report, but also his other dispatches about Oregon and had
had opportunities for daily interviews with Wilkes and the other
officers of his expedition (who had seen very much more of and
knew vastly more about Oregon than Whitman or any other mis
sionary did) for nine months before Whitman could by any possi
bility have reached Washington. Several of them, notably Gray
and Mrs. Dye, do not hesitate to malign him.
Thus Gray, p. 204 (writing in 1870), said: "To the disgrace
of the leader of that squadron, the general impression of all the
early settlers of this country is to the present day that he under
stood and tasted the qualities of Dr. McLoughlin's liquors, and re
ceived the polite attentions of the gentlemen of the Hudson's Bay
Co. with far more pleasure than he looked into or regarded the
wants of this infant settlement of his countrymen."
Mrs. Eva Emery Dye repeats and enlarges this shameless slan
der (pp. 176-7, "McLoughlin and Old Oregon") in a purely imag
inary dialogue between Lieut. Wilkes and George Abernethy (the
Methodist mission steward) as follows:
" 'Do you advise us to establish a government?' he asked.
" 'Not yet,' said the Commodore. 'Wait ! The British interest
already feels itself threatened by the presence of this exploring
squadron. Any action on your part may precipitate trouble, in
which case you are too few and too far away to be properly sup
ported. Wait till your numbers augment.'
"'Dr. McLoughlin's wine has affected his judgment,' said the
men of the mission.
"In the purple twilight Commodore Wilkes walked in the fields
of wheat. The crescent moon hung over Mount Hood. 'A lovely
land,' he murmured; 'charming by day, enchanting by night. Tell
me, what do you Americans think of the Hudson's Bay Co.?'
" 'The Hudson's Bay Co. is Great Britain's instrumentality for
securing Oregon,' was the answer.
" 'But,' urged the Commodore, 'the missionaries have received
untold favors from the Hudson's Bay Co., and if they are gentle
men it is their duty to return them.'
"The missionary faced about in the Commodore's path. 'Return
them? Certainly. I will exchange favors with Dr. McLoughlin or
any other man or set of men, but I will not sell my country for
it.' " Wilkes was almost angry with this "blunt missionary." It is
quite safe to say that for not one sentence of this dialogue can
Mrs. Dye produce any better authority than her own exuberant
fancy and her overweening ambition to write "a taking book," with-

232 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
out the least care whether it was true or false. There is not the
remotest probability that either "George Abernethy, the mission
steward," or any other missionary, "blunt" or otherwise, ever would
have dared when conversing with Lieut. Wilkes to imply that
Wilkes had said anything which meant that he would "sell his
country," or that any advice he had given if followed would cause
the said missionary or any one else to "sell his country," and
equally destitute of any probability is the statement she puts in
Wilkes' mouth that "The British interest already feels itself threat
ened by the presence of this exploring squadron." There is not a
hint of any such idea in any of Wilkes' unpublished dispatches nor
in his Special Report, nor in his great five volume Report pub
lished in 1845, nor in his testimony in 1866 in the great case of
the Hudson's Bay Co. and the Puget Sound Agricultural Co. vs.
the United States, and it plainly is another mere creature of Mrs.
Dye's extravagant fancy.
Equally preposterous is the plain implication of this imagined
dialogue that this Methodist mission steward, who had only been
in Oregon eleven months when Wilkes' squadron reached there,
was a more patriotic man than Lieut. Charles Wilkes.
Reynolds of Illinois had introduced a bill identical with Linn's
bill (No. 771), House of Representatives), and it, with various me
morials and proceedings of public meetings praying for the adop
tion of suitable measures by Congress for the occupation and set
tlement of the Oregon Territory, had been referred to a select com
mittee consisting of Reynolds of Illinois, Miller of Missouri, Daw
son of Louisiana, Cross of Arkansas, and Kennedy of Indiana.
February 9, 1843, this committee made a report of eight pages
(No. 157, Repts. of Corns., House of Representatives, 27th Cong.,
3d Sess., Vol. II.), in which they say: "The claim of the United
States to the tract of country called the Oregon Territory . . .
is founded upon discovery, occupancy and treaty. It has not been
questioned by any power but Great Britain; and it is not to the
knowledge of the committee doubted or disputed by any American
statesman. "This claim has been so often and ably investigated and as
serted, and so fully established by the executive department of this
Government, and by reports of committees, and in debates in both
branches of Congress, that the committee have not considered it
necessary for any useful purpose to enter into any farther argu
ment in support of its validity or justice." . . . "In conclusion,
the committee beg leave to remark, that in their opinion those per
sons mislead themselves who believe that this territory, under
suitable legislation by Congress, will not, like the new States that
have sprung up in the Mississippi valley, rise rapidly into agri-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 233
cultural, commercial and political importance." When Linn's bill
was sent over from the Senate, it, with Reynold's bill, was referred
to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, of which that brilliant states
man and "living record of the diplomatic history of our country,"
ex-President John Quincy Adams, was chairman, and Feb. 16, 1843,
his diary reads (Cf. Memoirs of J. Q. Adams, Vol. XL, p. 321) :
"When the Committee on Foreign Affairs was called, I reported the
bill from the Senate for the occupation of the Oregon Territory and
for other purposes, and the same bill reported by Reynolds of Illi
nois in the House, without amendments, and with the opinion of
the committee that neither of them ought to pass. They were then,
at my motion, referred, without opposition, to the committee of
the whole on the state of the Union," and thus ended the action of
the 27th Congress, 3d Session, on the Oregon question.
Four Presidents had built strong and deep the foundations on
which our claims to Oregon rested, viz. :
First, Thomas Jefferson (a) by buying the Louisiana Territory
in 1803, and so giving us a claim by contiguity of territory along
the whole east line of Oregon, as far north as 49 degrees (which
was then and long after supposed to have been fixed as the boundary
between the Hudson's Bay Co.'s territories and the French provinces
in America, in conformity with the tenth article of the Treaty of
Utrecht, in 1713, though it is now established that this belief [on
which several treaties were based] was erroneous, and that although
commissioners were appointed by France and England according to
the stipulations of that treaty, they did nothing and no such line
was ever run).
(b) By originating and sending out the Lewis and Clark Ex
pedition (1803-1806), and so adding to our claim by priority of
discovery of the mouth of the river, by Gray, in 1792, a claim by
priority of exploration of the whole breadth of its basin, from the
Rocky Mountains to the Pacific.
Second, James Madison (who had been Secretary of State under
Jefferson), (a) by favoring the Astoria Expedition (1810-1813),
which added to our claims by priority of discovery and exploration
a claim by priority of actual occupancy.
(b) By instructing our commissioners to negotiate the Treaty
of Ghent, that they should insist on the restoration of Astoria in
any treaty of peace.
Third, James Monroe (who had been one of the commissioners
who negotiated the purchase of the Louisiana Territory, and, as
Secretary of State under Madison, had sent the instructions to our
Commissioners to negotiate the Treaty of Ghent), (a) by insisting
on and securing the restoration of Astoria, October 6, 1818.

234 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
(b) By negotiating the treaty of October 20, 1818, with Great
Britain, being the first Treaty of Joint Policy toward Oregon
(though more commonly called the first Treaty of Joint Occu
pancy), with a provision that made it impossible that while it re
mained in force Great Britain could either strengthen her claims
or weaken ours to any part of Oregon, either by establishing trad
ing posts or making settlements.
(c) By making the treaty of February 22, 1819, with Spain,
which not only ceded us Florida, and defined the south and west
boundaries of the Louisiana Territory, but also fixed the northern
boundary of California (never before defined) at 42 degrees north
latitude, and ceded to us all her claims north of that line.
(d) By negotiating the treaty with Russia of April 5, 1824,
which fixed the south line of Russian America (now Alaska), at
54 deg. and 40 min., and so defined the north boundary of the Ore
gon Territory, as the treaty of 1819 had its south boundary.
(e) By the negotiations of 1823-24 with Great Britain on the
Oregon question, resulting in no treaty, but in the course of which
Great Britain, for the first time, offered us the line of 49 degrees
to the most northeasterly branch of the Columbia, and thence the
river to the ocean, which was, and was understood to be by all well
informed statesmen in both countries, an abandonment by Great
Britain of all claims to any territory south and east of the Colum
bia, and so left really in dispute, after 1824, only about 58,000
square miles, being that part of the present State of Washington
north and west of the Columbia.
(f) By the announcement July 22, 1823, to both Great Britain
and Russia, of the first form of the Monroe Doctrine, in the state
ment that the American continents were not thenceforth to be open
to colonization by any European power.
The fuller form of the Monroe Doctrine was stated in Monroe's
Annual Message December 2, 1823. Though called the Monroe Doc
trine it is altogether probable that John Q. Adams is entitled to
quite as much credit for formulating it as Monroe.
Fourth, John Quincy Adams — far and away the ablest American
diplomat of those days (who had acted as Monroe's most efficient
Secretary of State in all these negotiations — 1818 to 1824, inclus
ive) — and who had been one of our Commissioners to negotiate the
Treaty of Ghent; and who, as President, directed every step of the
negotiations of 1826-27, which resulted in the second Treaty of
Joint Policy (or Joint Occupancy), signed August 6, 1827, in which
again our rights were so safeguarded that while it remained in
force Great Britain could not, by any settlements or trading posts,
strengthen her claims to any part of Oregon. Early in these nego
tiations Great Britain again offered to make the line 49 degrees to

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 235
the most northeasterly branch of the Columbia, and thence the
river to the ocean, which was immediately refused by our plenipo
tentiary, Albert Gallatin, who again offered the line on which all
these Presidents had always insisted of 49 degrees to the coast,
with the instruction by direct order of President Adams, that that
line was "our ultimatum."
It is altogether probable that the services of John Quincy Adams
in securing Oregon to us were at least as great as those of any
other statesman, with the possible exception of Jefferson, and not
a sentence is to be found in any of his state papers, or in his
speeches in Congress, or in his voluminous correspondence, and
his full and minute diary, which indicates that he ever entertained
for an instant any thought that we should recede from the "ulti
matum" of 49 degrees as the most favorable line we could ever con
cede to Great Britain for the northern boundary of Oregon.
There can be no question therefore that his adverse report on
Linn's bill, and Reynolds' bill, was due, not to indifference as to the
political destiny of the Oregon Territory, nor to ignorance as to its
value to us, but to his conviction — based on a more complete knowl
edge than any other man possessed of every detail of the various
negotiations with France, Spain, Russia and Great Britain which
had affected our title to Oregon — that these bills ought not to be
passed, because they plainly violated our obligations, freely entered
into in times of profound peace, in the treaties of 1818 and 1827.
It has seemed necessary to quote very fully from the proceed
ings of the 27th Congress (and especially its second and third ses
sions), because while they have no connection with the origin and
purpose of Whitman's ride, the quotations herein made most indis
putably establish that there was not the slightest need of Whitman
to inform the Government about the value of Oregon to the United
States, nor to stimulate President Tyler and Daniel Webster to in
sist on holding it as far north as 49 degrees, and that he — knowing
absolutely nothing of the region really in dispute (except the farms
and gardens of Fort Vancouver), could not have furnished any in
formation of the slightest value to an administration which, for
more than nine months before he could by any possibility have
reached Washington, had had opportunities for daily interviews
with Wilkes and the other officers of his expedition, who from per
sonal explorations and surveys knew the value of the region really
in dispute, and particularly of what, as the world then looked, was
immeasurably its most important part — the Puget Sound country —
far better than Whitman or any other missionary to the Oregon
Indians did then, or for many years thereafter.
The records of the earlier diplomatic negotiations, and Congres
sional debates, and reports of Congressional committees, and Gov-

236 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
ernment explorers and agents, are only to be found in a few large
libraries, and the vital facts about them have been for a generation
past so suppressed and misstated by the advocates of the Whitman
Legend that it has seemed needful to quote from them extensively;
but as the reports of the later negotiations and Congressional de
bates, and committee reports and reports of Government explorers
and agents are in hundreds of libraries in all parts of the land, and
as concerning events after the spring of 1843, there was no special
inducement to misstate Governmental action by even the most
myth-loving advocates of the "Whitman Saved Oregon" Story,
there is no necessity for such extensive quotations from what is so
easily accessible to all who care to go thoroughly into the subject,
and consequently the later governmental action will be presented
more briefly, but with such references to original sources as will
enable the reader to follow the matter up as fully as inclination and
leisure may impel.
The "Oregon jingoes" who followed Benton's lead continually
insisted, not only during the campaign which resulted in the elec
tion of James K. Polk over Henry Clay as President, but as late as
January and February, 1845, that it was imperatively necessary for
the United States to immediately proceed to occupy Oregon with
settlers, and to encourage them to go there by passing Linn's bill
granting 640 acres of land to any male over 18 years of age who
would settle and live on it for five years, subsequently amended (by
Linn's successor in the Senate, D. R. Atchison), by providing a
grant of 160 acres additional to the wife (in case the settler should
be a married man), and 160 acres more for each child under 18
years of age that he might have when he settled on the land, and
160 acres more for each child he might have during the five years
before his title would be completed. (Cf. for Atchison's amended
bill, Cong. Globe, 28th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 56, date December 21,
1843.) Under these provisions a family having 8 children would have
received 2,080 acres, one of 10 children 2,400 acres, and one of 12
children 2,720 acres.
One of the arguments they most persistently advanced for the
urgent necessity of immediate action by our Government was that
we could never hope by negotiation with England to secure a satis
factory boundary line, because she was entirely satisfied to let
things remain indefinitely as they were under the treaties of 1818
and 1827, since she was receiving all the benefits resulting from
their provision for what was commonly called the Joint Occupancy
of Oregon, (but might much more properly be called the Joint Pol
icy of the two governments toward Oregon), and under that pro
vision was really in absolute control of the Oregon Territory, and

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 237
"by means of the Hudson's Bay Co. was colonizing it, establishing
forts in it to defend it against American troops, occupying all its
eligible sites for mills and towns, building mills, and cutting and
marketing all the best of its timber south of the Columbia, so that
when the boundary should be established at the Columbia we would
have to buy our ship timber from her, making game laws in it, con
stantly irritating and annoying the Indians south of the Columbia
so as to make them hostile, and favoring and humoring those north
of the Columbia so as to make them friendly, and in all possible
ways oppressing Americans who went to Oregon to settle." (Cf. in
Cong. Globe, 1st and 2d Sess., 28th Cong., and Appendix to 1st
Sess., speeches of Senators Benton, Buchanan, William Allen of
Ohio, D. R. Atchison of Missouri, and in the House of Representa
tives of Stephen A. Douglass, John Wentworth and J. A. McCler-
nand of Illinois, Alexander Duncan of Ohio, Kennedy of Indiana,
Cary of Maine, and others.) The facts are:
First. The English were not and never had been "in absolute
control of Oregon."
Second. They were not colonizing it. In the autumn of 1843
the entire number of British settlers (who were all ex-employes of
the Hudson's Bay Co., whose term of service had expired), was less
than 50 — less than two a year for all the years the Hudson's Bay
Co. and its predecessor in interest, the North West Co., had been in
Oregon. (Cf. Nesmith's Address., Tr. Or. Pioneer Association 1875,
p. 56.) Third. As to "forts to defend Oregon against Americans," there
were none, but, as stated by Lieut. Wilkes in his Special Report of
June 13, 1842, they were all mere Indian trading posts, "but in no
way to be considered as forts." (Cf. "Pendleton's Second Report,"
being Report No. 31, 27th Cong., 3d Sess., p. 75, quoted on p. 229,
ante.) Fourth. Instead of occupying all its eligible sites for mills, fac
tories and towns, the Hudson's Bay Co. had saw and grist mills
about six miles above Vancouver, and also at Colvile, about 500
miles northeast on the Columbia; and Dr. John McLoughlin, on his
own account, had laid claim to a mill and town site at the Falls of
the Willamette, where Oregon City now is; and they had trading
posts on sites where three considerable towns and one very small
one have since been built, viz. : Vancouver and Walla Walla (now
Wallula), in Washington, and Astoria and Oregon City, in Oregon
(the last named not opened till 1844 or 1845) ; that is, on the 292,-
000 square miles of the old Oregon Territory, between 1813 and
1844, they had actually occupied three millsites and four town-
sites, no one of the townsites being one on which a great city has
been built to this day.

238 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Fifth. All the timber they cut and marketed during the whole
time they occupied Oregon was not the one millionth part of the
timber then standing there, and not the one hundred thousandth
part of the timber that grew there during that time.
Sixth. They no more made "game laws" in Oregon than they
made laws establishing castes like those of India, or laws of primo
geniture like those of England.
Seventh. Their treatment of the Indians was exactly the same
south and north of the Columbia, and was such as to receive the
highest praise from American missionaries, settlers, explorers and
government agents.
Eighth. In no way did they oppress any well-behaved American
who went to settle in Oregon, or who visited the Territory for pleas
ure or as an explorer.
The absolutely indisputable proof of the seventh and eighth
propositions is stated herein in chapter No. VII. on the "Truth
About the Relation of the Hudson's Bay Co. to the American Ex
ploration, Occupation and Settlement of Oregon."
False as are all these premises of the "Oregon jingoes," equally
false is their conclusion that England was perfectly content to let
matters rest indefinitely under the treaty of 1827, because she was
obtaining all the benefits of that treaty, and constantly strengthen
ing her claims to Oregon.
The very opposite was the case. The English Government could
not strengthen its claims to any part of Oregon while that treaty
continued in force, and, alarmed by the continuous discussion in
Congress from 1838 onwards, and the widespread fever from Massa
chusetts to Missouri, and from Wisconsin to Louisiana, to migrate
to Oregon, and the prompt rejection by Webster (in the informal
conferences preceding the formal negotiations for the Webster-
Ashburton treaty) of any line south of 49 degrees as a negotiable
boundary line for the United States, with the rapidly increasing
agitation for 54 deg. 40 min. and the great activity of the Ameri
can press, which, as the Edinburgh Review said, in July, 1843 (p.
100) : "Teems with publications on the subject;" the English Gov
ernment, instead of "being content to let matters rest indefinitely
under the treaty of 1827," only five days after the completion of the
Ashburton treaty urged our Government to renew negotiations for
the settlement of the Oregon boundary, perceiving plainly enough
that unless it was speedily done there was danger that they might
not be able to secure a line so favorable even as the 49th degree.
Note : — The principal of these American publications about Ore
gon were: Irving's "Astoria" (1836) and "Bonneville" (1837)
(both immediately republished in England, and widely read in both
countries) ; Lieut. Slacum's Report (Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 24, 25th

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 239
Cong., 2d Sess., Dec. 18, 1837) ; Rev. Samuel Parker's "Journal of a
Tour Beyond the Rocky Mountains" (1838) ; Linn's Report (No.
470, Vol. V., Sen. Doc, 25th Cong., 2d Sess., June 6, 1838, with the
Ultimatum Map) ; Townsend's "Narrative of a Journey Across the
Rocky Mountains to the Columbia" (1839), which was immediately
republished in London.
Cushing's Report and Supplemental Report (p. 112) (No. 101,
Reports of Corns., House of Representatives, 25th Cong., 3d Sess.,
February 16, 1839, with the Ultimatum Map). Of this Report 10,-
000 copies were ordered printed "in addition to the usual number."
Greenhow's "History of Oregon and California," first or Govern
ment Edition, 228 pages, with map and index, of which 2,500 copies
"in addition to the usual number" were ordered printed by the
Senate February 10, 1840, (as Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 174, Vol. IV., 26th
Cong., 1st Sess.). It was also immediately reprinted in both New
York and London, as a book for general sale, with no change ex
cept striking off from the title page the fact that it was a Govern
ment document, and doubtless the United States Secret Service
fund paid the expenses of the London edition.
Thomas J. Farnham's "Travels in the Great Western Prairies,
the Anahuac and Rocky Mountains and in the Oregon Territory,"
(1st Edition, Poughkeepsie, N. Y., 1841).
Pendleton's First Report or Report of the Military Committee,
House of Representatives (No. 830, Reports of Corns., House of Rep
resentatives, Vol. IV., 27th Cong., 2d Sess. [64 pp.], with the Ulti
matum Map), of which 5,000 copies "in addition to the usual num
ber" were ordered printed May 27, 1842.
Pendleton's Second Report, No. 31, Reports Corns., House of Rep
resentatives, 27th Cong., 3d Sess., p. 78 (with the Ultimatum Map),
being the First Report (No. 830, 27th Cong., 2d Sess.) with 14 pp.
of extracts from Lieut Wilkes' Special Report added, and 5,000
copies ordered printed January 4, 1843.
Caleb Cushing's four long articles in North American Review,
October, 1828 (36 pp.), January, 1837 (37 pp.), January, 1839 (34
pp.), and January, 1840 (70 pp.); article in Hunt's Merchants'
Magazine for April, 1842 (then a very widely circulated and influ
ential publication), on "Oregon Territory;" copied in full in Niles'
Register for May 21, 1842. (Besides these there were almost in
numerable newspaper articles.)
Doc. No. 2, of Vol. I., of House Ex. Docs., 29th Cong., 1st Sess.,
1845-46, is President Polk's first Annual Message, date December
2, 1845 (this is also Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 1, 29th Cong., 1st Sess., and
it is also printed in App. to Cong. Globe, 29th Cong., 1st Sess., pp.
1-37), and among accompanying documents is "Correspondence with
the British Minister in Relation to Oregon," covering pp. 138-192,

240 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
inclusive. On p. 139 is first a letter to D. Webster, Secretary of
State, from H. S. Fox, British Minister to the United States, dated
Washington, November 15, 1842, announcing the desire of the Brit
ish Government, now that the northeast boundary was settled, to
take up the Oregon boundary, and enclosing the following extract
from a letter of Lord Aberdeen to Mr. Fox :
"Foreign Office, Oct. 18, 1842.
"Sir: The ratifications of the treaty, concluded on the 9th of
August" (i. e., the Ashburton Treaty, W. I. M.) "between Great
Britain and the United States, were exchanged by me, on the 13th
inst., with the Minister of the United States accredited to the court
of Her Majesty.
"The more important question of the disputed boundary between
Her Majesty's North American provinces and the United States
being thus settled, and the feelings which have been mutually pro
duced in the people of both countries being evidently favorable, and
indicative of a general desire to continue on the best footing with
each other, it has appeared to Her Majesty's Government that both
parties would act wisely in availing themselves of so auspicious a
moment to endeavor to bring to a settlement the only remaining
subject of territorial difference, which, although not so hazardous
as that of the northeast boundary, is nevertheless, even at this
moment, not without risk to the good understanding between the
two countries, and may, in course of time, be attended with the
same description of danger to their mutual peace as the question
which has recently been adjusted. I speak of the line of boundary
west of the Rocky Mountains.
"You are aware that Lord Ashburton was furnished with specific
and detailed instructions with respect to the treatment of this point
of difference between the two Governments in the general negotia
tions with which he was intrusted, and which he has brought to a
satisfactory issue. For reasons which it is not necessary here to
state at length, that point, after having been made the subject of
conference with the American Secretary of State, was not further
pressed. The main ground alleged by his lordship (p. 140) for
abstaining from proposing to carry on the discussion with respect
to the northwest boundary was the apprehension lest, by so doing,
the settlement of the far more important matter of the northeast
boundary should be impeded or exposed to the hazard of failure.
"This ground of apprehension now no longer exists; and Her
Majesty's Government, therefore, being anxious to endeavor to re
move, so far as depends on them, all cause, however remote, of even
contingent risk to the good understanding now so happily restored
between two countries which ought never to be at variance with

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 241
each other, have determined to propose to the Government of the
United States to meet them in an endeavor to adjust by treaty the
unsettled question of boundary west of the Rocky Mountains. On
the receipt of this dispatch, therefore, I have to desire that you
will propose to Mr. Webster to move the President to furnish the
United States Minister at this court with such instructions as will
enable him to enter upon the negotiation of this matter with such
person as may be appointed by Her Majesty for that object, and
you will assure him, at the same time, that we are prepared to pro
ceed to the consideration of it in a perfect spirit of fairness, and to
adjust it on a basis of equitable compromise.
"I am, with great truth and regard, sir, your most obedient,
humble servant.
"ABERDEEN.
"H. S. Fox, Esq., etc., etc."
Page 140, immediately following above, is : "Mr. Webster to Mr.
Fox:" "Department of State.
"Washington, Nov. 25, 1842.
"Sir : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note
of the 15th inst. upon the question of the Oregon or northwest
boundary, with an extract of a dispatch recently addressed to you
on the subject by the Earl of Aberdeen, explanatory of the wishes
of Her Majesty's Government — both of which I laid before the
President a few days afterwards.
"He directed me to say that he concurred entirely in the expe
diency of making the question respecting the Oregon Territory a
subject of immediate attention and negotiation between the two
Governments. He had already formed the purpose of expressing
this opinion in his message to Congress, and at no distant day a
communication will be made to the Minister of the United States
in London. "I pray you to accept the renewed assurance of my distinguished
consideration.
"DANIEL WEBSTER.
"H. S. Fox, Esq., etc., etc., etc."
Two dispatches of Edw. Everett, then our Minister to England,
to Daniel Webster, Secretary of State, quoted by George Bancroft
in Berlin Arbitration (p. 27), are to the same purport, as follows:
"London, Oct. 10, 1842.
"Sir: Lord Aberdeen, in the conference which ensued after the
exchange of the ratifications, observed that his only subject of re-

242 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
gret in connection with the treaty was, that the boundary between
the two countries on the Pacific Ocean had not been provided for;
and expressed a strong wish that I might receive instructions on
that subject.
"EDWARD EVERETT.
"Daniel Webster, Esq.,
"Secretary of State." "London, November 18, 1842.
"Sir: On arriving at the Foreign Office I was told that Lord
Aberdeen wished to see me, and was conducted to his room. He
informed me that he wished to read me a copy of a dispatch which
he had addressed to Mr. Fox, directing him to make known to the
President the strong desire of Her Majesty's Government to engage,
without delay, in a negotiation for the settlement of the boundary
between the two countries on the Pacific Ocean, and his wish that
instructions should be sent to me for that purpose. In the con
versation which ensued, he dwelt with great earnestness on the dan
ger to the good understanding between the two countries so happily
established by the treaty of Washington to be apprehended from
leaving this question in its present unsettled state.
"EDWARD EVERETT.
"Daniel Webster, Esq.,
"Secretary of State."
Returning to Doc. 2. On p. 141 is a letter from Mr. Upshur to
Mr. Pakenham, date February 26, 1844, replying to his of February
24, 1844, and making an appointment to meet Mr. Pakenham "to
morrow at 11 o'clock a. m. at the Department of State to confer
with him on the Oregon question," and another letter of Mr. Paken
ham to Mr. Calhoun, dated July 22, 1844, and referring to this
appointment, and to Mr. Upshur's death within a few days of the
date of Mr. Pakenham's note of February 24, 1844, and asking for
a renewal of the negotiations, which last letter marks the begin
ning of the negotiations of 1844-45-46 on the Oregon boundary ques
tion, and is followed by the protocols of that negotiation, the first
one dated August 23, 1844.
How did it happen that when both Governments were agreed in
October and November, 1842, to make the Oregon question "a sub
ject of immediate attention," no formal negotiations were had on
the subject till August 23, 1844?
The answer is readily found in a little study of easily accessible
authorities. All of President Harrison's Cabinet, after his death on April
4, 1841, continued to serve under Tyler until September 11, 1841,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 243
when, except Daniel Webster, they all resigned because President
Tyler had vetoed a bill passed by Congress re-establishing the
United States Bank; but Webster remained Secretary of State, in
order to settle the northeastern boundary, which was accomplished
August 9, 1842, by the Webster-Ashburton treaty.
He then desired to retire from a position which was far from
pleasant to him, as he was one of the greatest leaders of the Whig
party, and President Tyler had been "read out" of that party, on
account of his veto of the bank bill; and in order to furnish him
a position congenial to his tastes and suited to his talents, it was
proposed to send Edw. Everett, then Minister to England, as Min
ister or Commissioner to China (where we had not before had a
Minister), and then send Webster as Minister to England, where
it was expected that he would succeed in settling the question of
the Oregon boundary satisfactorily.
But after considerable correspondence, Everett declined to ac
cept the China mission, and Caleb Cushing was sent instead, and
negotiated the first treaty ever made between the United States
and China.
As Webster could not honorably displace his life-long friend
Everett without finding him some other place satisfactory to him,
and as no such place was open, Webster resigned on May 8, 1843,
and returned to private life till re-elected to the Senate, where his
new term began March 4, 1845.
In those days of no telegraphs, and few railroads and ocean
steamers, correspondence about this matter took much time, and
while it was going on no such delicate and difficult negotiation as
that about the Oregon boundary could prudently be begun, nor
could it be, after Webster resigned, till a new Secretary of State
should be installed and given time to become familiar with the
routine of the office.
After Webster's resignation, Hugh S. Legare, the Attorney
General, acted as Secretary of State ad interim from May 9, 1843,
to June 20, 1843, when he died suddenly. Then William S. Der
rick (Chief Clerk) acted as Secretary of State ad interim, June
21 to June 23, 1843. Then Abel P. Upshur, Secretary of the Navy,
acted as Secretary of State ad interim from June 24 to July 23,
1843, and on July 24 he was duly commissioned as Secretary of
State. Less than a month afterwards Mr. Everett wrote Mr. Upshur
as follows: (Cf. Berlin Arbitration, p. 28.)

244 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"(Confidential) "London, Aug. 17, 1843.
"Dear Sir: When Lord Aberdeen spoke of instructing Mr. Fox
on the Oregon question, he added an expression of his regret that
the negotiation should fall into his hands. He has on many oc
casions expressed a wish that I should be charged with the nego
tiation. Could I hope to bring it to a successful issue, it would
of course be very agreeable; but it seems to me out of the question
to carry on such a negotiation anywhere but at Washington.
"EDWARD EVERETT.
"Hon. A. P. Upshur."
Immediately following this, on p. 28, is "Mr. Upshur to Mr.
Everett" : "Department of State,
"Washington, Oct. 9, 1843.
"Sir: "The President directs that you take an early occasion to bring
again to the attention of Her Majesty's government -the subject of
the claims of the two countries respectively to the territory west
of the Rocky Mountains. The difficulties which the conflicting
claims of Russia to a portion of this territory have heretofore in
terposed are now happily removed by the treaty of April, 1824,
which defines the limits within which that power engages to re
strict its settlement; so that the questions now to be settled rest
exclusively between Great Britain and the United States.
"The offer of the 49th parallel of latitude, although it has once
been rejected, may be again tendered, together with the right of
navigating the Columbia upon equitable terms. Beyond this the
President is not now prepared to go.
"You will receive herewith the necessary powers to negotiate
upon the subject. If, however, the British Government prefers
that the negotiation shall be conducted in Washington, that ar
rangement will be perfectly agreeable to the President.
"A. P. UPSHUR.
"Edward Everett, Esq."
Immediately following this (on pp. 28-9) is "Mr. Everett to
Mr. Upshur: "(Confidential) "London, Nov. 2, 1843.
"Sir: By the steamer of the 16th October, I had the honor to
receive your dispatch No. 62, inclosing a full power from the Presi-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 245
dent to treat with this Government for the adjustment of the Ore
gon boundary, and containing your instructions on that subject.
I lost no time in applying for an interview with Lord Aberdeen,
and saw him the first day of his return to town. On apprising
him of the disposition of the President to open a negotiation on
this subject at London, Lord Aberdeen informed me that such an
arrangement would have been altogether agreeable to him if some
what earlier made, and reminded me that he had very often, in
the course of the last winter, expressed the wish that the President
would authorize me to treat on the subject. He had, however,
lately come to a conclusion and taken a step that made it neces
sary to treat upon the subject at Washington : this was the recall
of Mr. Fox and the appointment of a successor. Among the
grounds for adopting this measure was the belief that there would
be decided advantage in putting the management of this subject
into new hands, and consequently that had been and would be as
signed as a leading reason for the contemplated change. This
course, he said, had not been resolved upon till they had entirely
given up the expectation that I should be authorized to treat on
this subject. "EDWARD EVERETT.
"A. P. Upshur, Esq.,
"Secretary of State."
Immediately following this, on p. 29, is another dispatch from
Mr. Everett to Mr. Upshur, dated London, November 14, 1843,
showing that the British Foreign Office lost no time in recalling
Mr. Fox and commissioning Hon. Richard Pakenham as Minister
at Washington, for in it Everett says that on the 6th inst. Lord
Aberdeen (head of the British Foreign Office from September 2,
1841, to July 6, 1846), had requested him to call at Argyll House,
Lord Aberdeen's town residence; and that he had done so, and
had had "a long and upon the whole satisfactory conversation with
Lord Aberdeen," in the course of which "he told me that he had
communicated to Mr. Fox, by the steamer of the 4th, that his suc
cessor was appointed."
Pakenham arrived in New York February 12, 1844, on the Brit
ish sloop of war Vestal, of 26 guns, in 27 days from Plymouth,
England. (Cf. Niles' Register, Feb. 17, 1844.)
Returning now to House Ex. Doc. 2, 29th Cong., 1st Sess. On
p. 140, under date February 24, 1844, Mr. Pakenham wrote to Mr.
Upshur that he had been instructed "to lose no time in entering
into communication with the Secretary of State of the United
States upon the subject of Oregon, because "Upon no subject of
difference between the two Governments was the British Govern-

246 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
ment more anxious to come to an early and satisfactory arrange
ment than that relating to the Oregon or Columbia territory," and
asking for an appointment to begin negotiations.
Idem (p. 141) Mr. Upshur replied to Mr. Pakenham, under
date of February 26, 1844, saying: "The undersigned has the
honor to inform Mr. Pakenham that he will receive him for that
purpose, at the Department of State, tomorrow at 11 a. m."
At last then it seemed as though negotiations would speedily
be fully entered upon, but on February 28, 1844, Mr. Upshur, with
Mr. Gilmer, Secretary of the Navy, and several others, were in
stantly killed by the explosion of a great gun called the Peace
maker on board the United States ship of war Princeton.
Thus again our State Department was vacant, and although
that brilliant statesman John C. Calhoun was nominated and con
firmed Secretary of State March 6, 1844, and entered upon the
duties of the office April 1, 1844, Mr. Pakenham, appreciating the
necessity of allowing the new Secretary to become well wonted to
his office before attempting to carry on any negotiation about so
important, and delicate, and complicated a subject as the Oregon
boundary, did not address him upon it till he wrote the following
letter : "Washington, July 22, 1844.
"Sir : In the archives of the Department of State will be found
a note which I had the honor to address, on the 24th February
last, to the late Mr. Upshur, expressing the desire of Her Majesty's
Government to conclude with the Government of the United States
a satisfactory arrangement respecting the boundary of the Oregon
or Columbia territory.
"The lamented death of Mr. Upshur, which occurred within a
few days after the date of that note, the interval which took place
between that event and the appointment of a successor, and the
urgency and importance of various matters which offered them
selves to your attention immediately after your accession to office,
sufficiently explain why it has not hitherto been in the power of
your Government, sir, to attend to the important matter to which
I refer. "But the session of Congress having been brought to a close,
and the present being the season of the year when the least public
business is usually transacted, it occurs to me that you may now
feel at leisure to proceed to the consideration of that subject. At
all events, it becomes my duty to recall it to your recollection, and
to repeat the earnest desire of Her Majesty's Government, that a
question on which so much interest is felt in both countries should

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 247
be disposed of at the earliest moment consistent with the conveni
ence of the Government of the United States.
"I have the honor to be, with high consideration, sir, your obe
dient servant, "R. PAKENHAM.
"Hon. John C. Calhoun, etc."
To this Mr. Calhoun replied as follows:
"Department of State.
"Washington, August 22, 1844.
"Sir: The various subjects which necessarily claimed my at
tention on entering on the duties of my office have heretofore, as
you justly suppose in your note of the 22d of July last, prevented
me from appointing a time to confer with you, and enter on the
negotiations in reference to the Oregon territory.
"These have, at length, been dispatched, and, in reply to the
note which you did me the honor to address to me of the date
above mentioned, I have to inform you that I am now ready to
enter on the negotiation, and for that purpose propose a confer
ence tomorrow at 1 o'clock p. m., at the Department of State, if
perfectly convenient to you; but, if not, at any other (place) which
it may suit your convenience to appoint.
"The Government of the United States participates in the
anxious desire of that of Great Britain, that the subject may be
early and satisfactorily arranged.
"I have the honor to be, with high consideration, sir, your obe
dient servant, "J. C. CALHOUN.
"The Right Hon. R. Pakenham, etc., etc, etc."
To this Mr. Pakenham replied as follows:
"Washington, Aug. 22, 1844.
"Sir: I have had the honor to receive your note of this morn
ing date, in which you signify your readiness to enter on the nego
tiation in reference to the Oregon territory, proposing to me to
meet you in conference on that subject tomorrow at 1 o'clock.
"In reply, I have the honor to acquaint you that I shall have
great pleasure in waiting on you, at the Department of State, at
the hour proposed.
"Be pleased to accept the assurance of any distinguished con
sideration.
"R. PAKENHAM.
"Hon. John C. Calhoun, etc., etc., etc."

248 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
And thus, at last, almost two years after Lord Aberdeen had
expressed the desire of England to "immediately take it up and
settle it speedily," the final negotiation for the settlement of the
Oregon boundary line was really started.
This matter has been stated thus fully because one of the per
sistent contentions of various advocates of the Whitman Legend
has been that President Tyler promised Whitman, in March, 1843,
that there should be no farther negotiations about Oregon till he
should have time to lead a migration there with wagons. (Cf. Ex
tract from a lecture by Rev. H. H. Spalding in Sen. Ex. Doc. No.
37, 41st Cong., 3d Sess. (p. 22) ; Gray's "History of Oregon" (p.
290) ; Rev. M. Eells' "Indian Missions" (p. 174) ; Rev. M. Eells'
"Reply to Prof. Bourne" (pp. 94-5) ; Mrs. Eva Emery Dye's "Mc
Loughlin and Old Oregon" (p. 235) ; Craighead's "Story of Marcus
Whitman" (p. 67) ; Nixon's "How Marcus Whitman Saved Oregon"
(p. 130) ; Mowry's "Marcus Whitman and the Early Days of Ore
gon" (p. 171).
There is not the slightest probability that Whitman ever had
any interview with President Tyler and Secretary Webster. (Cf.
Chapter VIL, Part 2, infra.) Upshur's dispatch to Mr. Webster,
_. August 9, 1843 (which would unquestionably have resulted in re
opening formal negotiations on the Oregon boundary in November,
1843, in London, had not the British Government, tired of the long
delay, resolved to recall Mr. Henry S. Fox [their Minister at Wash
ington from October 2, 1835, to December 14, 1843] and transfer
the negotiation to Washington), is conclusive proof that there was
no agreement by President Tyler to delay negotiations on the Ore
gon boundary till news should be received of the arrival of the 1843
migration, for the news of the arrival of that migration at Fort
Hall was not received at St. Louis till November 30, 1843 (when
the 11 men sent back from Fort Hall by Fremont arrived there,
having lost the letters sent by Fremont, but having brought through
and left at Weston, Mo., for publication some letters from the mi
gration). (Cf. for the sending back of these men on September 22,
1843, p. 162 of Fremont's First and Second Exploring Expeditions,
being Sen. Ex. Doc. 174, 28th Cong., 2d Sess. ; for the arrival of the
party at St. Louis, the extract from St. Louis Gazette, quoted in
Niles' Register December 16, 1843.)
While there have been claims made that information was re
ceived in Washington in January, 1844, of the safe arrival at their
destination of the 1843 migration, no proof to sustain this wholly
improbable claim has been produced, and the earliest news of their
arrival that I have been able to find is in the following two ex
tracts from Niles' Register:

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 249
First. Issue of April 13, 1844 (p. 101), "Extracts from a let
ter dated October 20, 1843, at Wallamette Falls— The population
of this country, exclusive of the party of 700 now coming in from
the States, has increased at least one-third during the past year."
This is credited to the Newburyport Herald, but without date. The
date of the letter shows that it must have been written when only
those had arrived in the Willamette Valley who left the main body
of the migration at Fort Hall, and went ahead with saddle and
pack horses.
Second. Issue of April 20, 1844 (p. 113), "The Oregon. The
Emigrants." "A letter from the Oregon emigrants was received
at Platte City, Mo., on the 2d inst., announcing the safe arrival of
the emigrating company, and confirming the intelligence formerly
received. A history of the expedition will be published in St. Louis
next July."
A very complete record of the final negotiations on the Oregon
boundary is to be found in (a) Ex. Doc. No. 2, 29th Cong., 1st
Sess., which gives the protocols of the six conferences between
Pakenham and Calhoun (our Secretary of State from March 6,
1844, to March 5, 1845), held on August 23, August 26, September
2, September 12, September 20 and September 24, 1844; and the
seventh conference between Pakenham and Buchanan (our Secre
tary of State from March 5, 1845, to March 7, 1849), held July 16,
1845; and 46 pages of the "statements" of the respective negotia
tors which accompanied the protocols.
(b) Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 489, 29th Cong., 1st Sess., which in 51
pages gives the draft of the treaty of 1846, as submitted to the
Senate by the President for their advice as to whether or not it
should be accepted; the proceedings of the Senate thereon, ending
with a recommendation to the President to accept the treaty,
adopted by 38 to 12 on June 12, 1846; the treaty itself, as finally
ratified on June 18, 1846, by 41 to 14, with the proceedings of the
Senate thereon ; and the remainder of the correspondence accom
panying the treaty, including that accompanying the Joint Resolu
tion of the two Houses of Congress, approved April 27, 1846, au
thorizing the President in his discretion to give the twelve months'
notice to Great Britain of our desire to abrogate the treaty of 1827,
which notice was given by the President on April 28, 1846, and its
receipt acknowledged by Lord Aberdeen on May 21, 1846.
(c) "Berlin Arbitration," pp. 27-55. This is specially valuable
because it gives the despatches of Mr. Everett to Webster, Upshur
and Calhoun, and also some despatches of Mr. McLane to Buchanan
which are not given at all in Doc No. 489, and supplies omitted
parts of some of those which are in that document.

250 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
In the negotiations of 1823-24 Great Britain had offered us the
line of 49 degrees to the most northeasterly branch of the Columbia,
known as McGillivray's River, and thence that stream and the Co
lumbia to the Pacific Ocean, with the navigation of the Columbia
perpetually free to both nations. (Cf. Protocol of the 23d Confer
ence, July 23, 1824; Doc. 396, American State Papers, Foreign Re
lations, Vol. V.) In the negotiations of 1826-7 Great Britain had
offered in addition to the above to allow us a territory entirely de
tached from all our other possessions, embracing the greater part
of the peninsula between the waters of Puget's Sound and the
Pacific, with a further provision that "No works should at any
time be erected at the entrance of the river Columbia, or upon the
banks of the same, that might be calculated to impede or hinder the
free navigation thereof by the vessels or boats of either party."
(Cf. Protocol of Third Conference, Dec. 1, 1826, in Doc. 458, Vol.
VI., American State Papers, Foreign Rel.) As we have seen Lord
Ashburton came over in 1842, "with specific and detailed instruc
tions" to renew the proposition of 1826, but found Webster and
Tyler insistent on "No line south of the 49th degree as a negotiable
boundary line for the United States," and as his instructions posi
tively forbade his acceptance of that line, Oregon was left out of
the Ashburton treaty.
At the second conference between Pakenham and Calhoun, Au
gust 26, 1844, the former renewed the British offer of December 1,
1826, and in addition "To make free to the United States any port
or ports which the United States Government might desire either
on the main land or on Vancouver's Island, south of latitude 49
degrees." This Mr. Calhoun at once declined. (Cf. House Ex. Doc
2, 29th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 143, 144 and 146.)
Mr. Benton ("Thirty Years' View," Vol. II, p. 661) says: "Mr.
Calhoun, rejecting the usual arts of diplomacy, which holds in re
serve the ultimate and true offer while putting forward fictitious
ones for experiment, went at once to his ultimatum, and proposed
the continuation of the parallel of the 49th degree of north latitude
. . . to the Pacific Ocean. Mr. Pakenham declined this propo
sition in the part that carried the line to the ocean, but offered to
continue it from the summit of the mountains to the Columbia
River, a distance of some 300 miles ; and then follow the river to the
ocean." Mr. Benton is entirely in error in saying that Calhoun "went
at once to his ultimatum" with an offer of 49 degrees to the Pacific.
The records of the negotiation show that neither "at once" nor at
any time during this negotiation did Mr. Calhoun offer either 49
degrees to the Pacific, or any other line for a boundary. The rea-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 251
son for this is easily found by attention to the political conditions
of the time.
May 1, 1844, the Whig National Convention had met at Balti
more and unanimously nominated Henry Clay for President and
Theodore Frelinghuysen for Vice-President, and adopted a short
platform entirely ignoring the questions of Texas and Oregon.
The Southern leaders, who then completely dominated the Demo
cratic party, and who were determined to annex Texas at any cost,
knowing well the rising opposition in the North to any farther ex
tension of slavery, saw in far away Oregon a counterpoise to Texas,
and knowing that although Oregon had been known for a dozen
years or more to be easily enough accessible by wagon, yet its re
moteness would not allow of its being peopled rapidly enough to
have it admitted as a State for a good many years (as a matter of
fact it was not admitted as a State till February 14, 1859), while
Texas would come in as a State with two Senators at once (it was
admitted December 29, 1845), and a chance of dividing it later into
three or four States, with a corresponding number of Senators and
Representatives, and that Oregon was so far north of Mason and
Dixon's line and the Missouri Compromise line that slavery would
never go there, adroitly linked the two together, and in the Demo
cratic National Convention, held at Baltimore May 28, 29 and 30,
1844, having by the two-thirds rule defeated Van Buren, who had
151 out of a total of 266 votes on the first ballot, and in the first
seven ballots killed off all the other prominent candidates, on the
eighth ballot gave 44 votes to James K. Polk, who had received no
votes on the first seven ballots, and on the ninth ballot nominated
him — the first of the "dark horses" to make a Presidential race —
and put the following plank into their platform :
"Resolved: That our title to the whole of the territory of Ore
gon is clear and unquestionable ; that no portion of the same ought
to be surrendered to England or apy other power; and that the
reoccupation of Oregon and the reannexation of Texas at the earli
est practicable period are great American measures, which this con
vention recommends to the cordial support of the Democracy of
the Union."
Oregon first, and thirty-eight words specially to Oregon, and
only 4 to Texas! Was ever anything more ingeniously contrived
to bamboozle the average voter? "The whole of Oregon" was uni
versally understood to mean Oregon as far north as 54 degrees and
40 minutes, and forthwith began the notorious "fifty-four forty or
fight" campaign, which resulted in the election of Polk.
As the Conference between Pakenham and Calhoun began in
the midst of this campaign, and ended before the election, it can
easily be seen that Calhoun would not make any proposition for

252 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
a definite line, for to have proposed the line of 54 deg. and 40 min.
would have certainly resulted in its immediate rejection by Paken
ham, while if he had offered 49 degrees amid all the heat and fury
of a political campaign in which his own party was shouting for
"fifty-four forty or fight," and bitterly denouncing Clay, the Whig
nominee for the Presidency, as having "taken the British against
the American side" by offering 49 degrees in 1826, he would have
greatly strengthened the Whigs and weakened his own party, and
though personally he did not favor the "fifty-four forty or fight"
policy, and would have been glad to have settled the controversy
with 49 degrees as the boundary if there had been no Presidential
campaign in progress, he was too intense a partisan to be willing to
imperil Polk's election by proposing that line in the most critical
period of the 1844 campaign.
Whoever will read in Ex. Doc. No. 2 the statements that passed
between these two negotiators, viz., Calhoun to Pakenham, date
September 3, 1844 ; Pakenham to Calhoun, date September 12, 1844 ;
and Calhoun to Pakenham, September 20, 1844 ; will find them very
forceful presentations of the claims of their respective Govern
ments, but presenting nothing new (since the whole subject had
been thoroughly gone over by quite as able men in the negotiations
of 1823-4 and 1826-7), except a fuller statement than Gallatin made,
November 25, 1826, of the fact that by the Third Article of the
Treaty of 1818, and by its renewal by the Treaty of 1827, it was im
possible that the trading posts and other settlements made in Ore
gon by the Hudson's Bay Co. could in any degree strengthen the
British claim to it (which Benton and the "Oregon jingoes" were
constantly asserting they could do), but with no offer by Calhoun
of a definite boundary line.
Pakenham's "statement" of September 12, 1844, concludes as
follows :
"The undersigned believes that he has now noticed all the
arguments advanced by the American plenipotentiary, in order to
show that the United States are fairly entitled to the entire region
drained by the Columbia river. He sincerely regrets that their
views on this subject should differ in so many essential respects.
"It remains for him to request that as the American plenipo
tentiary declines the proposal offered on the part of Great Britain,
he will have the goodness to state what arrangements he is, on the
part of the United States, prepared to propose for an equitable
adjustment of the question; and more especially that he will have
the goodness to define the nature and extent of the claims which
the United States may have to other portions of the territory, to
which allusion is made in the concluding part of his statement, as

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 253
it is obvious that no arrangement can be made with respect to a
portion of the territory in dispute while a claim is reserved to any
portion of the remainder.
"The undersigned, British plenipotentiary, has the honor to re
new to the American plenipotentiary the assurance of his high con
sideration.
"R. PAKENHAM."
(Cf. House Ex. Doc. 2, p. 158.)
Mr. Calhoun's reply to this, dated September 20, 1844, is a gen
eral discussion of the "statement" of Mr. Pakenham, but the only
allusion in it to Mr. Pakenham's request above quoted is the fol
lowing very vague statement, in its concluding paragraph:
"In reply to the request of the British plenipotentiary, that
the undersigned should define the nature and extent of the claims
which the United States have to the other portions of the terri
tory, and to which allusion is made in the concluding part of state
ment A, he has the honor to inform him, in general terms, that
they are derived from Spain by the Florida treaty, and are founded
on the discoveries and exploration of her navigators; and which
they must regard as giving them a right to the extent to which
they can be established, unless a better can be opposed.
"J. C. CALHOUN.
"The Right Hon. Richard Pakenham, etc, etc., etc."
(Cf. House Ex. Doc. 2, p. 161.)
Plainly Mr. Calhoun, instead of moving on towards any definite
proposition about a boundary line, was merely "marking time,"
and waiting for the result of the election.
Had Mr. Clay been elected, there is every probability that Mr.
Calhoun (who never had endorsed the "fifty-four forty or fight"
humbug) would have offered again 49 degrees to the coast, but
when the returns showed Polk's election, very naturally Calhoun,
who cared vastly more about Texas than about Oregon, bent his
energies towards the annexation of the "Lone Star Republic," and
determined to leave Polk's Administration to get out of their "fifty-
four forty or fight" dilemma as best they might.
On January 15, 1845, Mr. Pakenham, having received no propo
sition for a boundary line (though his own proposition had been
rejected more than four and a half months before), wrote to Mr.
Calhoun that, "Considering on the one hand the impatience which
is manifested in the United States for a settlement of this ques
tion, and on the other the length of time which would probably
be still required to effect a satisfactory adjustment of it between

254 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
the two Governments, it has occurred to Her Majesty's Govern
ment that, under such circumstances, no more fair or honorable
mode of settling the question could be adopted than that of arbi
tration. "This proposition I am accordingly authorized to offer for the
consideration of the Government of the United States."
On January 21, 1845, Mr. Calhoun replied, declining to arbi
trate, but expressing "the hope that the question may be settled by
the negotiation now pending between the two countries" (Cf.
House Ex. Doc. 2, p. 162), and with this ended the connection of
Calhoun and the Tyler Administration with the Oregon negotia
tion. President Polk's Inaugural Address, March 4, 1845, after dis
cussing the Texas question at length, continued as follows: "Nor
will it become in a less degree my duty to assert and maintain by
all constitutional means the right of the United States to that
portion of our territory which lies beyond the Rocky Mountains.
"Our title to the country of the Oregon is clear and unques
tionable, and already are our people preparing to perfect that title
by occupying it with their wives and children."
There is here no claim of "fifty-four forty or fight," and a plain
opening of a path for retreat from that position; nevertheless, fol
lowing on the heels of all the fuss and fury of the "fifty-four forty
or fight" campaign, and the fiery speeches of the "Oregon jingoes"
in both Houses of Congress in the first and second sessions of the
28th Congress, this passage in the Inaugural produced great un
easiness and fear of war in England, where the ability of the aver
age American politicians, when they have carried the election, to
split the planks of the platform on which they have merely stood
to get the offices into kindling wood for the bonfires over their vic
tory, and to "eat their own words" without even making a wry
face over the act is less thoroughly understood than in this country.
Two articles, at this time, in two of the most influential publi
cations in England, the London Examiner and the Edinburgh Re
view, are very interesting in this connection, as showing the state
of England's opinion on the value of Oregon, the folly of going to
war about the whole or any part of it, and the view of the fair-
minded Englishman as to a proper division of the country between
the two nations.
From the Examiner article I will quote very fully; but as the
Edinburgh Review article is a lengthy review of ten books — includ
ing "American State Papers," "Farnham's Travels," "Greenhow's
History of Oregon and California" (London Edition) ; and "Narra
tive of United States Exploring Expedition," by Lieut. Charles

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 255
Wilkes, 5 vols. — I must summarize it, and only make a few brief
quotations from it.
(From London Examiner, April 26, 1845:)
"THE OREGON QUESTION.
"The maximum claim of England and the minimum claim
of America is the Columbia; the maximum of America and the
minimum of England is the 49th. If each were mad enough to in
sist on its maximum, collision must ensue.
"The best mode of arrangement would be that which has been
offered by England, and, though not accepted, not definitely re
jected by America— arbitration. The dispute after all is a mere
question of national pride, and the pride of neither nation could
be offended by submission to an award. If that award were to give
the whole country down to the Mexican frontier to England, Amer
ica would suffer no real loss. She would only be prevented from
wasting her resources and violating her constitution in the acquisi
tion and defense of what must, in effect, be a distant colony.
"If the award were to give the whole territory to America, the
value of the monopoly enjoyed by the Hudson's Bay Co. would be
a little diminished. But as that monopoly is injurious to the Eng
lish people, we should not bitterly grieve at an event which would
reduce the value of the company's stock one per cent.
"If arbitration be unattainable, the only mode of accommoda
tion is mutual concession, and the terms which we suggest for that
mutual concession are those which, if we were arbitrators, we
should award, namely, that the boundary line should be the 49th
degree until it meets the Pacific, and then the Straits of Fuca to
the sea. Our only claim rests on contiguity, and this would give
us more than mere contiguity entitles us to. This would give us
the whole of Vancouver's Island, and it would give us an abundance
of good harbors. It would also give us the country which is best
for the purposes for which we use it, the fur trade. The furs to
the north of the 49th degree are better and more abundant than
those to the south. All balancing, however, of the positive advan
tages to be obtained by the one nation or by the other on a parti
tion is mere childishness. The interruption of confidence for a
single week costs more than the whole country is worth. A mere
armament, though followed by accommodation, would cost more
than a thousand times its value. What proportion, therefore, does
it bear to a war?"
The Edinburgh Review article was published in the July, 1845,
number and contains about 15,000 words.

256 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
It was so eminently fair that the New York Tribune Almanac
for 1846 printed it in full, prefaced by the following paragraph:
"OREGON." "OUR RIGHTFUL NORTHWESTERN
BOUNDARY."
"Decidedly the clearest and best account we have seen of the
Oregon Boundary controversy is given in the following article from
the Edinburgh Review of July last :
"So lucid, so candid, so truthful is it, that the British newspaper
press (the London Times especially) denounce it as a virtual sur
render of all in dispute that is material, as in truth it is. The
boundary proposed by the Review is that proposed and urged by our
Government at different times, but always rejected by Great Britain.
"We think the Review demonstrates that it is the proper and
just one."
The article discusses the fur trade and the Hudson's Bay Co.'s
management of it, and their policy in dealing with the Indians,
says that Oregon is of little worth agriculturally, and that for the
fur trade (which it thinks the chief value of the country), the part
north of 49 degrees is much more valuable than the part south of
that parallel, discusses (from the British standpoint of course)
the question of title to the country, and declares that neither Eng
land nor the United States has a perfect title, and says "The great
error of all parties has been the importance attached to Oregon.
But, assuming it to be of any value, the Americans cannot be ex
pected to remain satisfied with an arrangement which, professing
to give them equal rights, practically excludes them" (i. e., from
the fur trade). It concludes as follows: "And we firmly believe
in Mr. Gallatin's prophecy" (in the 1826-7 negotiations), "that
under whatever nominal sovereignty Oregon may be placed, what
ever its ultimate destinies may be, it will almost exclusively be
peopled by the surplus population of the United States. The ne
gotiation for partition is now resumed, and we trust with a fair
prospect of success. It is much that the real worthlessness of the
country has been established. All that any prudent Englishman
or American can wish is, that the controversy should be speedily
and honorably settled. A week's interruption of confidence — such,
for instance, as followed the reception of Mr. Polk's inaugural
speech — costs each party twenty times the value of the matter in
dispute. "The obvious course is to refer the whole question to arbitra
tion. The decision of an arbitrator necessarily saves the honor
of each party, and in the present case there is nothing else to con
tend for. . . ." The earnest plea for arbitration concludes as

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 257
follows: "She" (i. e., the United States) "cannot deny that we
honestly believe it to be matter of controversy; and if a fourth
negotiation should fail, she is bound by friendship, by prudence,
and by regard to the welfare of the whole civilized world to allow
it to be settled by arbitration. Our readers have perhaps a right
to ask what, in our opinion, the decision of an honest arbitrator
would be? We think we have supplied premises from which it
may be inferred. We have shown that no nation now possesses
any title, perfect or imperfect, by discovery, by settlement, by
treaty, or by prescription. We have shown, too, that no nation
possesses a perfect title by contiguity; and we have shown that an
imperfect title by contiguity to the portion which lies north of
the 49th parallel is vested in England and that part which lies
south of that parallel in America. We think, therefore, that
that parallel ought to be the basis of the boundary; but,
as if prolonged indefinitely, it would cut off the southern extrem
ity of Vancouver Island, with little advantage to America, and
great injury, if we shall ever occupy that island, to England; we
think that it should cease to be the boundary when it reaches the
coast, and that from thence the boundary should be the sea. This
would give to us the whole of Vancouver's Island, which, if we are
absurd enough to plant a colony in the northern Pacific, is the
least objectionable seat.
"It possesses excellent ports, a tolerable climate, and some cul-
tivatable soil; an ascertained and defensible frontier, and the com
mand of the important straits, by which to the east and to the
south, it is separated from the continent. That its distance from
Europe would render it a costly and unprofitable incumbrance, is
true; but that objection applies with equal force to every part of
Oregon." Thus these two articles — in two of the most influential periodi
cals in Great Britain (both written by the famous political econo
mist and philosophical essayist, Nassau W. Senior, and published
fourteen and twelve months before the treaty of 1846 was made)
— recommend to Great Britain to yield to the American claims
and fix the boundary precisely as it was fixed by that treaty.
A favorite contention of Barrows and Nixon and other advo
cates of the Whitman Legend is that our statesmen and people
were constantly deceived by articles published in the interest of
the Hudson's Bay Co. in English periodicals, asserting the worth
lessness of Oregon, so that we might be induced to yield it up to
Great Britain as not worth contending for.
Thus (Nixon "How Marcus Whitman Saved Oregon," p. 192)
"In the mean time they" (i. e., the Hudson's Bay Co.) "ran a lit
erary bureau for all it was worth in the disparagement of Oregon

258 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
for all purposes except those of the fur trader. The English press
was mainly depended upon for this work, but the best means in
reach were used that all these statements should reach the ruling
powers and the reading people of the United States.
"The effect of this literary bureau upon American statesmen
and the most intelligent class of readers prior to the spring of
1843 is easily seen by the sentiments quoted, and by their pub
lished acts, in refusing to legislate for Oregon."
This Hudson's Bay Co.'s "literary bureau" is one of the mul
titudinous "facts" in Dr. Nixon's book for which "he himself" is
"authority" — it never having been discovered by any one else be
cause it only existed in his imagination.
Barrows' "Oregon" (pp. 191-2) asserts what is equally ficti
tious, and probably the germ out of which Dr. Nixon's fervid fancy
evolved this "literary bureau," as follows:
"At the time of the" (alleged) "interview between Whitman
and Webster, the most of the information received in the States
from the northwest had of necessity, therefore, come in through
English channels, and was moulded to Hudson Bay interests.
While that country lay as an obscure right between the two na
tions, and the Company saw an advance opening for their trade,
it was quite natural that they should diminish temptations to visit
it, and weave obstacles between it and a rival on the border. This
they did to a successful extent up to the time when Whitman ar
rived on the Potomac. They had made it quite obvious to the un
informed, says Gray, 'that the whole country was of little value
to any one. It would scarcely support the few Indians, much less
a large population of settlers.' English volumes of travel and
scholarly review articles were teaching the same delusion abroad."
True, Barrows explicitly contradicts this only 29 pages after
(on p. 220) and states — what is very rare in his "Oregon" — the
exact truth, as follows: "It is not necessary to itemize, for all
histories, sketches and travels touching primitive times and the
dawn of civilization in that country, came in the line of its dis
covery and purchase and exploration by the United States." But
such self-contradiction is by no means uncommon in Barrows'
"Oregon." Returning now to p. 192, Barrows continues: "So the Edin
burgh Review said: (b) 'Only a small proportion of the land is
capable of cultivation.' (a) 'West of the Rocky Mountains the
desert extends from the Mexican (Californian) border to the Co
lumbia,' and it endeavored to show that the country east of the
mountains was (a) 'incapable, probably forever, of fixed settle
ments' where now are Kansas, Nebraska and Dakota.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 259
"The British and Foreign Review preached to the same appli
cation and conclusion. 'Upon the whole, therefore, the Oregon
Territory holds out no great promise as an agricultural field.' The
London Examiner was quite pronounced, if not petulant, that the
ignorant Americans did not give up a country equal in area to
England eight times : 'The whole territory in dispute is not worth
twenty thousand pounds to either power.' "
"(Note Vol. LXXXIL, p. 240; also July, 1843, p. 184, British
and Foreign Review; January, 1844, p. 21, London Examiner,
quoted in Webster's Works in Introd. cxlix.)"
The putting of Vol. LXXXIL in this foot note was deliberately
dishonest, as he well knew that few of his readers would ever have
a chance to look up that volume and find that it was for July, 1845,
and because, to prevent any one from having any excuse for quot
ing its articles otherwise than by date, the Edinburgh Review has
always printed at the top of every page the month and year of its
publication. On p. 194 Barrows continues: "The same article from which
we have quoted in the Edinburgh Review thinks that the American
colonists in Oregon have been (b) 'misled by the representations
of the climate and soil of Oregon, which for party purposes have
been spread through the United States.' Then the Review becomes
prophetic: (b) 'It seems probable that, in a few years, all that
formerly gave life to the country, both the hunter and his prey,
will become extinct, and that their place will be supplied by a thin
white and half-breed population, scattered along the few fertile
valleys, supported by pasture instead of the chase, and gradually
degenerating into barbarism, far more offensive than the back
woodsman.' This defamation of Oregon is naturally followed by
the English writer with the declaration that (b) 'No nation now
possesses any title, perfect or imperfect, by discovery, by settle
ment, by treaty, or by prescription.' "
As it is impossible to tell from anything in Barrows what he
has here quoted from the July, 1843, and what from the July, 1845,
Edinburgh Review, I have marked the quotations from the July,
1843, issue with (a), and those from the July, 1845, issue with
(b), and I have quoted every word he has quoted from the July,
1845, number.
Yet, immediately following the last sentence quoted by him,
the Review goes on (as we have already seen) to declare that "An
imperfect title by contiguity to the portion which lies north of the
49th parallel is vested in England, and to that part which lies
south of that parallel in America," and then recommends that the
boundary should be run on the 49th parallel to the coast and the
Straits of Fuca to the ocean.

260 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Yet this article, thus avowedly written in 1845, to influence
England to yield to the American claim, and surrender Oregon up
to 49 degrees, is thus garbled and antedated by Barrows and Nixon
to deceive their readers into believing that it was published before
Whitman's ride to misrepresent the value of Oregon, and so induce
the Americans to surrender it to Great Britain.
As English reviews and quarterlies exercised ten thousand times
as much influence on English public opinion as on American, and
not even Barrows and Nixon pretend that they issued one edition
commending Oregon for their English readers, so that they would
insist on holding it, and a different one condemning it to deceive
their American readers into surrendering it, it would appear evi
dent to ordinary minds that even if their articles had been printed
before Whitman's ride, their effect would have been to cause Eng
land to be willing to surrender Oregon, rather than go to war for
what appeared of so little value.
But what sort of a historical conscience can a writer have, who,
like Barrows, not only advances the preposterous theory that Amer
ican opinion was misled about the value of Oregon "prior to Whit
man's arrival on the Potomac," by articles in British reviews and
quarterlies ; but, finding absolutely nothing of any importance about
Oregon in any such publications, prior to 1843, nothing which even
his phenomenal ability in misquoting can make even seem to fur
nish the least support to his theory, deliberately uses for proof that
the English publications had deceived our Government and people
"up to the time Whitman arrived on the Potomac" (i. e., late in
March, or more likely about the middle of April, 1843), such
garbled extracts as these, from articles published three months,
nine months, two years and three months, four years and three
months, and twenty-four years and three months after the time "up
to which" they had so succeeded in deceiving our people and states
men? — for the article from the London Examiner (from which he
quotes only fourteen words, with no intimation of its date), was
not published till July 24, 1847, and (on p. 196) he quotes thirty-
two words from a long article in the Westminster Review (and re
frains from giving any information as to its date), which was not
published till July, 1867 — and had no more connection with the
Oregon Question than it had with the Schleswig-Holstein Question,
or the Afghanistan Question, or the Transvaal Question, or the
Soudan Question.
Dr. Nixon, seeing the absurdity of thus asserting that articles
published in English reviews and magazines influenced public opin
ion here before their publication, coolly changes the date for the
London and Foreign Review article from its true date, January,
1844, to "as late as 1840," and that of the London Examiner article

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 261
from July 24, 1847, to . . . "in 1843." (Cf. his "How Marcus
Whitman Saved Oregon," p. 47.)
As we have seen, he set out to write that book with the idea
that "he himself was authority" for its facts (Cf. the first page of
its Preface), and therefore doubtless he deemed it entirely proper
that when any real facts obstinately persisted in being irreconcilable
with his theories, he, being "himself authority for his facts," had
the right to change dates — or anything else — so as to make the kind
of "facts" for which "he himself" was willing to be "authority."
The result is that his book is as grotesquely unhistorical as any
thing ever printed, and to one who knows the true history of the
acquisition of Oregon, and the facts about the character and unim
portance of Marcus Whitman's life, it is as laughable as a comic
almanac The article from the British and Foreign Review is fair from the
British standpoint, and instead of being designed to deceive Ameri
cans about Oregon and so induce them to surrender it to Great
Britain, was designed to secure arbitration of the boundary dispute.
The London Examiner article (from which both Barrows and
Nixon make the same outrageous misquotation of only fourteen
words) I will notice in connection with the origin of the treaty
of 1846. Returning now to the official record of the negotiations in House
6x. Doc. No. 2, we find that on July 12, 1845, Mr. James Buchanan,
Secretary of State, reopened the Oregon negotiation with Mr. Rich
ard Pakenham in a long statement beginning: "The undersigned,
Secretary of State of the United States, now proceeds to resume
the negotiation on the Oregon question, at the point where it was
left by his predecessor.
"The British plenipotentiary, in his note to Mr. Calhoun of the
12th September last, 'that as the American plenipotentiary declines
the proposal offered on the part of Great Britain, he will have the
goodness to state what arrangements he is, on the part of the
United States, prepared to propose for an equitable adjustment of
the question ; and more especially that he will have the goodness to
define the nature and extent of the claims which the United States
may have to other portions of the territory to which allusion is
made in the concluding part of his statement, as it is obvious that
no arrangement can be made with respect to a part of the territory
in dispute while a claim is reserved to any portion of the remain
der.' " This sentence is conclusive proof that Mr. Calhoun had
never offered 49 degrees or any other line for a boundary.
After strong argument in favor of the validity of our title to all
of Oregon (containing, however, nothing new), (on p. 169) he says
that "While the President holds these ideas as to the validity of

262 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
our title " (i. e., to the whole of Oregon), "he finds himself em
barrassed by the fact that his predecessors in office have not in
sisted on the whole of Oregon, but have "uniformly proceeded upon
the principle of compromise in all their negotiations. . . .
"In view of these facts, the President has determined to pursue
the present negotiation to its conclusion upon the principle of com
promise in which it commenced, and to make one more effort to
adjust this long-pending controversy. In this determination he
trusts that the British Government will recognize his sincere and
anxious desire to cultivate the most friendly relations between the
two countries, and to manifest to the world that he is actuated by
a spirit of moderation. He has, therefore, instructed the under
signed again to propose to the Government of Great Britain that
the Oregon territory shall be divided between the two countries by
the 49th parallel of north latitude from the Rocky Mountains to
the Pacific ocean, offering at the same time to make free to Great
Britain any port or ports on Vancouver's Island, south of this par
allel, which the British Government may desire."
To this, on July 29, 1845, Mr. Pakenham replied with a long
argument as to the claims of the two nations to the Oregon coun
try, and then without referring to the proposition made in Mr.
Buchanan's letter of July 12, to his Government for instructions
(as it was expected by both Governments that he would do, if not
willing himself to accept it), he peremptorily rejected it, in the
following language: "After this exposition of the view entertained
by the British Government respecting the relative value and im
portance of the British and American claims, the American pleni
potentiary will not be surprised to hear that the undersigned does
not feel at liberty to accept the proposal offered by the American
plenipotentiary for the settlement of the question. . . . The
undersigned, therefore, trusts that the American plenipotentiary
will be prepared to offer some further proposal for the settlement
of the Oregon question more consistent with fairness and equity,
and with the reasonable expectations of the British Government, as
defined in the statement marked D, which the undersigned had the
honour to present to the American plenipotentiary at the early
part of the present negotiation."
To this, on August 30, 1845, Mr. Buchanan replied with a long
and vigorous letter, contravening Mr. Pakenham's arguments as
to the claims of the British Government to any part of Oregon,
and stating that though convinced of the validity of our title to
the whole territory, the President, out of respect for the actions of
his predecessors in office, and from "a sincere and anxious desire
to promote peace and harmony between the two countries," had so
far yielded his own opinion as to again offer 49 degrees as the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 263
boundary line, and concluded as follows: (p. 192) "And how has
this proposition been received by the British plenipotentiary? It
has been rejected without even a reference to his own Government.
Nay, more; the British plenipotentiary, to use his own language,
'trusts that the American plenipotentiary will be prepared to offer
some further proposal for the settlement of the Oregon question
more consistent with fairness and equity, and with the reasonable
expectations of the British Government.'
"Under such circumstances, the undersigned is instructed by the
President to say that he owes it to his own country, and a just
appreciation of her title to the Oregon territory, to withdraw the
proposition to the British Government which had been made under
his direction; and it is hereby accordingly withdrawn.
"In taking this necessary step, the President still cherishes the
hope that this long-pending controversy may yet be finally adjusted
in such a manner as not to disturb the peace or interrupt the har
mony now so happily subsisting between the two nations.
"The undersigned avails himself, etc. "JAMES BUCHANAN.
"Right Hon. Richard Pakenham, etc., etc."
This proved a very embarrassing condition of affairs for the
British Foreign Office, which had expected that Mr. Pakenham
would have referred to it for instructions any proposition he might
receive for a boundary to Oregon ; and though not disposed to dis
grace Mr. Pakenham by a recall, it did censure him, as witness the
following :
"Mr. McLane to Mr. Buchanan. "London, Oct. 3, 1845.
"I received on the 29th ult. your dispatch No. 9, dated the 13th
of September, transmitting a copy of your last note (30th of August,
1845) to Mr. Pakenham, relative to the Oregon question.
"On the day following I was invited by Lord Aberdeen . . .
to an interview at his house in Argyll street, which I granted ac
cordingly. The object of the interview, as I had anticipated, re
lated exclusively to the posture in which the negotiations between
the two Governments had been placed by your note of the 30th
August to Mr. Pakenham, and the withdrawal of the proposition
which the President had previously directed.
"Lord Aberdeen not only lamented but censured the rejection of
our proposition by Mr. Pakenham, without referring it to his Gov
ernment. He stated that if Mr. Pakenham had communicated the
American proposition to the Government here, as he was expected
to have done, he, Lord Aberdeen, would have taken it up as the

264 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
basis of his action, and entertained little doubt that he would have
been enabled to propose modifications which might ultimately have
resulted in an adjustment mutually satisfactory to both Govern
ments. "It was quite obvious to me that Lord Aberdeen had become
convinced in his own mind, though in what way I do not pretend
to conjecture, that the terms which it was his intention ultimately
to propose or assent to would be accepted by the President, and that
on this account he particularly regretted the interruption in the
negotiation without affording an opportunity for that purpose.
"Hon. James Buchanan, "L0UIS McLANE.
"Secretary of State."
On page 34 of Sen. Ex. Doc. 489 (which was not made public
till after the ratification of the treaty of 1846; when, on August 7,
1846, the injunction of secrecy was removed by unanimous vote of
the Senate), Mr. Buchanan wrote to Mr. McLane, on November 5,
1845, concerning the withdrawal of the offer of 49 degrees as fol
lows: "The President thus took his ground, from which he will not
depart. If the British Government have any new proposition to
submit it must proceed from them voluntarily, and without any
previous invitation or assurance on our part ; and then such a propo
sition will be respectfully considered by the Government of the
United States.
"This is the posture on which the negotiation now stands; and
unless in the meantime it should be change'd by some action on the
part of the British Government, the President intends to lay the
whole subject before Congress for their consideration."
Accordingly in his first Annual Message, December 2, 1845, the
President devoted much space to Oregon, briefly summarizing the
history of our negotiations with Great Britain on the Oregon bound
ary, and transmitting with the message the documents relating to
the negotiations under President Tyler's and his own administra
tion, which are in House Ex. Doc. No. 2 and Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 1,
29th Cong., 1st Sess.
Then he continued : "All attempts at compromise having failed,
it becomes the duty of Congress to consider what measures it may
be proper to adopt for the security and protection of our citizens
now inhabiting, or who may hereafter inhabit, Oregon, and for the
maintenance of our just title to that territory. In adopting meas
ures for this purpose, care should be taken that nothing be done
to violate the stipulations of the convention of 1827, which is still
in force. The faith of treaties in their letter and spirit has ever
been, and, I trust, will ever be, scrupulously observed by the United

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 265
States. Under that convention a year's notice is required to be
given by either party to the other before the joint occupancy shall
terminate, and before either can rightfully assert or exercise ex
clusive jurisdiction over any portion of the territory. This notice it
would, in my judgment, be proper to give; and I recommend that
provision be made by law for giving it accordingly, and terminating,
in this manner, the convention of the 6th of August, 1827.
"It will become proper for Congress to determine what legisla
tion they can, in the meantime, adopt, without violating this con
vention." He then recommends, as things that may properly be done with
out violating the convention :
1st. "The extension of our laws over American citizens in Ore
gon, to the same extent as the Act of Parliament of July 2, 1821,
had extended British laws over British subjects in Oregon.
2nd. "That provision be made for establishing an Indian agency
and such sub-agencies as may be deemed necessary beyond the Rocky
Mountains. 3rd. "That a suitable number of stockades and block-house forts
be erected along the usual route between our frontier settlements on
the Missouri and the Rocky Mountains ; and that an adequate force
of mounted riflemen be raised to guard and protect them on their
journey. 4th. "That a monthly mail to Oregon be established." And it
continued as follows: "It is submitted to the wisdom of Congress
to determine whether, at their present session, and until after the
expiration of the year's notice, any other measures may be adopted,
consistently with the convention of 1827, for the security of our
rights, and the government and protection of our citizens in Oregon.
That it will ultimately be wise and proper to make liberal grants
of land to the patriotic pioneers, who, amidst privations and dangers,
lead the way through savage tribes inhabiting the vast wilderness
intervening between our frontier settlements and Oregon, and who
cultivate and are ready to defend the soil, I am fully satisfied. To
doubt whether they will obtain such grants as soon as the conven
tion between the United States and Great Britain shall have ceased
to exist would be to doubt the justice of Congress ; but pending the
year's notice it is worthy of consideration whether a stipulation to
this effect may be made consistently with the spirit of that conven
tion. "The recommendations which I have made as to the best manner
of securing ouf rights in Oregon are submitted to Congress with
great deference. Should they, in their wisdom, devise any other
mode better calculated to accomplish the same object, it shall meet
with my hearty concurrence.

266 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"At the end of the year's notice, should Congress think it proper
to make provision for giving that notice, we shall have reached a
period when the national rights in Oregon must either be abandoned
or firmly established. That they can not be abandoned without a
sacrifice of both national honor and interest is too clear to admit of
doubt." There were speedily introduced in Congress a joint resolution
authorizing the President to give the twelve months' notice requisite
to terminate the treaty of 1827, and bills "to organize and arm the
militia of Oregon," "to organize a territorial government for Ore
gon," "to establish a line of stockade and block-house forts on the
route from the frontier settlements of Missouri to the territory of
Oregon," and "to protect the rights of American citizens in the terri
tory of Oregon until the termination of the joint occupancy of the
same." On these various measures such a flood of oratory was let loose
as rarely has been heard in Congress, no less than 98 Representatives
and 34 Senators speaking on them, notwithstanding all the excite
ment about the beginning of the war with Mexico, on April
24, 1846, and the introduction and passage of the measures needful
for carrying on that contest.
In all the scores of thousands of pages of official reports of de
bates in Congress from the beginning of our national existence to
this day, there is little matter that is more drearily uninteresting
than the six or seven hundred thousand words of this debate —
threshing over as it does only the same old straw of our title to
Oregon, and the records of our negotiations with Great Britain upon
it, and of our duties under the treaties of 1818 and 1827, from which
all the grain had been threshed years before, especially in the great
debates of 1824-5, 1828-9, 1842-3, and in the numerous reports of com
mittees to the House and Senate.
None of the bills were enacted into law, but the joint resolution
for the abrogation of the treaty of 1827 passed the House by 163 to
54, and, after long debate and amendments making it more concilia
tory in tone, and authorizing the President to give the notice at "his
discretion," it passed the Senate by 42 to 10, and was approved by
President Polk, April 27, 1846. The notice was given on April 28,
1846, and inclosed in a dispatch of same date from Mr. Buchanan
to Mr. McLane, by whom it was delivered to Lord Aberdeen on May
21, 1846, and by him acknowledged in a letter to Mr. McLane, dated
May 22, 1846, announcing that "In conformity with its tenor, Her
Majesty's Government will consider the convention of the 6th of
August, 1827, abrogated accordingly from the 21st of May, 1847."
(Cf. Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 489, pp. 46-8 and 50.)

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 267
But, already, on May 18, 1846, Lord Aberdeen had instructed Mr.
Pakenham to reopen negotiations at Washington and offer us the
line suggested first by Mr. Huskisson, the British plenipotentiary, in
1826; and repeatedly suggested by Edward Everett, in November
and December, 1843 ; April, 1844 ; and February, 1845 ; and proposed
in the London Examiner, April 25, 1845 ; and the Edinburgh Review
of July, 1845 ; as follows : "You will accordingly propose to the
American Secretary of State that the line of demarcation should be
continued along the 49th parallel, from the Rocky Mountains to the
sea coast, and from thence, in a southerly direction, through the
center of King George's Sound and the Straits of Juan de Fuca, to
the Pacific Ocean, leaving the whole of Vancouver's Island, with its
ports and harbors, in the possession of Great Britain." (Cf. Berlin
Arbitration, p. 52.)
Our Government had been informed by the dispatch of Mr. Mc
Lane to Mr. Buchanan, dated London, April 17, 1846, that the British
Government "Would take no further step towards renewing the ne
gotiation until after Congress had finally acted upon the question
of notice." (Cf. Berlin Arbitration, p. 49.)
How speedily the Earl of Aberdeen directed this resumption of
negotiations only two days after being informally notified of the
action of Congress on the question of notice, and without waiting
for the formal official notification of that action, appears from
the following extract from a long dispatch of Mr. McLane to Mr.
Buchanan, dated London, May 18, 1846:
"I received late in the day, on the 15th inst. (Friday), your des
patch number twenty-seven, dated the 28th of April, 1846 ; transmit
ting a notice for the abrogation of the convention of the 6th of Au
gust, 1827. ... I have now to acquaint you that, after the re
ceipt of your despatches on the 15th inst. by the 'Caledonia,' I had
a lengthened conference with Lord Aberdeen; on which occasion
the resumption of the negotiation for an amicable settlement of
the Oregon question, and the nature of the proposition he contem
plated submitting for that purpose, formed the subject of a full
and free conversation. I have now to state that instructions will
be transmitted to Mr. Pakenham by the steamer of tomorrow, to
submit a new and further proposition on the part of this Gov
ernment for a partition of the territory in dispute. ... 'It
must not escape observation, that during the preceding admin
istration of our Government the extension of the line on the 49th
parallel to the Strait of Fuca, as now proposed by Lord Aberdeen,
was actually suggested by my immediate predecessor' (Edw. Ever
ett), as one he thought his Government might accept." (Cf. Sen.
Ex. Doc. 489, 29th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 17-19.)
(For Everett's repeated suggestions of the line via Straits of

268 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Fuca Cf. Everett to Upshur, Nov. 14, 1843, Berlin Arbitration, p.
30 ; Everett to Upshur, Dec. 2, 1843, Id. p. 31 ; Everett to Aberdeen,
Nov. 30, 1843, Id. p. 32; Everett to Nelson, April 1, 1844, Id. p. 33;
Everett to Calhoun, Feb. 28, 1845, Id. p. 35.)
President Polk, desiring to shift the responsibility for aban
doning 54 deg. 40 min. from his own shoulders to the Senate, on
June 10, 1846, sent a message to the Senate beginning as follows:
"To the Senate of the United States.
"I lay before the Senate a proposal, in the form of a conven
tion, presented to the Secretary of State on the 6th inst. by the
Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of Her Bri
tannic Majesty, for the adjustment of the Oregon question, to
gether with a protocol of this proceeding. I submit this proposal
to the consideration of the Senate, and request their advice as to
the action which, in their judgment, it may be proper to take in
reference to it."
Then, after setting forth such reasons as he was willing to
avow for taking this course, instead of the usual one of signing
a treaty and sending it to the Senate for its ratification (with or
without amendment), or its rejection, he continues:
"My opinions and my action on the Oregon question were fully
made known to Congress in my annual message of the 2d of De
cember last; and the opinions therein expressed remain unchanged.
"Should the Senate, by the constitutional majority required
for the ratification of treaties, advise the acceptance of this propo
sition, or advise it with such modifications as they may, upon full
deliberation, deem proper, I shall conform my action to their ad
vice. Should the Senate, however, decline by such constitutional
majority to give such advice, or to express an opinion on the sub
ject, I shall consider it my duty to reject the offer."
After three days' debate, and the rejection of an amendment
limiting the right of the Hudson's Bay Co. to navigate the Co
lumbia to the year 1863, on June 12, 1846, by a vote of 38 to 12,
the Senate advised the President to accept the proposal of the
British Government, and, accordingly, on June 15, 1846, Mr.
Buchanan and Mr. Pakenham signed the treaty, and on June 16,
1846, the President sent it to the Senate with a brief message, and
after another three days' debate, and the rejection by a vote of
5 yeas to 42 nays of a substitute which Senator E. Hannegan of
Indiana offered insisting on our right to the territory to 54 degrees
and 40 minutes, on June 18, 1846, by a vote of 42 yeas to 14 nays
the Senate ratified the treaty, exactly as it was written in Eng
land. (Cf. Doc. 489, pp. 1-9.)
The first article of the treaty fixed the northern boundary of
the Oregon territory at 49 degrees north latitude to the middle

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 269
of the channel which separates the continent from Vancouver's
Island, and thence southerly through the middle of said channel
and of Fuca's Strait to the Pacific.
The second article grants free navigation of the Columbia to
the Hudson's Bay Co. and to British subjects trading with it. This
right the introduction of steamboat lines and the building of rail
roads long since made worthless.
The third and fourth articles are as follows:
"Art. 3. In the future appropriation of the territory south of
the 49th parallel of north latitude, as provided in the first article
of this treaty, the possessory rights of the Hudson's Bay Co. and
of all British subjects who may be already in the occupation of
land or other property lawfully acquired within the said territory,
shall be respected.
"Art. 4. The farms, lands and other property of every descrip
tion belonging to the Puget's Sound Agricultural Company, on the
north side of the Columbia River, shall be confirmed to the said
company. In case, however, the situation of those farms and lands
should be considered by the United States to be of public and
political importance, and the United States Government should
signify a desire to obtain possession of the whole or of any part
thereof, the property so required shall be transferred to the said
Government, at a proper valuation to be agreed upon between the
parties." Although of the 55 Senators voting on the ratification of this
treaty 32 were Democrats and 23 Whigs, it was saved from defeat
only by the Whig vote, for the yeas included 23 Whigs and only
18 Democrats, and all the 14 nays were Democrats, being the irre
concilable "fifty-four forty or fight" ones.
Benton, who had so long led the "Oregon Jingo" band, seems
never to have been carried away by the "fifty-four forty or fight"
craze, "He was one of the very few leading Demorcats who, through
out the Presidential campaign, and at all times, was not only satis
fied with 49 degrees, but also contended that the American claim
to 54 degrees and 40 minutes was wholly unfounded, and the merest
pretense." (Cf. "Life and Times of James K. Polk," by John Robert
Irelan, M. D., p. 214.)
Benton himself (in "Thirty Years' View," Vol. IL, p. 661) says
"Mr. Calhoun showed a manly spirit in proposing the line of 49,
as the dominant party in the United States, and the one to which
he belonged, were then in a high state of exultation for the bound
ary of 54 deg. 40 min., and the Presidential canvass, on the Demo
cratic side, was raging upon that cry. The Baltimore Presiden
tial convention had followed a pernicious practice, of recent inven
tion, in laying down a platform of principles on which the can-

270 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
vass was to be conducted, and 54 deg. 40 min. for the northern
boundary of Oregon had been made a canon of political faith, from
which there was to be no departure except upon the penalty of
political damnation. Mr. Calhoun had braved this penalty, and
in doing so had acted up to his public and responsible duty. . .
Mr. Buchanan, the new Secretary of State, did me the honor to
consult me. I answered him promptly and frankly that I held
49 deg. to be the right line; and that, if the administration made
a treaty upon that line, I should support it. This was early in
April. ..."
(Id. p. 677) "The issue was an instructive commentary upon
the improvidence of these party platforms, adopted for an election
eering campaign, made into a party watch-word, often fraught with
great mischief to the country, and often founded in ignorance or
disregard of the public welfare. This Oregon platform was emi
nently of that character. It was a party platform for the cam
paign ; its architects knew but little of the geography of the north
west coast, or of its diplomatic history. They had never heard of
the line of the Treaty of Utrecht, and denied its existence; they
had never heard of the multiplied offers of our Government to
settle upon that line, and treated the offer now as a novelty and
an abandonment of our rights; they had never heard that their
54 deg. 40 min. was no line on the continent, but only a point on
an island on the coast, fixed by the Emperor Paul as the southern
limit of the charter granted by him to the Russian Fur Company;
had never heard of Frazer's River and New Caledonia, which lay
between Oregon and their indisputable line, and ignored the ex
istence of that river and province. The pride of consistency made
them adhere to these errors; and a desire to destroy Mr. Benton
for not joining in the hurrahs for the "whole of Oregon, or none,"
and for the "immediate annexation of Texas without regard to
consequences," lent additional force to the attacks upon him. The
conduct of the Whigs was patriotic in preferring their country to
their party — in preventing a war with Great Britain — and in sav
ing the administration from itself and its friends."
Not only did the Whigs in the Senate save the treaty from
defeat, but the course of the Whig papers in allaying the war
spirit, and of the Whig leaders, and especially their greatest leader,
Daniel Webster, in working constantly for peace during the stormy
10% months between Pakenham's brusque rejection on July 29,
1845, of Polk's offer through Secretary of State Buchanan of the
line of 49 degrees, and the tender by Lord Aberdeen, on June 10,
1846, of the treaty which was ratified, was eminently sane and truly
patriotic. George T. Curtis, in his "Life of Webster," after speaking of

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 271
the clamor for war on the Oregon question by extremists of both
countries, says (p. 257) : "On the 7th of November," (1845)
"therefore he went into Fanueil Hall" (Boston) "and spoke on the
subject of Oregon. . . After expressing the opinion that it was
a fit subject for compromise and amicable adjustment, and that
such an adjustment could be made in a manner perfectly consistent
with the honor and the rights of all parties, he indicated the 49th
parallel as a natural arrangement, the two countries keeping
abreast on that line to the Pacific Ocean."
(P. 258) After giving some extracts from the speech Mr. Cur
tis goes on: "A letter which now lies before me, written from
Copenhagen on the 24th of December, 1845, informed Mr. Webster
that his speech had been translated and published in full, not only
in Denmark and in Sweden, but in nearly every language on the
Continent. It was considered, out of England, as having settled
the question of peace or war.
"But the diplomatic crisis was not passed until some time
afterward. On the assembling of Congress in December (1845),
President Polk, in his annual message, after having recited the
history of the negotiations, and submitting the correspondence,
recommended that notice be given for terminating the joint occu
pation of the territory under the convention of 1827, and that the
laws of the United States be extended over our citizens in that
country. "From this point Mr. Webster's influence in the settlement of
this controversy involves a public and a private history which
must be taken together.
"At about the middle of December he received a private letter
from James McGregor, Esq., of Glasgow, a distinguished member
of Parliament. In his answer to this letter Mr. Webster suggested
the offer by the British Government of the 49th parallel as the
boundary. His letter was shown to Lord Aberdeen and the sug
gestion was acted upon. . ."
The story of this letter to Mr. McGregor and its results is told
in some detail in an article in the London Examiner for July 24,
1847 ; and with that and a brief comment on the atrocious way that
Rev. William Barrows in his "Oregon," and Dr. O. W. Nixon in
his "How Marcus Whitman Saved Oregon," have used fourteen
words from it to convey to their readers an idea totally opposed
to the purpose of the writer of the article, we will conclude the dis
cussion of the adoption of the Treaty of 1846.
On p. 192 of his "Oregon," Barrows (without giving the date of
the article — but printing it in such connection that all his readers
would suppose it was published before Whitman's ride), says:
"The London Examiner was quite pronounced, if not petulant, that

272 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
the ignorant Americans did not give up a country equal in area to
England eight times. 'The whole territory in dispute is not worth
twenty thousand pounds to either power.' " As usual Barrows
blunders on the amount of "territory in dispute," which was not
all of the Oregon territory, but only that part north and west of
the Columbia, which was about equal in area to England one in
stead of eight times — Great Britain having offered in 1824 and
again in 1827, to make that the line which Barrows himself knows
and states on pp. 73 and 75, and again on p. 285.
This, however, is a trivial matter compared with (1) his attempt
to create the impression that it was printed prior to Whitman's
ride, and (2) his deliberate and most shameless perversion of the
article which he pretends to quote. It is quoted verbatim (omit
ting its title) in the "Works of Daniel Webster," Vol. I., Introduc
tion, p. 149.
From the first paragraph of the article itself it is plainly ap
parent that it was published, not before Whitman's ride, but after
the treaty of 1846 had settled the title to Oregon, and the whole
article shows that it was written not to depreciate Oregon, nor to
find fault with "ignorant Americans," but to do honor to Mr. Mc
Gregor for having helped to cause England to yield to our claim
of 49 degrees, and is copied by the editor of Webster's works (who
was his life-long friend, Edward Everett), to do honor to Webster,
and there is nothing in it which even suggests petulance, and not
a word about "ignorant Americans," nor even the least intimation
that the Americans ought to have yielded up any part of Oregon
south of 49 degrees. Its date, I found after ten years' search, was
July 24, 1847.
That the reader may see how shamelessly the reverend histor
ian perverts its meaning, I will copy it in full :
"THE OREGON TERRITORY."
"In reply to the question put to him in reference to the present
war establishments of this country and the propriety of applying
the principle of arbitration in the settlement of disputes arising
among nations, Mr. McGregor, one of the candidates for the repre
sentation of Glasgow, took occasion to narrate the following very
important and remarkable anecdote in connection with our recent,
but now happily terminated differences with the United States on
the Oregon question. At the time our ambassador at Washington,
the Hon. Mr. Pakenham, refused to negotiate on the 49th parallel
of north latitude as the basis of a treaty" (this was July 29th,
1845), "and when by that refusal the danger of a rupture between
Great Britain and America became really imminent, Mr. Daniel
Webster, formerly Secretary of State to the American Government,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 273
wrote a letter to Mr. McGregor, in which he strongly deprecated
Mr. Pakenham's conduct, which, if persisted in and adopted at
home, would to a certainty embroil the two countries, and suggested
an equitable compromise, taking the 49th parallel as the basis of
an adjustment. Mr. McGregor agreeing entirely with Mr. Webster
in the propriety of a mutual giving and taking to avoid a rupture,
and the more especially as the whole territory in dispute was not
worth £20,000 (pounds) to either power, while the preparations
alone for a war would cost a great deal more before the parties
could come into actual conflict, communicated the contents of Mr.
Webster's letter to Lord John Russell, who at the time was living
in the neighborhood of Edinburgh, and in reply received a letter
from Lord John, in which he stated his entire accordance with the
proposal recommended by Mr. Webster and approved by Mr. Mc
Gregor, and requested the latter, as he (Lord John) was not in a
position to do it himself, to intimate his opinion to Lord Aberdeen.
Mr. McGregor, through Lord Canning, Under Secretary of the For
eign Department, did so, and the result was that the first packet
that left England carried out to America the proposition in accord
ance with the communication already referred to on which the
treaty of Oregon was happily concluded. Mr. McGregor may there
fore be very justly said to have been the instrument of preserving
the peace of the world, and for that alone, if he had no other service
to appeal to, he has justly earned the applause and admiration not
of his own countrymen only, but of all men who desire to promote
the best interests of the human race." To this the editor of
"Webster's Works" adds: "Without wishing to detract in any
degree from the praise due to Mr. McGregor for his judicious and
liberal conduct on this occasion, the main result is exclusively due
to his American correspondent."
And from this article, congratulating England for having
yielded to the American claim of 49 degrees, Barrows has the
face to extract the single sentence, "The whole territory in dis
pute is not worth 20,000 pounds to either power," and preface it
with the barefaced falsehood "The London Examiner was quite
pronounced, if not petulant, that the ignorant Americans did
not give up a country equal in area to England eight times," and
to print it in such a connection as would lead every reader to
believe that it was printed prior to March, 1843.
Could there be any lower depth of infamy in misquotation
than this?
Dr. O. W. Nixon, on p. 47 of his "How Marcus Whitman Saved
Oregon," among the misquotations which he prints as samples of
the deceptive work of his (imaginary) "literary bureau" prints
this outrageous misquotation as follows:

274 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"The London Examiner in 1843 wonders that 'Ignorant Amer
icans' were 'disposed to quarrel over a country, the whole in dis
pute not being worth to either party twenty thousand pounds.' "
Of course, to one who assures his readers, as Dr. Nixon does,
that he himself "Is authority for the facts in this book," it seems
entirely proper not only to antedate this article four years, but
to insert expressions in it directly contradictory to the whole
tenor of the article, so that, as he quotes it, it may support his
ridiculous theory of a "literary bureau" to deceive Americans
about the value of Oregon, instead of demolishing that theory, as
it would do if properly dated and quoted as written.
There were two ambiguities in the Treaty of 1846.
First. There was no definition of the extent of the "possessory
rights" of the Hudson's Bay Co., or of the "farms, lands and other
property" belonging to the Puget's Sound Agricultural Co.
This resulted in a long contention as to their value, after the
United States appropriated these possessions.
Various propositions were made for the payment to the two
companies of the value of their claims, and after the subject had
been a source of irritation between the two Governments for many
years, on July 1, 1863, a treaty was made between Great Britain
and the United States providing for the submission of the ques
tion to trial before two commissioners, one from each nation, with
power to choose an umpire, if needful, their decision to be final
and binding.
The taking of evidence began at Victoria, Vancouver Island,
August 5, 1865, and ended August 24, 1867. Witnesses were ex
amined in British Columbia, at several places in Oregon, and also
in Washington Territory, in Montreal, New York City, Detroit,
Mich., Washington, D. C, Cincinnati, 0., New Orleans, La., Golds-
boro, N. C, the Tortugas, and London, England. The United
States called more than 100 witnesses, including almost every
prominent army officer that had ever been stationed in Oregon,
among them Generals U. S. Grant, Phil Sheridan, Gordon Gran
ger, Alfred Pleasanton, Rufus Ingalls, James A. Hardie, C. C.
Augur, David H. Vinton, and Benjamin Alvord, also Admiral
Charles Wilkes and Commander Gibson of the United States
Navy. Finally the Commissioners, on September 10, 1869, awarded
the Hudson's Bay Co. $450,000, and the Puget Sound Agricultural
Company $200,000, which was promptly paid by our Government.
Second. There was no name given (as there should have been)
to the "channel which separates Vancouver's Island from the con
tinent," and a few years later, when the Oregon territory had be
come considerably settled, and the gold discoveries of the Frazer's

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 275
River country and the Kootenay region had drawn many settlers
to British Columbia, the British cast covetous eyes on the Island
of San Juan, and sought to make it appear that the "channel"
meant in the treaty was the Rosario Strait, south and east of San
Juan Island, and not what was plainly meant in the Treaty, the
Canal de Haro, north and west of San Juan Island.
After long contention about this matter — in 1859 serious
enough to somewhat endanger the peaceful relations between the
two nations — on May 8, 1871, by Article 34 of the Treaty of
Washington, it was agreed by Great Britain and the United
States to submit the question to the arbitration of the Emperor
William of Germany, his decision to be final and without appeal.
The famous historian, George Bancroft, then past 70 years of
age, and a life-long Democrat, was at once nominated by the Re
publican President, Grant, and unanimously confirmed by an
overwhelmingly Republican Senate, as our Envoy Extraordinary
and Minister Plenipotentiary to Berlin, distinctly on the ground
that he was the one man best qualified, from his full knowledge of
every phase of the question, to present our case successfully, as
he did. His "Memorial" begins as follows: "The treaty of which
the interpretation is referred to Your Majesty's arbitrament was
ratified more than a quarter of a century ago. Of the sixteen
members of the British Cabinet which framed and presented it
for the acceptance of the United States, Sir Robert Peel, Lord
Aberdeen and all the rest but one are no more. The British Min
ister at Washington who signed it is dead. Of American states
men concerned in it, the Minister at London, the President and
Vice-President, the Secretary of State, and every one of the Presi
dent's constitutional advisers, except one, have passed away. I
alone remain, and after finishing the three-score years and ten that
are the days of our years, am selected by my country to uphold its
rights. "Six times the United States had received the offer of arbi
tration on their northwestern boundary, and six times had re
fused to refer a point where the importance was so great and the
right so clear. But when consent was obtained to bring the ques
tion before Your Majesty, my country resolved to change its policy,
and in the heart of Europe, before a tribunal from which no judg
ment but a just one can emanate, to explain the solid foundation
of our demand, and the principles of moderation and justice by
which we have been governed.
"The case involves questions of geography, of history, and of
international law; and we are glad that the discussion should be
held in the midst of a nation whose sons have been trained in
those sciences by a Carl Ritter, a Ranke, and a Heffter.

276 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"The long-continued controversy has tended to estrange from
each other two of the greatest powers in the world, and even
menaced, though remotely, a conflict in arms. A want of confi
dence in the disposition of the British Government has been sink
ing into the mind of the States of the Union now rising on the
Pacific, and might grow into a popular conviction, not easy to be
eradicated. After having secured union and tranquility to the
people of Germany, and attained a happiness never before allotted
by Providence to German warrior or statesman, will it not be to
Your Majesty a crowning glory now, in the fullness of years and
in the quiet which follows the mighty struggles of a most eventful
life, to reconcile the two younger branches of the great Germanic
family?" (Cf. Berlin Arbitration, p. 3.)
On October 21, 1872, the Emperor decided as follows:
"Have decreed the following award: Most in accordance with
the true interpretations of the Treaty concluded on the 15th of
June, 1846, between the Governments of Her Britannic Majesty
and the United States of America, is the claim of the Government
of the United States that the boundary line between the territories
of Her Britannic Majesty and the United States should be drawn
through the Haro Channel."
Thus ended the contest for Oregon, 80 years, 5 months, 10 days
after the dauntless courage and skillful seamanship of Captain
Robert Gray, in the staunch little ship Columbia, entering the
mouth of the "Great River of the West," completed the great mari
time discoveries which, beginning with Columbus' voyage just
three centuries before, had determined the form and discovered
the great river systems of North America, and gave us our first
claim to the then unnamed region drained by "Columbia's River,"
as Gray named it.
This contest, the longest, the most interesting, the most re
markable, and the most successful we have ever waged for terri
tory, gave us possession, without war and without any purchase
price (except the $650,000 paid the Hudson's Bay Co. and the
Puget Sound Agricultural Co. for their "possessory rights"), of
about 292,000 square miles, or nearly one-twelfth of our area on
this continent, being all for which we had ever really contended;
for the "fifty-four forty or fight" cry was the most transparent "bait
for gudgeons" ever put into a national platform to humbug the
ignorant voters, and so secure the election of men who had no
idea, when they should have won the election, of doing anything
else but compromising on 49 degrees.
Considering the flimsy nature of the Spanish title based on mere
discovery and the papal bull of Pope Alexander VI., and the
"Treaty of Partition of the Ocean" of June 7, 1494, between Spain

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 211
and Portugal, not followed, for more than two and a half cen
turies, by the least attempt at any permanent occupation, or even
any land exploration, compared with the British claim from over
land exploration of Alex. McKenzie, in 1793, and occupancy at
various points inland and on the coast from 1806 onwards, of the
region north of 49 degrees (where no American had ever even at
tempted to establish trading posts or form settlements), and the
claim of Great Britain to that region by contiguity — how could
we ever have justified ourselves in going to war for the region be
tween 49 degrees and 54 deg. and 40 min., which, before Polk's
election, we had four times offered to yield to Great Britain, viz. :
in the negotiations of 1818 and 1823-24 and 1826-27, and in Secre
tary Upshur's instructions to Everett, on October 9, 1843?
There can be no doubt that the line of the Treaty of 1846 would
have been gladly accepted by any administration at Washington
from the date of the Louisiana Purchase onward till it was ac
complished, 58 years and 7 months from the beginning of our
diplomatic struggle for Oregon, in the "Instructions to our Com
missioners to negotiate the Treaty of Ghent," to consent to no
claim of Great Britain south of 49 degrees, and to insist on includ
ing Astoria in any arrangement for mutual restoration of places
captured during the war.
As the whole official story of the contest about the San Juan
Island question is told in a single easily accessible volume, "The
Berlin Arbitration," it is unnecessary to write more about it here.
Before leaving the governmental action on the Oregon acquisi
tion it seerfis proper to state compactly together the most authori
tative portion of the absolutely indisputable evidence in support of
the position that according to the very terms of the Treaty of
1818 and its renewal in 1827 no trading posts established or set
tlements made by the Hudson's Bay Co. or anything else done by
Great Britain could strengthen their claim, or weaken ours, to
any part of the Oregon territory while those treaties remained in
force. That Benton and the "Oregon jingoes" who followed his lead
constantly claimed that Great Britain could thus strengthen her
claims and weaken ours, and that she was constantly doing so
through operations of the Hudson's Bay Co., is true, and it is also
true that an essential postulate of the Whitman Legend is that
Great Britain could thus strengthen her claim and was doing it
through the Hudson's Bay Co., but we shall find on examination
of the text of the treaties that this was impossible, and a careful
study of the original text of all the negotiations with Great Britain
on the Oregon boundary will show that not only did our Presidents
and diplomats who managed those negotiations hold that nothing

278 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
that Great Britain could do while those treaties remained in force
could in the least degree strengthen her claims to any part of
Oregon, but also that every English diplomat who negotiated on
the Oregon boundary tacitly admitted the correctness of this view,
as no one of them ever alleged that anything done after October
20, 1818, on sea or land, had in the least degree strengthened the
British claim to any part of Oregon, and, as we shall see, Lord
Aberdeen, head of the British Foreign Office from September 2,
1841, to July 6, 1846, explicitly assented to the correctness of the
American contention that the posts of the Hudson's Bay Co. and
the settlements of discharged employes of that company in Ore
gon could not in any way strengthen the British claim to any part
of it. Let us examine first the treaties themselves.
The third article of the Treaty of 1818 was the only one relating
to the Oregon country (though the name Oregon was not com
monly applied to it till about ten years later), and it reads as
follows :
"Art. 3. It is agreed that any country that may be claimed
by either party on the northwest coast of America, westward of
the Stony Mountains, shall, together with its harbors, bays, and
creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same, be free
and open for the term of ten years from the date of the signature
of the present convention, to the vessels, citizens, and subjects, of
the two powers ; it being well understood that this agreement is not
to be construed to the prejudice of any claim which either of the
two high contracting parties may have to any part of the said
country, nor shall it be taken to affect the claims of any other
power or state to any part of the said country; the only object of
the high contracting parties, in that respect, being to prevent dis
putes and differences among themselves."
The Convention of August 9, 1827, reads as follows:
"Art. 1. All the provisions of the third article of the conven
tion concluded between the United States of America and His
Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, on the 20th of October, 1818, shall be, and they are hereby,
further indefinitely extended and continued in force, in the same
manner as if all the provisions of the said article were herein
specifically recited.
"Art. 2. It shall be competent, however, to either of the con
tracting parties, in case either should think fit, at any time after
the 20th of October, 1828, on giving due notice of twelve months
to the other contracting party, to annul and abrogate this conven
tion; and it shall, in such case, be accordingly entirely annulled
and abrogated, after the expiration of the said terms of notice.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 279
"Art. 3. Nothing contained in this convention, or in the third
article of the convention of the 20th of October, 1818, hereby con
tinued in force, shall be construed to impair, or in any manner
affect, the claims which either of the contracting parties may have
to any part of the country westward of the Stony or Rocky Moun
tains." The significance of the change in the language of article 3 in
this convention, when compared with that of the convention of 1818,
will be seen on reading the extracts from John Q. Adams' speeches,
with which this chapter concludes.
Albert Gallatin, one of the ablest of all American diplomats,
who had negotiated with Richard Rush the first treaty of Joint
Policy (signed October 20, 1818), and who, as our plenipotentiary,
conducted the negotiations in 1826 and 1827 which resulted in the
extension of that joint occupancy by a treaty signed August 6,
1827, wrote a letter dated London, November 25, 1826, to Henry
Clay, Secretary of State, describing the progress made in the nego
tiations up to that time. It is No. 29, of Doc. 458, Vol. VI., Ameri
can State Papers, Foreign Relations (pp. 652-55), and on p. 653,
stating his discussions with the British plenipotentiaries, he
writes: "I observed, as relating to the settlements of the British
in that quarter:
"1st. That those made subsequent to the convention of 1818
added nothing to the claims of Great Britain, the rights of both
parties having been expressly reserved by that convention, which
allowed for a joint occupancy."
This statement of the purpose and effect of the joint occupancy
treaty was so obviously correct that the British plenipotentiaries
— though strenuously contending for the British claims based on
alleged priority of discovery and occupation, and traversing as best
they could all of our claims to exclusive right based on priority
of discovery, and exploration, and occupation, did not attempt to
make any reply to this, nor set up any claim based on any settle
ments made, or new trading posts established subsequent to the
convention of 1818.
July 12, 1845, Mr. Buchanan, Secretary of State, wrote to Mr.
McLane, our Minister at London, giving a brief historical sketch
of the propositions for the adjustment of the Oregon boundary
(Cf. Sen. Ex. Doc. 489, 29th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 27-32), and on
p. 29 he said : "The next notice of this question will be found un
der the administration of General Jackson. It is contained in the
instructions of Mr. Livingston to Mr. Van Buren, dated on the 1st
of August, 1831, with a copy of which, so far as they relate to this
subject, you shall be furnished. From this, you will perceive that
General Jackson's administration, so far from objecting to the

280 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
occupation of the whole territory by the British in common with
ourselves, were entirely satisfied to suffer this state of things to
continue. These instructions do not proceed upon the principle of
claiming the whole territory for the United States, although they
express a strong opinion in favor of our right." After stating that
the term of joint occupation was indefinitely continued for the pur
pose, in the language of the treaty, "of giving time to mature meas
ures which shall have for their object a more definite settlement of
the claims of each party to the said territory," they go on to remark
that "this subject, then, is open for discussion; and until the rights
of the parties can be settled by negotiation, ours can suffer nothing
by delay." So far as I have been able to discover this is all that has ever
been printed of these instructions to Van Buren, but this little
is sufficient to show that Jackson, and Livingston — and presum
ably Van Buren — held to the same opinion as Gallatin had ex
pressed four years before.
This position was also vigorously asserted by Edw. Everett,
our Minister to England in Tyler's administration, and assented
to by Lord Aberdeen, in November and December, 1843, as follows:
"Berlin Arbitration" (p. 29), "No. 18, Mr. Everett to Mr. Upshur
(private and confidential), London, November 14, 1843. . . .
Lord Aberdeen assented also to my remark that the numerous sta
tions which the Hudson's Bay Co. had established south of the
49th degree of north latitude since the year 1818, though they
might and unquestionably would embarrass the British Govern
ment in reference to that company, and through them in reference
to public opinion, ought not to prejudice the claims of the United
States. This I think a very important point to be kept firmly in
view." (Ibid. p. 32.) "No. 19, Mr. Everett to Mr. Upshur (confiden
tial), London, December 2, 1843. . . I spoke with considerable
earnestness in reprobation of the conduct of the Hudson's Bay Co.
in multiplying and pushing their posts far to the south of the
Columbia, and said I trusted that the Government would not allow
itself to be embarrassed by this circumstance. Fair warning had
been given to the company in 1818 that no settlements after that
date should prejudice the rights of either party. He (i. e., Lord
Aberdeen) said he did not consider the existence of those settle
ments as a very serious matter, but the navigation of the Columbia
was a serious one."
Precisely similar ground was taken by Hon. John C. Calhoun
in his negotiations with Richard Pakenham.
Doc. 2, of Sen. Ex. Doc, Vol. I., 29th Cong., 1st Sess., is Presi
dent Polk's Message, date December 2, 1845, with accompanying

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 281
documents; and one of these documents is Exhibit "A," presented
to Mr. Pakenham at their third conference (September 2, 1844), by
Secretary Calhoun, and in it (p. 152), Calhoun says: "Another
negotiation was commenced in 1826, which terminated in renewing
on the 6th of August, 1827, the third article of the convention of
1818, prior to its expiration. It provided for the indefinite exten
sion of all the provisions of the third article of that convention,
and also that either party might terminate it at any time it might
think fit, by giving one year's notice after October 20, 1828. It
took, however, the precaution of providing expressly that 'nothing
contained in this convention or in the third article of the conven
tion of the 20th of October, 1818, hereby continued in force, shall
be construed to impair or in any manner affect the claims which
either of the contracting parties may have to any part of the coun
try westward of the Stony or Rocky Mountains.' That convention
is now in force, and has continued to be so since the expiration of
that of 1818. By the joint operation of the two, our right to be
considered the party in possession, and all the claims we had to
the territory, while in our possession, are preserved in as full vigor
as they were at the date of its restoration in 1818, without being
affected or impaired by the settlements since made by the subjects
of Great Britain. Time, indeed, so far from impairing our claims,
has greatly strengthened them since that period." (The italics
in this extract are Calhoun's.)
This view of the case Mr. Pakenham did not pretend to attempt
to controvert, though traversing all of Mr. Calhoun's other posi
tions. Similarly, Tyler's administration having been succeeded by
Polk's, and Calhoun having been succeeded by James Buchanan as
Secretary of State, and the negotiation of the Oregon question with
Pakenham continuing, on July 12, 1845, Buchanan addressed a
communication to Pakenham — covering pp. 163-169 of this Doc. No.
2 — in which he again offered the line of 49 degrees to the Pacific;
and, on p. 168, he says : "The title of the United States to the en
tire region drained by the Columbia River and its branches was
perfect and complete before the date of the treaties of joint occu
pation of October, 1818, and August, 1827, and under the express
provisions of those treaties, this title, whilst they endure, can never
be impaired by any act of the British Government. In the language
of the treaty of 1827, 'nothing contained in this convention, or in
the third article of the convention of 1818 thereby continued in
force, shall be construed to impair, or in any manner affect the
claims which either of the contracting parties may have to any part
of the country westward of the Stony or Rocky Mountains.
"Had not the convention contained this plain provision, which
has prevented the respective parties from looking with jealousy on

282 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
the occupation of portions of the territory by the citizens and sub
jects of each other its chief object, which was to preserve peace and
prevent collisions in those distant regions, would have been en
tirely defeated. It is then manifest that neither the grant of this
territory for a term of years, made by Great Britain to the Hud
son's Bay Co. in December, 1821, nor the extension of this grant in
1838, nor the settlements, trading posts and forts which have been
established by that company under it, can in the slightest degree
strengthen the British or impair the American title to any portion
of the Oregon Territory. The British claim is no stronger than it
was on the 20th of October, 1818, the date of the first convention."
This contention as to the effect of the treaty of joint occupancy
was so indisputably correct that Pakenham, though replying vigor
ously and at length to Buchanan's other positions, and declining
the offer of 49 degrees as the boundary to the Pacific — though at
the hazard of war — did not even attempt any reply to this.
Greenhow, who was for years Librarian and Translator of the
State Department, and therefore thoroughly acquainted with the
views of successive Presidents and Secretaries of State, in his "His
tory of Oregon and California" (1845 Ed., p. 354), asserts the same
view of the force of the treaty of 1827, as follows: "The advan
tages of the convention were, in 1827, as in 1818, nearly equal to
both nations; but the difference was, on the whole, in favor of the
United States. The British might, indeed, derive more profit from
the fur trade as carried on by their organized Hudson's Bay Co.
than the Americans could expect to obtain by the individual efforts
of their citizens; but the value of that trade is much less than is
generally supposed; no settlements could be formed in the terri
tory beyond the Rocky Mountains, by which it could acquire a popu
lation, while the arrangement subsisted; and the facilities for occu
pying the territory at a future period, when its occupation by the
United States should become expedient, would undoubtedly have
increased in a far greater ratio on their part than on that of Great
Britain." George Bancroft (in Berlin Arbitration, p. 139), says: "In
that same year, while everything was still fresh in memory, Mr.
Buchanan had recorded his interpretation of the treaty in an in
struction to Mr. Bancroft, the American Minister at London, who,
as his colleague in Washington, had taken part in its negotiation
and knew every step of its progress."
Id. (p. 126) Bancroft says: "As to settlements properly so-
called, there could be none ; for under the British treaty with Spain,
and the treaty of non-occupation between the United States and
Great Britain, impliedly at least, there could be no grants or hold
ings of territory by individuals or companies of either party."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 283
If any man that ever lived knew what was the true meaning and
intent of these articles in the treaties of 1818 and 1827, it was John
Quincy Adams, who, as Secretary of State under Monroe, wrote the
treaty of 1818, and as President in 1827 directed every step of the
negotiations which resulted in the treaty of August 6, 1827, and
with two extracts from his speeches on Oregon in the House of Rep
resentatives on February 9 and April 13, 1846, I will close this ex
position of governmental action to secure Oregon. February 9, 1846
(Cf. Cong. Globe, p. 340), Mr. Adams said: "And here I beg leave
to repeat an idea that I have already expressed before, and that is,
that there is a very great misapprehension of the real merits of this
case, founded on the misnomer which declares that convention to be
a convention of joint occupation. Sir, it is not a convention of
joint occupation. It is a convention of non-occupation — a promise
on the part of both parties that neither of the parties will occupy
the territory for an indefinite space; first for ten years; then until
the notice shall be given from one party to the other that the con
vention shall be terminated" ... (p. 341, 3d col.) "All these
titles are imperfect.
"Discovery is therefore no title of itself. The discovery of a
river and of land is no title of itself. Exploration comes next. That
gives something more of a title. Continuity and contiguity both
concur to give a title. They are none of them perfect in them
selves. There is nothing complete in the way of title but actual
possession ; and that is the only thing we now want, to have a per
fect, clear, indisputable and undoubted right to the territory of
Oregon. It is possession — it is occupation, if you please. Well, sir,
we have made two conventions with Great Britain — one in 1818, one
in 1827 — by which we have not agreed to anything like joint occu
pation. Sir, in the days of Sir John Falstaff, so facetiously alluded
to by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Starkweather) the other day,
he says 'a captain;' these villains will make the word 'captain' as
odious as the word 'occupy,' which was an excellent good word be
fore it was ill-sorted. Now this 'occupation' is as 'odious' in some
parts as Sir John Falstaff said the word 'occupy' was in his
time after it had been ill-sorted. There is no occupation now. Oc
cupation is the thing we want. Occupation is what I aim for put
ting an end to that convention for; because it says we shall not
occupy that territory."
April 13, 1846 (Cf. Cong. Globe, p. 664), Mr. Adams said: "But
in that convention of 1818 it was merely stipulated that we should
not make settlements, that is, that we should not occupy, and that
same stipulation was binding upon Great Britain as well as upon
us. It was not only a total misnomer, but a total perversion of the

284 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
whole question of right, to call that convention a convention of joint
occupation — it was a convention of non-occupation.
"And, in making this convention with Great Britain we stipu
lated formally to reserve the right of 'any third Power' — that is to
say the right of Spain, for no other Power but Spain had any claim
— and it was reserved in the convention of 1818, as Mr. Adams
showed when he was up before" (i. e., on February 9, 1846, p. 342,
col. 1, W. I. M.) "from the words of the convention itself. The year
after that Spain ceded to us all her right upon the whole of that
coast from 42 degrees north. Those rights, then, which we had re
served, by compact with Great Britain in the convention of 1818,
were all transferred to us; and when in the year 1827 we came to
renew that convention for an indefinite period, it was made in the
same form as the convention of 1818, leaving out the reservation and
thereby, on the part of Great Britain as well as ourselves, admitting
that the United States were entitled to all the claims and pretensions
of Spain." Then after discussing the claim of Great Britain that
under the Nootka Sound convention she was entitled to at least equal
rights with the United States in Oregon he says (p. 664, 2d col.) :
"Now in the Nootka Sound convention, the substance of which was
the same as our conventions with Great Britain of the year 1818
and the year 1827, the word 'settlement' was included ; that was to
say, that Spain agreed that the subjects of Great Britain should
have the right of navigation, and trading with the savages, and of
settlement." . . . (3d col.) "I say that if Great Britain was
entitled to make settlements by the treaty of Nootka Sound, in 1790,
she has forfeited and abandoned that right by the omission of the
word in the conventions of 1818 and 1827. In 1818 the convention
was made between us and Great Britain. Great Britain claimed at
that time the privileges of the Nootka Sound convention; but she
did not choose to claim the right to make settlements for the limited
time of ten years. That convention itself excluded it; it left out
that word 'settlements,' copying the Nootka Sound convention in all
other respects, leaving the country open for navigation, commerce,
and trade with the savages. Why did they leave out that word 'set
tlement'? There was no reason assigned for leaving it out; but if
it had been included, we should have had the right of settlement as
well as they. They forfeited it; they renounced it by omitting the
word 'settlement' in the convention of 1818, and it continues to be
omitted to this day. In 1827, when the convention came to be re
newed, an indefinite time was assigned instead of ten years; and
there again the reservation of rights of any third Power whose rights
were reserved before, and the word 'settlement' continued to be
omitted: Great Britain having no right under that convention to
make any settlements whatever."

CHAPTER VII.
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE RELATION OF THE HUDSON'S
BAY CO. TO AMERICAN EXPLORATION, OCCUPATION,
AND SETTLEMENT OF THE OREGON TERRITORY, AS
APPEARS FROM A CAREFUL STUDY OF ALL THE AC
CESSIBLE CONTEMPORANEOUS LETTERS, DIA
RIES, REPORTS TO THE GOVERNMENT, AND
BOOKS WRITTEN BY THE AMERICAN FUR
TRADERS, SCIENTISTS, PLEASURE TRAVEL
ERS, MISSIONARIES, AND LEADERS OF
PARTIES OF EMIGRANTS, DOWN TO THE
SIGNING OF THE TREATY OF JUNE
15, 1846, FIXING THE BOUNDARY.
Intimately connected with this question is the history of the
contest between the North West Co. and the Hudson's Bay Co.
(1805-1821) and the founding of the Red River Colony, near the
site of the present city of Winnipeg, Manitoba, in 1811-12, its de
struction in 1815, and again in 1816, and the consolidation of
the two companies in 1821.
To fully understand the motive which led to the establishment
of the Red River Colony, and its success in forcing the consolida
tion of the North West and Hudson's Bay companies, one must read
the equivalent of about 3,000 pages like this, in the following list of
12 books, all but the first two of which are so very rare that I have
never seen but one full set — that in the Ayer Collection of the New
berry Library, Chicago.
(1) "Observation on the Present State of the Highlands of
Scotland, with a View of the Causes and Probable Consequences
of Emigration. By the Earl of Selkirk." Edinburgh, 1805, p. 232,
and Appendix LXI. equal 283.

286 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
(2) "Sketch of the British Fur Trade in North America. By
the Earl of Selkirk." London, 1816, p. 130.
(3 "Letters to the Honorable the Earl of Selkirk on His Set
tlement at the Red River. By Rev. John Strachan, D. D., Rector
of York (now Toronto), Upper Canada." London, 1816, p. 76.
(4) "Narrative of Transactions in the Red River Country from
the Commencement of the Operations of the Earl of Selkirk till
the Summer of the Year 1816. By Alexander McDonnell." Lon
don, 1819, pp. 152 and 87. This is the North West Co.'s side
of the case.
(5) "Statement Respecting the Earl of Selkirk's Settlement
of Kildonan Upon the Red River in North America, Its Destruction
in 1815-16, and the Massacre of Governor Semple and His Party."
London, 1817, pp. 125 and 89. This was the Hudson's Bay Co.'s side
of the case.
(6) "Statement Respecting the Earl of Selkirk's Settlement,"
etc. (as above) "with Observations Upon a Narrative of Occur
rences in the Indian Countries" (i. e., upon Alex. McDonnell's
book, No. 4 above). London, 1818; New York, 1818, pp. 194 and
C equal 294.
(Like No. 5, this is the Hudson's Bay Co.'s side of the case, and
though no author is given they were both written by John Halket,
a London lawyer, and a brother-in-law of the Earl of Selkirk.
— W. I. M.)
(7) "Narrative of John Pritchard, Pierre Chrysologue Pam
brun of Montreal, formerly Lieutenant in the Voltiguer Corps of
Lower Canada, and Frederick Damien Heurter, late Acting Ser
geant Major and Clerk in the Regiment De Mueron, Respecting the
Aggressions of the North West Co. against the Earl of Sel
kirk's Settlement upon the Red River." London, 1819, p. 91.
This is, of course, on the Hudson's Bay Co.'s side of the case.
(8) "Letter Book of Capt. Miles McDonnell, First Governor
of the Red River Colony." ("From the Canadian Archives.") Only
a fragment, covering pp. 187-226. No date.
(9) "Letter to the Earl of Liverpool by the Earl of Selkirk,
on the subject of the Red River Settlement." London, 1819, p. 224.
This is, of course, the Hudson's Bay Co.'s side of the case.
(10) "Report of Proceedings connected with the Dispute be
tween the Earl of Selkirk and the North West Co. at the Assizes
held at York, in U. C, October, 1818. From Minutes Taken in
Court." Montreal and London, 1819, pp. 424 and 48.
(11) "Report of Trials in the Courts of Canada Relative to the
Destruction of the Earl of Selkirk's Settlement on the Red River,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 287
with Observations by A. Amos." London, 1820. (No. 11 is the
same as No. 10, with the addition of "Observations" by A. Amos,
a London lawyer in the employ of the Hudson's Bay Co. These
"Observations" were designed to make the official "Report" seem
less unfavorable to the Hudson's Bay Co. and to Lord Selkirk.
— W. I. M.)
(12) "Papers Relating to the Red River Settlement. Ordered
printed by the House of Commons, July 19, 1819." Folio 287 p.
Titles (3), (10) and (12) are the ones on which I have mainly
depended. How vital is the connection between the story of the reasons for
and results of the founding of the Red River Colony, and the treat
ment by the Hudson's Bay Co. of the Indians in Oregon, and the
relations between the Hudson's Bay Co. and the Americans in Ore
gon from 1828 to 1846 will appear later.
The matters stated in these books also are of great value as
showing the total falsity of the assertion — so often made with a
self-complacent air of superiority by Englishmen wholly ignorant
of this dismal chapter in their history, and echoed by the few
equally ignorant and very snobbish Americans, who always delight
in belittling their own country, and who, wherever they are, "always
turn up their trousers when it rains in 'dear old Lunnon,' " that
"the English always get along much better with the Indians than
the Americans," for the story of this contest between rival British
fur companies, especially after the consolidation of the leading
Canadian companies in 1805, under the name of the North West
Co., demonstrates beyond any possibility of dispute that in all the
vast regions where these two equally loyal British companies — the
North West Co. and the Hudson's Bay Co. — came in competition for
many years, not with Americans, but with each other, the Indians
were thoroughly debased, and as greatly injured in morals by the
greed and selfishness of these two British corporations, and their
determination to over reach each other, even if to do it wholesale
robbery and murder alike of Indians and whites were needful to
accomplish their purposes, as Indians ever were anywhere in the
United States or British America.
We have seen in Chapter IV. that the North West Co., the great
Canadian fur company, was the competitor Astor feared, and that it
was that company which, aided by the breaking out of the war of
1812, finally wrought the undoing of the Astoria enterprise, and, at
the same time by a cunningly devised scheme of purchase forestalled
the capture of Astoria by His Majesty's ship Raccoon, and gather
ing all the profits into the coffers of the North West Co., tricked
Capt. Black and his officers and crew out of the snug fortune which
they had expected to realize as prize money by the capture, not

288 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
merely of a rude blockhouse, but of an immense stock of furs and
merchandise belonging to an American fur company.
And in Chapter VI. we have seen that the North West Co. re
mained in charge of Astoria (or, as they had renamed it, Fort
George), when, on October 6, 1818, it was unconditionally restored
to us by Great Britain.
At that time the Hudson's Bay Co. not only had no post within
many hundred miles of any part of the Oregon Territory, but had
none in British America west of the Rocky Mountains, yet less than
two and one-half years later, on March 26, 1821, the North West
Co., which had explored British America north to the Arctic and
west to the Pacific, was blotted out of existence by a consolidation
with the Hudson's Bay Co., the terms of which, while probably the
best that could then be obtained, and perhaps somewhat equitable
as to future conduct of business and division of profits, yet, con
sidering their relative enterprise in exploring and in developing
the fur trade, certainly gave a disproportionately large share of
its benefits to the older, but far less enterprising and energetic com
pany. (Cf. for the terms of this consolidation "The Hudson's Bay
Territories," etc., by R. M. Martin, London, 1849, p. 50 ; "The Cana
dian Northwest, Its History and Its Troubles," by G. Mercer
Adams, Toronto, 1885, p. 145; "History of the Great Company,"
by Beckles Willson, Toronto, 1899, pp. 433-5.)
The License of Exclusive right to trade with Indians in all such
parts of British America "as shall not form any part of our prov
ince in North America," and of the exclusive right as against any
other British subjects to trade with Indians in the region which
afterwards came to be known as Oregon, was granted by the English
government on December 6, 1821, for the period of 21 years, to the
Hudson's Bay Co., and W. McGillivray, of Montreal, and S. Mc-
Gillivray and E. Ellice, of England (the last three representing
the North West Co. ) , though the business was to be carried on only
in the name of the Hudson's Bay Co.
"In 1824 the claims of the North West Co. were extinguished by
mutual consent," though as the rights of the "Norwesters" to stock
in the consolidated company remained unchanged, this 1824 agree
ment seems to have been merely a technical change for administra
tive and bookkeeping convenience, and the Hudson's Bay Co. thence
forward was the sole owner of the rights under this license.
May 30th, 1838, the company surrendered this license, and re
ceived in lieu thereof another similar grant for 21 years from that
date. (Cf. for the copies of the Consolidation agreements of March
26, 1821, and of 15th of September, 1824. "A. 2" and "A. 3," pp.
277-312, Vol. 1, H. B. Co. vs. U. S., and for copies of the Licenses

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 289
of Exclusive trade of December 6th, 1821, and May 30, 1838, Idem
"A. 4" and "A. 5," pp. 312-319.)
How came this consolidation (which had been first recommended
by McKenzie on pp. 433-7 of his "Voyages from Montreal Through
the Continent of North America to the Frozen and Pacific Oceans."
London, 1801) to be effected?
Thos. Douglas, fifth Earl of Selkirk, was a very thrifty Scotch
nobleman, much inclined to "safe" speculations (i. e., when he pos
sessed such inside information as would not merely secure him from
loss, but assure him ample profit).
He was also so thorough a believer in "the right divine of kings
to govern wrong" that it grieved him much to observe that many
a native-born British subject — Englishman, Scotchman or Irishman
— was migrating to the United States, and so generally prospering
there that their correspondence with those left behind was con
stantly swelling the number of those who deserted the monarchy
for the republic, and speedily learned that a nation could prosper
better without kings, and earls, and dukes and barons than with
them. His Lordship thereupon thriftily determined to exert all his
influence to turn this migration from the United States to the Brit
ish colonies, and, at the same time, thereby to increase his own
already ample fortune.
His first essays in establishing colonies were in 1803, on Prince
Edward's Island, and speedily thereafter at Baldoon, in the ex
treme southwest part of Upper Canada, on a small creek that flows
into Lake St. Clair.
In connection with this latter project he visited Canada, and
what followed is told in "A Narrative of Transactions," etc., by
Alex. McDonnell, as follows:
(P. 1) "Previous to the year 1806, the Earl of Selkirk had been
engaged in various landed and colonizing speculations in British
North America, in the course of which he visited Canada.
"In the course of his travels his attention was naturally directed
to the situation of the trade, and particularly to that carried on
with the Indians in the barter of manufactured goods and other
articles for furs and peltries, which ever since the discovery of and
establishment of the colony by the French had been considered as
the chief branch of its commerce.
"During His Lordship's residence in Montreal he was received
with the hospitality which so much characterizes the inhabitants
of that city, and to none was he indebted for more pointed atten
tions and civility than to the merchants connected with the fur
trade, and more especially the partners of the North West Co.
His inquiries into the nature and extent of the trade, and their

290 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
particular establishment, which has always been an (p. 2) object
of curiosity to strangers visiting Canada, were readily answered
by these gentlemen, who withheld no information which could
gratify the liberal and useful researches of a noble traveler. They
remarked at the time that these inquiries were more extended than
usual; but they little expected that their confidential communica
tions to a person expressing his admiration at the result of their
exertions, and his sincere friendship and thankful acknowledg
ments to themselves, should have awakened the spirit of self-interest
which has subsequently been so apparent; still less did they sup
pose they were placing means in the hands of a commercial rival, to
be applied first in opposition to their trade, and, after the failure
of that experiment, in an attempt to effect the ruin of their estab
lishment. "On the noble Lord's return to England he prosecuted with much
anxiety the inquiries he had commenced in Canada connected with
this subject, and the situation of the Hudson's Bay Co., with the
great advantages under which the fur trade might be conducted
from Hudson's Bay, when compared with the obstacles and difficul
ties opposed to the Canadian merchants, soon presented themselves
to his discernment. The route to the remote and most valuable trad
ing stations in the Northwest country was nearly 2,000 miles more
distant by interior communication from Montreal than from Hud
son's Bay, and it was evident, if the assumed (p. 3) rights of this
chartered company to the exclusive commerce and navigation of the
bay were legal, by a strict enforcement of them the whole fur trade
might be diverted into that channel.
"His Lordship communicated his ideas on the subject, though
very partially, to a gentleman then in England, who had been long
interested in the North West Co., and to whom the public are in
debted for a description of the country and of his own voyages and
discoveries (i. e., Alex. McKenzie. — W. I. M.)
"In consequence of this communication, an agreement was subse
quently entered into by Lord Selkirk and this gentleman to specu
late in the stock of the Hudson's Bay Co., without any definite object
on the part of His Lordship's associate, beyond possibly a resale at
an enhanced price, when a sufficient amount should have been pro
cured to enable them to exercise a beneficial influence in the man
agement of the company's concerns, and thereby to increase the value
of their stock. The moment was peculiarly favorable for their pur
pose : the stock of the company had fallen from 250 per cent, to be
tween 50 and 60, in consequence of misfortune or mismanagement
of their affairs, which were in a state of rapid decay and considered
bordering upon insolvency, no dividend having been paid for several
years. Under such circumstances considerable purchases were easily

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 291
made by the parties, but His Lordship's (p. 4) views becoming en
larged, with the extended knowledge he obtained of the supposed
rights conferred upon the company by its charter, a disagreement
took place as to the further objects they had originally in view ; and
after some legal proceedings an arrangement was made between the
parties, by which Lord Selkirk became proprietor of the greatest
part of the stock acquired on their joint account.
"Being thus disengaged from any connection which could inter
fere with his views, and having established for himself a sufficient
footing in the affairs of the company, Lord Selkirk extended his pur
chases to the amount of nearly £40,000, the whole amount of the
company's stock being rather under £100,000. Several members of
the committee immediately made way for the appointment of his
near relatives and friends to the direction, and from this period His
Lordship may be considered as possessing an unlimited influence
and control in the management of the affairs and disposal of the
property of the company. Although more activity was perceived in
the general conduct of their concerns, some time elapsed before His
Lordship's ultimate object and plans were disclosed; but his prep
arations being made, a general court was convened by public notice
in the month of May, 1811. The proprietors were informed at this
meeting that the Governor and committee considered it beneficial
to their general (p. 5) interests to grant His Lordship in fee simple
about 116,000 square miles (or 74,240,000 acres) of what was sup
posed to be their territory on condition that he should establish a
colony on the grant and furnish on certain terms from among the
settlers such laborers as are required by the company in their trade.
The proprietors did not see in these conditions any sufficient con
sideration for the grant, and every one present, with the exception
of the noble Lord and the committee, signed and delivered a protest
vs. it to the court. Notwithstanding this opposition the grant was
confirmed, and His Lordship became the ideal proprietor of a do
main exceeding in extent the Kingdom of England, with only one
objection to the title, that with respect to the right of the grantors
they had equal power to assign him a similar kingdom in the moon.
"In addition to the protest offered by the proprietors, remon
strances were made against the wild and hopeless project of estab
lishing the proposed colony by every person interested in the trade
of the country. . . .
"The distance between the spot where the first settlement was
afterward formed and York Factory in Hudson's Bay, the point of
communication (p. 6) with the sea, is by actual measurement 725
miles ; and the navigation, such as it is, may be called open between
the months of June and October. . . . The distance of the Red
River from Lake Superior is rather greater than from Hudson's Bay,

292 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
and from Montreal, by the nearest route (that of Lake Superior),
about 2,300 miles. The distance from the nearest inhabited part of
Upper Canada, which may possibly be another colony of Lord Sel
kirk's, called Baldoon, is about 1,600 miles.
"It must be obvious, from the distances here described, and the
difficulty of communication, which is only practicable in birch bark
canoes, that no market could be found beyond the immediate con
sumption of the colony for the agricultural product of a settlement
so situated. Idem (p. 9) "To the North West Co. this establishment was par
ticularly objectionable. They denied the right of either the Hudson's
Bay Co. or Lord Selkirk to any part of the territory ceded to him,
of which their predecessors and themselves had been in occupancy
for at least a century. They were aware that it was further in
tended to enforce against them the penalties provided by the char
ter of seizure of their persons and confiscation of their property as
interlopers on the territories absurdly claimed by the company; and
they saw in the terms on which the grant was made that the estab
lishment of this colony was only a pretext to induce settlers to emi
grate and thus to introduce into the country at an inconsiderable
expense a sufficient number of persons to carry into effect (p. 10)
the Noble Lord's plans of aggression and competition vs. their trade.
The North West Co. was founded in 1783 by an association of
traders, prior to that time engaged in rival undertakings, and who,
on the conquest of Canada, following the footsteps of their prede
cessors, the French colonists, had engaged in the trade."
How drastic were the measures by which the Noble Lord meant
to utterly ruin the trade of the North West Co., or so injure it as
to force the consolidation of the two, by asserting and enforcing in
the most arbitrary manner, over all this vast wilderness, to which
the North West Co. denied that either the Earl or the Hudson's Bay
Co. had any rights of ownership, the same rights as owner in fee
simple, that an Englishman would be allowed to exercise respect
ing the lawns and flower gardens on his private estate in Great
Britain, may be seen from this extract from a letter from the Earl
of Selkirk to Mr. William Hillier, a principal agent of the Hudson's
Bay Co. : "You must give them solemn warning that the land be
longs to the Hudson's Bay Co., and that they must remove from it;
after this warning they should not be allowed to cut any timber
either for building or fuel ; what they have cut should be openly and
forcibly seized and their buildings destroyed. In like manner they
should be warned not to fish in your waters, and if they put down
nets, seize them as you would in England those of a poacher. We
are so fully advised of the unimpeachable validity of these rights
of property, that there can be no scruple in enforcing them wherever

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 293
you have the physical means." (Cf. "Papers Relating to the Red
River Settlement," p. 154.)
As his grant covered for several hundred miles the only possible
line of travel for the "North Westers," from their great headquar
ters, at Fort William, on the north shore of Lake Superior, to the
Rocky Mountain and Pacific Coast regions, "which their enterprise
had explored, and where by far the greater and more valuable part
of their fur trade was found, they would have been something very
much more or less than human if they had not determined to resist
to the utmost these monstrous pretensions of a right to prevent them
from navigating the streams and lakes, and traveling over the port
ages, and catching fish and killing game for their subsistence in the
vast unsettled wilderness where they and their predecessors in in
terest had enjoyed these rights undisturbed for several generations,
while it was "only twenty-five years since the Hudson's Bay Co. first
made an establishment on Red River" (Cf. "Papers Relating to the
Red River Settlement," p. 165).
This aggression was not, however, attempted to its fullest extent
at first, and so open hostilities did not begin with the very founding
of the colony, though there had been for several years not only a
very vigorous, but often a very unscrupulous competition between
the traders of the two companies, which had thoroughly demoralized
the Indians about all the regions where both the companies sought
the trade of the natives. (Cf. on this article in London and West
minster Review, Vol. 29, April to August, 1838, pp. 373-392, as fol
lows: "The Indians, without doubt, would have been more numer
ous, more moral and more comfortable had they never seen the face
of a man professing to be a Christian."
As to these evils, it must be borne in mind that the Indians were
for many years subjected to all the corrupting influences of a com
petition between two rival companies, who prospered by their de
basement, the North West Co. of Montreal and the Hudson's Bay
Co. Spirituous liquors were introduced as early as the first settle
ments of the latter company, in 1670. During the competition,
"which did not cease until the year 1S21, it was the interest of the
rival Europeans to gain possession of the Indians, by whatever
means, and it used to happen that whenever an Indian canoe was
seen approaching on the lake rival boats would start on a race to
reach it first, and scenes of bloodshed were the consequence."
To the same tenor is what Daniel W. Harmon says in his "Jour
nal of Voyages and Travels in the Interior of North America, etc.,"
after 19 years' continuous service in the North West Co. (1800-
1819), as follows (p. 314) (in an account of the Indians generally
on the east side of the Rocky Mountains in British America) :

294 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"The white people have been among these above mentioned for
about 150 years. . . . But I very much question whether they
have improved in their character or condition by their acquaintance
with civilized people. In their savage state they were contented
with the mere necessaries of life, which they could procure with con
siderable ease; but now they have many artificial wants created by
the luxuries which we (p. 315) have introduced among them, and as
they find it difficult to obtain these luxuries, they have become to a
degree discontented with their condition and practice fraud in their
dealings. A half-civilized Indian is more savage than one in his
original state. The latter has some sense of honor, while the former
has none. I have always experienced the greatest hospitality and
kindness among those Indians who have had the least intercourse
with white people. They readily discover and adopt our evil prac
tices; but they are not as quick to discern and as ready to follow
the few good examples which we set before them."
This was written after Harmon had retired from the service of
the North West Co., and it will be observed that he does not charge
this condition to the one company more than to the other.
Turning now to the Earl of Selkirk's "Sketch of the British Fur
Trade," in which he is seeking to make a case against the "North
Westers" (pp. 38-9), he arraigns them for "speculating on the vices
of their servants by encouraging them to habits of drink and dissi
pation," and (p. 51) "It is an indisputable fact that the native In
dians have been growing more deficient in every estimable point of
character from the time that Canada fell under the Protestant Gov
ernment of Great Britain. The cause of this lamentable and humil
iating fact can no longer be a mystery, when it is known that the
immediate management of these people has been left without control
in the hands of men who speculate upon the vices of their servants."
On p. 82, desiring to make the Hudson's Bay Co. (of which he
had been for five years the real manager) appear to have been as
angelic as he had sought to make the "Norwesters" satanic, he
wrote :
"So far from 'speculating upon their vices,' the Hudson's Bay
Co. have uniformly expressed the strongest desire to preserve moral
and religious habits among their people, nor have their efforts for
this purpose been without effect."
Though His Lordship does not claim that great things had actu
ally been done for the Indians by the Hudson's Bay Co., it is evi
dent from his contrasting the North West Co.'s treatment of its em
ployes with that of the Hudson's Bay Co. and ascribing the debase
ment of the Indians to the "Norwesters," that he would have it in
ferred that the Indians who had been only under the influence of
the Hudson's Bay Co. were in vastly better condition than those who

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 295
had been contaminated by the influence of their rivals, but, unfortu
nately for him, not only have we the before quoted extract from Har
mon's Journal, but, in the fragment of the "Letter Book of Miles Mc
Donnell" (who, as Governor of the Red River Colony, led out the first
party of settlers for it from Scotland, in 1811, via Hudson's Bay,
and arrived at York Factory, the chief Hudson's Bay Co.'s post on
the Bay, too late to go on to Red River till the spring of 1812), on
pp. 217 and 218, after describing the lack of discipline among clerks
and other white employes at that place, he continues as follows :
"Mr. Auld and Mr. Cook are both very unpopular amongst the In
dians here, who have likewise caught the spirit of dissatisfaction to a
very great degree.
"These people, who in 1782 offered to defend the Factories against
the French, refuse now to come to the Goose Hunt, and feel indiffer
ent on all occasions to obey the orders of the company's officers.
There are no chiefs among them, and they are in the utmost state of
individual debasement and depravity that can be conceived. It is a
melancholy reflection that during their long intercourse with the
whites they have not acquired one moral virtue, nor is the faintest
idea of the true Deity to be found among them."
It must be remembered that for more than a century these In
dians and their ancestors had never had any intercourse with any
white men except the Hudson's Bay Co.'s employes, their habitat
being hundreds of miles northeast of any line of travel of the North
West Co.; while Miles McDonnell's position as the flrst Governor
of the Red River Colony is assurance that he would not exaggerate
anything to the injury of the Hudson's Bay Co.
To His Lordship's charge that they speculated on the vices of
their servants and carried an excessive amount of intoxicating
liquors into the Indian country, the "Norwesters" retorted as fol
lows : "An offer made by Lord Selkirk in the year 1803 to the North
West Co. to furnish them with spirits for their Indian trade from
distilleries to be carried on at his settlement at Baldoon in Western
Canada, shows that he held a different doctrine in respect to supply
ing the Indians with spirits until he found it convenient to lavish
his abuse on the North West Co." (Cf. Papers Respecting Red
River Settlement, p. 135.)
They also stated that "Great improvements had taken place in
this (p. 10) respect" (i. e., the trade in liquors by the North West
Co.) "before Lord Selkirk's interference, which it is essential to
state, that he may not lay claim to the little merit the reviled fur
traders are entitled to on the subject.
"It was shown that the quantity of spirituous liquors introduced
into the Northwest country had in the two preceding years been re-

296 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
duced from 50,000 to 10,000 gallons ; no great quantity, considering
there were at that time 2,000 white persons in their employment, of
which the greater number were to pass the winter in a Siberian cli
mate." (Cf. Narrative of Transactions, etc. Preface, p. 9.)
Returning now to the history of the Red River Colony: "The
first emigrants to Red River were about twenty-five families, Irish
and Scotch, in the spring of 1811. They reached York Fort too late
to go on to Red River in 1811, and spent the winter of 1811-12 at
York Fort in much misery, and did not reach Red River till the
autumn of 1812."
The next party of settlers arrived early in the winter of 1812-13.
During the first winter there was not only no friction between the
colonists and the Norwesters (one of whose principal forts was at
the forks of Red River, but a few miles from the colony), but it is
admitted that the colonists were only kept from great suffering if
not starvation by the kindness of the Norwesters in giving them
food. This peaceful condition was of short duration, for on January
8, 1814, Miles McDonnell issued a proclamation forbidding for
twelve months the exportation of any provisions procured or raised
within the territory, "except what might be necessary for taking to
their respective destinations the parties then with the same."
Soon after "an order was published by Miles McDonnell forbid
ding the hunting of buffalo on horseback, under the penalty of three
months' imprisonment for the first offense, and forfeiture of the
horse with a similar imprisonment for the second." (Cf. Papers
Respecting Red River Settlement, pp. 155-8. )
If these orders could be enforced they Avould have starved the
North West Co.'s trading and exploring parties, for the Red River
Valley had been their source of supply for the buffalo meat and fat
with which, for many years before a Hudson's Bay Co.'s post was
established anywhere near there, they and their predecessors in in
terest had made the pemmican, which was the main food of their
parties when traveling or living at times and in regions where game
and fish could not be obtained.
On October 21, 1S14, Miles McDonnell sent the following letter
to Mr. Duncan Cameron, acting for the North West Co. at the forks
of the Red River:
"Take notice, that by the authority and on the behalf of your
landlord, the Right Hon. Thomas, Earl of Selkirk, I do hereby warn
you and all your associates of the North West Co. to quit the post
and premises you now occupy at the forks of the Red River within
six calendar months from the date hereof." (Cf. Papers Respecting
Red River Settlement, p. 10.)

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 297
Soon after his proclamation forbidding the export of any provis
ions, Miles McDonnell attacked a fort of the North West Co., and
took from it 600 packages of 85 pounds each of pemmican, and took
them to the Hudson's Bay Co.'s fort. (Cf. Narrative of Transac
tions, etc., p. 28.)
Sir Gordon Drummon was then Governor General of Canada, and
a dispatch from him to Earl Bathurst dated "Castle Quebec, August
15, 1815," thus gives his opinion of "Governor" Miles McDonnell:
"The plan of affording military protection to the Earl of Selkirk's
settlement is in my opinion decidedly impracticable, on account of
expense of transporting and supporting the troops there, and the
certain consequence of involving England in an Indian war for ob
jects foreign to the interests of the British Government." . . .
"The most mischievous consequences are likely to occur from the
conduct and character of the individual whom Lord Selkirk has se
lected for his agent, who styles himself a governor, and from whose
intercourse with the persons in the employ of the North West Co.
it is in vain to look for the spirit of moderation and conciliation
which is so desirable should animate persons situated as these
traders and settlers are, cut off as they are from the whole civilized
world and dependent on their union and mutual good offices for pro
tection, not only from the savage tribes by which they are sur
rounded, but against an enemy not less formidable, viz., famine."
(Cf. "Papers Relating to the Red River Settlement," pp. 4-5.)
Idem (p. 12) "Inclosure 12" is a copy of a letter from Lieut.
Col. J. Harvey, Dept. Adjt. Gen., to Messrs. Maitland, Gordon and
Auldjo of Montreal, which says : "Sir Gordon Drummond is of
opinion that if the lives of and property of the Earl of Selkirk's set
tlers are or may hereafter be endangered, that danger will arise
principally from the conduct of Mr. Miles McDonald, His Lordship's
agent, who appears to His Excellency to be actuated by anything but
a spirit of moderation and conciliation, in his language and de
meanor, toward the servants of the North West Co. He has, more
over, assumed powers which cannot possibly, in His Excellency's
opinion, have been vested in him, or any agent, private or public,
of any individual or of any chartered body."
The leaders of the North West Co. held commissions from Canada
as magistrates for the Indian country, and they now proceeded to
try what virtue resided in this judicial power, and from their head
quarters at Fort William issued a warrant for the arrest of Gov
ernor McDonnell, to which, after no small demurring, he reluctantly
submitted, and "on the 21st of June, 1815, Miles McDonnell quitted
the Red River, having surrendered himself a prisoner, under the
warrant from Fort William, a few days before to Alex. McKenzie, a
partner and one of the agents of the North West Co." . . .

298 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Their Governor gone, the discontent which had been steadily
growing in the minds of the great majority of the colonists burst
forth, and they resolved to quit the colony, and accordingly, "On
the 27th of June, 1815, the colony was finally broken up, and the
remaining settlers and servants embarked for Jack River." (Cf.
Papers, etc, p. 171.)
About 50 families, in all 140 persons, "threw themselves upon
the compassion of the North West Co. for passage away from the
scene of their misery and were conveyed in their canoes to York
(now Toronto), Upper Canada, while some 13 or 14 families, con
sisting of about 40 persons, started for Jack River on their way to
Hudson's Bay." (Cf. Narrative of Trans., etc., p. 39; also Papers
Relating to the Red River Settlement, p. 24.)
Immediately on the arrival of these people in York, Rev. John
Strachan wrote and published his "Letter to the Right Honorable
the Earl of Selkirk," its preface being dated "York, U. C, Oct. 15,
1816." Dr. Strachan was probably the most brilliantly gifted and the
most useful Episcopal clergyman of his generation in Canada, and
was Bishop of Toronto from 1839 to his death in 1867, in his eighty-
second year. While somewhat narrow in his views, especially in re
gard to the rights of other churches than his own, he always had the
full courage of his convictions, and was always absolutely fearless
in expressing and contending for what he believed to be right on any
subject. He was also as intense a Tory, and as anxious to prevent any one
born subject to "His Gracious Majesty," George the Third, from
bettering his condition by migrating to the United States, as was the
Earl of Selkirk, as witness the following passages from his "Letter
to the Earl of Selkirk (pp. 20-21) : "But to turn the stream of emi
gration from the United States to the British Colonies is confessedly
an object of the greatest importance. . . It appears that the
Ministry begins to be sensible of its importance, and it is to be
hoped that a total exclusion of American settlers will form part of
their plan ; for unless this policy be adopted and rigidly adhered to,
this valuable colony (i. e., Canada) cannot be long preserved to the
British Crown (p. 21).
"You are too well acquainted with the depravity of the American
character to desire any number of that people in your settlement. I
am, nevertheless, persuaded that so far from raising a colony of
British subjects, whose principles and morals shall be free from the
contamination of the United States, etc."
In extenuation of this bitterness it should be remembered that
York had been captured by the army of the United States in 1813.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 299
The "Advertisement" or preface of his little book is as follows :
"As soon as I heard that the Earl of Selkirk was commencing a
settlement on Red River, I determined to warn the public of the de
ception, and of the great misery which emigrants must experience in
such a distant and inhospitable region. But it was difficult to pro
cure the necessary information, and before it could be obtained the
progress of the American war called my attention to distress nearer
home. It was not till last June that I was able to get a copy of His
Lordship's Prospectus, a paper neatly drawn up, but, alas ! destitute
of truth. To those who are amazed, after reading my remarks, at
the promises and assertions which it contains, I am justified in say
ing that promises still more remarkable, and assertions still more
extravagant, were made by the Earl of Selkirk himself, at Stromness,
in June, 1813, to persons whom he was enticing to go out. Few of
these wretched men have any written agreement; an omission, I
hope, not wilfully made to prevent legal redress ; for surely punish
ment ought to be inflicted on speculators who persuade families
under false pretenses to leave their native homes.
"Of the settlers who went to the Red River many died at
Churchill in Hudson's Bay from the severity of the climate and the
quality of their food. Others seriously injured their health, and
not one of those who have escaped saw a joyful day from the time
they left Scotland till they began their journey to Canada. The
following letter may prevent any more from encountering the mis
eries of the polar regions ; and this is all I am able to effect. But
retributive justice is due ; and I flatter myself that among the many
great examples of disinterested benevolence so common in Great
Britain, one may be found sufficiently powerful to compel Lord Sel
kirk and his brother proprietors to make ample compensation to the
survivors for the money and effects lost at Churchill and the mis
eries they have endured."
The following extracts will show how thoroughly selfish and des
titute of any vestige of philanthropy were all of Selkirk's coloniza
tion schemes.
(P. 6) Writing of Selkirk's Prince Edward's Island colony he
says : "The quantity of land assigned to each family, of 50 or even
100 acres, was too small. In a very few years the farmer, if in
dustrious, must have sold out or purchased the adjacent lands at
their own price. Had farms, even large farms, been given to the
first settlers for nothing, and the means of cultivation for the first
year, the advantage would have been yours.
"It is the settlers that give value to the surrounding soil. Noth
ing is more common in the United States than for the proprietors
of large tracts to give extensive farms gratis to the few that first

300 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
encounter the difficulty of settling. Your people could not sit down
with satisfaction on a purchase of 50 acres when they saw (p. 7)
their neighbors getting 200 from the Government for nothing.
(P. 9) "For every settler brought into Upper Canada by Your
Lordship you received 200 acres of land, of which you were bound
to grant him 50, making a net profit of 150 acres on each settler.
This portion of 50 acres being too small for a farm, must in a few
years be sold for a trifle, or the pioneer be compelled to purchase
at any price as soon as he was able (if that could ever happen on
so small a farm) the adjoining lands. This is a way of accumulat
ing property not the most honorable to the peerage and attended
with the most pernicious consequences to the colony and its admin
istration. Such settlers consider themselves dupes, they become
discontented with their situation and with the Government which
permits such transactions.
"And it must be allowed that it would be much better for the
King to grant at once any quantity of land that he chooses to a
person whom he wished to serve than to give it in this manner. I
am ready to acquit Your Lordship of any profit, as yet, in either of
these speculations; grasping at too much, nothing has been obtained,
and though marked with more than the precaution of an American
land jobber, they have been singularly unsuccessful.
"Taking these things into consideration, I was disposed to pass
over in silence Your Lordship's land speculations in Prince Ed
ward's Island and in Upper Canada. You might have been deceived
and really supposed that the conditions offered on both occasions
were extremely liberal, but after the experience which they must
have given you, and your visit to America, it will not be so easy to
excuse you for offering worse conditions to emigrants, going to an
infinitely worse situation, where they can only meet with disap
pointment and misery.
"Your projected settlement at the Red River, or third attempt at
colonization, appears to me not only more extravagant than either
of the former, but one of the most gross impositions that ever was
attempted on the British public and must be attended with the most
baneful consequences to all those unfortunate men who, deluded by
the false promises held out to them, shall leave their homes for such
a dreary wilderness."
(P. 12) "The proprietors may be ignorant, but you know, my
Lord, that situation is the true criterion of the value of lands and
the principal cause of retarding or accelerating their settlement."
. . . "In this portion of the Prospectus" (i. e., Selkirk's Pros
pectus, which Strachan quotes in full on pp. 69, 76, and which is an
example of as conscienceless ingenuity in misrepresentation of the
desirability of the Red River Valley as a place to which to migrate

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 301
from Great Britain as was ever printed by the most rascally land
speculator on earth.— W. I. M.) I particularly call the reader's at
tention to the very slight manner of noticing the remoteness of the
projected colony. A stranger would naturally suppose that, as Up
per Canada is carefully omitted in comparing the lands of the Red
River with the other colonies, they formed part of that extensive
province, more especially since they are declared to be equal in soil
and climate to any in British America. As respects the value of
land, situation is everything. The most fruitful valley in the world
is worth nothing if surrounded with impassable mountains. The
assertion, therefore, that these lands are in no ways different in ad
vantages from those of Lower Canada and Nova Scotia is false, un
less their situation be equally favorable."
(P. 16) Speaking of the title of the Hudson's Bay Co. to the
fee simple of all the land draining into Hudson's Bay, he says : "As
to the opinion of lawyers of the first eminence declaring the title un
exceptionable, it is here, as on many other occasions, of little weight,
since other gentlemen of the first legal character in England have
pronounced the charter illegal and void. The Hudson's Bay Co.
thought this latter the more correct opinion, for, in 1802, when their
commerce was infringed upon by rival traders, they very wisely de
clined bringing the question to a decision in a court of justice."
(P. 27) Commenting on the statement in the prospectus that the
expense of bringing out emigrants will average £10 for each family,
he says in a footnote : "It appears that instead of £10 for each fam
ily, 10 guineas are paid for man, woman and child, which makes an
immense difference to the settler — see the postscript." Turning to
the postscript, 62-68, we find statements of Alexander Matheson,
John Macpherson, Andrew Macbeath and William Gunn, who had
been brought from the Red River Settlement in the North West
Co.'s boats, and also a copy of Alexander Matheson's agreement with
Lord Selkirk, which fully justify all the severe things Strachan has
written. (P. 28) "To charge £50 for every 100 acres, in a place so remote,
is to pillage the unfortunate emigrant ; for if he had found his way
to Canada he would have received 200 acres for nothing, or, at most,
£9, the price of survey; and instead of being cut off from all the
world, he could have been in a good neighborhood, and near a good
market for his produce. In this province farms are frequently pur
chased, with improvements, for $2 per acre; that is, from 10 to 20
acres clear, with a small log house. In the midst of the rich settle
ments, and in favorable situations, the price is greater, sometimes
$10 per acre ; but the average price of land through the whole prov
ince does not exceed $1."

302 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Pages 30 to 46 he gives tables showing the distances, "first, from
Red River Settlement to Hudson's Bay, 710 miles, with 25 portages
and many other impediments."
"Second, from Fort William on Lake Superior, about 1,300 miles
from Montreal or 2,000 from the sea to Your Lordship's colony on
the Red River, 644 miles, with about 40 portages; and third, from
Red River to the Falls of St. Anthony, about 764 miles, with two
portages." I have copied thus at length from Dr. Strachan's letter because
nowhere else can so clear and convincing a statement be found of
the heartless selfishness of the Earl of Selkirk's various coloniza
tion schemes, for which he has received from some eulogists of the
Hudson's Bay Co. the reputation of a philanthropist, though all of
these eulogists carefully refrain from stating any details of Selkirk's
schemes, or from intimating the real purpose of his founding the
Red River colony.
Mr. Colin Robertson — an old Norwester who had gone over to the
Hudson's Bay Co. — was on his way to the colony from Montreal
with a party of the Hudson's Bay Co. employes, and at the Lake of
the Woods heard of the destruction of the colony, and that those
who had not gone in the North West Co.'s boats to Canada had gone
to the Hudson's Bay Co.'s post at Jack River, near the outlet of Lake
Winnipeg. He therefore hastened thither, and put himself at their
head, and "on the 19th of August, 1815, Colin Robertson arrived in
Red River, accompanied by the colonists, who had been driven off,
together with about 20 clerks and servants." (Cf. Papers, etc., p.
174; also the beginning of Pambrun's Narrative.)
"On the 3d of November, 1815, Mr. Robert Semple arrived in Red
River as Governor in Chief of the Hudson's Bay Territories, accom
panied by a Mr. Alexander McDonnell, sheriff to the settlement, in
charge of about 160 persons, a few of them servants, but the greater
part settlers with their families from Scotland, and by Mr. James
Sutherland, in charge of supplies for the Hudson's Bay Co.'s trad
ing posts."
Connected with this first destruction and re-establishment of the
Red River Settlement two winter journeys were made, one east by
Lagomoniere, the other west by John Pritchard, which are thus
related. "These letters" (i. e., from Lord Selkirk to the colonists an
nouncing his intention in the spring of 1816 to join them as soon
as possible), "were entrusted to a person named Lagomoniere, whom
Lord Selkirk could depend upon, and who had made a hazardous
winter journey, on foot, of upward of 2,000 miles for the purpose of
bringing intelligence to Montreal from the Red River of the re-estab-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 303
lishment of the colony." (Cf. "Statement Respecting the Earl of
Selkirk's Settlement," etc., p. 41.)
Pritchard had been with the North West Co. from 1801 to 1814,
when he decided to settle in the Red River Colony.
On p. 11 of his "Narrative" he says that in the autumn of 1814
the Northwesters in Montreal had told him that the Red River Col
ony would be broken up, and continues : "In the hope of preventing
the evil by warning Governor McDonnell of the danger which men
aced the settlement, I undertook a journey to Red River by the cir
cuitous route of Hudson's Bay, a distance of near 4,000 miles, the
greatest part of which I performed on snowshoes, hauling after me
upon a sledge provisions and every other requisite to serve me for
20 or 30 days at a time.
"I set out from Montreal on the 28th of October, 1814, and ar
rived at Red River on the 15th of April ensuing, when I had the
mortification to find that the prediction of McKenzie was in part
accomplished." Either of these journeys — on foot and alone — was a very much
more remarkable performance than Whitman's journey — not on foot
and alone, but with saddle and pack animals and one companion,
Lovejoy— all the way to Fort Bent, besides a guide from Fort Hall
to the Missouri frontier, and the company of a small party of fur
traders, the last 550 miles of the way from Bent's Fort to the Mis
souri frontier.
In the late winter of 1815-16 Selkirk reached Montreal via New
York from England, and renewed the efforts previously made to se
cure from Sir Gordon Drummond a garrison of regular British sol
diers to be stationed at Red River, but failing for the reasons set
forth in Drummond's dispatch of August 18, 1815, Selkirk, like a
feudal lord of the Middle Ages, proceeded to raise a small army of
his own by enlisting something more than a hundred of the dis
charged soldiers of two regiments of the German mercenaries that
England had hired to fight against the United States (and who had
been discharged in Canada on the conclusion of peace), and having
by some means obtained a bodyguard for himself from the Thirty-
seventh Regiment and a commission as "Magistrate in the Indian
country" under the Canada Judicature Act, he marshaled his forces
in full uniform, and with colors flying and drums beating set out
from Lachine, near Montreal, in the beginning of June, 1816, for
Fort William and the Red River.
Meanwhile events were moving rapidly toward the bloody trag
edy of the second destruction of the ill-fated colony.
? In October, 1815, Colin Robertson surprised and captured Fort
Gibraltar, the North West Co.'s post at the confluence of the Red

304 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
and Assinihoine without bloodshed, but contented himself with
taking two cannon and 30 stand of arms that had been taken from
the settlement the preceding year. (Cf. "The Great Company," p.
408.) Whether or not Governor Semple approved of this act does
not appear.
In March Semple went west to inspect certain Hudson's Bay
Co.'s forts, and in his absence, on the 17th of March, 1816, the North
West Co.'s post at the forks of the Red River was again forcibly
seized by Colin Robertson at the head of an armed party.
Robertson and his party having on the 19th of March, 1816,
seized the North West express, and having opened the letters therein
addressed to Duncan Cameron and S. Lamar of the North West Co.,
and seized the papers found in Cameron's desk and on his table,
Robertson declared that he had succeeded beyond his expectations,
as well in getting possession of the fort without bloodshed as in hav
ing found papers therein which would justify all he had done; and
after the capture of the express he further said that he was now in
possession of such documents and so completely master of the se
crets of the North West Co. that he should be able to bring them to
what terms he pleased in the coalition which must take place to pre
vent the ruin of both companies; and lastly, that he declared he
would fortify the post and sink all the boats and pemmican that
Alex McDonnell of the North West Co. might bring down, should
he venture to make the trial. (Cf. Papers Relating to the Red
River Settlement, etc., pp. 176-7.)
Robertson destroyed Fort Gibraltar and took Chief Factor Dun
can Cameron prisoner and sent him via Hudson's Bay to England,
where he was at once discharged without trial. (Cf. "The Great
Company," p. 409.)
"On the 19th of June, 1816, the unfortunate affray took place in
which Governor Semple and about 20 of his officers and men lost
their lives.
"The numbers killed and wounded on each side appear to have
been one killed and one wounded on the part of the half-breeds, and
one wounded and 20 or 21 killed on that of the colonists. . . The
time occupied by the whole affair . . . did not exceed a quarter
of an hour ... if the fact that the colonists were the assail
ants (of which I apprehend there can be little doubt) be admitted.
"On the 22d of June, 1816, the colony was a second time broken
up and the settlers proceeded on the afternoon of that day from Fort
Douglas to Lake Winnipic" (Cf. Papers Relating to the Red River
Settlement, pp. 185, 192, 194.)
Some of the leading colonists were carried to Fort William as
prisoners.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 305
Meanwhile Selkirk and his private army were hastening toward
Red River, and at Sault Ste. Marie received news of the battle be
tween the half-breeds and Governor Semple's party and the second
destruction of the colony.
Pushing on as rapidly as possible, he camped his army opposite
Fort William, late in August, 1816, and issuing warrants proceeded
to arrest all of the partners of the North West Co., who were then
gathered there for the annual meeting, and sent them prisoners to
Montreal, accused of high treason, murder, robbery and conspiracy,
and then proceeded to occupy Fort William till May, 1817, and to
do as he pleased with all the correspondence and records and prop
erty of the North West Co. there, and sent out expeditions and cap
tured three other of the North West Co.'s forts.
No sooner did the Norwesters reach Montreal than they were all
released on bail and warrants were at once sworn out for the arrest
of the Earl, but when an officer reached Fort William with them
the doughty nobleman, instead of submitting to the law as the "Nor
westers" had done, made the officer a prisoner, and after a few days'
confinement released him and ordered him to go back whence he
came. The Canadian Government at once (in October, 1816) revoked
Selkirk's commission as justice of the peace, likewise all other com
missions held in the Indian country by "Norwesters" or Hudson's
Bay Co. officers, and appointed Colonel W. B. Coltman and Major
John Fletcher as special commissioners to proceed to the scene of
the disturbance in the Indian country and investigate and report
upon the nature, extent and causes of the difficulties between the
North West Co. and the Hudson's Bay Co., and their report covers
pp. 152-250 of the "Papers Respecting the Red River Settlement,"
and, while evidently fair, is very distinctly more favorable to the
North West Co. than to Selkirk and the Hudson's Bay Co. The
commissioners left Quebec October 31, 1816, and Montreal Novem
ber 7, 1816, but were unable to reach Fort William, and accordingly
returned to York and waited for spring.
Meanwhile these tales of wholesale murder and robbery and op
pression had reached London, and so scandalized all England that
in February, 1817, while Selkirk was still carrying things with a
high hand at Fort William and capturing North West Co.'s forts
whenever possible, the Governor General of Canada received from
the home Government a dispatch which contained the following
passage :
"You will also require, under similar penalties, a restitution of
all forts, buildings and trading stations, with the property which
they contain, which may have been seized or taken possession of by
either party, to the party who originally established or constructed

306 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
the same, and who were in possession of them previous to the recent
disputes between the two companies. You will also require the re
moval of any blockade or impediment by which any party may have
attempted to prevent the free passage of traders or other of His
Majesty's subjects, or the natives of the country, with their merchan
dise, furs, provisions or other effects, throughout the lakes, rivers,
roads and every other usual route of communication heretofore used
for the purpose of the fur trade in the interior of North America,
and the full and free permission of all persons to pursue their usual
and accustomed trade without hindrance or molestation. The mu
tual restoration of all property captured during these disputes and
the freedom of trade and intercourse with the Indians, until the
trials now pending can be brought to a judicial decision, and the
great question at issue with respect to the rights of the companies,
shall be definitely settled." (Cf. "The Great Company," p. 423.)
This was followed, May 3, 1817, by a public proclamation by the
Prince Regent ordering all officers and servants of the Hudson's
Bay Co. and the North West Co. to refrain from in any way molest
ing each other or interfering with one another's trade, and ordering
restitution of all places captured by either party from the other.
(Cf. Report of the Proceedings, etc., at the Assizes held at York,
App. 2, pp. 41-45.)
Armed with this authority the Sheriff of Upper Canada arrived
at Fort William very soon after Selkirk had left, dispossessing those
he had left in charge, and restored it to its owners, and it was hoped
that peace would be speedily restored throughout the Indian coun
try, at least as far as white men were concerned.
But this hope proved vain, as Williams, Semple's successor in
the Governorship, continued to harass the "Norwesters" with the
aid of Selkirk's mercenaries, so that "There were numerous ex
amples of the abuse of force and the utter abandonment to lawless
ness during this and the following year." (Cf. "The Great Com
pany," p. 427.)
This was the natural result of the long delay in trying the pris
oners sent from Fort William to Montreal by Selkirk in August,
1816. Naturally His Lordship sought to have them all transported
across seas and tried in England, and an order was actually issued
by the Home Government for that to be done, but on vigorous re
monstrance from Canada it was countermanded.
At length, when Selkirk's utmost ingenuity could no longer post
pone the trial, it took place in October, 1818, at York (now Toronto),
Upper Canada.
The only full report of it is contained in "The Report of Proceed
ings, etc., at the Assizes in York," which was published by the North

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 307
West Co., with a brief advertisement and preface. The advertise
ment is as follows :
"In reprinting this report of the recent proceedings in Upper
Canada, connected with the disputes between the Earl of Selkirk
and the North West Co., the agents of the company have to state
that the minutes of these proceedings were taken by a sworn short
hand writer employed under the sanction of the Court, and on con
dition of furnishing the Court with a copy of his minutes in the
event of any conviction taking place.
"The report and the appendix, therefore, are to be considered as
documents strictly official, and the preface and notes, reprinted from
the Montreal edition, are the only comments offered by the North
West Co. in answer to the numerous calumnies with which they have
been assailed through the medium of the press, as well as by ex parte
statements in the House of Commons. When the papers laid on the
table of that honorable house are printed for the use of the members
of the Legislature, it will be seen how far these calumnies are sup
ported by the documents bearing upon the case ; and when the agents
of the North West Co. shall be acquainted with the nature of these
documents, if it shall appear that the conduct of those with whom
they are connected requires further explanation, they will take an
early opportunity to offer the same. In the meantime they entreat
the attention of the public to the reports of the trials which have
taken place, and they request that the cases made out in evidence be
fore juries may be compared with the aggravated statements and
ex parte affidavits previously published and industriously circulated
by the Earl of Selkirk and his agents.
"They also request those who may take any interest in the ques
tion to compare the recently published narrative of Mr. Pritchard,
the late petitioner to the House of Commons, and his associates, Mr.
Pambrun and Mr. Heurter, with the evidence of the same persons
subjected to cross-examination in an open court, and contrasted with
the testimony of the witnesses for the defense.
"It appears that the result of this comparison, on the trials, in
duced the juries to reject the evidence of these persons as unworthy
of belief ; and considering the circumstances under which their nar
ratives are now produced, and pending the legal investigations which
are still at issue, as well as the parliamentary proceedings which
have been instituted, it is submitted that no impartial person can
give credit to ex parte statements resting on such suspicious au
thority, and manifestly published with a view to prejudge a question
depending on official documents and legal decisions."
The preface says : "The arrest by the Earl of Selkirk of several
partners and people in the employ of the North West Co. at Fort

308 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
William in August, 1816, on charges of high treason, murder, rob
bery and conspiracy is well known to the public, and the trials at
York, in Upper Canada . . . demonstratively exhibit the utter
futility of those charges; and the long period that has elapsed be
tween the time they were brought and that when the trials upon
them have taken place is an additional proof, if any were wanting,
of the oppressions under colour of law to which Lord Selkirk has
subjected the North West Co."
The preface goes on to declare that the defendants had tried in
vain to obtain a more speedy trial, which had been postponed be
cause of the claim constantly made by the prosecution that the Earl
of Selkirk had the evidence and was not within reach of the court,
and declares that "The Earl of Selkirk was only dragged into the
arena as the 'private prosecutor' by the determination of the Gov
ernor General of Canada to order the liberation of the prisoners if
they were not speedily brought to trial," and continues, "Instead,
however, of making his appearance as the private prosecutor in
these causes at York, where he was anxiously expected up to the
very hour of the commencement of Brown and Boucher's trial,
His Lordship disappointed the Crown officers, his own witnesses
and the public, and although he started from Montreal in the direc
tion of Upper Canada, he soon after turned off to the left and pro
ceeded by way of New York to England, anticipating, no doubt, this
signal defeat and unable to withstand the mortification of witness
ing it in person."
Indictments for murder of Robert Semple, June 19, 1816, had
been returned against four persons as principals, four more as acces
sories before the fact and against 10 persons, among whom were
Alex McKenzie, John McDonald, Simon Fraser, Allen McDonnell
and John McLoughlin, as accessories after the fact.
Paul Brown and Francois F. Boucher were the only ones ar
rested as principals, and their trial began October 19, 1818. The
evidence and Judge's charge cover 225 pages, and in less than an
hour — in fact before the Judges had left the courtroom when they
had adjourned court for an hour — the jury acquitted the prisoners.
The trial lasted nine days.
Trial of the accessories, October 30, 1818: John Siveright, as
accessory both before and after the fact, and Alexander McKenzie,
Hugh McGillis, John McDonald, John McLoughlin and Simon Fra
ser, as accessories after the fact, were put on trial. The report
covers 155 pages, and in three-quarters of an hour the jury acquitted
all the defendants.
This is followed by the report of the trial of John Cooper and
Hugh Bennerman, Red River settlers who had left the colony for
stealing a cannon, which resulted in their acquittal.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 309
On p. 200 of the part relating to the trial of the accessories and
of Cooper and Bennerman is a postscript stating that on February
22, 1819, the Grand Jury at York, Upper Canada, had indicted
Thomas Douglas, Earl of Selkirk, Miles McDonnell, P. C. Pambrun,
John Pritchard and others to the number of 20 in all, for a con
spiracy to ruin the trade of the North West Co.
This is followed by the reports of two civil cases, William Smith
(the constable to whose warrant Selkirk had refused to submit) vs.
the Earl of Selkirk, and Daniel McKenzie vs. the Earl of Selkirk,
each for false imprisonment at Fort William. Smith recovered £500
and McKenzie £1,000 damages.
(P. 155) "So far as regarded the seizure of property and the in
terruption of trade" (i. e., of the North West Co. by the Earl of Sel
kirk) the point was decided by the Prince Regent's proclamation of
the 3rd of May, 1817, in consequence of which the North West Co.
recovered possession of their property and re-established their trade ;
but that proclamation left the rights of parties and the crimes al
leged against individuals to be investigated and decided upon by
law." Selkirk did not again appear in America, but, broken in health,
retired to the south of France, and died at Pau, April 8, 1820.
Meanwhile the contemptuous disobedience to the proclamation of
the Prince Regent by Governor Williams and his mercenaries, espe
cially his wholly inexcusable arrest of leaders of the North West
Co., and his sending them to Hudson's Bay, whence some were trans
ported to England and some to Canada, where they were imme
diately released without any attempt at trying them for anything;
and, worst of all, his arrest of the famous Benjamin Frobisher,
against whom there was neither accusation nor warrant, and send
ing him a prisoner to Hudson's Bay, whence he escaped with two
companions, though suffering from a severe wound in the head, and
started on foot for the nearest North West Co.'s post, some 500 miles
distant, and though of an iron constitution, perished from starva
tion on the way, in November, 1819, stirred both Canada and Eng
land with intense indignation.
The Duke of Richmond, then Governor General of Canada, at
once sent two officers of his suite to the Red River with dispatches
enjoining obedience to the laws, while the North West Co. warned
the Home Government that if the Hudson's Bay Co., or Lord Sel
kirk and his agents, continued their illegal acts intended to ruin
their business, they would resist with arms.
These representations caused the Home Government to notify
the Hudson's Bay Co.'s directors that they must stop the lawless
outrages of their subordinates against the North Wrest Co. or take
the consequences.

310 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Under the pressure of the Home Government (which saw no
other way to secure peace in the Indian country), on March 26,
1821, the contract of consolidation of the companies was signed,
each to furnish half the capital and to share equally the profits, but
all in the name of the Hudson's Bay Co.
The new company, however, adopted in toto the organization and
methods of conducting the business of the North West Co. (which
experience had proved vastly superior to those of the Hudson's Bay
Co.), by which there were three principal classes of employes in the
Indian country, viz: Clerks (on salaries ranging from £20 to £100
a year), chief traders and chief factors, with an elaborate scheme
for promoting clerks to chief traders, and chief traders to chief fac
tors, and for retiring chief factors and chief traders when they
might desire it (if consistent with the continued prosperity of the
business). As the compensation of chief traders and chief factors was a
certain share of the profits, and as if there were losses instead of
profits, those losses were charged up against and deducted from the
profits of subsequent years instead of being deducted from the capi
tal stock, this plan insured a constant succession of the most capable
men for the leading positions, all carefully trained through long
years of apprenticeship as clerks before they could become chief
traders and chief traders before they could become chief factors, and
all having the keen interest of partners in the success of the busi
ness. By the contract of consolidation "There were 25 chief factors
and 28 chief traders appointed, who were named in alternate suc
cession from the Hudson's Bay Co.'s and the North West Co.'s ser
vants. The servants of both companies were placed on an equal
footing." (Cf. "The Hudson's Bay Territories, etc., by R. M. Martin,
Esq., Author of the History of the British Colonies," London, 1849,
p. 50; also "The Canadian Northwest," etc., pp. 145-6.)
As the Red River Colony could no longer be carried on in de
fiance of the proclamation of the Prince Regent, in a spirit of hos
tility to the North West Co.'s interests, there ceased to be any rea
son why that company should oppose colonization, and so "Even
hostility to colonization by the conditions of the new license was
specifically forbidden." (Cf. "The Canadian North West. Its His
tory and Its Troubles. By G. Mercer Adams," Toronto, 1885, p.
148.) With the consolidation of the two companies and the death of
Lord Selkirk, it ceased to be needful to beguile Europeans into mi
grating to a region whose situation was so inaccessible that nothing
the colonists raised could be profitably exported till more than half
a century later, when the invention of Bessemer steel made it pos-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 311
sible to substitute steel for iron in rails and bridge construction,
and so to reduce freight charges on railroads that regions hundreds
of miles from navigable water could be densely populated by com
munities accustomed to the comforts of modern civilized life.
On p. 22 of R. M. Martin's "Hudson's Bay Co. Territories, etc.,"
speaking of the Red River Settlement, he says : "Lord Selkirk died
in 1820, since which period no emigrants have been sent out from
Europe." . . . "The people revel in abundance, but it is all for
home consumption; they have no market for their produce."
The only things obtainable in the country which were valuable
enough in proportion to their weight to pay for exportation were
furs and peltries, in which their "landlord," the Hudson's Bay Co.,
forbade them to trade.
It is not within the scope of this work to discuss whether or not
this consolidation and the means by which it was accomplished was
good for the world at large, or for the best interests of British
America, but there can be no doubt that once accomplished it exer
cised a very beneficial influence over all the region they occupied
on the relations between the Hudson's Bay Co. and the Indians, and
on the relations between the Hudson's Bay Co. in Oregon and the
Americans who went there to explore and to settle. For as to the
Indians : First, they had no longer any temptation to furnish them
liquor to prevent them going to rival traders who would furnish it,
and thus one of the greatest sources of Indian demoralization and
ruin was done away with.
Second, they could prescribe and enforce on their employes uni
form rules for the treatment of the Indians, which treatment in a
few years' time gave them great influence over all the Indians with
whom they came in contact.
How beneficial that influence was we shall speedily see by the
unanimous contemporaneous testimony of the Americans who actu
ally went to Oregon and there encountered the Hudson's Bay Co.'s
officers and the Indians.
As to their relation to the American exploration, occupation and
settlement of Oregon, the chief factors and chief traders who were
sent to the Oregon Country understood perfectly that here was no
question of doubtful rights, as in the case of the claims of the Hud
son's Bay Co. to the ownership in fee simple of all lands draining
into Hudson's Bay, but a matter of certain right, established by
treaty between the United States and Great Britain, that Ameri
cans had exactly the same rights in any part of the Oregon Terri
tory as they had while the treaty continued in force, and their ex
perience of the disastrous conditions during the long contest be
tween the two companies — to whichever one they originally be
longed—would most powerfully dispose them to avoid contentions

312 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
and to live in peace with any Americans who might seek to estab
lish homes for themselves in Oregon.
They also understood perfectly well some years before any
Americans went to Oregon after the treaty of 1818, that "in no
event could the British claim to Oregon extend south of the Co
lumbia," the Hudson's Bay Co. having officially notified Dr. John
McLoughlin so in 1825 (Cf. Copy of a Document, etc., in Tr. O.
P. A., 1880, p. 49, quoted herein (pp. 429-439, infra), and they
equally well knew that by the express terms of the treaties of 1818
and 1827 nothing done by either nation in establishing trading posts
or making settlements while those treaties remained in force could
in any way affect the question of title to Oregon.
As to the disastrous effects of the competition with the North
West Co. on the business of the Hudson's Bay Co (aggravated, it
is true, as to the years 1800-1815 by the Napoleonic wars), it ap
pears from a letter of J. H. Pelly, Governor of the Hudson's Bay
Co., to the Lords of the Committee of the Privy Council for Trade,
dated February 7, 1838, that in the years 1800-1807 their dividends
were only 4% a year, 1808-1813 there were no dividends and 1814-
1821 their dividends were only 4% a year. (Cf. Vol. 9, Report of
Case of Hudson's Bay Co. and P. S. Agl. Co. vs. U. S., being Argu
ment of Caleb Cushing, p. 23.)
When the consolidation was made the capital was doubled, but
how much of this was "water" cannot be told, as the capital was so
largely a matter of stocks of furs and merchandise and transporta
tion facilities — horses, carts, canoes, boats, etc., and weapons and
forts — the inventorying of which gave much opportunity for over-
estimation. On this capital stock of £400,000 dividends of 4% were paid in
1823-24, from 1824 to 1841 half-yearly dividends of 5%, with bon
uses of 10% for the years 1828 and 1832, and an average bonus of
6% annually from 1832 to 1841, making in all an average yearly
profit of about 14%, against a little less than 2%% on an average
from 1800 to 1833, inclusive. (Cf. R. M. Martin's Hudson's Bay
Territories, p. 56.)
By the contract of consolidation of March 26, 1821, five shares,
or one-twentieth of the capital stock, was allotted to the Governor
and company (i. e., of the Hudson's Bay Co.) "in order to carry
into effect certain arrangements to be by them made with the rep
resentatives of the said Earl of Selkirk, deceased," and by the con
tract of September 15, 1824, it was declared that "the said repre
sentatives had been admitted members of the company and proprie
tors of stock in lieu thereof." (Cf. Vol. I., pp. 282 and 296, Rept.
of Cases of Hudson's Bay Co. and P. S. Agl. Co. vs. U. S.)

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 313
In 1835 the Hudson's Bay Co. purchased from the heirs of Sel
kirk all their claims to the 116,000 square miles of land and all their
interest in the improvements at Red River Colony.
"The price, being the amount— £85,000— which it had cost His
Lordship and his executors to found and so far maintain this set
tlement in the wilderness." (Cf. "The Canadian Northwest, by G.
Mercer Adams," p. 173.)
Justin Winsor, in his "Narrative and Critical History of Amer
ica," Vol. 8, p. 61, says: "In 1836 the company had paid to the
heirs of Lord Selkirk for the return of the Red River Territory a
sum which stood on its books as a balance between the cost, the in
terest added and the profits deducted at £84,111."
Before entering on the true relations of the Hudson's Bay Co.
to the American exploration, occupation and settlement of Oregon,
two results of this contest and the books published about it are
worthy of notice.
First — ''In Chapter VI. we have noticed the report of Secretary
of War, John C. Calhoun, on December 5, 1818, recommending the
chartering by Congress of a great fur company, which should have
a monopoly of trading with the Indians in all of our Indian coun
try." There can be no doubt but what these disturbances between the
North West Co., of which fullest knowledge was spread at that
precise time by these books published in the interest of the two
companies, and by newspaper articles, had a great if not a decisive
influence in defeating the project for a United States fur-trading
monopoly. Its opponents could ask no better arguments against it than
to say : "Look across the boundary into Canada and see what whole
sale oppression, robbery and murder of whites and demoralization
of Indians a fur-trading monopoly and the attempt to maintain it
has produced for the past five or six years" — for then the new Hud
son's Bay Co. monopoly was not created.
Second — There is no doubt that a large part of the false charges
made by newspapers and the "Oregon Jingo" politicians, in the
years 1820 to 1846, against the Hudson's Bay Co., of having int
cited the Indians to attack and kill Americans in the Rocky Moun
tains, and of opposing American settlement in Oregon, which were
later revived and amplified by Gray and Spalding and other advo
cates of the Whitman Legend, are examples of that most common
source of historical errors, the transference to the valley of the Co
lumbia by credulous and careless and myth-loving minds of their
vague recollections of what they had read in these various books
about what actually took place in the Red River Valley.

314 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Though these books are now very rare they must have been com
mon enough in the years 1816 to 1840 or 1850, and McLoughlin and
Pambrun, names prominent in them, were also prominent in Ore
gon ; McLoughlin, Chief Factor, in charge of the whole Oregon coun
try, with headquarters at Fort Vancouver, and Pambrun at Walla
Walla, till his accidental death in May, 1841. Let us now examine
briefly the accusations made against the Hudson's Bay Co. by the
leading advocates of the Whitman Legend, and then the indisput
able proofs of their total falsity in the contemporaneous testimony
of the Americans themselves on the subject.
At the request, first of the late Dr. Justin Winsor more than a
score of years ago, when he was librarian of the Boston Public
Library, and later of various other librarians and historians, that
a thorough study should be made of this subject, I have carefully
examined during the past 23 years every diary and contemporary
letter, published and unpublished, to which I could get access, and
every report to the Government, and every newspaper and magazine
article I could find, and every book published by each and every
American — fur trader, ship captain, leader or member of a party
of settlers, missionary, scientist, and private or Government ex
plorer — who went to Oregon at any time before the treaty of 1846
settled the boundary, and who was at any post of the Hudson's Bay
Co. in that territory, and have copied from these documents every
word they wrote therein about their treatment by the Hudson's Bay
Co. officials, at any and all places where they met them.
In the cases of J. L. Meek, and some other pioneers, and of the
leaders of the migrations of 1844 and 1845, and of the first Ameri
can settlers north of the Columbia (in 1845), who did not, as far as
yet appears, leave any contemporaneous written records of their
reception and treatment by the Hudson's Bay Co. (except Joel Pal
mer's Journal hereinbefore quoted), I have studied carefully their
statements and addresses at the meetings of the Oregon Pioneer
Association and their testimony in the cases of the Hudson's Bay
Co. and the Puget Sound Agricultural Co. vs. the United States,
and copied all that related to their own personal reception and
treatment by the Hudson's Bay Co.'s officers and employes at their
various posts in the Oregon Territory, and all that came under their
own observation of the treatment accorded to each and every other
American of honest reputation by the Hudson's Bay Co.'s officers
and employes anywhere in the Oregon Territory.
The whole makes more than 200 pages like this, and when fairly
quoted in connection with its context and with other contemporane
ous documents it is uniformly favorable to the Hudson's Bay Co.,
a result which not a little surprised me, for, while long since satis
fied that the vast preponderance of the contemporaneous evidence

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 315
was on that side, the contrary had been so constantly and vehe
mently asserted by Benton and the other "Oregon Jingoes" in Con
gress from 1825 to 1846, and by Spalding and Gray and M. Eells
and Barrows and Nixon and Craighead and Laurie and Coffin and
Penrose and the other advocates of the Whitman Saved Oregon
Story, that I supposed that there must be somewhere some little
valid evidence in support of their accusations against the company.
Plenty of noisy politicians and reckless newspaper editors in
the States, no one of whom had ever been within from 1,000 to 2,000
miles of any Hudson's Bay Co.'s post in Oregon during all these
years, were "twisting the tail of the British lion" by vehemently
denouncing the Hudson's Bay Co. for committing all kinds of
wrongs upon each and every unfortunate American who entered
Oregon; but not only is there not a single sentence in all the con
temporaneous written and printed records made by those Ameri
cans who actually went to Oregon, which, taken fairly in connec
tion with its context, shows the least opposition on the part of the
Hudson's Bay Co. officers and employes to the exploration of any
or all of Oregon by Americans, or to the establishment of missions
therein, or the making of settlements anywhere in Oregon (except
ing of course on the lands already occupied by the Hudson's Bay
Co., which were not the one-ten-thousandth part of the whole of
the territory), but there is the most abundant evidence that the
Hudson's Bay Co. aided every American of decent character who
sought to explore any part of the Oregon Territory, or to found mis
sions or begin settlements therein.
When any of these Americans attempted to wrest the fur trade
from the Hudson's Bay Co. they were met with vigorous competi
tion, but even this was no fiercer than rival American fur compa
nies waged with each other in regions farther east in the Rocky
Mountain country where the Hudson's Bay Co. never had a trading
post. It is true, also, that a few of these people from whom I quote,
notably Captain Spaulding of the ship Lausanne, which carried out
the great reinforcement of 52 persons to the Methodist Mission in
1840, after speaking in the warmest terms of the unbounded kind
ness that he personally and all his 52 passengers received from the
day the ship entered the Columbia till it left, indulges in severe
strictures on the policy of the Hudson's Bay Co. toward the Indians.
As this, however, relates to matters hundreds of miles from any
place where he was, and of which he could have no opportunity for
personal observation, and as it was squarely contradicted by many
a staunch American fur trader who had had amplest opportunity
for personal observation, it requires no farther comment than to

316 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
state that it was mere unsupported hearsay, unworthy of the slight
est credence.
Similarly Rev. G. Hines, one of this 1840 party, after the Meth
odist Mission was broken up in 1844, returned to the States and in
1850 published in New York his "History of Oregon," and though
repeatedly acknowledging the unbounded kindness with which he
and his missionary associates had been treated by the Hudson's Bay
Co., he indulges in unfavorable criticism of the course of the com
pany in opposing settlement, mixing the conditions of the Red River
country, where the company claimed absolute title to the soil, with
the conditions in Oregon, where they never claimed any other or
greater rights than any American had, and evidently transferring
to the Hudson's Bay Co. the actions of the North West Co. in oppos
ing the establishment of the Red River Colony, as stated herein
before. This evidence from the best sources existing, and most of it from
strictly original sources, and much of it never yet published, is from
five officers of the United States Army and Navy, four of the most
famous American fur traders, ten of the A. B. C. F. M. missionaries,
two independent Protestant missionaries, six Methodist missionar
ies, two scientists, fourteen leaders of parties of American settlers
who were neither fur traders nor missionaries, and two of Wyeth's
1832 party (which was the first party of Americans to migrate to
Oregon for the purpose of founding a permanent settlement there)
— in all 45 persons. While I hope some time to publish the whole
of this evidence with full bibliography of it all, the scope of this
book will only permit quotations of part of it. The reader may
rest assured that these are fair samples of it all, and that the ideas
he gets from these samples are the ideas he would get if he had the
whole of it before him.
But before examining this contemporaneous evidence let us
glance at the accusations made against the Hudson's Bay Co. by the
leading advocates of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story.
From Gray's "Oregon," p. 137: "I am fully aware of the great
number of pensioned satellites that have fawned for Hudson's Bay
Co. pap, and would swear no injustice was ever done to a single
American, giving this hypocritical, double-dealing, smooth-swind
ling, called honorable Hudson's Bay Co. credit for what they never
did, and really for stealing credit for good deeds done by others."
. . . "An overgrown monopoly, in using its influence with Ca
tholicism to destroy Protestantism in Oregon and the American set
tlements, has destroyed itself."
Idem, p. 159. "The Protestant missions were not dependent on
the Hudson's Bay Co. for supplies, any more than the Sandwich
Islands were, or the American Fur Co. were. . . Whitman's

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 317
party brought seeds of all kinds. They had no occasion to ask of
the Hudson's Bay Co. a single seed for farming purposes, a single
thing in establishing their mission, only as they had disposed of
things at the suggestion of McLeod and McKay" (in July, 1836, at
Green River) "as unnecessary to pack them further."
This is what Gray wrote in 1870, but May 20, 1836, Rev. H. H.
Spalding wrote to D. Greene, Secretary, a letter (never yet pub
lished), from Otoe Agency, mouth of the Platte River (more than
900 miles east of Green River), in which is the following:
"We find that we must leave many things we consider almost
indispensable. My classical and theological books will nearly all
be left. We can take no seeds except a few garden seeds."
Gray (p. 383) : "The Hudson's Bay Co., under the guidance of
James Douglas and P. S. Ogden, carried forward their plans and
arrangements by placing men at their posts along the line of the
immigrant route, who were doing all they could by misrepresenta
tion and falsehood to deceive and rob those who were journeying to
this country." (p. 532) : "That this influence" (i. e., of the Hud
son's Bay Co.) was exerted to destroy that mission" (i. e., Whit
man's) there can be no doubt."
Gray's outrageous accusations against Captain Grant we have
shown (in Chapter V. ante) to be directly contrary to the facts.
Rev. H. H. Spalding's Memorial in his pamphlet (published as
Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 37, 41st Cong., 3d Sess., p. 42) : "The said Whit
man massacre, and the long and expensive wars that followed, were
commenced by the above said British monopoly" (i. e., the Hudson's
Bay Co. ) "for the purpose of breaking up the American settlements,
and of regaining the territory, and that they were especially cha
grined against the said Whitman as being the principal agent in
disappointing their schemes."
This accusation is repeated many times with slight variations in
phraseology in this pamphlet.
Barrows' "Oregon" copies, amplifies and reiterates these ac
cusations, and so do Nixon and Coffin, while Craighead, Mowry
and M. Eells, though avoiding direct citation of several of the more
outrageous of these accusations, not only by endorsing Gray and
Spalding as honest and trustworthy, and quoting largely from them,
but also by direct charges against the Hudson's Bay Co., create in
the minds of their readers the belief that that company were guilty
of all the wicked practices against American explorers, settlers and
missionaries of which Gray and Spalding and Barrows have ac
cused them. Thus Mowry (pp. 225-6) on the "Causes of the Whit
man Massacre," instead of quoting the letters of Whitman, Spald
ing and Mrs. Whitman, which show plainly enough the true causes,
says (p. 225) : "The Oregon Presbytery of the Old School Presby-

318 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
terian Church, after a full investigation, adopted a report which
says: 'The causes of the massacre were reducible to two, viz.:
"The purpose of the English Government, or of the Hudson's Bay
Co. to exclude American settlers from the country; and the efforts
of Catholic priests to prevent the introduction of education and
Protestantism, by preventing the settlement of American citizens;
and the efforts which both parties made, operating on the ignorant
and suspicious minds of the savages, led to the butchery in which
twenty-five lives were lost.' " How "full" this "investigation" was is
shown by the fact that there were but 14 lives lost in this massacre
(p. 226). "There is no question but that the Hudson's Bay Co., in
its interests and feelings, was largely antagonistic to the American
movement, and therefore to the work of the Protestant missiona
ries. Some of its officers can hardly be held blameless." But he is
very careful not to name any of those officers, nor to specify any
evidences of this alleged "antagonism to the work of the Protestant
missionaries." Craighead declares (p. 96) : "They" (i. e., the American mis
sionaries) "necessarily encountered the opposition of the Hudson's
Bay Co. in their efforts to improve the material conditions of the
people among whom they labored, and the power of the company
at that time was well nigh irresistible."
Idem (p. 54) : "From this time forward" (i. e., 1838, when the
first Catholic missionaries arrived in Oregon. — W. I. M. ) "there was
also a marked change in the feelings of most of the company toward
the Protestant missionaries."
Idem (p. 55) : "The jealousy and unfriendliness of which we
have spoken was not exhibited toward the Protestant missionaries
alone, but toward all persons wishing to settle in and improve the
country, and especially to Americans."
Let us see now how these accusations appear in view of all the
contemporaneous testimony that can be found of American mis
sionaries, settlers, explorers, fur traders, scientists and United
States military and naval officers who actually went to Oregon.
The first Americans who have left any record of their experience
at the Hudson's Bay Co.'s posts in Oregon are two of the most
famous of the fur traders, Joshua Pilcher, who in 1827 set out from
St. Louis, followed the Platte to the Rocky Mountains, crossed at
the South Pass, explored what is now Eastern Idaho and Western
Montana, and spent the winter of 1828-9 in the Flathead Valley,
where he met a Hudson's Bay Co. trader, who invited him to Fort
Colvile, their most important post on the Upper Columbia. Here
he was most kindly received and hospitably entertained, and invited
to join their annual east-bound express, which he did, and went with
them up the Columbia and across the mountains and down the Sas-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 319
katchewan to the Red River Settlement, and thence across the prai
ries to the Missouri River, and so back to St. Louis in June, 1830.
Jedediah Smith led a party of eighteen fur traders to and through
California and then turned north, and in Oregon was attacked in
August, 1828, by the Rogue River Indians, and all but Smith and
three other men were killed and all the furs stolen.
The survivors soon after reached Fort Vancouver, where they
were welcomed and freely entertained, and Dr. McLoughlin at once
fitted out a strong party, who proceeded to the scene of the massacre
and recovered the greater part of the furs, which he afterward pur
chased from Mr. Smith on terms satisfactory to him.
Nothing more chivalrous and courteous is recorded in the annals
of commerce than the reception and treatment of these American
rivals in the fur trade by the Hudson's Bay Co., and in their letters
to the Secretary of War, written in the autumn of 1830, and pub
lished with other documents relating to the fur trade and the ex
ploration of the Rocky Mountain and Pacific Coast regions, in Sen.
Ex. Doc. 39, 21st Cong., 2d Sess. (of which 1,500 extra copies were
ordered to be printed January 26, 1831), both Pilcher and Smith,
while pointing out to the Government the legislation needful to
enable the American fur traders to compete on something like equal
terms with the Hudson's Bay Co., and urging the abrogation of the
treaty of 1827, and the assertion of our title to Oregon, did not for
get to make grateful mention of their obligations to the Hudson's
Bay Co. for most kind and hospitable treatment, as follows :
From Pilcher's letter to the Secretary of War.
"I remained 20 days at Fort Colvile, received the most kind and
hospitable treatment from the gentlemen of the post; and having
received from them an offer of the protection of their annual express
packet along the line of their posts and establishments, across the
continent to Lake Winnipic, I determined to accept it, and relin
quished the intention of going down the Columbia to its mouth.
(P. 10) I set out from Fort Colvile the 21st of September, 1829, in
company with six men of the post carrying annual express or packet
across the continent.
"Our route was up the main river Columbia; our conveyance a
batteau of four or five tons. In this batteau we ascended the river
about 300 miles, when the river divides into three forks, the main
one being still navigable to its head, which issues from a lake in the
Rocky Mountains. We arived at the Boat Encampment the 4th of
October and remained there till the 2nd of November, waiting for
the arrival of a party from Hudson's Bay. They arrived at the end
of this time, and by them I had the happiness to hear from the
United States. The news had of course to be somewhat old, as they

320 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
brought it from Hudson's Bay. One item of intelligence was the
election of President Jackson, which had taken place just about one
year before; and here I met the master ship carpenter of whom I
have spoken going on to Fort Vancouver." November 4th they set
out on horseback to cross the continental divide, the summit of
which they reached in three days. (p. 11) "Where two small ponds
within a few yards of each other send their waters in opposite di
rections, forming the head sources of the Athabasca and the mid
dle fork of the Columbia." (p. 12) "We were still on foot and on
snowshoes; but my fatigue and labor in traveling were greatly les
sened by a most valuable present, kindly made me by Mr. Round"
(the Hudson's Bay agent in charge of Edmonton House) "of a
carrole and three good dogs to draw it, which carried my baggage
always and myself often." . . . "My company from Carlton
House was two Indians, trained up to the service of the Company
and well fitted for the part they had to act, vigilant, active, faithful,
and full of resources for conquering the difficulties of the way. One
of them had brought the express from York Factory on Hudson's
Bay, about 1,000 miles on foot, on a pair of snowshoes; and they
were now carrying the express back. This express consisted not
only of letters, but of all the accounts of the Company collected
from every post, and transmitted annually along the whole line,
from the mouth of the Columbia to Hudson's Bay, and thence to
the partners in England. With these valuable dispatches these In
dians were intrusted, and everything safely and expeditiously con
ducted." He was hospitably entertained by Governor McKenzie at Red
River Settlement for three days; left there March 29th, and trav
eled across the country to the Mandan Indian villages, where he
arrived April 22, 1830, and considered his journey terminated there,
though he was still 1,600 miles from St Louis, (p. 13) "I had
been seven months getting from Fort Colvile to the Mandans, hav
ing been detained three and a half months on the route, and having
traveled near 2,500 miles between these two points during the win
ter months, and chiefly on snowshoes." . . . "From the gentle
men of the Hudson's Bay Co. I experienced everywhere the most
kind and hospitable treatment, for which my thanks and gratitude
are eminently due and cordially rendered."
(P. 17) "Both the Hudson's Bay Co. and citizens of the United
States engage in trapping, and each suffers occasionally from the
attacks of the Indians. And here I take occasion as an act of jus
tice to the gentlemen of the Hudson's Bay Co. to say that I saw
nothing to justify the opinion that they excited the Indians to kill
and rob our citizens." (Cf. Sen. Ex. Doc. 39, pp. 9-17, also copy of
a document found among the papers of Dr. John McLoughlin in

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 321
Transcript Oregon Pioneer Association, 1880, pp. 46-55, and herein
quoted (pp. 429-439, infra), as no one can understand the beginning
of settlement in Oregon without reading that document carefully.)
Mr. Jedediah S. Smith wrote, at the end of the letter signed by
himself and his two partners, David E. Jackson and W. L. Sublette,
as follows : "One of the undersigned, to-wit, Jedediah S. Smith, in
his excursions west of the mountains arrived at the post of the Hud
son's Bay Co. called Fort Vancouver, near the mouth of the Mult
nomah River.
"He arrived there in August, 1828, and left the 12th of March,
1829, and made observations which he deems it material to com
municate to the Government. . . The crop of 1828 was 700 bush
els of wheat. The grain full and plump and making good flour;
fourteen acres of corn, the same number of acres of peas, eight acres
of oats, four or five acres of barley and fine garden, some small apple
trees and grapevines. The ensuing spring eighty bushels of seed
wheat were sown; about 200 head of cattle, fifty- two horses and
breeding mares, 300 head of hogs, fourteen goats, the usual domes
tic fowls. They have mechanics of various kinds, to-wit, black
smiths, gunsmiths, carpenters, coopers, tinner and baker, a good
saw mill on the bank of the river five miles above, a grist mill
worked by hand, but intended to work by water." . . . "Their
(i. e., the Hudson's Bay Co.'s) influence over the Indians is now
decisive. Of this the Americans have constant and striking proofs,
in the preference which they give to the British in every particular.
"In saying this, it is an act of justice to say also that the treat
ment received by Mr. Smith at Fort Vancouver was kind and hos
pitable, that personally he owes thanks to Governor Simpson and
the gentlemen of the Hudson's Bay Co. for the hospitable entertain
ment he received from them, and for the efficient and successful aid
which they gave him in recovering from the Umpquah Indians a
quantity of fur and many horses of which these Indians had robbed
him in 1828. As to the injury which must happen to the United
States from the British getting control of all the Indians beyond
the mountains, building and repairing ships in the tidewaters of
the Columbia, and having a station there for privateers and vessels
of war, is too obvious to need a recapitulation.
"The object of this communication being to state facts to the
Government, and to show the facility of crossing the continent to
the great falls of the Columbia with wagons, the ease of supporting
any number of men by driving cattle to supply them where there
was no buffalo, and also to show the true nature of the British es
tablishments on the Columbia, and the unequal operation of the
convention of 1818.

322 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"These facts being communicated to the Government, they con
sider that they have complied with their duty, and rendered an ac
ceptable service to the administration ; and respectfully request you,
sir, to lay it before President Jackson."
Capt. B. L. E. Bonneville, of the United States Army, was the
next American who led a fur-trading party into the Oregon country
(1832-35) and left any record of his reception and treatment there
by the officers of the Hudson's Bay Co. with whom he came in
contact. It is very brief, as follows : "Capt. Bonneville and his comrades
experienced a polite reception from Mr. Pambrune, the superin
tendent; for, however hostile the members of the British company
may be to the enterprises of American traders, they have always
manifested great courtesy and hospitality to the traders them
selves." . . . "As he stood in need of some supplies for his
journey, he applied to purchase them from Mr. Pambrune; but soon
found the difference between being treated as a guest or as a rival
trader. The worthy superintendent, who had extended to him all
the genial rites of hospitality, now suddenly assumed a withered up
aspect and demeanor, and observed that, however he might feel dis
posed to serve him personally, he felt bound by his duty to the Hud
son's Bay Co. to do nothing which should facilitate or encourage
the visits of other traders among the Indians in that part of the
country." (Cf. Irving's Bonneville, Chapter XXXIV.)
No sensible man would think of complaining because his com
petitors in business were unwilling to assist him with supplies to
be used in trade which they desired to keep for themselves, and in
Bonneville's unpublished dispatches in the War Department (which
I have twice gone over carefully) there is not a word of censure of
the Hudson's Bay Co., though he points out in his dispatch dated
Crow Country, July 29, 1833, the advantages the Hudson's Bay Co.
have over the Americans by having cheaper goods, etc., and recom
mends our Government to occupy Oregon, recommending "a full
company" for the purpose, and saying: "Five men there would be
as safe as a hundred, either from the Indians, who are extremely
peaceable and honest, or from the establishments of the Hudson's
Bay Co., who are themselves too much exposed by their numerous
small posts ever to offer the least violence to the smallest force."
Nathaniel J. Wyeth, in 1832, led out a small party of settlers to
Oregon, of whom eleven arrived at Vancouver and eight remained in
the country, and were very kindly received, and those who wished
to settle were helped by the loan of tools, seeds, etc., and began the
permanent American settlement of Oregon.
One member of this party, John Ball, a graduate of Dartsmouth,
was promptly hired by the Hudson's Bay Co. to teach their school

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 323
at Vancouver, and when at the end of ten weeks he resigned, an
other member of it, Solomon H. Smith, was employed, and remained
in charge of it for two years, and on the expiration of his term Mr.
Cyrus Shepard, one of the laymen who went out with the Lees in
1834 to found the Methodist Mission, was employed for the winter
of 1834-5, so that for some two and a half years this, the first school
in the Oregon country, though established and maintained entirely
by the Hudson's Bay Co., was taught by Americans.
"Silliman's Journal" (then a widely circulated periodical) pub
lished in its December, 1833, number, an article by Prof. Eaton, of
Rensselaer School, Troy, N. Y., on the "Geology and Meteorology
of the Rocky Mountains," in which he acknowledges his obligations
to John Ball for very valuable observations, and says his last let
ter was dated Fort Vancouver, March 3, 1833, and says: "Mc
Loughlin raised 1,200 bushels of wheat at Vancouver in 1832, and
a great quantity of barley, peas, potatoes, etc." . . . "He lent
Mr. Ball oxen, plough, cows, axes, etc., and he commenced plough
ing in January in latitude 46 deg. The vegetables of the preceding
season were still standing in gardens untouched by frost. New
grass had sprung up sufficiently for excellent pasture."
Idem (January, 1834) In an article on the fur trade: "The
Hudson's Bay Co. are humane and attentive to settlers, encouraging
them both with assistance and protection, but they are extremely
jealous of any interference or participation in the fur trade."
Idem (July, 1835), is letter from John Ball, assigning as the
only reason why he had returned to the States that he had no wish
to follow the customs of the country, and "become identified with
the natives" (i. e., marry a squaw).
In 1833 Wyeth returned to the States and organized "the Co
lumbia Fishing and Trading Co.," and on April 28, 1834, set out
from Independence, Mo., for Oregon with his second party, consist
ing of "between fifty and sixty men" ("Lee and Frost's Ten Years in
Oregon," p. 114), conveying the Methodist missionary party and the
scientists, J. K. Townsend and Thomas Nuttall.
He took a large bill of Indian goods, not for the purpose of trade
with the Indians, but to deliver to the Rocky Mountain Fur Co., but
that company refusing to keep their contract with him, he was
obliged to establish a post and trade them to the Indians. (Cf. his
letter to his uncle, Leonard Jarvis, from Ham's Fork of the Colo
rado, June 21, 1834, as follows) : "The companies here have not
complied with their contracts with me, and in consequence I am
obliged to make a fort on Lewis River to dispose of the goods I
have with me." (Cf. "The Correspondence and Journals of Nathan
iel J. Wyeth," p. 135; also pp. 134, 137, 139.)

324 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
This fort he built between July 15 and August 6, 1834, and his
journal for August 6, 1834, reads: "Having done as much as was
requisite for safety to the fort and drank a bale of liquor, and
named it Fort Hall in honor of the oldest partner of our concern,
we left it." (Idem, p. 227) Two years later he sold this to the
Hudson's Bay Co. and returned to Cambridge, Mass., and acquired a
competency in the ice business.
The advocates of the Whitman Legend — following W. H. Gray —
have, with one voice, accused the Hudson's Bay Co. of oppressing
Wyeth and driving him out of the business by unfair means, and
conveyed the impression that he would have continued in the busi
ness if he had been treated fairly; but there has always been
abundant proof, though not easily accessible, that these accusations
were false, and that lack of capital and of willingness on the part
of his partners in the east (mostly in and about Boston, who fur
nished nearly all the capital) to hold on long enough for a paying
business to be built up were the causes of his abandoning Oregon.
In 1899 the Oregon Historical Society printed, as Vol. I. of the
"Sources of Oregon History," "The Correspondence and Journals of
Nathaniel J. Wyeth" (p. 262 with maps), which furnishes over
whelming proof that it was caused by the above stated reasons, to
gether with sundry misfortunes for which no mortal was respon
sible, viz., the delay of his brig, May Dacre (sent round Cape Horn,
which was struck by lightning and obliged to put into Valparaiso
for three months for repairs, and so did not arrive in the Columbia
till September, 1834, after the salmon season was entirely over), and
an epidemic of malarious disease which carried off thirteen of his
party, as stated in his letters as follows:
Correspondence (pp. 146-7), Wyeth to his uncle, Leonard Jarvis.
"Columbia River, October 6, 1834. ... On the 14th ulto.
met the brig, then just arrived and coming up the river to find me.
She was struck by lightning on the way out, which occasioned a de
lay of about three months, in consequence of which our fishing sea
son was entirely lost."
Wyeth to Weld (pp. 148-9) : "Wappatoo Island, April 3, 1835.
. . . I have had a severe winter of it. All my men have been
sick, except myself and one man, and nothing but pure obstinacy
has kept me from being hauled up. This Wappatoo Island which I
have selected for our establishment is about fifteen miles long and
about an average of three wide. On one side runs the Columbia, on
the other the Multnomah. It consists of woodlands and prairie and
on it there is considerable deer and those who could spare time to
hunt could live well, but a mortality has carried off to a man its
inhabitants and there is nothing to attest that they ever existed ex
cept their decaying houses, their graves and their unburied bones,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 325
of which there are heaps. So you see, as the righteous people of
New England say, Providence has made room for me, and without
doing them more injury than I should if I had made room for my
self, viz., by killing them off."
Wyeth to F. Tudor (pp. 149-50) : "Fort William, September 6,
1835. . . . This business has not been successful in any of its
branches, therefore it will terminate soon. The business I am in
must be closed ; not that it might not be made a good one, but be
cause those who are now engaged in it are not the men to make it
so. The smallest loss makes them 'fly the handle,' and such can
rarely succeed in a new business."
Wyeth to Brown (pp. 150-51) : "Fort William, September 6,
1835. . . . We this year put up about half a cargo of salmon,
half a barrel of which you will find marked with your name; also
one for my father, one for my wife, for Leond Jarvis, Chas. Wyeth,
Leond I. Wyeth, N. J. Wyeth and Frederic Tudor. Any expense
please charge to me."
Wyeth to Leo. Jarvis (pp. 151-2) : "Columbia River, September
20, 1835. . . . We have had a bad season for salmon. About
half of a cargo only obtained. The salmon part of the business will
never do. I have sent half a barrel to you, which you will receive
through Mr. Brown. I am now a little better from a severe attack
of bilious fever. I did not expect to recover, and am still a wreck.
Our sick list has been this summer usually about one-third the whole
number, and the rest much frightened. Thirteen deaths have oc
curred, besides some in the interior killed by the Indians. Some
property has been lost also by Indians."
Wyeth to Brother Charles (pp. 152-3) : "Columbia River, Sep
tember 22, 1835. . . . Our salmon fishing has not succeeded.
Half a cargo only obtained. Our people are sick and dying off like
rotten sheep of bilious disorders."
Wyeth to Brother Leonard (p. 153) : "Columbia River, Septem
ber 22, 1835. . . . Salmon half a cargo ; one- third of our people
on the sick list continually; seventeen dead to this date is the
amount of the summer. I am but just alive after having been so
bad as to think of writing up my last letters."
Wyeth to his wife (p. 154) : "Columbia River, September 22,
1835. . . . The season has been very sickly. We have lost by
drowning and disease and warfare seventeen persons to this date,
and fourteen now sick."
Unless, therefore, Gray and Spalding, Barrows, Craighead, M.
Eells, Coffin, Mowry, Nixon, Penrose, Geo. Ludington Weed et al.
can show that the Hudson's Bay Co. controlled the lightning in the
Southern Pacific, the course of the salmon in the Northern Pacific,
the malaria along the Columbia River Valley, the actions of the

326 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Rocky Mountain Fur Co. in breaking their contract with Wyeth in
the Green River Valley, about 340 miles east of any fort they then
possessed, and the minds of the eastern partners of Wyeth, all their
accusations against that company of having driven Wyeth out of
Oregon are proven false.
That Wyeth had not the least complaint to make of his treatment
has been manifest to any one who has been content to look up evi
dence, instead of writing "history" from his imagination or his
prejudices, since 1839, when, in "Cushing's Supplemental Report"
(No. 101, Reports of Corns., H. of R., 25th Cong., 3d Sess., Vol. I.),
his "Memoir" was printed, from which the following extract shows
clearly why the Hudson's Bay Co. held the trade of the Indians, and
states clearly how he and all other Americans were received at the
Hudson's Bay Co.'s posts.
(P. 21) "Experience has satisfied me that the entire weight of
this company will be made to bear on any trader who shall attempt
to prosecute his business within its reach; in proof of which is the
establishment of the post at the mouth of the Big Wood River (i. e.,
Fort Boise), which was done immediately after Fort Hall was built;
and the fact that a party was kept in the vicinity of Fort Hall, with
an especial view to injure its trade, the whole time that it remained
in the hands of its projectors. There has never been any successful
trade in this country by the Americans, and it is only by trapping
that they have been able to make any use of it; and in this they
are much annoyed by the English traders, who follow them with
goods and do not scruple to trade furs from hired men, who they
are well aware do not own them.
"I do not wish to charge this dishonest practice to them alone,
nor do I know that they began it, for it is common to both parties
against the other, and also between the different parties of the
Americans, but it results in the complete destruction of the Ameri
can trade and business in the country. No sooner does (p. 21) an
American concern start in these regions than one of these trading
parties is put in motion, headed by the clerk of the company, whose
zeal is stimulated by the prospect of an election to a partnership in
it, fitted out with the best assorted goods from their ample stores
and men who have been long in the service of the company and whose
wages of many years are in its hands as security for their fidelity.
Under these circumstances we come in contact. If there are furs
in the hands of the Indians their superior assortment of goods will
obtain them. The trappers who catch the furs are mainly fitted out
on credit by the companies, and there are too many of them who do
not scruple to avail of an opportunity to sell their peltries for new
supplies of luxuries or of finery, rather than to pay their debts. In
this way the American companies are broken up."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 327
(P. 21) "In their personal intercourse with Americans who come
into the country (p. 22) they are uniformly hospitable and kind.
The circumstances under which we meet them are mortifying in the
extreme, making us too often but the recipients of the bounty of
others instead of occupants to administer it, as should be the case.
No one who has visited their posts, I presume, can say anything in
dispraise of his reception, and for myself, setting matters of trade
aside, I have received the most kind and considerate attention from
them." Wyeth's "Correspondence and Journals" fully confirm this, as
witness the following :
Letter LXVI., probably to F. Tudor, undated (pp. 52-3) . . .
"When I arrived at the British posts my men, what were then left,
being determined to wander no more, I was left to myself. In this
dilemma I was invited by Dr. J. McGlaucland (McLoughlin) (Gov
ernor in behalf of the Hudson's Bay Co. in this country) to make
this post my habitation until I returned. I have been treated in the
most hospitable and kind manner by all the gentlemen of this coun
try." Letter LXIX., Wyeth to Brother Leonard: "Fort Vancouver,
January 16, 1833 (p. 54). . . This letter will reach you by the
favor of the Hudson's Bay Co., to whose agents in this quarter I
am much indebted for assistance and information."
Letter LXX., Wyeth to Brother Charles : "Fort Vancouver, Jan
uary 16, 1833 (p. 55). . . This will be short and I hope sweet. It
comes to you by the politeness of the Hudson's Bay Co. I have re
ceived all manner of attention and assistance rendered in such a
way as to make it palatable."
Letter LXXIL, Wyeth to (fragment undated, and no address) :
(P. 56) . . . "I cannot close this without expressing to you how
much I am indebted to Mr. Pambrun, Mr. Herron and Mr. Herma-
tinger (Ermatinger) for the attention they have shown me."
Letter LXXXIIL, Wyeth to McLoughlin : "Plain of the Three
Buttes, July 5, 1833 (p. 68).
"Dear Sir : Having arrived at the camp of Mr. Bonneville I take
the liberty of writing you by this last opportunity to express how
much I am under obligation to Mr. Hermatinger for the polite and
agreeable manner in which he has dispensed your hospitality to me
during the whole route.
"I am here in a direct train for the States, and cannot without
some extraordinary accident fail of reaching home in October next.
Should you visit the States I would feel myself highly honored by a
visit or any intercourse which might be agreeable to you, for which

328 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
purpose I have enclosed my direction. Should any of your friends
visit the States a letter would procure them any attention which
may be in my power. It will be a pleasure to execute any business
commands with which you may entrust me. Models of American
agricultural implements, seeds and other matters connected with
your tastes or business.
"Respectfully, your obedient servant,
"NATHL. J. WYETH."
"To Doctor McLaughland (McLoughlin), Fort Vancouver."
Letter LXXIX., Wyeth to Mess. Editors: "Cambridge, Novem
ber 11, 1833 (p. 79). Having while on a recent visit to the Colum
bia received much attention and kindness from the English traders
there, I deem it a duty to express my gratitude for the same, more
especially as I am frequently asked the question if I was ever mo
lested by them. By all their acts toward myself I am fully con
vinced that all persons who from any cause may come into contact
with them will receive honorable and gentlemanly treatment. Among
the many to whom I am under obligation I wish to name Chief
Factors John McLaughlin and Finlinson (Finlayson), Chief Trader
Francis Heron, Mr. Francis Ermatinger and Mr. Pambrun. Among
the American traders I have received much attention from Mr. Mc
Kenzie and Mr. Laidlow of the American Fur Co. and Mr. Wm. L.
Sublette. To all the above gentlemen I tender my thanks.
"Your obedient servant,
"NATHL. J. WYETH."
Letter CCXXIIL, Wyeth to Ermatinger: "Bear River, July 5,
1834 (p. 140). Your esteemed favor of the 12th ulto. reached me
by the politeness of Mr. Newell on Ham's Fork of Green River.
Mr. N. also informed me of the particulars of the battle with the
Blackfeet. It must have been a capital mixture of wine and gun
powder. I am happy to hear that you had some success last year,
but am afraid that you will do but little this season.
"I am quite happy to hear that the doctor remains at Vancouver.
I shall soon have the pleasure of seeing him."
Turning now to his journal (p. 173) : "October 14, 1832. . .
Arrived at Fort Walla Walla about 5 o'clock in the evening. I was
received in the most hospitable and gentlemanly manner by Pean-
bron (Pambrun), the agent for this post. The fort is of no strength,
merely sufficient to frighten Indians (pp. 176-7). October 29, 1832.
Started at 10 o'clock and arrived at the fort of Vancouver at 12,
four miles. Here I was received with the utmost kindness and
hospitality by Dr. McLauchland (McLoughlin), the acting Governor
of the place. I find Dr. McLauchland a fine old gentleman, truly

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 329
philanthropic in his ideas. He is doing much good by introducing
fruits into this country, which will much facilitate the progress of
its settlement (Indian corn 3,000 bushels). The gentlemen of this
company do much credit to their country and concern by their edu
cation, deportment and talents. I find myself involved in much
difficulty on account of my men, some of whom wish to leave me,
and whom the company do not wish to engage nor to have them in
the country without being attached to some company able to pro
tect them, alleging that if any of them are killed they will be obliged
to avenge it at any expense of money and amicable relations with the
Indians. And it is disagreeable for me to have men who wish to
leave me. The company seem disposed to render me all the assist
ance they can. They live well at these posts. They have 200 acres
of land under cultivation ; the land is of the finest quality."
(P. 177) "November 6, 1833. I must here mention the very
kind, gentlemanly conduct of Mr. Jas. Bernie, superintendent of
Port George, who assisted me to a boat and pilot for the outer har
bor and acted the part of host to perfection ;" . . . (and then,
without changing date) "I am now afloat on the great sea of life
without stay or support, but in good hands, i. e., myself and Provi
dence and a few of the Hudson's Bay Co., who are perfect gentle
men." (P. 181) "31st to the 3d of February we had warm and wet
weather. On the 3d at 10 o'clock we started for Walla Walla. I
had with me two men and am in company with Mr. Ermatinger of
the Hudson's Bay Co., who has in charge three boats with 120
pieces of goods and twenty-nine men. I parted with feelings of sor
row from the gentlemen of Fort Vancouver. Their unremitted kind
ness to me while there much endeared them to me, more so than it
would seem possible during so short a time. Dr. McGlaucland (Mc
Loughlin), the Governor of the place, is a man distinguished as
much for his kindness and humanity as his good sense and informa
tion, and to whom I am so much indebted as that he will never be
forgotten by me."
(P. 232) "September 2, 1834. Then down the Walla Walla
River west by north ten miles to Fort Walla Walla, where I found
Mr. Pambrun, who did the honors of the fort in his usual hand
some style."
(P. 233) "September 14, 1834. At 12 o'clock arrived at Fort
Vancouver, where I found Dr. McLaughlin in charge, who received
us in his usual manner. He has here power, and uses it as a man
should to make those about him and those who come in contact with
him comfortable and happy."
(P. 250) "February 12, 1835. In the morning made to Van
couver and found there a polite reception and to my great astonish-

330 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
ment Mr. Hall J. Kelley. He came in company with Mr. Young
from Monte El Rey (i. e., Monterey, Cal.) It is said stole between
them a bunch of horses. Kelley is not received at the fort on this
account as a gentleman. A house is given him and food sent him
from the Governor's table, but he is not suffered to mess here."
(P. 251) "February 23, 1835. I arrived at Vancouver in the
morning 23d February and met a reception such as one loves to
find in such a country as this."
Finally in a letter to J. G. Palfrey, M. C. from Massachusetts,
dated Cambridge, December 13, 1847 (i. e., eighteen months after
the treaty fixing the boundary at 49 degrees), urging that his claims
to Fort William and Wappatoo Island should be recognized in the
bill for organizing Oregon Territory, Wyeth enclosed a long state
ment of his work in beginning the American settlement of Oregon
by his two expeditions thither.
In this statement there is not one word of criticism of the Hud
son's Bay Co., nor the least intimation that it was in any way re
sponsible for his abandoning his Oregon business; but (Idem, p.
255) there is the following straightforward statement of why he
abandoned the country, while its concluding sentence shows the
friendly relations subsisting between him and Dr. McLoughlin.
"During the winter of 1836 I resided at my post of Fort Hall,
and in the spring of that year returned to Fort William of Wap
patoo Island, whence I carried more supplies to Fort Hall, arriving
there the 18th of June, and on the 25th left for the United States
by way of Taos and the Arkansas River and arrived home early in
the autumn of 1836. The commercial distress of that time pre
cluded the further prosecution of our enterprise, that so far had
yielded little but misfortunes. It remained only to close the active
business, which was done by paying every debt, and returning every
man who desired to the place whence he was taken, and disposing
of the property to the best advantage. All the property in the in
terior, including Fort Hall, was sold, it being necessary in order to
retain that post to keep up a garrison for its defense against the
Indians and to forward annual supplies to it, an operation at that
time beyond our means. Fort William at Wappatoo Island, requir
ing nothing of that kind, was retained, and the gentleman then in
charge of it, Mr. C. M. Walker, was directed to lease it to some
trusty person for fifteen years unless sooner reclaimed. Nothing
having been heard from Mr. Walker for a long time, I sent a request
to John McLaughlin Esq. for the same purpose, and also to have
the island entered in my name at the land office established by the
provisional government."
As Wyeth was the only American who ever founded a fur trad
ing post in the Oregon Territory between 1813 and 1846 (for Fort

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 331
Bridger was south of 42 degrees and so in Mexican Territory), it
has seemed to me advisable to treat of Mr. Wyeth's experience very
fully, since the advocates of the Whitman Legend have so persist
ently held him up to view as the chief victim of the Hudson's Bay
Co.'s oppression of American fur traders.
The first American missionaries to Oregon were the Methodists,
Revs. Jason and Daniel Lee, and Cyrus Shepard, P. L. Edwards
and C. M. Walker, laymen, who went overland in N. J. Wyeth's
1834 party.
September 14, 1834, Rev. J. Lee, narrating their arrival at Fort
Vancouver, wrote: "When we landed the Governor (i. e., Dr.
McLoughlin) and gentlemen of the fort were on shore awaiting our
arrival, and received us and conducted us to the fort. The polite
attentions we received from these gentlemen caused us almost to
think we were in our own native land." (New York Christian Advo
cate and Zion's Herald, October 30, 1835.)
(Idem, November 13, 1835.) In a letter from Cyrus Shepard,
dated Fort Vancouver, January 16, 1835. "On our arrival we were
received in the most friendly manner by the Governor and gentle
men of the fort, who till the present time have remained sincere
friends to us and to the cause in which we are engaged."
(Idem, September 2, 1836.) In a letter from Jason Lee, dated
Mission House, Willamette River, March 14, 1836, he copies a very
friendly letter from Dr. McLoughlin, enclosing a subscription list
of the gentlemen of the company at Fort Vancouver, aggregating
£26, for the use of this American Methodist Mission.
No one of these men was a Methodist, so that there was no
church obligation impelling them to subscribe.
McLoughlin was a Catholic, and he headed the list with £6, and
the rest were either Presbyterians, Episcopalians or Catholics.
Rev. D. Lee and Rev. J. H. Frost (who went out with the great
reinforcement to this mission in 1840) published in 1844, in New
York, a book entitled "Ten Years in Oregon," and there are numer
ous passages in it which show that this kind treatment of these
Methodist missionaries continued during the whole nine years of
Mr. Lee's stay in Oregon.
(P. 225) Lee and Frost. As to the reception of the great re
inforcement to the Methodist Mission, consisting of fifty-two per
sons, which arrived at Fort Vancouver June 1, 1840 :
"Dr. McLoughlin came on board, and was introduced to the mis
sion family, and gave them a very kind invitation to partake of the
hospitalities of the fort. . . On the following day all were com
fortably roomed in the fort, and nothing was lacking on the part

332 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
of the ladies and gentlemen of the establishment to render our so
journ comfortable and pleasant."
(Idem, p. 265) On August 13, 1843, when ready to embark for
the United States, Mr. Lee writes this of their reception and treat
ment by Mr. Birnie, in charge of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s post at
Fort George (or Astoria) : "While we were here the kind hospi
talities of Mr. James Birnie's house were very generously served up
for our entertainment."
For other passages in this book stating similar acts of kindness
by Mr. Pambrun at Walla Walla, Dr. McLoughlin at Vancouver and
Mr. Birnie at Astoria and of the captain of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s
ship Cadboro, Cf. pp. 123, 126, 134, 213, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226,
281, 327.
Another of these Methodist missionaries who was one of the
great reinforcement in 1840 was Rev. Gustavus Hines, who re
mained till after the mission was broken up in 1844, and in 1851
he published a "History of Oregon" in New York. It contains
abundance of statements of the great kindness of the Hudson's Bay
Co.'s officers through all those years.
Four brief extracts must suffice for Hines.
(P. 90) Relating the arrival of the great reinforcement of fifty-
two persons in the ship Lausanne, on June 1, 1840, at Fort Van
couver, Mr. Hines says: "Dr. John McLoughlin, the superintend
ent of the company's affairs — though a Catholic* himself — received
us with much cordiality, and extended to us the hospitalities of the
place so long as we should find it convenient to remain." And the
whole fifty-two of them did remain without any charge for their
entertainment till they were sent to their several destinations.
(Idem, p. 120) "December 8, 1840. Arrived at Vancouver at 2
p. m. I was received with all that courtesy and hospitality which
usually characterize the gentlemen of the Hudson's Bay Co."
(Idem, p. 245) Reception at Fort Vancouver, August 29, 1845.
This was after the election of James K. Polk to the Presidency on
the "fifty-four, forty or fight" platform, when, if ever, it might be
* Many erroneous statements have been made about Dr. McLoughlin's
religious convictions and affiliations. In 1878 there were published in Port
land, Ore., in the Catholic Sentinel, "Historical Sketches of the Catholic
Church in Oregon During the Past Forty Years" (1838-1878). Their author
was the first Archbishop of Oregon, Rev. Francis Norbert Blanchet, D. D.
In giving a sketch of Dr. John McLoughlin's life, Father Blanchet said: "Dr.
McLoughlin was the arbiter to whom both whites and Indians looked for the
settlement of their differences and the friend from whom they sought relief
in all their difficulties. His ashes rest beneath the shadow of the Cathedral
cross of Oregon City, where he died in April, 1857. He was originally a
member of the Anglican church, but was converted by Archbishop Blanchet in
1842, and was ever afterwards a most exemplary Catholic. May his soul rest
in peace." This should be accepted as conclusive. — C. B. Bagley.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 333
supposed the Hudson's Bay Co. would be extremely antagonistic to
all Americans, but this is Mr. Hines' report:
"Next morning went up to the fort to complete our prepara
tions for sea; were very kindly received by James Douglas, Esq.,
who, by his friendly attentions and acts of benevolence, paved the
way to render our voyage much more agreeable than it otherwise
would have been."
(Idem, p. 389) "Few persons, whether coming by land or by
sea, have ever visited Vancouver without being received with a hos
pitality which knew no bounds, until every want of the traveler
was supplied. Innumerable have been the favors conferred by them
upon the American missionaries, and their assistance has been
rendered at times when great inconvenience and even suffering
would have resulted from neglect."
(Idem, p. 149) April 28, 1843. Mr. Hines gives the following
account of his reception at Fort Vancouver, on the way to the up
per Columbia with Dr. E. White (U. S. sub-Indian Agent for the
Oregon Indians, and organizer of the first migration from the
States to Oregon, that of 1842) :
"Called on Dr. McLoughlin for goods, provisions, powder, balls,
etc., for our accommodation on our voyage up the Columbia, and
though he was greatly surprised that, under the circumstances, we
should think of going among those excited Indians, yet he ordered
his clerks to let us have whatever we wanted. However, we found
it rather squally at the fort, not so much on account of our going
among the Indians of the interior, as in consequence of a certain
memorial having been sent to the United States Congress implicat
ing the conduct of Dr. McLoughlin and the Hudson's Bay Co., and
bearing the signatures of seventy Americans. I inquired of the
doctor if he had refused to grant supplies to those Americans who
had signed that document; he replied that he had not, but that the
authors of the memorial need expect no more favors from him. Not
being one of the authors, but merely a signer of the petition, I did
not come under the ban of the company; consequently I obtained
my outfit for the expedition, though at first there were strong indi
cations that I would be refused. We remained at the fort over night
and part of the next day, and after a close conversation with the
gentleman in command" (i. e., McLoughlin) "were treated with
great courtesy."
This memorial to Congress we will consider later.
This expedition was in connection with certain reports of In
dian disturbances, and as the advocates of the Whitman Legend,
quoting a single sentence from this chapter, entirely disconnected
from its context, and without comparison with other contempo-

334 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
raneous documents, have claimed that it furnishes strictly con
temporary proof that it was generally understood in Oregon in the
spring of 1843 that Whitman's ride was to save Oregon, and as,
when so compared, it is shown to prove nothing of the kind, but to
show the kindness of both McLoughlin and McKinlay toward Amer
icans, we will examine it at this point.
The sentence they quote is as follows: (p. 143) "The arrival
of a large party of emigrants" (i. e., Dr. White's party) "about this
time, and the sudden departure of Dr. Whitman to the United
States, with the avowed intention of bringing back with him as
many as he could enlist for Oregon," etc. (Cf. articles in reply to
Prof. Bourne's "The Whitman Legend," by Rev. S. B. L. Penrose,
President of Whitman College, widely printed in newspapers in
January, 1901; by W. A. Mowry in Boston Transcript, near April
12, 1901; W. A. Mowry and M. Eells, S. £. Times, November 15,
1902; and M. Eells' "Reply to Prof. Bourne," p. 66.)
At first sight it does look as if here was a statement that gives
some support to the claim that the "Saving Oregon" theory of
Whitman's ride was known in Oregon in the winter of 1842-3, and
indorsed by Hines as early as 1845-6 (when it is supposed his book
was written), and if it were not for those — to the advocates of
myths — most vexatious things known as "contexts" and "other con
temporaneous documents" the advocates of the Whitman myth
might claim that they had at last produced one little bit of evi
dence of some value on the single point of the publication of the
myth earlier than 1864-1865, though as Hines had no connection
with the A. B. C. F. M. mission, and knew nothing of the dissensions
of that mission, and the destructive order of the Board which
caused Whitman's ride, even if he had published a "Saving Oregon"
theory of it, that could not be accepted as proving that theory to
be true, but only that he — an outsider — had heard such a theory
for it before he left Oregon.
But let us examine the context, and also two letters of Mrs.
Whitman to her husband, the first dated March 29, 1843 (which
letter is No. 103, Vol. 138, of the Am. Bd. Mss.), and the second
dated April 14, 1843, Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn., 1893, pp.
160-162). The passage from Hines (pp. 142-3) relates to the rumors
of the hostile intentions toward the whites on the part of the Cayuse,
Nez Perces and Walla Walla Indians.
In an endeavor to pacify those excited Indians, Dr. White, the
Indian Agent, and Mr. Hines left the Willamette settlement for a
journey of some 300 miles up the Columbia, and at The Dalles were
joined by Rev. H. K. W. Perkins, and under date of May 9, 1843,
Hines (after stating that they reached Whitman's mission at 5
that afternoon) goes on: (p. 164) "When the Indians were first

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 335
told that the Americans were designing to subjugate them and take
away their lands, the young chiefs of the Kayuse tribe were in favor
of proceeding immediately to hostilities. They were for raising a
large war party and, rushing directly down to the Willamette set
tlement, cut off the inhabitants at a blow. The old chiefs were of
a different opinion; they suggested more cautious measures. Tak
ing into consideration the difficulty, at that season of the year, of
marching a large party the distance of three or four hundred miles
through a wide range of mountains covered with snow, they ad
vised all the Indians to wait until they should obtain more infor
mation concerning the designs of the Americans. They also thought
it would not be wisdom in them, in any case, to commence an
offensive war, but to prepare themselves for a vigorous defense
against any attack. They frequently remarked to Mr. Geiger that
they did not wish to go to war, but if the Americans came to take
away their lands, and bring them into a state of vassalage, they
would fight so long as they had a drop (p. 165) of blood to shed.
They said they had received their information concerning the de
signs of the Americans from Baptiste Doric This individual, who
is a half-breed son of Madame Dorio, the heroine of Washington
Irving's "Astoria," understands the Nez Perces language well, and
had given the Kayuses the information that had alarmed them. Mr.
Geiger endeavored to induce them to prepare, early in the spring, to
cultivate the ground as they did the year before, but they refused to
do anything, saying that Baptiste Dorio had told them that it would
be of no consequence; that the whites would come in the summer
and kill them all off and destroy their plantations.
"After Dorio had told them this story, they sent a Walla Walla
chief called Yellow Serpent to Vancouver, to learn from Dr. Mc
Loughlin the facts in the case. Yellow Serpent returned and told
the Kayuses that Dr. McLoughlin said he had nothing to do in a
war with the Indians; that he did not believe the Americans de
signed to attack them, and that, if the Americans did go to war with
the Indians, the Hudson's Bay Co. would not assist them. After
they got this information from the hias (great) doctor, the Indians
became more calm, many of them went to cultivating the ground
as formerly and a large number of little patches had been planted
and sown before we arrived at the station."
Mrs. Whitman's letter of March 29, 1843 (never yet published)
was written from Waskopum (i. e., the Methodist missionary station
at The Dalles, where Rev. H. K. W. Perkins was located) . It was
directed on the outside to "Dr. M. Whitman, or Rev. D. Greene,"
and indorsed as "Received August 9, acted to Dr. Whitman, April
12, D. G."

336 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
It covers fourteen pages. The first two pages of this letter are
mostly filled with the excitement among the Cayuse (or Kaiuse)
Indians, caused by Dr. White's folly in November, 1842, in attempt
ing to force them to adopt the code of laws which had been adopted
by the Nez Perces.
On p. 3 she wrote : "Mr. Geiger writes me that 'the Indians are
constantly talking about going to war with the Americans and will
not believe anything else but that you have gone for men to fight
them.' This last is the most trying to me of all the rest. This orig
inated, I am sorry to say, from some remarks which, as the Indians
tell me, Mr. Spalding made while at the station last fall. They
never have heard a lisp from me of the object of your visit to the
States, no more than you told them before you left, and one would
think they had seen enough of you to know you had not the least
desire of that kind toward them."
Turning to Mrs. Whitman's letter of April 14, 1843, we find the
following (after the statement that she had left the Methodist
Mission at The Dalles on Monday, April 3, and reached Walla Walla
Saturday, April 8) : "The excitement among the Kaiuses has
abated considerably from what it was when I commenced this let
ter. Mr. McKinlay of this fort has been to Vancouver and brought
back word to them from Dr. McLoughlin that they, the British, do
not, neither have they intended to make war upon them. This re
lieves them considerably. Now their fear is the Americans. They
have been led to believe that deceitful measures are being taken to
rob them of their land, to kill them all off. Language like this has
been told them, and at the meeting last fall, 'that if you do not make
laws and protect the whites and their property, we will put you in
the way of doing it.' They consider this a declaration to fight and
they have prepared accordingly. We hope no depredations will be
committed upon us or the mission property, and think the difficulties
can be removed and adjusted to their minds, but not without the
most prudent and wise measures. The agent (i. e., Dr. White. — W. I.
M.) is quite ignorant of Indian character, and especially of the
character of the Kaiuses. Husband's presence is needed very much
at this juncture. A great loss is sustained by his going to the
States. I mean a present loss to the station and to the Indians,
and hope and expect a greater good will be accomplished by it.
There was no other way for us to do. We felt that we could not
remain, as we were without more help, and we are so far off that
to send by letter and get returns was too slow a way for the pres
ent emergency."
So it appears that Mr. Hines did not hear that Whitman had
gone east to save Oregon in 1843, but that he had gone east, accord
ing to the Indians, to bring out soldiers to fight and conquer the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 337
Indians and to settle the Nez Perces country, i. e., where Spalding's
mission station was situated.
As these Indians were exceedingly jealous of any settlement of
whites in their country, this, combined with some wild talk of Spald
ing's that Whitman had gone for soldiers to fight them and the
unwisdom of Dr. White, the Indian Agent, in forcing laws upon
them in the autumn of 1842, soon after Whitman started for the
States (which were assigned by Mrs. Whitman in her two letters
of March 29 and April 14, 1843 as the real causes of the excite
ment among the Indians) gives a perfectly reasonable ground
for this excitement, with which the Hudson's Bay Co. had
nothing whatever to do, except that when the Indians turned to
their long-time friends, McKinlay and McLoughlin, for advice, they
received from them precisely the advice best adapted to calm them
and end the warlike excitement among them, as is testified to both
by Hines in the passage quoted from his page, 165, and also by Mrs.
Whitman in hers of April 14, 1843.
While all that Mr. Hines writes of his own personal experience
and that of his associates in the Methodist mission is entirely fa
vorable to the Hudson's Bay Co., yet when he came to write his book
in the States in 1845-6, when the "fifty-four forty or fight" craze
was rampant among a large part of the Democratic politicians, he
could not resist the temptation to add to the popularity of his book
by the following attack on the Hudson's Bay Co. (pp. 386-8) :
"Another feature of the policy of the company is the course
which they have pursued in relation to colonizing the country. They
have always been opposed to its settlement by any people except
such as, by a strict subjection to the company, would become sub
servient to their wishes. This has, doubtless, arisen from two cir
cumstances: First, the fur trade of Oregon has been rapidly de
clining for a number of years past, and the Hudson's Bay Co. are
fully aware that this trade alone will not be sufficient to sustain
them in the country for many years to come, and to abandon the
country would involve themselves in an immense loss. These lia
bilities they wish to guard against by opening sources of wealth in
other branches of business, to be under their control.
"Secondly, they have had in their employment, every year, many
hundreds of persons, consisting of Canadian French, Hawaiians,
half-breed Iroquois, and others, who are under their absolute con
trol so long as they remain in the Indian country. Many of these,
from year to year, either by having large families, by the decline of
the fur trade, or by superannuation, become unprofitable servants,
and by the company are settled in various parts of the country,
where they support themselves, and become, indirectly, a source of
profit to the company. They wished to preserve Oregon as an asy-

338 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
lum for their servants, on both sides of the Rocky Mountains, where
they could use them to advantage in agricultural, pastoral and man
ufacturing pursuits, when they could be no longer serviceable to
them in the business of the fur trade. That the company have con
templated a rapid decline, and probable termination of the fur trade,
west of the Rocky Mountains, appears from the fact of their having
been formed into a new company, under the name of 'Puget's Sound
Agricultural Company,' with a capital of £2,000,000. This company
has pretended to hold large tracts of land in the vicinity of Puget's
Sound, under grants of letters patent from the English Government ;
and here they have attempted to establish a colony, but without
success. "This attempt was made in 1842. The half-breed descendants of
the gentlemen and servants of the Hudson's Bay Co. had been col
lecting together in a colony on a small tract of fertile land, lying
on Red River, east of the Rocky Mountains, for more than thirty
years, and so rapid was the increase of the colony, and so limited
the arable country of the Red River, that the company resolved to
send off a colony of the numerous Scotch and English half-breeds
settled on that river to the shores of the Pacific Ocean. Accord
ingly, in 1842, Sir George Simpson, who for many years has been
the resident Governor of the Hudson's Bay Co., by holding out the
most flattering inducements, succeeded in forming a colony of some
thirty families, of which he took the charge in person. They left
the Red River Settlement late in the spring, with their scanty sup
plies packed upon the backs of mules and Indian ponies, and passing
through the stupendous gates of the Rocky Mountains, they arrived
on the borders of Puget's Sound some time in the month of October.
If the fertility of the soil, where they were planted by Sir George,
had corresponded with the picturesque beauty of the face of the
country, doubtless the colony would have succeeded; but, in conse
quence of a total failure of the crops the first year, the colonists
abandoned the place, contrary to the wishes of the company, and
settled in a more fertile portion of the country.
"Two other settlements intended for the reception and support
of retiring servants of the company have been established in Oregon ;
one in the valley of the Cowlitz, north of the lower Columbia, the
other on the delightful plains watered by the Willamette River,
south of the Columbia. As interested motives first induced the com
pany to establish these settlements, so it has always been their
policy to keep them in a state of absolute dependence. The colon
ists have not only been responsible to the company for the course
of conduct they have pursued, but from it alone, until very recently,
they have been obliged to receive all their supplies of foreign neces
saries, consisting of clothing, groceries, etc., for which they have

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 339
been obliged to pay in the produce of the soil, at prices to suit the
avaricious propensities which have developed themselves in the
whole policy of the Hudson's Bay Co.
"The oppressive measures adopted by the company, in reference
to these settlements, were such as to cause them to languish for
years, and to induce some of the most active and enterprising
among the settlers to take refuge in the United States."
On this it is only needful to remark :
First. The contemporary evidence in this chapter demonstrates
beyond any question the total falsity of his opening statement that
the "Hudson's Bay Co. have always been opposed, etc."
Second. Instead of "many" of these discharged employes being
settled by the company in various parts of the country, the total
number so settled in Oregon up to the autumn of 1843 was only
fifty, or less than an average of two a year for the whole time since
the North West Co. acquired Astoria. The "Copy of a Document"
(cf. pp. 429-439 infra) shows how wise were the regulations under
which McLoughlin began the colonization of Oregon.
Third. As a British corporation, it was the patriotic duty of
the Hudson's Bay Co. by all honorable means to endeavor to secure
as much of Oregon as possible for Great Britain, precisely as it was
of Americans to secure as much as possible for the United States.
Fourth. There is the most unanswerable evidence in the diplo
matic papers and the debates in Congress and in the "Copy of a
Document" (pp. 429-439 infra) that it was perfectly understood by
both Governments after 1824 that "in no event could the British
claim extend south of the Columbia River."
Fifth. The Puget's Sound Agricultural Co. was not formed to
hold Oregon, since nothing done while the treaties of 1818 and 1827
remained in force could effect that, but to separate the agricultural
and stock raising business of the company, as it became extensive,
from the fur trade, which was that for which the Hudson's Bay Co.
had its exclusive license.
Sixth. Instead of having a capital of £2,000,000, the capital
stock of the Puget's Sound Agricultural Co. was only £200,000, of
which only £20,000 was ever paid up, and on this the total divi
dends up to the payment made to the company of $200,000 by the
United States on September 10, 1869, were only 55%, equal to
£11,000. (Cf. pp. 113, 124 and 149 of the evidence for the Puget's
Sound Agricultural Co., being Vol. II. of the Report of the Cases
of the Hudson's Bay Co. and Puget's Sound Agricultural Co. vs.
the United States.)
Seventh. Neither "in the vicinity of Puget's Sound" nor any
where else in the Oregon Territory south of 49 degrees did either

340 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
the Puget's Sound Agricultural Co. or the Hudson's Bay Co. ever,
for one instant, pretend to hold "large tracts of land," or so much
as one acre of land "under grants of letters patent from the English
Government." Neither Great Britain nor the United States had any right,
while the treaties of 1818 and 1827 remained in force, to grant any
land in any part of Oregon, and neither Government did make any
such grants to any person or corporation till after the treaty of
1846 had given the United States the right to make such grants
south of 49 degrees, and Great Britain the right to make such grants
north of 49 degrees.
Eighth. Mr. Hines is entirely mistaken about (a) "a small tract
of fertile land on Red River"; (b) "the rapid increase of that col
ony" ; (c) "the limited area of the arable country on the Red River" ;
(d) that the company sent off a colony from the Red River to Ore
gon in 1842; (e) that the colony contained "some thirty families";
(f) that Sir George Simpson "took the charge in person" of that
colony; (g) that "they left the Red River with their belongings
packed on the backs of mules and ponies."
There was an immense tract of fertile land in the Red River
country, as was well known then by all persons who cared to write
from knowledge and not from their imaginations. Instead of a
rapid increase of that colony its increase had been very slow, and
continued so till the extension of railroads there (more than thirty
years after the time of which Mr. Hines is writing) gave them ac
cess to markets for their produce.
"In March, 1843, the total population of the Red River settle
ment was 5,143, of which number 2,798 were Roman Catholics and
2,345 were Protestants. . . . The heads of families were 870,
of whom 571 were Indians or half-breeds, natives of the territory;
152 Canadians, 61 Orkneymen, 49 Scotchmen, 22 Englishmen, 5
Irishmen and 2 Swiss, and Wales, Italy, Norway, Denmark, Ger
many, Poland and the United States of America one each. There
was also one Esquimaux. . . . The people revel in abundance,
but it is all for home consumption; they have no outlet, no market
for their produce. (Cf. "Hudson's Bay Co.'s Territories and Van
couver's Island," by Robert Montgomery Martin, London, 1849, pp.
21-22.) As there was enough fertile land in the Red River Settlement —
now known as Manitoba — to support more than a hundred times
as many people as lived there in 1841, it was not at all "because of
the limited area of arable country on the Red River that a party
not of "about thirty families," but of "twenty-three heads of fami
lies, in all eighty persons, men, women and children," were engaged
by the Hudson's Bay Co. to go to Oregon, in 1841 — not 1842 — not

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 341
as colonists to strengthen the British claim to Oregon (which was
impossible while the treaty of 1827 continued in force), but as half-
servants of the company, to work the farms of the Puget's Sound
Agricultural Co. on the Cowlitz River, on the north side of the Co
lumbia, i. e., in the region which the English hoped to retain when
the boundary line should be settled.
Instead of "Sir George Simpson being in charge of this party
in person," it left the Red River Settlement June 5, 1841, five days
before Sir George Simpson arrived there (on June 10, 1841), from
Montreal, on his tour around the world, and he did not overtake
them till July 19, 1841, when they had made more than one-third
of the journey to Fort Vancouver, and he and his party only re
mained with them part of two days and the night between. He
passed on after advising that they should change their route to that
of the boat parties down the Columbia, which they thought they
would do, but afterward followed on his trail, which was the regular
saddle route all the way to Fort Colvile, and thence down the Co
lumbia by boats. He reached Fort Vancouver on or about August
27, 1841, but this Red River migration did not arrive at Fort Walla
Walla, 220 miles up the Columbia from Vancouver, till October 4,
1841. They started with their goods packed not "on the backs of
mules and ponies," but in the Red River carts, and used them to
the mountains, where the difficulties of the way were so much
greater than on the route from the States to Oregon that they aban
doned their carts and packed their goods on their oxen and other
spare animals the rest of the way. Whether this migration — the
only one ever made, or, so far as any contemporary evidence shows,
ever planned from the Red River Settlement to Oregon — was in 1841
or 1842 would be of no particular consequence if it were not that
the original, or Spalding-Gray version of the origin of Whitman's
ride made that ride originate in the announcement in September or
October, 1842, that these Red River settlers were then on their
way to ravish Oregon from the United States.
With this demonstration of the total lack of accuracy in the
particulars on which Mr. Hines bases his accusations vs. the Hud
son's Bay Co. the reader can form his own conclusions as to the
credence to be given to his charge that the Hudson's Bay Co. op
posed the settlement of the country and oppressed the settlers.
Turn now to the missionaries of the A. B. C. F. M.
In 1835 Rev. Samuel Parker went to Oregon on an exploring
tour, and this is what the Missionary Herald had to say, on p. 445,
November, 1836, about his reception and treatment by the Hudson's
Bay Co. :
"Communications have been received from Mr. Parker, dated
May 21, 1836. ... He received much aid and numerous kind

342 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
attentions from the gentlemen connected with the Hudson's Bay
Co. . . . Facilities have been afforded him by them for explor
ing large tracts of country not otherwise easily accessible by him."
(Idem, March, 1837, p. 124) "Mr. Parker makes a grateful men
tion of the kind and polite treatment he had received from the
officers of the company, who, together with the gentlemen engaged
in trade from the United States, with whom he traveled through
the mountains, had borne nearly all his expenses of conveyance,
clothing and subsistence, he not having been obliged to spend more
than two dollars in money from the time he left the Missouri till
his arrival at the Sandwich Islands."
Of this time he was the guest of the Hudson's Bay Co. continu
ously from October 6, 1835, to July 14, 1836, when he reached Hono
lulu as a free passenger in the Hudson's Bay Co.'s ship.
(For Mr. Parker's grateful acknowledgments of the kindness he
received at the various posts of the Hudson's Bay Co. and his en
thusiastic commendations of the kind treatment of the Indians by
the Hudson's Bay Co., Cf. "Parker's Journal of an Exploring Tour
Beyond the Rocky Mountains." Ithaca, N. Y., 1838, pp. 130, 131,
132, 148, 169, 172, 272, 273, 304, 347).
In 1836 the Spalding- Whitman party went overland to found
the American Board Mission, and July 16, 1836, from the rendez
vous near Green River, in a six and a half page foolscap letter to D.
Greene, Secretary, from which nothing has yet been printed, Whit
man wrote: "By the arrival of Messrs. McCloud and McCay"
(should be McLeod and McKay. — W. I. M.) "we are furnished with
a safe and direct escort to Walla Walla, and have availed ourselves
of their company and protection. We received the most flattering
encouragement from these gentlemen, one of whom, Mr. McCloud,
is a partner in the North West Fur Co. (should be Hudson's Bay
Co.) that we should have every facility in our journey, and all
necessary supplies of goods, provisions, etc., at Walla Walla."
Under the gratuitous escort of these two Hudson's Bay Co.
traders the party traveled not only to Walla Walla, but to Fort
Vancouver, a distance of more than 1,000 miles, or more than one-
half of their whole journey from the Missouri River to Vancouver.
The Whitman Saved Oregon advocates are never tired of ex
patiating on the hardships of this journey, and the great heroism it
required to undertake it, but as they were every mile of the way
under the escort of either American fur traders or these Hudson's
Bay Co. traders, they were all the way perfectly safe, and in this
same letter Whitman wrote: "I see no reason to regret our choice
of a journey by land. . . . It is one of the best trips that can
be made for invalids, such as dyspeptics, liver, spleen or scrofulous
affections, all of which I confidently believe will be greatly relieved

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 343
if not permanently cured. . . . In my own case and Mrs. Whit
man's we are more than compensated for the journey by the im
provement of health." Which simply shows that for them, as for
not a few men engaged in the fur trade before that time, the over
land journey "was its own reward" as a benefit to their health.
Mrs. Whitman kept a journal for her mother of this journey
(which was published in Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn. for
1891). It contains many accounts of favors extended to them by Messrs.
McLeod and McKay on the journey, of which space will only allow
quoting the following: "August 27. This morning Mr. McLeod re
mained behind in pursuit of game, and did not come into camp until
we had made a long nooning, yet about 3 o'clock he came into
camp loaded with wild ducks, having taken twenty-two. Now,
mother, he has, just as he always did during the whole journey,
sent over nine of them."
All that relates to Whitman's wagon in this journal of Mrs.
Whitman has been already quoted in Chapter V.
For other extracts from it as to the kindness of the Hudson's
Bay Co.'s officers en route and at Forts Hall, Boise, Walla Walla
and Vancouver, Cf . Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn., 1891, pp. 46,
47, 48, 49, 51, 53, 56, 57, 58, 59, 63, 66.
Mrs. Whitman, so far as known, kept no journal except this
one in the form of a letter to her mother covering (though not by
any means for every day) June 27 to October 18, 1836.
In Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn., 1891 and 1893, are quite
a large number of letters of Mrs. Whitman, and a few of her hus
band, to relations and friends, and there are many passages in
these stating the favors done them by various Hudson's Bay Co.'s
officers, and showing the friendly relations subsisting between the
various mission families and the Hudson's Bay Co.'s officers in
charge of Forts Walla Walla, Colvile, Vancouver, Hall and Fort
George (i. e., Astoria) and the visiting back and forth between the
mission families and these Hudson's Bay Co.'s forts, and there is
not the least intimation that there was any antagonism between
the missions and the Hudson's Bay Co. I regret that space will
not allow me to quote all these extracts, but the reader will find
them on pages 88, 97, 103, 111, 139, 158-161, 164, 166, 168 and 189
of 1891, Trans., and pages 111, 161, 206 and 207 of 1893 Trans.
So far as has yet appeared Dr. Whitman kept no journal at
any time, and if either W. H. Gray or his wife kept journals he
carefully refrained from ever quoting anything from any of them.
Rev. C. Eells kept a journal constantly, but it was destroyed when
his house was burned in 1872. His eldest son, Mr. Edw. Eells, told
me this on August 23, 1905, at Portland, Ore.

344 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Mrs. Eells, Mr. and Mrs. Walker and Mr. and Mrs. Spalding
seem to have kept journals part of the time, and in the Mss. of the
Oregon Historical Society are the following fragmentary journals
of these people, viz., Mrs. Walker, June, 1838, to December 26, 1838,
and September 7, 1847, to October 26, 1848; Rev. E. Walker, Sep
tember 10, 1838, to October 4, 1838, and January 5, 1841, to Novem
ber 15, 1842.
Mrs. H. H. Spalding, February 1, 1836, to June 8, 1840. While
in the Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn. for 1889, pp. 54-88 (a),
is printed Mrs. C. Eells' Journal, March 5 to September 2, 1836.
Rev. H. H. Spalding kept a journal pretty regularly from No
vember, 1838, to April, 1842, then a blank till February 21, 1843,
and then a few entries covering a page and a half, and ending March
7, 1843. This journal has been for some years in possession of
Rev. M. Eells.
I have gone over all of these with care, and not only is there
not a sentence in any one of them indicating the slightest feeling
of antagonism between any of these missionaries and the Hudson's
Bay Co., but there are in all of them the most abundant evidences
that the mission families and the Chief Traders in charge of Forts
Hall, Boise, Walla Walla, Vancouver and Colvile were on the
friendliest possible terms, visiting back and forth freely, and the
Hudson's Bay Co.'s officers not only helping them to establish
their several mission stations, but subsequently rendering them
frequent assistance in various ways as long as the missions ex
isted. Want of space only allows the quotation of a few samples on
this point.
Mrs. Eells' journal was very concise.
The mission party consisted of six men and four women, viz.:
Rev. C. Eells and wife, Rev. A. B. Smith and wife, Rev. Elkanah
Walker and wife, Mr. W. H. Gray and wife, Mr. Cornelius Rogers
and a "Mr. Stevens, an old mountain man whom we have hired to
go with us." (Cf. Transactions, 1889, p. 66.)
"Friday, July 27, 1838. . . . Arrive at Fort Hall; intro
duced to Mr. McKay, one of the Chief Factors of the Hudson's Bay
Fur Co. . . . Received kindly by all at the fort." . . "Sun
day, July 29th, Mr. Gray lodges in the fort. . . About 10 o'clock
Mr. Ermatinger" (the chief trader in charge of Fort Hall from
1838 to 1842.— W. I. M.) "comes to invite us to breakfast; says he
has just got up. After breakfast he comes again to invite us to
have preaching in the fort. Afternoon, Mr. Eells preaches in the
dining room; some fifty or sixty hearers."
"Tuesday, July 31. Make arrangements for moving camp. . .
Ermatinger gives ten pounds sugar."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 345
"Wednesday, August 15. . . Encamped on the river opposite
Fort Boise; feasted with milk, butter, turnips, pumpkins and sal
mon." "Friday, August 17. . . Some of the gentlemen at the post
sent us a piece of sturgeon for breakfast."
"Sunday, August 19. . . Mr. Payton (Payette) sends another
sturgeon." (Cf. 1889, Transactions, pp. 83, 86, 87.)
Rev. E. Walker's 1838 journal covers his and Rev. C. Eells' ex
ploring trip to decide on a location for their mission station.
They reached Fort Colvile (about 230 miles north of Whitman's
mission). "Monday, September 17, 1838" (having that morning eaten the
last mouthful of their stock of provisions), the journal reads: . .
"We reached here about 1 this day. Received a cordial welcome
from Mr. McDonald and lady."
"Wednesday, September 19th. . . After dinner I opened the
subject of our coming. Found Mr. McDonald favorably disposed,
and willing to assist us. This was a great relief to my mind. We
purposed starting tomorrow, but he thought it not best, so have
altered our determination. . . Mr. McDonald promised to send
tools to us at Big Head's place, so we shall be saved the trouble
with them on the route."
"Thursday, September 20th. Received a present of two pairs of
moccasins this morning from Mr. McDonald. . . He seems more
and more interested. He has engaged to give us what supplies we
want for the journey, and to send some on for us while building,
and told us if we want more to send for them. . . Mr. McDonald
said he felt very anxious that our station should exceed all the rest
in this country."
"Friday, September 21st. . . We did not get prepared to
start till nearly 11 ; but when we did we found ourselves well pre
pared with provisions through the kindness of Mr. McDonald and
lady." "He sent for an Indian, one of the Ponderays, and told him he
must take care of our animals and packs, and must not expect any
pay for it, for we came with the Bible and Testament to do them
good. They must do all we wanted them to. Accordingly we had
very little trouble with our packs and animals."
After traveling about for five days they decided to locate at
Tshimakain (The Place of a Spring) (the place recommended by
Mr. McDonald), about sixty-five miles south of Colvile, and not
finding any tools and supplies were worrying about them, when
• . . "to our joy the Indian sent by Mr. McDonald arrived soon
after dinner with two axes, 10 pounds of Indian meal, 30 pounds
of flour, 10 pounds of buffalo meat (dried), 15 pounds of bacon, all

346 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
of the first quality, making 95 pounds in all. "Big Head" (the In
dian chief on whose land they had located) "gave us some potatoes
soon after, so that we have a good stock of provisions at present,
enough to last us what time we wanted to stay."
Turning now to Rev. H. H. Spalding's Journal (from which
only sixty-one words have yet been published that have any bearing
on the Whitman Saved Oregon Story).
In December, 1847, and January, 1848, as shown by Spalding's
own letters in the chapter on "The Whitman Massacre and Its
True Causes," Spalding thankfully admitted that he owed his own
life to the humanity of the Catholic priest, Father Brouillet, and
that he was ready to implore the good services of that Hudson's Bay
Co.'s officer, the Catholic McBean, who had succeeded, in 1846, the
Scotch Presbyterian, McKinlay, in charge of Fort Walla Walla, and
also the aid of Capt. Richard Grant, whom he and Gray subse
quently so shamefully slandered, as have all the other leading ad
vocates of the Whitman Legend, and that in letters to D. Greene,
Secretary, he gratefully acknowledged that not only he and his fam
ily, but all of the captives at Wailatpu, a total of sixty persons,
owed their rescue from death at the hands of the Indians to "the
timely, prompt, judicious and Christian efforts of the Hudson's Bay
Co., and especially Mr. Ogden and Mr. Douglas," and from his let
ters we have seen how great and constant was the kindness he and
his family had received year by year from Mr. McDonald, the
Hudson's Bay Co.'s chief trader in charge of Fort Colvile, some
200 miles northwest of his station.
In his journal we shall see that from Mr. Pambrun (the Hud
son's Bay Co.'s chief trader in charge of Fort Walla Walla — about
125 miles west of his station — till his death in May, 1841), he also
received friendly assistance, both in presents and in help to keep
the Indians in order.
September 19, 1838, he wrote : . . "Canoes return from Walla
Walla with three turkeys, a present from Mr. Pambrun."
January 10, 1840 : "Sabbath. Good number at Sunday school.
Mr. Griffin preaches in English. Meet with the people as usual at
eve. Mr. Pambrun speaks to the people, encourages them to work
their land and to listen to their own teacher and not go after
strangers." Pambrun, it must be remembered, was not only a Hudson's Bay
Co.'s officer, but a Catholic. Could any stronger proof be needed
that the excitement and exposure incident to Spalding's narrow
escape at the time of the Whitman massacre had brought on the
lunacy predicted by A. B. Smith and Dr. Whitman (Cf. Smith's
letter of September 28, 1840), than the fact that in the summer of
1848 Spalding started the story and all the rest of his life asserted

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 347
it to be true that the Hudson's Bay Co. and the Catholics had in
stigated the Whitman massacre to break up Protestant missions
and destroy American settlements in Oregon?
Passing over their very kind reception at Walla Walla, and the
kindness of the Hudson's Bay Co. in furnishing them transporta
tion down the Columbia to Fort Vancouver, and their hospitable
reception there (where the two wives remained as guests from Sep
tember 12 to November 3, 1836, while their husbands were select
ing sites for missions and building houses), I can only find space
to quote the following from Mrs. Whitman's journal, under date of
September 16th. After describing the extensive farming and stock-
raising operations of the Hudson's Bay Co. at Vancouver, and their
mills there and at Colvile, she says : "Dr. McLoughlin promises to
lend us enough to make a beginning, and all the return he asks is
that we supply other settlers in the same way. He appears desir
ous to afford us every facility for living in his power. No person
could have received a more hearty welcome, or be treated with
greater kindness than we have been since our arrival." This gen
erous offer to help these American Presbyterian missionaries to
establish themselves, precisely as two years before he had helped
the Methodist missionaries, and as McDonald, the Hudson's Bay
Co.'s Chief Trader at Fort Colvile helped Spalding in 1836, and in
1838 helped Eells and Walker, with wheat and other grains, and
vegetables for seed and provisions, till they could raise a crop, and
the loan of cattle and hogs and horses and farming implements,
with no wish for any return except that they should "pass the good
deed along," by "helping others in the same way," was the curious
way in which the great-hearted McLoughlin, head of the Hudson's
Bay Co. in Oregon, and whose word was absolute law at all their
posts west of the Rockies from 1824 to 1845, though himself a Cath
olic, "opposed the American occupation of Oregon," by Protestant
missionaries, and he took the same remarkable way of opposing the
establishment of American settlers" by treating the great migra
tions of 1842, 1843 and 1844 and 1845 in precisely the same way,
except that as there were so many of them, and they were not mis
sionaries, he did expect them to pay, from the crops they should
raise, the advances he made to them, without which advances there
must have been great suffering among them.
May 5, 1837, Dr. Whitman in an eight-page foolscap letter to D.
Greene, Secretary, wrote: "At Vancouver we were received in the
kindest manner by Dr. McLoughlin, Chief Factor, etc., and by all
the other gentlemen of the company. After obtaining such sup
plies as we needed for building and exploring, and making arrange
ments for future supplies, we returned to explore and build, leaving
our wives at Vancouver. . . . The present worship of the In-

348 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
dians was established by the traders of the Hudson's Bay Co. It
consists of singing and a form of prayer taught them, after which
the Chief gives them a talk. It has had a favorable influence on
them in rendering them more civil and little addicted to steal.
Some of the leading truths of civilization have been taught them.
"A system of punishment for crime established by the traders
has done much good."
Mrs. Spalding also kept a diary of their journey to Oregon (now
among Mss. of Oregon Historical Society), and under date of July
6, 1836, at the rendezvous on Green River, she wrote: "A trader
of the Hudson's Bay Co., with a party of men, has arrived and
camped near. . . . He has kindly invited us to travel with his
company, promising to afford us all the assistance in his power."
August 3, 1836, of their reception at Fort Hall she wrote: "Ar
rived at this place a little after noon ; were invited to dine at the
fort, where we again had a taste of bread." August 20, 1836, at
Snake Fort or Fort Boise, she wrote : "Have received many favors
from the gentlemen of the fort." September 3, 1836, at Fort Walla
Walla, she wrote: "Reached this post today. Mr. Pambrun, the
clerk in charge of this establishment, kindly received us into his
dwelling as guests, for which may we feel true gratitude." Sep
tember 13, 1836, at Fort Vancouver: "Reached this place yester
day. . . . Met with the warmest expressions of friendship and
find ourselves in the midst of civilization, where the luxuries of this
life seem to abound."
In the Missionary Herald for October, 1838, p. 387, is a summary
of a letter of Mr. Spalding, dated September 4, 1837, in which, after
brief description of Fort Colvile, then in charge of Mr. McDonald,
and stating that the company raised 3,500 bushels of grain and an
equal quantity of potatoes there, it continues: "Mr. McDonald
kindly furnished Mr. Spalding with thirty-five bushels of grain,
twelve hundred- weight of flour, a yoke of oxen and three swine to
aid him in beginning his new establishment among the Nez Perces,
besides numerous other articles for the comfort of his family." A
later letter of Mr. Spalding shows that these supplies were a free
gift. March 15, 1838, Mr. Spalding wrote a letter to D. Greene, Secre
tary (from which I think nothing has yet been published), in which,
after stating cost of flour at Vancouver, he continues:
"The reason of my asking flour from Boston was to provide for
extremities, as we were told several times while on our journey by
a gentleman who had spent some time at Vancouver that we must
not expect many favors from Vancouver and Walla Walla. But
the Lord ordered it otherwise, and we find in the gentlemen of the
Hon. Hudson's Bay Co. a disposition to render us every possible

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 349
favor. Of course there is no reason why this should pass from your
room. . . . Dr. McLoughlin leaves this spring for England,
passing with the express to Montreal, and has expressed a deter
mination to visit Boston if possible. He will receive a letter of
introduction from us to the secretaries of the Board. Should he call
he will take pleasure in giving you all the information you may
wish respecting this country. In a former letter I have mentioned
his strong desire that the Board should commence immediately a
mission in the lower country. As you will have seen in a former let
ter he speaks very favorably of the Cowlitz. Should he fail of vis
iting Boston, I would suggest the propriety of opening a corre
spondence with him."
September 11, 1838. Spalding to D. Greene, Secretary (a nine-
page letter hitherto unpublished). After defending himself and
Whitman from the charge that they were devoting too much of their
time to farming he goes on: "The question will be asked, has not
the Hudson's Bay Co. several establishments in the country where
large quantities of grain are raised every year? Yes, two, Van
couver and Colvile. But these and all other posts of the company
in the country are for a specified object, and did the gentlemen in
charge adhere strictly to their instructions no missionary or settler
could receive any article or anything from these posts except for
beaver, and no provisions for that, as they are raised only at two
stations to any extent, viz., Vancouver and Colvile, and at these
only sufficient to meet the wants of the company, the former de
signed for the shipping and the posts on or near the coast, the lat
ter for the posts in the interior. But the gentlemen in charge at
these stations have seen fit to treat us with the greatest kindness
and to furnish us as yet with every needed merchandise, for which
they have been blamed from the other side of the mountains, and
with sufficient provisions for our two families to begin with. But
these supplies, especially provisions, have ever been furnished us
as a favor, and not in the way of trade, and for this truly great
favor I trust we ever shall be truly thankful ; but while we remem
ber these favors and bless God for so wonderfully providing for us
in the infancy of our mission, I hope that none of us will bring our
selves to think that because we are missionaries we are therefore
not to be regulated by the rules that regulate gentlemen in their
intercourse with each other, but grasp all favors we can get and
ask for more, which would only certainly make it necessary for the
company sooner or later to deny us and throw us on our own re
sources, but bring ourselves and perhaps the Board into disgrace.
Consequently your mission in this country cannot depend on the
Hudson's Bay Co. for supplies of provisions. Doubtless a station
in the region of Colvile would receive, as I have, abundance of pro-

350 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
visions for one or two years till it could sustain itself, provided the
Yankee be not too pronounced in questions, etc., such as 'What do
you charge a pound for pork?' 'What will you let me have a bushel
of wheat for?' 'Can I get a pound of sugar here?' Mr. McDonald
gave me to understand when here that the supplies of provisions I
received last fall were all that the fort could safely part with, and
that was furnished as a favor, as all supplies from that fort would
be, and not in the way of trade. And here let me say that the
favors which we have received from Mr. McDonald and wife have
not been few nor of little consequence to us. Besides the supplies
furnished us for a given price, which are no less favors for being
sold, and frequent presents of a bag of fine flour, a ham, a side of
pork, buffalo tongues, etc, etc., there has been no charge for the
first supply of provisions in 1836, the amount of which I will give
you when I am certain it is not to be charged."
September 22, 1838, Spalding to D. Greene, Secretary (hitherto
unpublished). Besides a financial statement of the mission it contains the fol
lowing :
"As we are not in a country of trade except for beaver, all our
supplies are furnished as favors, and not in the way of barter.
They are furnished us at only 80 per cent, advance on the prime
cost in London. We feel ourselves greatly favored that we can re
ceive our supplies in this country without being obliged to wait two
or four years for their arrival from Boston. But if we may not
dictate as to our drafts, we may regulate the time of sending in
our bills (and) as our drafts usually go out in the spring our bills
can usually be sent down in the summer, which will be the same as
drawing at ten or eleven months' sight."
Some of the advocates of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story,
notably Gray, Barrows and Craighead, have declared that after the
Catholic missionaries reached Oregon (which was in 1838) there
was a marked change for the worse in the actions of the Hudson's
Bay Co. toward Americans.
Let us see what the record says.
July 13, 1841, Dr. Whitman wrote a six-page letter to D. Greene,
Secretary (from which nothing has yet been printed), in which we
find the following: "Your fears lest our good understanding with
the gentlemen of the Hudson's Bay Co. should have been inter
rupted are not well founded — for it has remained undisturbed up
to this date ; indeed, we never were on better terms than at present.
I believe I have told you that Mr. McLoughlin and Mr. Pambrun
were the only two professed Catholics among the gentlemen of the
company with whom we have to do business. To the hour of Mr.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 351
Pambrun's death (which was in May, 1841), without interruption
we were growing more and more in confidence and kind offices."
Mr. Pambrun had been continuously in charge of Fort Walla
Walla, only twenty-five miles from Whitman's Station, from 1832
to 1841, and every American who went there in all those years and
has left any record spoke in the highest terms of his kindness and
hospitality. The mission house in which Mr. Eells lived burned January 11,
1841, and March 6, 1841, Rev. C. Eells wrote to D. Greene, Secre
tary, a letter the essential parts of which were printed in the Mis
sionary Herald for October, 1841. After giving an account of the
fire, he continues :
"Mr. McDonald, who is in charge of Fort Colvile" (sixty miles
from them), "on hearing of our misfortune, unasked, dispatched
four men immediately, and they soon made our house habitable.
Two gentlemen of the Hudson's Bay Co., Messrs. McLean and Mc-
Pherson, volunteered their services to assist in whatever was neces
sary to be done, and came at the same time with them, or rather
led the march.
"All camped upon the ground when the mercury must have been
not less than 10 below zero and the snow from six inches to one foot
in depth. This is but a specimen of the unvarying kindness shown
us by the gentlemen of the Hudson's Bay Co. with whom we have
had any particular intercourse or connection."
No advocate of the Whitman Legend has ever quoted this letter,
or alluded to this action of the Hudson's Bay Co., except that Rev.
M. Eells, in the life of his father, Rev. C. Eells, published it in 1895,
but he has never even alluded to it in any of his articles specially
devoted to advocating the Whitman Saved Oregon Story.
Rev. E. Walker's diary, under date of Sunday, January 17, 1841,
reads as follows:
"Just as the sun was setting Mr. McLean and Mr. McPherson
rode up with four men to assist in repairing the burnt house and
bringing letters to Mr. Eells and myself from Mr. McDonald.
"They were more or less frozen and suffered much on the route."
March 18, 1845, Rev. C. Eells wrote an eight-page letter to D.
Greene, Secretary, in which is the following concerning Mr. Mc
Donald, who had for years been in charge of Fort Colvile— the near
est white neighbor they had— and who had left Fort Colvile in Sep
tember, 1844, to take his children where they could be educated:
"The kindness of that estimable family toward us was unabated to
the last. The politeness and cordiality with which we have ever
been welcomed to their generous hospitality, the prompt and cheer
ful manner in which they have attended to frequent calls for assist-

352 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
ance and the numerous unsolicited and gratuitous favors they have
conferred upon us deserve grateful acknowledgment."
John Lee Lewes succeeded McDonald at Fort Colvile and was
equally kind to these missionaries.
Rev. E. Walker to D. Greene, April 3, 1848, says that on Decem
ber 9, 1847, when the news of the Whitman massacre reached them,
they sent an express to Fort Colvile, and Mr. Lewes at once replied,
urging if there seemed to them any danger that they "fly to this
establishment one and all without delay, and I will do my best for
your protection, till we can find the means to convey you all to Van
couver, or till the times of peace return again, making it safe for
you to return to your own abode."
They remained at Tshimakain till Wednesday, March 15th, but
the following extracts from Mrs. Walker's journal will show how
earnestly solicitous Mr. Lewes was for their safety:
"Saturday, February 12, 1848. An express from Colvile. Mr.
Lewes alarmed about us in consequence of Indian rumors. We are
much perplexed to know what to do. We fear to go, we fear to stay.
"Sunday, 13th. . . . This afternoon another express arrived
from Colvile. Affairs there have taken a serious turn. The men are
under arms and in alarm for themselves and for us.
"Sunday, 20th. . . . Another letter from Mr. Lewes. He
has also sent a Canadian to remain awhile.
"Friday, March 10th. Thos. Roy left for Colvile this morning.
"Sunday, March 12th. Frederick Lewes (son of John Lee Lewes)
and Thomas Roy arrived. Mr. Lewes seems rather afraid to have
us remain longer.
"Monday, March 13th. We conclude that it is best to remove
to Colvile for awhile.
"Wednesday, March 15th. We left home about noon, perhaps
to return no more.
"Saturday, March 18th. We reached Colvile about noon, where
we received a cordial welcome."
The two families remained guests of Mr. Lewes till June 1, 1848,
when they left under an escort of the First Oregon Riflemen, and
under date of June 1, 1848 (in a twenty-two-page letter in the form
of a diary) to Rev. D. Greene, Secretary, Rev. C. Eells wrote:
"With emotions which we cannot well express for the great kind
ness and invaluable assistance of John Lee Lewes, Esq., we took
leave of that worthy gentleman."
In 1835 Lieut. W. A. Slacum, of the United States Navy, was
sent by President Jackson's personal orders on a special mission to
obtain all possible information that would be useful to our Govern
ment about Oregon, and his memorial was printed as Sen. Ex. Doc.
No. 24, 25th Cong., 2d Sess.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON "-353
In it he says : "Mr. Jason Lee, one of the founders of the Meth
odist Mission, acknowledges the kindest assistance from Dr. Mc
Loughlin, of Fort Vancouver, who gave him the use of horses, oxen
and milch cows, and furnished him all supplies. Indeed Dr. Mc
Loughlin has acted toward many of the settlers in the same manner,
giving them the use of cattle and horses on the following terms :
"The produce of the neat cattle and horses belong to the Hud
son's Bay Co., and are liable to be called for at any time. If the
cattle die, the persons holding them are not charged with their value.
Horses to be returned in kind, or the sum of $8, the current value of
the horse, is charged."
As to his own treatment by the Hudson's Bay Co. there is only
space for the following extract:
(P. 5) "The next day Mr. Douglas, returning from Fort
George, called aboard the Loriot, and repeated the invitation given
me by Mr. Finlayson to visit Fort Vancouver ; and as there was but
one more Indian settlement between this point and the Hudson's
Bay Co.'s establishment at Vancouver, I embarked with Mr. Doug
lass, in his canoe, with nine 'Canadian voyagers.' We made about
fifty miles in twenty-four hours and landed next day at the fort,
where I met a hospitable reception from Dr. John McLoughlin and
Mr. Duncan Finlayson."
In 1839 Thomas J. Farnham (characterized by a prominent Eng
lishman who traveled with him on the Pacific as "a flamboyantly
patriotic American"), went to Oregon at the head of a small migra
tion, mostly from the vicinity of Peoria, 111. In 1841 he published,
at Poughkeepsie, N. Y., "Travels in the Great Western Prairies, and
in the Anahuac and Rocky Mountains, and in the Oregon Territory,"
of which two more editions were published in New York City, and
one in London in 1843.
He had this to say of his reception and treatment by the Hud
son's Bay Co. in their "desperate attempts to prevent Americans
reaching and settling Oregon."
(P. 132-6) "A friendly salutation was followed by an invita
tion to enter the fort, and a 'welcome to Fort Hall' was given in a
manner so kind and obliging that nothing seemed wanting to make
us feel that we were at home. . . . Goods are sold at this estab
lishment 100 per cent, lower than at the American posts."
(He doubtless meant for half the price, which is 50 instead of
100 per cent, lower. — W. I. M.)
Having spent three days enjoying the kindest hospitality at Fort
Hall, Farnham went on and (on pp. 83-84 ante) we have already
quoted his equally kind reception at Fort Boise.
September 22, 1839, Mr. Farnham reached Whitman's station,
and under date of September 27th he thus records the arrival of

354 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Chief Trader Ermatinger, on his return from Vancouver to Fort
Hall (p. 153) : "In the afternoon of this date, the arrival of Mr.
Ermatinger, the senior clerk at Fort Hall, created quite a sensation.
His uniform kindness to the missionaries has endeared him to
them." There is not one word in any contemporaneous letter or diary
of any of the American missionaries or travelers who had to do
with Mr. Ermatinger which is not of the same tenor as this, and
as the extract from Father De Smet heretofore quoted (on p. 124).
But some years later Ermatinger became a Catholic, and so Gray,
some years later still, when Ermatinger was dead, began to abuse
him, and though most of the advocates of the Whitman Legend have
refrained from following Gray in this matter, the very imaginative
Mrs. Dye, in "McLoughlin and Old Oregon" (McClurg, 1900), de
votes Chapter XXII. to "Ermatinger Guards the Frontier," and
though he was certainly in command of Fort Hall in 1838 and 1839,
she represents him as having been sent to Fort Hall in 1840 (the
very year that he helped Newell, Meek and Wilkins to outfit and
drive from there to Walla Walla the first three wagons which ever
went through to the Columbia (Cf. pp. 85-88 ante), to prevent
wagons going beyond there to Oregon, and to deceive the mission
aries and Americans generally as to the accessibility of Oregon
from the United States! She quotes not a solitary authority for
her statements on these points, but says: "He slyly led the mis
sionaries through the most difficult goat trails over the mountains."
. . . "Through jungles (things which cannot be found between
Fort Hall and the Columbia River. — W. I. M.) and over mountain
patches of snow, where never man or beast had trod before." This
related to the parties of 1840 and 1841, and when we come to exam
ine Lieut. Wilkes' report we shall see how very wide of the truth
her statements are as to the missionaries of 1840 as far as their
opinion of the accessibility of Oregon from the States is concerned,
while Newell's account hereinbefore quoted of the wagons of 1840
from Fort Hall to Walla Walla makes it absolutely certain that
Ermatinger did not, as Mrs. Dye asserts, conduct these missionaries
at all. Instead of giving the correct account (as Newell himself
gave it) of Ermatinger helping Meek, Wilkins and himself drive
through three wagons from Fort Hall, Mrs. Dye says in Chapter
XX: "Jo Meek, the American trapper, and his 'pard' had decided
to settle in the Willamette Valley. They went to Fort Boise and
got Whitman's 'old wagon.' Into it they packed their Indian wives
and babies, and drove by a recently discovered trail over the Blue
Mountains to Wailatpu."
For this, as in fact for all the statements in her book, she quotes
no authority.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 355
But that is doubtless the safest way when a writer desires to
write history out of the profound depths of a very lively imagina
tion. (P. 155) Farnham thus relates his reception and treatment at
Fort Walla Walla: "I was kindly received by Mr. Pambrun at
Walla Walla. This gentleman is a half-pay officer in the British
Army. ... I breakfasted with him and his family. ... I
tarried only two hours with the hospitable Mr. Pambrun, but as if
determined that I should remember that I would have been a wel
come guest a much longer time, he put some tea and sugar into the
packs. ... A fine, companionable fellow. I hope he will com
mand Fort Walla Walla as long as Britons occupy it, and live a
hundred years afterward."
(P. 170) He thus describes his reception and treatment at Fort
Vancouver: "Mr. James Douglas, the gentleman who has been in
charge of the post during the absence of Dr. McLoughlin" (while
on his trip to England and back) "conducted us to a room warmed
by a well-fed stove; insisted that I should exchange my wet gar
ments for dry ones, and proffered every other act that the kindest
hospitality could suggest to relieve me of the discomforts resulting
from four months' journeying in the wilderness."
The missionary parties of 1838, 1839 and 1840 were just as
kindly received and treated at these forts as Farnham, except that
the 1838 party (Gray, C. Eells, A. B. Smith, E. Walker and their
wives, Mr. Stevens and Cornelius Rogers) did not go to Walla Walla
and Vancouver. Barrows, with his habitual indifference as to facts,
says (p. 147), speaking of the 1838 party: "Impediments, perils
and Indians do not seem to have been put before their fancies there
at that fur traders' Gibraltar, for they had no carriages. They had
acted on the already well-established impressions in the East that
carriages could not travel to Oregon." This is the sort of imagina
tive writing about Hudson's Bay Co.'s posts that all the advocates
of the Whitman Saved Oregon Story indulge in.
One of Fremont's party to Oregon in 1843 was Col. Wm. Gil
pin, graduate of West Point, who took a distinguished part in
the Mexican War and was afterward Governor of Colorado. In
1867 he testified in Washington, D. C, in the case of the Hud
son's Bay Co. vs. the United States that he spent several days at
Fort Hall in September, 1843, and several weeks there on his re
turn in 1844, and that it was an adobe and log cabin trading post,
worth in his judgment about $2,000, and occupied by eleven men
(Hudson's Bay Co. vs. United States Ev., Vol. VI., p. 330). "So
much for this fur traders' Gibraltar." That there was no "well-
established impression in the States that carriages could not travel
to Oregon" is evident from the fact that Dr. Weed, who kept a re-

356 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
ligious book store in Cincinnati (and was the agent there of the
American Board Coms. Foreign Missions), sent a wagon to the
frontier for this party, which not being suitable they traded for
another, and Gray, in a letter (never yet published) to D. Greene,
Secretary, dated Rendezvous on Wind River, July (no day), 1838,
thus describes its disposition: "The wagon we purchased to sup
ply the place of the one sent by Dr. Weed we have exchanged with
Capt. Fontenelle (an American fur trader never connected with the
Hudson's Bay Co.), who kindly exchanged with us when we could
bring it no farther for want of horses." This was more than seven
hundred miles east of Fort Hall, for, though Gray does not state
the precise place where the trade was made, Mrs. Eells' diary for
May, 31, 1838, says: "Give the wagon to Capts. Drips and Fon
tenelle" (Cf. Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn., 1889, p. 73). This
was when they were camped at Fort William on Laramie Fork of
the Platte River.
The parties of 1839 and 1840 left their wagons at Fort Hall for
precisely the same reason that Whitman left his cart at Fort Boise,
and Gray traded off his wagon to Fontenelle "on account of the
fatigue of our animals."
We have already (pp. 227-232 ante) stated the great extent and
value of Lieut. Wilkes' explorations of Oregon during April to
October, 1841, and quoted from his hitherto unpublished dispatch
No. 98 and from his special report of June 13, 1842, to the Navy
Department. Surely if the Hudson's Bay Co. was disposed to throw obstacles
in the way of the exploration of Oregon by Americans, here was an
opportunity for them to do so very effectively by declining to fur
nish any information, and by dealing out supplies grudgingly, and
only when paid for at the highest market rates.
Turn now to the testimony of (no longer Lieutenant) Rear
Admiral Charles Wilkes, who being duly sworn at his residence, in
Charlotte, N. C, on December 31, 1866, testified as follows in the
case of "The Puget's Sound Agricultural Co. vs. United States,"
after testifying that he was in command of the United States ex
ploring expedition in Oregon in 1841:
"Interrogatory 3. What report of this expedition has ever been
made, and by what authority has it been published?
"Ans. It was made by the direction of the Congress of the
United States and published by their authority, and at the expense
of the Government.
"Int. 4. Was the report so published written by you ; and if so,
from what was it prepared?

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 357
"Ans. It was written by me entire — prepared from my own
notes and from official reports made by the officers under me, in the
carrying out of orders issued by me."
(Idem, p. 234) Cross-examination.
"Cross. Int. 4. How long after the time you saw these posts of
the company was this report written?
"Ans. I kept a diary during the expedition of every day's pro
ceedings and occurrences throughout the whole time embraced in
the publication, written daily, before I retired to rest. It had been
my practice long before the expedition, and has been ever since."
(Idem, p. 238) "Cross Int. 18. Did you not receive from the
officers of the Puget's Sound Agricultural Co. all the attention in
their power and did they not afford you every facility that they
could in carrying out the objects of your expeditions?
"Ans. For the first week I did not. I understood from the gen
tlemen that they were precluded from giving me aid until they re
ceived instructions from Vancouver. Afterward, in arranging my
traveling parties, procuring horses from the Indians, and giving
us models and instructions for making saddles for the horses, they
were very kind. As regards the surveying duties, they afforded me
no assistance. "Int. 19. Was there any government in the country when you
were there?
"Ans. There was none, nor did I look for any.
"Int. 20. How many vessels and how large a force of men had
you while at Nisqually?
"Ans. A sloop-of-war and a brig-of-war, with two (2) launches
and some ten boats. The crews comprised upward of three hundred
(300) men" (Cf. Vol. 8, Rept. P. S. Agl. Co. vs. U. S., pp. 228-238).
Turning to Vol. VI. (Hudson's Bay Co. vs. United States) we
find on p. 289 :
"Int. 62. What opportunities did you have for learning the
value of the trade of the Hudson's Bay Co. ?
"Ans. I had a great many opportunities of learning, in conver
sation, and eliciting opinions in relation to the then value as well
as future prospects of the trade in furs and peltries obtained, the
modes of trapping, fitting out, discipline, and operations at their
various posts, the times and seasons best suited for the conveyance
of the articles dealt in, both by land and water, and also informa
tion in regard to the climate and the character and numbers and
intercourse with the Indians. Also, the emigration from the States
and the condition in which the parties arrived in the territory, to
gether with the routes most practicable through the Rocky Moun
tains," and on p. 299 the following:

358 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Cross Int. 60. Have you not stated, in speaking, in a report
made by you of your explorations after 1841, of the members of the
Willamette Mission and Dr. McLoughlin, that 'they invariably spoke
of Dr. McLoughlin in the highest terms. They were averse to his
absolute rule of the whole territory, and, although it was considered
by them as despotic, they could not adduce any instance of the
wrong application of his power ?' "
"Ans. The paragraphs quoted are to be understood as referring
to the moneyed power which Dr. McLoughlin, being at the head of
the Hudson's Bay Co., could give or withhold at his pleasure. In
some cases he thought proper to extend a helping hand or afford
means to settlers, while in other cases he denied it. This was cal
culated to produce a great deal of ill feeling, as well as good feel
ing. "Int. 61. Have you not also stated at the same time and in the
same report, speaking of the settlers, that the settlers are also de
terred from crimes, as the company has the power of sending them
to Canada for trial ?
"Ans. I have stated so; and this applies to those settlers who
were formerly in the service of the Hudson's Bay Co.
"Int. 62. So far as your knowledge extends, has Dr. McLoughlin
extended to newcomers and settlers, of good character, every facil
ity in his power and also invariably given them the use of cattle,
horses, farming implements and supplies, to facilitate their opera
tions until such time as they are able to provide for themselves?
"Ans. I think he has. All cases of any misunderstanding be
tween himself and settlers, that came to my knowledge, proved his
liberality and solicitude for their welfare.
"Int. 63. Did not the officers of the Hudson's Bay Co. afford to
yourself and the officers under your command every facility within
their power to further the exploration in which you were engaged?
"Ans. I think they did, sir."
Idem, p. 301, the following is of interest, though not bearing
strictly on the matter now immediately under discussion:
"Re-examination." "Int. 5. Whether or no you ever at any time before 1847 made
any estimate of the value of all the posts and trade of the Hudson's
Bay Co. south of the 49th degree of north latitude ; if so, state un
der what circumstances you made it, and what it was?
"Ans. I made such an estimate at the suggestions of many per
sons connected with the Government and Congress, and to Sir George
Simpson during a visit of his to Washington. I think this visit was
about the year, 1846, prior to or about the time of the making of the
treaty. The amount I estimated them to be worth was a half million
dollars for all the posts of Hudson's Bay and Puget's Sound Com-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 359
panies. Sir George Simpson thought it ought to be a million. I
told him that it might be so, but advised him to get that sum in
serted in the treaty, for I thought that if he left it out of the treaty
he might get much less."
Turning now to his great five volume report published in 1845,
let us read a few of the many acknowledgments therein of the
kindness of the Hudson's Bay Co. — not of Dr. McLoughlin at Fort
Vancouver alone, but at every post of the company they visited and
every officer they encountered. Vol. IV., p. 30: "On the 13th of
May, Mr. Anderson, in charge at the Hudson's Bay Co.'s post of
Nisqually, was kind enough to present me with two bullocks for the
crews and a quantity of vegetables, for which we felt ourselves much
indebted. A large supply of milk was also sent to us daily from
the dairy and many other little kindnesses and attentions were
manifested." (Vol. IV., p. 310) "Mr. Anderson's kindnesses had obviated
many of these obstacles."
(Vol. IV., p. 315) "We were kindly received by Mr. Forrest, the
superintendent" (i. e., of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s farm on the Cow
litz), "who quickly made arrangements for canoes to carry us down
the Cowlitz and Columbia rivers to Astoria or Fort George. He
also provided us with an excellent repast and pressed us to remain
over night."
(Idem, p. 320) Describing their arrival at Astoria: "Mr. Bir
nie, the agent of the Hudson's Bay Co., met us at the landing with
lanterns and every assistance, and gave us a truly Scotch welcome.
We soon found ourselves in his quarters, where in a short time a
fire was burning brightly, and his hospitable board spread with
good cheer, although it was past midnight."
(Idem, p. 323) "The Hudson's Bay Co.'s officers possess and
exert a most salutary influence, endeavoring to preserve peace at
all hazards. It is now quite safe for a man to pass in any direction
through the part of the country where their posts are."
[Idem, p. 327) Describing Vancouver, he says: "Between the
steps are two old cannons on sea carriages, with a few shot, to speak
defiance to the natives, who no doubt look upon these as very for
midable weapons of destruction. I mention these, as they are the
only warlike instruments to my knowledge that are within the pick
ets of Vancouver, which differs from all the other forts in having no
bastions, galleries or loop-holes." ... On their arrival at Van
couver they found Dr. McLoughlin absent, but "only a few minutes
elapsed before Dr. McLoughlin came galloping up. He gave us that
kind reception we had been led to expect from his well-known hos
pitality. . . . He at once ordered dinner for us, and we soon

360 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
felt ourselves at home, having comfortable rooms assigned us and
being treated as part of the establishment."
(Idem, p. 328) "All goods are sold at Vancouver at 80 per cent.
advance on the London prime cost; . . . but at the other posts
it is about 100 per cent, to cover the extra expense of transporta
tion." (Idem, p. 331) . . . "All the above-named missionaries ex
cept the Methodists came across the Rocky Mountains; they repre
sented the pass through them as by no means difficult, and that they
had entertained no apprehension of the hostile Indians. They had
accompanied a party of fur traders from St. Louis, and gave a de
plorable account of the dissipation and morals of the party. Messrs.
Griffith and Clarke (should be Griffen and Clark. — W. I. M.) were
entirely disappointed in finding self-support here, and had it not
been for the kindness of Dr. McLoughlin, who took them in, they
would have suffered much. They were advised to settle themselves
on the Faulitz Plains, where I understand they have since taken land
and succeeded in acquiring quite respectable farms." ... "I
was introduced to several of the missionaries. . . . They, for
the most part, make Vancouver their home, where they are kindly
received and well entertained at no expense to themselves. The
liberality and freedom from sectarian principles of Dr. McLoughlin
may be estimated from his being thus hospitable to missionaries of
so many Protestant denominations, although he is a professed Cath
olic, and has a priest of the same faith officiating daily at the
chapel." (Idem, p. 333) "Wherever the operations of the company ex
tend they have opened the way to future emigration, provided the
means necessary for the success of the emigrants and rendered its"
(the country's) "peaceable occupation an easy and cheap task."
(Idem, p. 341) "On the 3d of June we made arrangements for
leaving Vancouver and proceeding up the Willamette; but the
weather was so stormy that we deferred our departure until the fol
lowing day. Dr. McLoughlin had kindly furnished us with a large
boat, and although we had provided ourselves with provisions, we
found in her a large basket filled with everything that travelers
could need or kindness suggest."
(Idem, p. 343) "There was a petty dispute between Rev. Mr.
Waller and the company, and he complained of them. It seems that
the company refuses to buy any beaver skins except from the hunt
ers and trappers, and he accuses them of monopoly in consequence.
The company, on the other hand, say that they have no idea of sell
ing goods out of their own stores for the purpose of enabling others
to enter into competition with them; and that they will spare no
expense to keep the trade as long as they can in their hands. This

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 361
is certainly not unfair. I cannot help feeling that it is quite un-
suited to the life of a missionary to be entering into trade of any
kind. To embark in traffic must, I think, tend to destroy the use
fulness of a missionary, or divert his attention from the great cause
in which he is engaged. ... I am disposed to think that any
complaints against the Hudson's Bay Co. for endeavoring to keep
the trade in their own hands come with an ill grace from the mem
bers of a mission who are daily receiving the kindest attentions
and hospitality from its officers."
(Idem, p. 393) "In taking leave of Mr. Ogden, I must express
the great indebtedness I am under for his attentions and kindness
to Mr. Drayton, as well as for the facility he offered him for ob
taining information during their progress up the Columbia. I am
also under obligations to him for much interesting information
respecting this country, which he gave without hesitation or reserve.
He was anxious Mr. Drayton should accompany him to Okanagan.
(Idem, p. 395) "As respects the success of the missionary la
bors, it is very small here" (i. e., at Wailatpu).
(Idem, p. 401) "By the kindness of Mr. McKinlay (chief trader
in charge of Fort Walla Walla) and by the direction of Mr. Ogden,
Mr. Drayton found himself fitted with good horses and every con
venience requisite for the journey, besides a quantity of provisions."
Lieut. Johnson's party had gone east from Puget's Sound to the
Columbia over a region previously wholly unexplored and nearly
in the center line east and west of that part north and west of the
Columbia, which was the only part really in dispute between the
United States and Great Britain after 1824, and their reception at
Colvile is thus stated.
(Idem, p. 440) "They (i. e., part of Johnson's party) reached
Fort Colvile late in the afternoon, and were all soon made to forget
the fatigues of the journey by the kind attentions of Messrs. Mc
Donald and Maxwell, who had charge of the post."
(Idem, p. 443) "Lieut. Johnson having reached Fort Colvile
with his party, it was determined that they should spend three days
there, not only to refresh their horses, but to repair the damages
which their saddles and packs had received. For these purposes
Mr. McDonald afforded every facility in his power, besides supply
ing all their wants, and received in payment of the articles he fur
nished Lieut. Johnson's orders upon the ship, to be collected through
the authorities at Vancouver."
(Idem, p. 450) "Of the more northern parts of the Oregon Ter
ritory" (i. e., north of 49 degrees), "through the kindness of the
officers of the Hudson's Bay Co. I obtained much interesting infor
mation, little of which has, I believe, been yet communicated to the
public."

362 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
(Idem, p. 454) "On the 19th (June, 1841) Lieut. Johnson was
preparing to depart, with his party, having recruited his horses
and mended his accoutrements. The kindness of Messrs. McDonald
and Maxwell supplied all their wants, and enabled the party to
leave Colvile in a better state than they had originally departed
from Nisqually. To these gentlemen my thanks are especially due
for their attention to the officers, who all spoke in high terms of the
kindness they received. After their departure they found that the
ladies of the establishment had been equally mindful of their com
forts, in not only filling their haversacks, but in supplying them
with moccasins."
(Idem, p. 463) "They" (i. e., part of Lieut. Johnson's party)
"reached Walla Walla before dark and were kindly welcomed by
Mr. McLean, one of the company's clerks, who was in charge of that
post." (Idem, p. 468) "On the 4th of July they" (i. e., Lieut. Johnson's
party) "left the fort and crossed the river. . . . Mr. McLean's
kindness and attention were similar to that already met with, and
he provided them with necessary horses, provisions, etc."
(Idem, p. 470) "On the 15th" (July) "reached Nisqually, all
well, having performed the journey of about 1,000 miles." . . .
"They traversed a route which white men had never before taken,
thus enabling us to become acquainted with a portion of the coun
try about which all had before been conjecture."
(Vol. V., p. 123) "Soon after the wreck of the Peacock, Capt.
Hudson, hearing that Dr. McLoughlin was in want of hands to aid
him in the harvest, dispatched the Kanakas (i. e., Sandwich Island
ers) belonging to the Peacock up to Vancouver to assist in gather
ing it in. It afforded some little pleasure to contribute this aid, and
thus in some small degree to repay the attentions and kindness of
the company's officers." . . . "The articles necessary for this
purpose (i. e., the repairs of the brig Oregon), which we ourselves
were not able to supply, were cheerfully furnished us at reasonable
prices from the stores and workshops of the company. Indeed,
nothing could exceed the kind attentions that were lavished upon
us ; and the moment we expressed a desire it was immediately com
plied with." . . . "It will be remembered that Passed Midship
men Eld and Colvocoressis were ordered to make a journey through
the Chickeeles country to Gray's Harbor, just as the ship was get
ting under way from Nisqually, and that circumstances rendered
their departure more hurried than it was desirable it should be.
But through the kindness of Mr. Anderson and Capts. McNeil and
Scarborough" (all three Hudson's Bay Co.'s officers. — W. I. M.),
"the party was not left in want of anything very material."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 363
(Idem, p. 136) . . . The number of posts occupied by the
Hudson's Bay Co. in this territory is twenty-five. (This includes
those west of the Rockies between 49 deg. and 54 deg. 40 min. — W.
I. M.). These are located at the best points for fur trade, and so as
to secure the resort of the Indians without interfering with their
usual habits. Places are also occupied in the vicinity of their
abodes during the most favorable part of the year for obtaining the
proceeds of their hunting. This is regulated with much skill, and
the portion of the country once under their care is never suffered
to become exhausted of furs ; for whenever they discover a decrease
the ground is abandoned for several years until the animals have
time to increase again. A charge has been made against the com
pany that they were desirous of exterminating the beaver south of
the Columbia, and would continue to hunt them until every fur-
bearing animal was exhausted. This from the information I re
ceived I believe to be erroneous; the story has probably proceeded
from feelings of rivalry on the part of those who spread the repout
Another charge made against them of exciting attacks on the free
trappers, who are generally from our borders, is to be received with
many allowances. It has been made in many cases from interested
motives, and I am satisfied that nothing of this kind could ema
nate from Vancouver or from any of the officers.
"The whole conduct of Dr. McLoughlin is totally at variance
with such a course ; every facility has been at all times extended to
newcomers and settlers; it is sufficient that they are of good char
acter, and the use of cattle and horses, farming utensils and sup-
lies is invariably extended to facilitate their operations until such
time as they are able to provide for themselves.
"During our stay at Vancouver I had the pleasure of seeing
many members of the Wallamette Missions" (i. e., the Methodist
Mission. — W. I. M.), "but they were unable to give me much infor
mation. They invariably spoke of Dr. McLoughlin in the highest
terms. They were averse to his absolute rule over the whole terri
tory, and although it was considered by them as despotic, they could
not adduce any instance of the wrong application of his power. He
is, notwithstanding, extremely unpopular among all classes of our
countrymen, but for what reason it is difficult to conceive."
Idem, p. 147, contains the following letter from Wilkes to Dr.
McLoughlin and Mr. Douglas, dated U. S. Brig Porpoise, Baker's
Bay, October 5, 1841 :
"Gentlemen: My last duty before leaving the Columbia I feel
to be that of expressing to you my sincere thanks for the important
aid and facilities which you have afforded the expedition on all oc
casions for carrying out the object of our visit to this part of the
world ; and be assured it will prove a very pleasant part of my duty

364 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
to make a due representation of it to my Government. Your per
sonal kindness and friendly attentions to myself and officers from
our first arrival have laid me under many obligations, which I trust
it may be at some future day in our power to return," and he adds :
. . . "At the same time I wrote a letter to our Government,
informing them of the assistance we had received, stating the ser
vices these gentlemen had rendered us, and asking that an expres
sion of acknowledgment might be made through the British Min
ister at Washington to the directors of the Hudson's Bay Co. in
England." The letter to our Government was dated October 31,
1841, and is as follows:
"U. S. Ship Vincennes, Port of San Francisco,
"Upper Cal., Oct. 31, 1841.
"Sir: It becomes my pleasing duty to make known to the Gov
ernment previous to leaving the northwest coast of America the
strong obligations we feel for the many kind attentions and courte
sies which we have received from John McLoughlin, Esq., Chief
Factor of the Hon. Hudson's Bay Co., at Fort Vancouver, and to all
the officers of the honorable company with whom we have had in
tercourse in the prosecution of the duties in the Oregon Territory
required by my instructions.
"These gentlemen have done everything to facilitate our opera
tions by the prompt attentions and liberal supplies rendered the
officers and crew of the late U. S. ship Peacock on the occasion of
her wreck on the bar of the Columbia, and also in the outfit of the
U. S. Brig Oregon, for which I view the expedition greatly indebted,
having enabled me to carry my instructions more promptly and
fully into effect.
"I cannot but consider the Government in duty bound to make
a proper expression to the Hon. Hudson's Bay Co., through the Brit
ish Minister at Washington, for the liberal services rendered, which
I beg leave to assure you would be extremely gratifying to my feel
ings and duly appreciated by them.
"I have the honor to be, sir, most respectfully, your obedient
servant, (Signed) "CHAS. WILKES."
For other acknowledgments by Lieut. Wilkes of kindness re
ceived from the Hudson's Bay Co.'s officers, Cf. Vol. IV., pp. 322,
329, 364, 369, 372, 404, 419, 433, 434, 445, 494, and Vol. V., pp. 135,
136.) Before parting with Lieut. Wilkes it seems proper to take up
the account of the building of the first small ship in Oregon, as
published in "Transactions of Oregon Pioneer Assn." for 1891, pp.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 365
181-192, and compare it with Wilkes' account of the matter as far
as he and the Hudson's Bay Co. were concerned in the matter.
In the "Transactions" as above is a letter (undated, but which
seems to have been written somewhere about 1880), to Hon. J. W.
Nesmith, by Joseph Gale, one of the little company who helped to
build "The Star of Oregon" in 1841, and who in September, 1842,
as captain, with a crew of four men and a little Indian boy and one
passenger, sailed the schooner Star (48 ft. 8 in. on the keel and 10
ft. 9 in. on the beam) from the mouth of the Columbia to San Fran
cisco. The letter is too long to quote in full and I will only quote such
parts as are necessary to consider in connection with the attitude
of the Hudson's Bay Co. toward Americans in Oregon.
(Trans., p. 181) "This is intended only as a synopsis of the fol
lowing transactions:
"It was not until the latter part of the summer of 1840 that the
spirit of American enterprise began to manifest itself in Oregon.
Previous to that it appeared to be dead; but, instead, it was only
inactive for the want of something to arouse it into action. Among
the desiderata of the country were horses and cattle. It is true that
there were quite a number of cattle in the valley, and these were
held by Ewing Young, the Methodist Mission and the Hudson's Bay
Co., and with such tenacity that it was next to an impossibility to
purchase them at any reasonable price. The want of these were
severely felt by nearly every settler in the Wallamet Valley. How
to better our cases by supplying ourselves with such animals was a
question that troubled and puzzled us all.
"Consequent upon our deficiency was the question of the practi
cability of building a vessel and sail her to California and there
dispose of her for stock. This proposition was favorably received
and thoroughly discussed pro and con. The result was an organiza
tion of a company of the following-named men for that purpose,
viz.: John Canan, Ralph Kilbourn, Pleasant Armstrong, Henry
Woods, George Davis and Jacob Green. These men secured the ser
vices of Felix Hathaway, an excellent ship carpenter, to lay out,
assist and superintend the work generally. They all shortly after
got their tools, provisions, etc., together and descended the Wal
lamet River to near its junction with the Columbia, and there, on
the east side of Swan Island, selected a site upon which to build
their vessel. . . . (p. 182). "The work went rapidly on, not
withstanding the opposition of the Hudson's Bay Co., which had
been anticipated. . . . It is not pertinent to this narrative to
dwell (p. 183) upon the treatment of the Hudson's Bay Co. to us.
Suffice it to say that they did all they could to deter us from the
work; but it went on until completed in spite of them. And had

366 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
it not been for Captain Wilkes, in all probability we would have
been obliged to lay the vessel up on account of not being able to
procure cordage and canvas for rigging and sails.
"He interviewed Dr. McLoughlin on the subject pretty roughly.
The doctor excused himself by saying that he thought they were
making a coffin for themselves, for, said he, 'There is Gale at the
head, who has been in the Hudson's Bay Co. for several years as a
hunter and trapper, and what does he or the rest of them know
about the managing and navigating of a vessel at sea?' 'Never
mind,' said or retorted the captain, 'I have seen enough to convince
me that he knows what he is about, and if you have such things as
they need you will oblige not only me, but, I believe, every Ameri
can in the country, by letting them have them, and should they not
be able to pay you for them, and as I shall want a considerable
amount of such things myself, you may charge the aggregated
amount to me and I will settle the same with you.' 'Oh, well, well,'
said the doctor, 'they can have as much of cordage and other ma
terials as they wish.'
"So the store, through Commodore Wilkes' influence, was thrown
open to us ; but, alas, the season was too far advanced for us to get
the vessel in readiness to make the passage that fall. We, never
theless, while the chances of getting those things were so favorable,
and for fear that after the Commodore would leave the river
might shut down on us again, purchased an ample supply of all the
necessaries we needed, such as cordage, canvas, paints, oils, etc.,
etc., for which we paid the company in wheat and furs of different
kinds, and returned thanks to Commodore Wilkes for his generous
offer." ... (p. 184) "I received a letter from Commodore
Wilkes, in which he stated that he was on the point of leaving the
country, and that he felt greatly interested in the successful issue
of our enterprise, and as there was no port or town from which we
could hail or clear, and that without such, or papers to show from
and to what Government we belonged, there would be the proba
bility of having our vessel seized. And he further stated :
" 'If you can convince me that you understand navigation, I am
ready to furnish you with papers that will be honored in whatever
port you may enter, for I do not think it advisable for you or any
other person to attempt it without an adequate knowledge of that
science, it matters not in other respects how good a seaman one
may be.'
"How generous and noble the old Commodore. He was perfectly
right. Now for me to wait on him in person was out of the ques
tion. I therefore called Kilbourn and told him to get his pen, ink
and papers and write while I dictated. So we soon had the follow
ing letter written:

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 367
" 'To Commodore Charles Wilkes, of the United States Navy.
'"Dear Sir: I received your very kind letter and am very
thankful for the interest you have taken in our affairs, but I am
very sorry that I cannot see you in person, owing to being confined
to my bed by the fever and ague. I acknowledge the propriety of
your remarks in reference to going to sea without a knowledge of
navigation, and also the entering of a foreign port without papers
to show from whence I came. I do not, my dear sir, profess to be
a consummate navigator, yet I have a sufficient knowledge of that
science to take a vessel to any given port upon the globe, and, as it
is almost impossible for me to see you in person, you will very much
oblige me by proposing such questions which, should I be able to
satisfactorily answer, may convince you of that fact. With much
respect, " 'I am your obliged and humble servant, " 'JOSEPH GALE.'
" 'To Commodore Charles Wilkes, of the U. S. M.'
"This letter was dispatched immediately to the mouth of the
Columbia River and delivered to the Commodore. The next morn
ing our boat started on its return and in three days after I received
an answer in which were a few questions regarding the science of
navigation, which I answered and dispatched in a second letter to
the Commodore, and on the return of our boat I was highly rejoiced
to find that my answers were satisfactory. In consequence of this
I received a large document with the United States seal upon it,
which was the papers alluded to by the Commodore.
"The exploring squadron left the country a few days afterward.
The grand old Commodore, before leaving, made us a present of a
flag, an ensign, and also a compass, a kedge anchor, and hawser 140
fathoms long, a log line and two log glasses — 14 and 20 second
glasses. I bought a quadrant epitome and a nautical almanac from
Kilbourn, who was Capt. Couch's mate, for which I paid him $45.
These were sufficient for all ordinary purposes."
It was not till September 3, 1842, that they were at Astoria ready
with their little craft to try the voyage to San Francisco, and ad
verse winds prevented them from putting to sea till September 12,
and on the 17th of September they reached their destination. They
sold the little schooner for 350 cows, and the following spring they
recruited a party of forty-two men for Oregon, all bringing more or
less stock, and May 17, 1843, started to drive to Oregon "1,250 head
of cattle, 600 head of mares, horses and mules— mares, horses and
colts principally — and nearly 5,000 head of sheep, and after a toil
some journey of seventy-five days arrived in the Willamette Valley
with comparatively small loss. The rest of what disposition was

368 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
made of that stock is known, I presume, to everybody. There is one
thing certain, it done away with the stock monopoly and set the
people of Oregon in a fair way of getting on in the future. This
result was brought about by the indomitable wills of a few men
who are now scarcely known."
So much for Capt. Gale's account, written somewhere near thirty-
eight years after the event, and without any claim of reference to
any contemporaneous written diary or other record of the affair
except as hereinbefore quoted and the following two brief notes (pp.
186-7) : "I penned the following note to Mr. Douglas, Dr. Mc
Loughlin being absent:
" 'James Douglas, Esq.
" 'Sir : As I am now on my way to California, if you have any
letters or commands that you wish to send to Mr. Ray, residing
there, I will, with pleasure, take them to him.
" 'Very respectfully,
" 'JOSEPH GALE.'
"I received the following answer:
" 'Mr. Joseph Gale.
" 'Sir : As the schooner Cadborough, Capt. Scarborough, will
leave for that port soon we will not trouble you in that particular.'
(His very words.) " 'Yours, etc.,
" 'J. DOUGLAS.'
"Of course, like the rest, he thought such a thing as our reach
ing California was all braggadocio in us."
It is to be observed, first, that naturally Mr. Gale desired to
make the best showing for himself throughout the transaction ; and
second, that Gale had spent some years in the Rocky Mountains as
an American trapper before going to Oregon to settle as a farmer
and stock raiser (Cf. Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn., 1880, pp.
10-12) and evidently had the strong prejudice against the Hudson's
Bay Co. resulting from that life, reinforced by hearing from 1865
to 1880 the constant iteration and reiteration of the accusations
hereinbefore quoted against the Hudson's Bay Co. of Gray and
Spalding and sundry other advocates of the Whitman Legend ; and
third, that, though there is no reason to question his honesty and
the intensity of his patriotism, it would seem from Wilkes' account
of this same matter that Gale's recollection was not entirely trust
worthy after the lapse of thirty-eight years as to the cause of the
attitude of the Hudson's Bay Co. toward them at first, or as to ex
actly what changed that attitude a little later.
In Vol. IV. of Wilkes' Report, written as he testified entirely by
himself, and published not thirty-eight, but only four years after

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 369
the event, and prepared not from unassisted memory, but by con
stant reference, not merely to notes, but to a diary which he testi
fied he always wrote up daily "before retiring to rest," we find his
account of this affair as follows :
(P. 337) "During my stay at Vancouver I had a visit from
three of a party of eight young Americans, who were desirous of
leaving the country, but could not accomplish it in any other way
but by building a vessel. They were not dissatisfied with the terri
tory, but they would not settle themselves dow^. in it because there
were no young women to marry except squaws or half-breeds. They
informed me that they were then engaged in building a vessel on
Oak Island, in the Willamette, where I promised to visit them on
my way up the river. I found them in difficulty with Dr. McLough
lin, who had refused to furnish them with any more supplies, in
consequence, as he stated, of their having obtained those already
given them under false pretenses."
(Idem, p. 342) "We encamped on the island occupied by the
young Americans, of whom I spoke in the preceding chapter (p.
337) and close to the place where they were building their vessel.
The group of which it is one is called the Oak Islands.
"On landing we were introduced to them all. They had reached
the Oregon country by crossing the Rocky Mountains a year before,
and worked on the Willamette, where they at first proposed to set
tle themselves; but they found that that was out of the question,
as there was little or no prospect of their being contented, and they
were now bent on leaving the country at all hazards. Every one
with whom I spoke gave them a good character, except one, and I
found that shortly before my visit he had been turned out of the
partnership. "The vessel they were building was a small schooner. One of
their number having served a short time in a ship-yard in the United
States, the rest were employed as his assistants, cutting timber and
preparing the plank, which they procured from the cedar on the
bank of the river.
"I explained to them the cause of Dr. McLoughlin's refusal to
assist them, which they denied most positively. I then told them
it was proper for them to deny having authorized any trick or
deception, on doing which I was sure they would receive any assist
ance that lay in the power of Dr. McLoughlin. This they subse
quently did, and I was informed that they then received all the aid
he had in his power to give. I tried to dissuade these young men
from making their voyage; for I found on conversing with them
that not one of them knew anything about the sailing of a vessel or
navigation.

370 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"I therefore knew how great dangers they would experience on
the voyage, even to California, whither they intended to go, with
the intention of taking sea-otter by the way on the coast of Oregon.
After their arrival at San Francisco it was their plan to sell their
vessel and cargo, if they were fortunate enough to obtain any; or,
if not, to go down the coast further (p. 343), when they would cross
over the country and return by the way of Mexico or Texas. It
gave me much pleasure to see the buoyancy of spirit so character
istic of our countrymen with which they carried on their plan. Be
fore I left the Columbia in September they asked me for a sea let
ter for their protection, at the same time informing me that their
vessel was launched, met their expectation and was called the 'Star
of Oregon.' . . . The next morning I left the boat builders,
after assuring them that they should have all the assistance I could
give them in their outfit."
This account, it will be seen, is radically different from Gale's,
and it would appear that the decision not to try and hunt sea-otter
along the rock-bound coast of Oregon (which with their inexperi
ence in navigation would almost certainly have meant the wreck
ing of their craft and the probable loss of all on board), but to go
to San Francisco and sell their craft and return to Oregon with
stock and settle there was an afterthought during the year that
elapsed between the finishing of their craft and their start for Cali
fornia. Gale's account represents Wilkes as calling McLoughlin to
account, but Wilkes says that he advised them to go to McLoughlin
and deny having authorized any trick or deception, and that "they
subsequently did this and then received all the aid he" (i. e., Mc
Loughlin) "had it in his power to give."
Perhaps an explanation of most of Gale's mistakes lies in the
fact that according to his own account he was not actively con
nected with the work of building the schooner till after she had
been launched from the ways at Oak Island and towed up the Wil
lamette to the falls to be finished (i. e., till after Wilkes' visit to
the boat-builders' camp), and that the friction with McLoughlin
was due to some actions of some of the other seven men concerned
in the matter of which he was not fully informed.
Mrs. Dye not only assumes all of Gale's account to be accurate,
but, according to her usual habit, embellishes his tale with sundry
(supposed) discussions at Fort Vancouver and conversations with
Dr. McLoughlin and Lieutenant Wilkes, duly inclosed in the quo
tation marks, which with her only serve to show that she has found
the alleged quotations in the exhaustless storehouse of her own re
markable imagination (Cf. McLoughlin and Old Oregon, pp. 185-
193).

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 371
It will be noticed that Gale accuses the Methodist Mission with
aiding the Hudson's Bay Co. to keep up a monopoly of cattle in the
Willamette. He also mentions Ewing Young, but as Young died
in February, 1841, while the "Star" was not launched till late in
May, 1841, he must certainly be left out of the account. He also
takes credit for breaking the monopoly in cattle as the result of the
building of the "Star of Oregon," and his daring voyage in her to
San Francisco with only four men and an Indian boy as crew, none
of whom knew anything about a sailor's duties. This totally ignores
the cattle driven from the States by the 1842 party under White,
and the much greater number — some 1,300 head — brought by the
1843 migration, which reached the Willamette only sixty days after
Gale's party.
While Gale's party are entitled to much credit, it would appear
therefore that their efforts were not quite so indispensable to the
welfare of Oregon as he seemed to imagine when, in his old age, he
wrote what he doubtless intended for a true account of the building
of the first sea-going craft in the Old Oregon Territory, and of his
exploit in sailing her to California and leading back a party to
Oregon with horses, cattle and sheep.
Of the experiences of the 1842, 1843 and 1845 migrations at Fort
Hall we have written fully in Chapter V., and have shown that,
according to all the contemporaneous statements of the leaders and
members of those parties that are known to exist, they were all
kindly treated at that post, and that there was not the least effort
made to prevent them from going on to the settlements in Oregon
with wagons. I have found no contemporaneous record of the 1844
party except the diary of Rev. Edw. E. Parrish, who does not say
one word about their reception and treatment at Hall, Boise, Walla
Walla or Vancouver (Cf. Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn., 1888,
p. 82). Before we take up the contemporaneous testimony of the leaders
and members of those parties as to their reception and treatment at
Walla Walla and Vancouver, let us examine Lieutenant Fremont's
report of his second expedition, in 1843-4, and the experience of the
scientists Nuttall and Townsend.
Following Spalding (Cf. Pacific, November 9, 1865, and same in
Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 37, 41st Cong., 3d Sess.) and Gray (Cf. his "His
tory of Oregon," pp. 290 and 314), Nixon (Cf. "How Marcus Whit
man Saved Oregon," p. 131) asserts that Fremont was detailed to
escort the 1843 migration (which they all claim was under Whit
man's leadership).
The claim that Fremont was to escort this migration is as ri
diculous as all the rest of the Whitman Legend, for Fremont's re-

372 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
port (p. 106 of Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 174, 28th Cong., 1st Sess., being
the second page of the report of the second expedition), distinctly
declares that "it was to vary the route to the Rocky Mountains from
that of the 1842 expedition," which had followed the Oregon trail
all the way to the South Pass.
Fremont did not start from the Missouri frontier till May 29th,
whereas the Oregon migration had started May 22, and he only kept
the Oregon trail to the crossing of the Kansas River, eighty-eight
miles from Independence, Mo., and then left that trail and kept up
the Kansas, and then went southwest to the Arkansas River, and
did not again reach the Oregon trail till 761 miles from Independ
ence on that trail, but 1,066 by the route he had traveled.
This put him so far behind the migration that he did not over
take its rear till August 22, on Bear River, and he parted from it
on the 26th at Soda Springs and went to explore the Great Salt
Lake, and saw no more of the migration until he reached Fort Walla
Walla. At Fort Hall he makes no other mention of Mr. Richard Grant
than this, under date of September 19, 1843: "I rode up to the
fort and purchased from Mr. Grant (the officer in charge of the
post) several very indifferent horses and five oxen in very fine or
der." The migration, so vastly greater than was expected, had
stripped the fort of all supplies that could be spared (Cf. Fremont's
Report, p. 149).
October 8, 1843, the expedition reached Fort Boise, and Fremont
thus states what reception they encountered:
"We were received with an agreeable hospitality by Mr. Payette,
an officer of the Hudson's Bay Co. in charge of the fort ; all of whose
garrison consisted of a Canadian engage." . . . "Mr. Payette
had made but slight attempts at cultivation, his efforts being lim
ited to raising a few vegetables, in which he succeeded tolerably
well, the post being principally supported by salmon. He was very
hospitable and kind to us, and we made a sensible impression upon
all his comestibles; but our principal inroad was into the dairy,
which was abundantly supplied, stock appearing to thrive extremely
well; and we had an unusual luxury in a present of fresh butter,
which was, however, by no means equal to that of Fort Hall, prob
ably from some accidental cause."
October 26, 1843, they reached Fort Nez Perce or Walla Walla,
and the report says: "Mr. McKinlay, the commander of the post,
received us with great civility; and both to myself and the heads
of the emigrants who were there at the time, extended the rites of
hospitality in a comfortable dinner to which he invited us."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 373
November 8, 1843, they reached Fort Vancouver, and the report
says: "I immediately waited upon Dr. McLoughlin, the executive
officer of the Hudson's Bay Co. in the territory west of the Rocky
Mountains, who received me with the courtesy and hospitality for
which he has been eminently distinguished, and which makes a
forcible and delightful impression on a traveler from the long wil
derness from which we had issued. I was immediately supplied
by him with the necessary stores and provisions to refit and sup
port my party in our contemplated winter journey to the States ;
and also with a Mackinaw boat and canoes, manned with Canadian
and Iroquois voyagers and Indians, for their transportation to The
Dalles of the Columbia. In addition to this efficient kindness in
furnishing me with these necessary supplies, I received from him
a warm and gratifying sympathy in the suffering which his great
experience led him to anticipate for us in our homeward journey
and a letter of recommendation and credit for any officers of the
Hudson's Bay Co. into whose posts we might be driven by unex
pected misfortune.
"Of course the future supplies for my party were paid for, bills
on the Government of the United States being readily taken; but
every hospitable attention was extended to me, and I accepted an
invitation to take a room in the fort and to make myself at home
while I staid.
"I found many American emigrants at the fort; others had al
ready crossed the river into their land of promise — the Willamette
Valley. Others were daily arriving, and all of them had been fur
nished with shelter, as far as it could be afforded by the buildings
connected with the establishment. Necessary clothing and provis
ions (the latter to be afterward returned in kind from the produce
of their labor) were also furnished. This friendly assistance was
of very great value to the emigrants, whose families were otherwise
exposed to much suffering in the winter rains, which had now com
menced, at the same time that they were in want of all the com
mon necessities of life."
We have already shown in Chapter V. what very material ser
vice Payette rendered Fremont by informing him of the easier pass
over the Blue Mountains, of which he had informed Farnham in
1839. Next let us see what treatment was accorded to the two emi
nent naturalists, Thomas Nuttall, a botanist, and John K. Town-
send, an ornithologist, who went to Oregon with Wyeth's second
party in 1834.
In 1839 Mr. Townsend published, in Philadelphia, his "Narrative
of a Journey Across the Rocky Mountains to the Columbia River,"
which was immediately republished in London, and on p. 169 he

374 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
thus describes their arrival and reception at Fort Vancouver: "On
the beach in front of the fort we were met by Mr. Lee, the mis
sionary (who had gone on in advance with his associates from Fort
Hall), and Dr. John McLoughlin, the Chief Factor and Governor of
the Hudson's Bay posts in this vicinity.
"The doctor is a large, dignified and very noble-looking man,
with a fine expressive countenance and remarkably bland and pleas
ing manners. The missionaries introduced Mr. Nuttall and myself
in due form, and we were greeted and received with a frank and
unassuming politeness which was most peculiarly grateful to our
feelings. "He requested us to consider his house our home, provided a
separate room for our use, a servant to wait upon us, and furnished
us with every convenience which we could possibly wish for.
"I shall never cease to feel grateful to him for his disinterested
kindness to the poor, houseless and travel-worn strangers."
On p. 244 he writes thus of his reception by Mr. Pambrun when
on his way up the Columbia in 1836 to explore the Blue Mountains :
"On the evening of the 6th (of June) we arrived at Walla Walla
or Nez Perces Fort, where I was kindly received by Mr. Pambrun,
the superintendent."
On p. 255 he thus describes his reception at Fort George (or
Astoria) in September: "On the 24th I embarked in a canoe with
Indians for Fort George and arrived in two days. Here I was
kindly received by the superintendent, Mr. James Birnie, and prom
ised every assistance in forwarding my views."
On p. 263 he writes thus of his leaving Fort Vancouver for his
return home via the Sandwich Islands: "I took leave of Dr. Mc
Loughlin with feelings akin to those with which I should bid adieu
to an affectionate parent; and to his fervent 'God bless you, sir,
and may you have a happy meeting with your friends,' I could only
reply by a look of the sincerest gratitude. Words are inadequate
to express my deep sense of the obligations which I feel under to
this truly generous and excellent man, and I fear I can only repay
them by the sincerity with which I shall always cherish the recol
lection of his kindness and the ardent prayers I shall breathe for
his prosperity and happiness."
On p. 265 he writes thus of the treatment received from the
Hudson's Bay Co.'s agent at Honolulu : "On my arrival Mr. George
Pelly, agent of the Honorable Hudson's Bay Co., kindly invited me
to his house, where I remained three days, and at the end of that
time Mr. Jones procured for me a neat and very comfortable grass
cottage, in which I live like a prince."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 375
Returning now to the 1842 migration. "Hasting's Emigrant's
Guide to Oregon and California" (p. 20) says: "Arriving at Fort
Boise, we were very kindly received and entertained by the gentle
man in charge, who kindly proffered to let us have such provisions
as we needed and to render us any additional service in his power."
(P. 27) After describing their arrival in the lower settlements
of Oregon he goes on : "The country did not appear to us, in real
ity, that delightful region which we had thus long and laboriously
sought. Dismay and dissatisfaction appeared to be visibly im
pressed upon every countenance, and deep discontent pervaded
every breast. All, however, soon obtained temporary residences.
Dr. McLoughlin kindly proffered to render them any assistance in
his power. He proposed to sell goods on a credit to all those who
were unable to make immediate payment. He also commenced
building extensively at the falls of the Wallamette, and thereby
gave immediate employment, at the highest wages, to all those who
wished to labor."
(P. 51) "Dr. McLoughlin, who is Chief Factor of the Hudson's
Bay Co. west of the Rocky Mountains, is in charge" (i. e., at Van
couver). "He is courteous, intelligent and companionable, and a
more kind, hospitable and liberal gentleman the world never saw.
Every possible attention, kindness and hospitality are extended to
all who visit him, either upon business or otherwise ; some of whom
he invites to his own table, where they are treated with all the
courtesy and etiquette of English refinement.
"For all others a spacious apartment is provided, which is called
the 'bachelors' hall,' and which contains a convenient sitting-room,
a dining-room and several comfortable lodging apartments, all of
which are provided expressly for those who are not invited to his
private table. Those who occupy the 'bachelors' hall' are also fur
nished with all the luxuries of the fort, servants are in readiness to
give them any attention, and, although they remain for weeks, or
even months together, as many have, the kindness, attention and
hospitality of the doctor are still unremittingly bestowed. But the
kindness and hospitality of this gentleman do not end here, for
when his guests wish to return to their homes a cart with servants
is sent to convey their baggage or goods to the river, and all this,
too, without promise or hope of reward. A Mr. James Douglas,
who is occasionally in charge of this fort in the absence of the doc
tor, is also an intelligent gentleman, and is alike courteous, kind
and hospitable as the doctor.
(P. 58) "A kindness and hospitality exist, among those pio
neers of the west, which are almost unparalleled. Upon the arrival
of emigrants in the country immediate arrangements are made by

376 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
the former settlers to provide them with houses and provisions, and
every aid is rendered them in making their selection of lands and
procuring houses for themselves. The doctor, McLoughlin, also
affords them every aid in his power, furnishing them with goods
and teams upon a credit, if they are unable to make immediate
payment, providing them with wheat for their bread and seed and
receiving wheat the next year in payment, and letting them have
cows and other cattle, to be returned in such kind as shall be agreed
upon, with a portion of the increase. This kindness and generosity
of the doctor are not confined to emigrants upon their arrival
merely, but they are extended to every settler and respectable in
habitant in all the various portions of the country."
Dr. Elijah White, sub-Indian Agent, in his report to the Com
missioner of Indian Affairs, dated April 1, 1843, says: "I think I
mentioned the kind and hospitable manner we were received and
entertained on the way by the gentlemen of the Hudson's Bay Co.,
and the cordial and most handsome reception I met with at Fort
Vancouver from Gov. McLoughlin and his worthy associate Chief
Factor, James Douglas, Esq."
We have already in Chapter V. discussed the account of the mi
gration of 1843, in George Wilkes' "History of Oregon," based on
Burnett's letters, and quoted its account of the kindness to it of
Captain Richard Grant, the Hudson's Bay officer in charge of Fort
Hall.
Of their reception at Fort Boise nothing is said, but of their
treatment at Forts Walla Walla and Vancouver Burnett wrote as
follows: (Geo. Wilkes, p. 90) "We found Mr. McKinlay, a very
intelligent Scotchman, in charge of this post, and at his hands re
ceived every civility and attention."
(Idem, p. 93) He thus describes his arrival and reception at
Fort Vancouver: "On my arrival I was received with great kind
ness by Doctor McLoughlin and Mr. James Douglas, the second in
command. They both tendered me the hospitalities of the fort,
which offer, it is scarcely necessary to say, I accepted willingly
and with pleasure. Dr. McLoughlin is the Governor or Chief Factor
of the Hudson's Bay Co., a situation most difficult and arduous in
its duties, and requiring most consummate ability in the person
aspiring to fill it. The Hudson's Bay Co. have been most fortunate
in their selection of Dr. McLoughlin for this important trust. Pos
sessed of a commanding person, a refined, benevolent and amiable
manner; owning extensive acquirements drawn from study, travel
and intercourse with mankind; a profound knowledge of human
nature, and withal a firmness that insured obedience and respect,
he is peculiarly qualified to protect the important interests of this

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 377
powerful company and to control its wayward servants while thus
far removed from the reach of other civil authority. Dr. McLough
lin is upward of six feet high and over sixty years of age. In per
son he is robust, erect and a little inclined to corpulency, one of the
natural results of contentment and repose. The clear flush of rosy
health glows upon his cheeks, his eye still sparkles with youthful
vivacity while he is in conversation with you, and his fine head of
snow-white hair adds not a little to the impressiveness of his ap
pearance. His hospitality is unbounded, and I will sum up all his
qualities by saying that he is beloved by all who know him."
(Idem, pp. 96-7) He has this to say about the treatment of the
emigration by Dr. McLoughlin: "Whatever may be the cause of
complaint existing against the Hudson's Bay Co. in their treat
ment of former emigrants from the United States, the kindness of
Dr. McLoughlin to this emigration has been very great. He fur
nished them with goods and provisions on credit, and such as were
sick were sent to the hospital free of expense, where they had the
strict and careful attendance of Dr. Barclay, a skilful physician
and an excellent and humane man. The Chief Factor likewise lent
the emigrants the company's boats to bring down such of the fami
lies and baggage as had been left at the Cascades by the advanced
guard of the expedition which had preceded me; and he also fur
nished them with the same facilities for crossing the river with
their cattle at Vancouver. Had it not been for the kindness of this
excellent man many of us would have suffered greatly, and I have
no doubt that much injustice has been done him by confounding
his personal conduct with that of many of his countrymen. The
policy of the company has, it is true, been very seriously con
demned, as will be seen by Mr. Spaulding's communication" (This
was Capt. T. Spaulding of the ship Lausanne, hereinafter com
mented on by me. — W. I. M.) "embraced in Mr. Pendleton's report,
but it is very questionable whether Dr. McLoughlin is justly charge
able with all the evils that have arisen out of it. It is certainly
true that he has been in some measure the victim of misrepresenta
tion, for I know of my own knowledge that the Indians of Southern
Oregon and those bordering on the California line, instead of being
inoffensive and well-disposed, as described by Mr. Spaulding, are
on the contrary hostile, thievish and treacherous. This is some
thing toward a general refutation. It is certain that the doctor
himself has uniformly aided settlers by supplying them with farm
ing implements and with seed grain, as a loan, to be returned out
of the succeeding crop. He has even gone so far as to lend them
hogs, to be returned two or three years afterward by their issue
of the same age ; to furnish oxen to break their ground and cows

378 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
to supply milk to their families. This certainly appears to me to
be a very poor way to retard the settlement of the region and to
discourage adventurers who arrive in it.
"A great deal has been said against him because he has refused
to sell the cattle belonging to the company, and those who have
made these complaints have certainly reflected very little upon the
subject and are incapable of measuring the enlarged scope of the
doctor's policy. The supply of cattle and sheep of the settlements
was very limited, and the great object has been to increase it. This
could only be carried out by secure measures for their protection;
and it would have been absurd, indeed, while the authorities of the
fort were denying themselves the luxury of beef or mutton to carry
out this important object, if they should have sold cattle to those
whose caprice might destroy them at pleasure. Besides, all the
cattle, with the exception of a very few, were inferior Spanish ani
mals, and it was a matter of necessity to improve the stock by
crossing them with those of the English breed. The same case ex
isted with regard to the sheep, which were from California, but
which, by repeated crossings, have at length not only been greatly
increased, but have been improved nearly to the condition of full-
bloods. "The science of stock raising the rough mountain men who were
the first settlers from the States did not understand. They could
only understand that brutes were made to kill, and hence the dis
satisfaction and consequent complaint. Having improved his stock
and accomplished a proper degree of increase, the doctor was ready
enough to sell on reasonable terms, though, to say the truth, he did
not find a very ready market."
(Idem, p. 98) "The utmost liberality characterizes all the deal
ings with the stranger and even with the resident. If your fortunes
have been adverse, and you are not able to pay for the last year's
dealings, you are required to give your note, drawing interest at
five per cent. Instances have come to my knowledge since my ar
rival in which Dr .McLoughlin has extended the credit of some
of his customers for two or three years together. He has supplied
most of the members of last year's emigration with such articles as
they needed, taking in payment only the pledge of their honest faces
and hard hands."
In Niles' Register for November 2, 1844, is a letter from Mr.
Burnett, dated Lincoln, Oregon, July 25, 1844, in which is the fol
lowing : "I was six weeks at Vancouver, where myself and family
were most hospitably entertained by Dr. McLoughlin free of all
charge. He has been a great friend to me and has done much for
the emigration generally."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 379
November 10, 1843, Mr. Burnett addressed a letter to the editor
of the St. Louis Reporter, from which paper it was copied into
various other papers.
In it he wrote: "Provisions are abundant here, and Dr. Mc
Loughlin (who is the most liberal and hospitable man in the world)
furnishes the emigrants with wheat to be paid for in cash or in
wheat next year. At the Cascades we met provisions sent us by
the doctor, and all purchased who applied, even without money.
Two boats have been sent us with provisions, and the doctor has
lent two boats to the emigrants free of charge. We find him doing
everything to aid the emigrants."
Capt. T. Spaulding commanded the ship Lausanne, which car
ried from New York to Vancouver the great reinforcement of fifty-
two persons to the Methodist Mission, leaving New York October
9, 1839, and arriving at Vancouver June 1, 1840.
Turning to Pendleton's two reports hereinbefore mentioned (No.
830, 2d Sess., and No. 31, 3d Sess., 27th Cong., Reports Coms. H.
of R.), we find (on pp. 56-61) "extracts from the journal of Capt.
Spaulding of the ship Lausanne, in the year 1841." (Should be
1840.— W. I. M.)
(P. 56) "Dr. McLoughlin, chief agent for the Hudson's Bay
Co., has charge of all their affairs in this part of the territory. He
is a gentleman of pleasing address, possessing great urbanity of
manners and unbounded hospitality, opening his house to all
strangers who can furnish any recommendations, or who have any
claim, as men of character, upon his hospitality; even the trappers
and other desperate men from the Rocky Mountains and from Cali
fornia are not turned away, but are provided for outside the fort.
Indeed, I received every civility, not only from the doctor, but all
the Hudson's Bay Co.'s servants, especially from Mr. Barrit (Bir
nie?), in charge of Astoria, or Fort George, who kindly came on
board at Baker's Bay and piloted the ship to the fort (fourteen
miles), and supplied all my large company with every refreshment
the place afforded ; also sent on board the best Indian pilot on the
river; but, not even satisfied with this, he kindly accompanied me
himself to Gray's Bay, the most difficult part of the river, where I
found the Hudson's Bay Co.'s ship Columbia waiting a wind to
pass Tongue Point channel. Capt. Humphries of the Columbia
came on board and rendered me every assistance in his power and
sent his first officer, Mr. Letty, up with me to Pillar Rock, about
fourteen miles from Gray's Bay. The next morning, after getting
under way, I was hailed by a canoe, which I found had been dis
patched by Mr. McLoughlin, who, hearing of my arrival, imme
diately sent on board the best pilot at the fort to assist me, sending

380 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
also a large tub of fresh butter and a bag of fresh bread. This
civility and attention can only be appreciated when I state that I
had no chart of the river that I could run ten miles by without get
ting aground; and that, out of the company's service, there is no
chart of the river of any value. That of Mr. Slacum is very good
for the bar, but of no value afterward. Arrowsmith's is of no use
whatever. "On my arrival abreast Fort Vancouver, about 6 o'clock in the
evening, I found the doctor on the bank ready to receive us. He
immediately came on board and invited all the ship's company,
fifty-four in number, to take tea with him at the fort; I with four
of my passengers accepted the invitation. The next day all the
ship's company were provided with comfortable quarters and an
abundant table at the fort; and this hospitality was continued till
they were all sent to their several destinations. One of the peculiar
traits of the doctor's character is that he never tires in his benevo
lent acts. This I was told by those who have been intimate with
him for years; and, so far as my experience goes, I can truly con
firm all that was told me, for while at Vancouver I received from
him every civility, and his kind offices followed me all the way down
the river and even out over the bar."
It is true that Capt. Spaulding on pp. 58-9 criticises the Hud
son's Bay Co. for intruding on American territory and for cruelty
to the Indians, but concerning these criticisms it must be remarked :
(1) That the Hudson's Bay Co. had exactly as good a right
there as any American had, because our Government, by freely exe
cuted treaties made, not at the end of a war, but in time of pro
found peace, had consented that any English citizen who chose
might be there; and
(2) That the accusations of cruelty to Indians must have been
incorrect gossip which he heard, being directly contrary to the uni
form policy of that company; and
(3) That while what I have quoted from him is his report of
his own experiences and observations, all his derogatory criticisms
are of matters of which he had no chance for personal observation
and are mere hearsay, and from abundant contemporaneous sources
there is indisputable evidence that these derogatory statements
based on hearsay are incorrect.
In 1834 Hall J. Kelley, a Boston school teacher, who had been
urging the settlement of Oregon by lectures, newspaper articles and
pamphlets ever since 1817, and who had journeyed to Oregon via
Mexico and California, led a small party "of about a dozen" from
California to Oregon, arriving in the Willamette Valley the last
of October, 1834. It seems impossible to determine the exact num-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 381
ber in Kelley's party, he himself giving it variously in different
places and some other authorities giving it nine and some fifteen.
Lee and Frost say "about a dozen." Though Kelley himself was a
thoroughly honorable man, a few disreputable individuals who had
loose ideas as to the titles to horses had attached themselves to the
party, and in the northern settlements of California these men had
stolen some horses and taken them along to Oregon, and so upon
the whole party rested the disgrace of the charge (which Governor
Figueroa of California sent by sea to McLoughlin) that Kelley's
party were horse thieves — a crime which in the pioneer days of all
the Far West has meant a worse offense than murder. Under this
dreadful stigma the party remained till Ewing Young, the leading
spirit in the party (but not of the dishonest faction of it) secured
from Governor Figueroa the next year a statement that he was in
nocent, after which he and McLoughlin were good friends.
Kelley was sadly broken in health when he reached Oregon, and
though undoubtedly honest, on account of Governor Figueroa's
warning against him McLoughlin did not welcome him nor his party
as he had done other parties of Americans, but he (McLoughlin)
says that when Kelley arrived at Fort Vancouver he was "very ill,
and out of humanity I placed him in a house, put a man to nurse
him, the surgeon of the establishment attended on him, and had his
victuals sent him every meal until he left in 1835, when I gave him
a passage to Oahu. On his return to the States he published a nar
rative of his voyage in which, instead of being grateful for the
kindness shown him, he abused me and falsely stated I had been
so alarmed with the dread that he would destroy the Hudson's Bay
Co. trade that I kept a constant watch over him."
Kelley himself in his "Narrative" (p. 59) says: "When about
to leave Oregon the Chief Factor of the company presented me with
a draft of seven pounds sterling, payable at the Sandwich Islands.
A part, however, was paid at Vancouver in articles of comfort.
This was kind, and I felt grateful for it." (Cf. on Kelley (a) H.
H. Bancroft's "History of the North West Coast," Vol. IL, pp. 548-
54; (b) "A History of the Settlement of Oregon and the Interior
of Upper California and of Persecutions and Afflictions of Forty
Years' Continuance Endured by the Author, Hall J. Kelley, A. M.,"
Springfield, Mass., 1868, and for Ewing Young, Transactions Ore
gon Pioneer Assn., 1880, pp. 56-8).
Kelley's book (as its title page plainly indicates) gives abundant
evidence that his mind was very much disordered when it was writ
ten. Of the great value of his services to Oregon there can be no
doubt. As early as 1817 he began an agitation for the colonization
of Oregon and was the first to assert in his numerous lectures and

382 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
pamphlets and newspaper articles the feasibility of an overland
migration. As early as 1829 he procured the incorporation by the
Massachusetts Legislature of "The American Society for encourag
ing the settlement of the Oregon Territory," and in 1830 published
a "Geographical Memoir of Oregon," accompanied by a map, and
in 1831 a "General Circular" for those intending to migrate to Ore
gon, in which he printed the Rocky Mountain Fur Co.'s account of
the first wagons to the Rocky Mountains in 1830 and their declara
tion that they could easily have gone over the mountains through
the Southern Pass, and Pilcher's declaration in the same Sen. Ex.
Doc. 39, 21st Cong., 2d Sess., that "wagons and carriages may cross
them in a state of nature without difficulty and with little delay in
the day's journey."
In 1832 he published in Zion's Herald, in Boston, several articles
calling for missionaries to accompany his migration to Oregon.
Wyeth's first party resulted from Kelley's publications.
His personal reception and treatment, and that of his party by
the Hudson's Bay Co., were certainly quite as kind as could have
been expected with the charge of being horse thieves hanging over
the whole party.
Ewing Young died in February, 1841, and left nothing in writ
ing concerning his reception in Oregon by the Hudson's Bay Co.,
and the only trustworthy account is that of his intimate friend, Mr.
Courteney M. Walker (Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn., 1880, pp.
56-8). As Mr. Walker was the manager of Wyeth's fur trading and
salmon fishing post at Wappatoo Island, at the mouth of the Wil
lamette, he certainly was not likely to be prejudiced in favor of the
Hudson's Bay Co. He says that by the spring of 1836, after Gov
ernor Figueroa had withdrawn his charges as far as Ewing Young
was concerned, Young, being very active and desirous of accumu
lating property, began to erect a distillery, and continues : "By this
time a thorough reconciliation had taken place between Young and
Dr. McLoughlin and the latter told Mr. Young that if he persisted
in his distillery it would prove a ruin to the farming settlement,
and assured him that if he wished to enter into any kind of enter
prise that would be useful and beneficial to the young settlement
that he would advance any required aid. Upon this appeal and
offer he abandoned the distillery and then was planning for a saw
and grist mill.
"About this time (winter of 1836-37) Lieut. Slocum (Slacum)
arrived, calling at Vancouver, where he made his quarters. In a
few days he called upon Young and, everything being explained sat
isfactorily, Young and Slocum put in motion the introduction of

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 383
Spanish cattle into Oregon and within a few days a company was
formed, Slocum supplying the money and giving a free passage to
the persons engaged in his chartered brig to California. In this
company Young acted as the purchasing agent and manager."
As Dr. McLoughlin furnished one-half of the money for this
company, the fact that Young was made "purchasing agent" shows
how complete was the reconciliation between him and McLoughlin.
Except the journal of Rev. E. E. Parrish, hereinbefore noted
(Cf. p. 371 ante), and which says nothing of their treatment by the
Hudson's Bay Co.'s officers, I have found no contemporaneous ac
count of the 1844 migration, which started after Congress (at the
first session of the 28th Congress) had indulged in a great amount
of very bellicose discussion on Oregon — the Democratic leaders
clamoring for "all of Oregon" (i. e., to 54 deg. 40 min.) as a prepara
tion for the "fifty-four forty or fight" campaign of the summer and
autumn of 1844, and denouncing the great Whig leader, Henry
Clay, as a "traitor" for proposing in 1826 as our "ultimatum" the
identical line of 49 deg. which that staunch Democrat, President
James Monroe, had proposed in 1818 and 1823, and which that
equally staunch Democrat, Polk, in 1846, accepted despite the "fifty-
four forty or fight" campaign on which he was elected.
Two of the prominent members of this 1844 migration were Hon.
John Minto, who was President of the Oregon Pioneer Association
in 1877, and Joseph Watt, a prominent Oregonian for many years.
In "Transactions Oregon Pioneer Association" for 1876, pp. 35 to
50, is the "Occasional Address" for that year, by Mr. Minto, and
on pp. 36-7 it reads as follows :
"This difference between the two classes of colonists is shown
in the different circumstances and the results of the attempt of each
to colonize on Puget Sound. Under the guidance and fostering care
of the Hudson's Bay Co. the hardy Scotch and Canadians failed.
As they were slowly abandoning the enterprise, a few citizens of
the United States, against the almost hostile opposition of the Hud
son's Bay Co., against the earnest advice and with the express state
ment of Dr. McLoughlin, the Chief Factor, that they (the company
he represented) could give them no aid, not even employment, went
there and maintained themselves, and in a few years were holding
public meetings and passing resolutions calling on their Govern
ment to remove the (to them) foreign elements out of their way. I
may here remark that it is one of the notable features of the immi
gration of 1844 that it furnished the nucleus of this successful set
tlement on Puget Sound."
On pp. 47-8, as follows : "The families and wagons were brought
down the Columbia by boats loaned by the Hudson's Bay Co. by

384 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
their then Chief Factor, Dr. John McLoughlin. Daniel Clark, S.
B. Crockett and myself had left our trains at Fort Howard and
made our way down the valley of the Columbia, and while working
for a little means to return with applied to Dr. McLoughlin for the
use of a batteau of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s with which to go up
and assist our friends down the river. This we received from the
good man. He also caused our orders we had on the company for
the little supplies our earnings in the settlement would command
to be respected, more for the sake of the object of our enterprise
than from any obligation to fill them. Indeed, he set aside their
rules of trade to do so, and I noticed a difference between his man
ner and that of Mr. James Douglas in their intercourse with us.
Mr. Douglas was an urbane, civil and gentlemanly man in his deal
ings with us ; but, honest to himself and his sovereign, he could not
disguise his chagrin at each addition to the number of American
settlers, and if ever man, by loyalty to his sovereign's interests,
earned honors, James Douglas deserved his knighthood. But John
McLoughlin 'held the patent for his honors immediately from Al
mighty God.' He filled our orders, wished us success in our en
terprise and said of his own volition that a messenger would leave
that evening with the last dispatches to a vessel about to sail out
of the Columbia River, which afforded us, if we would like to take
it, an opportunity to write to our friends in the east we might not
get again for six months. We thanked him, but said we could not,
for we had no writing material with us. He immediately ordered
us furnished with everything necessary."
In the "Transactions of Oregon Pioneer Assn. for 1886," pp. 24-
27, Joseph Watt publishes "Recollections of Dr. John McLoughlin,"
from which the following are extracts:
"On the 13th of November, 1844, a company of immigrants.
landed at Fort Vancouver, brought there on a batteau commanded
by Joseph Hess, an immigrant of '43. The boat belonged to the
Hudson's Bay Co. Mr. Hess was intrusted with the boat for the
purpose of bringing immigrants down the river. We had eaten the
last of our provisions at our last camp and were told by Hess that
we could get plenty at the fort, with or without money; that the
old doctor never turned people away hungry. This made us feel
quite comfortable, for there was not a dollar among us. As near
as I can remember the company consisted of sixteen men, five women
and four children. As soon as we landed at the fort the men all
started to find Dr. McLoughlin, the women and children walking
about the shore for exercise. We soon found the doctor in a small
room he called his office. He was a tall, broad-shouldered, portly
and dignified old gentleman ; his hair long and white as snow ; face

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 385
cleanly shaven, ruddy and full, and of a rather nervous tempera
ment. He met us pleasantly, made us welcome, inquired as to our
journey down the river, and particularly of those we left behind.
We were the first to arrive, with the exception of a few packers.
He inquired who commanded the boat and how much we had to
pay. He told us that he had furnished the boats free of charge to
certain parties to bring immigrants down the river, limiting their
charges to keep them from taking advantage of necessity. He spoke
of our being so late, and feared there would be considerable suffer
ing before they could all be taken down the river, but would do all
in his power until they reached their destination.
"We then made known to him our wants. We were all out of
provisions. There was a small table in one corner of the room, at
which he took a seat and directed us to stand in a line (there being
so many of us the line reached nearly around the room) , and then
told us the year before and in previous years he had furnished the
people with all the provisions and clothing they wanted, but lately
had established a trading house at Oregon City, where we could get
supplies; but for immediate necessity he would supply provisions
at the fort. Several of our party broke in, saying, 'Doctor, I have
no money to pay you, and I don't know wh n or how I can pay
you.' " 'Tut, Tut ! never mind that ; you cannot suffer,' said the doc
tor. He then commenced at the head man, saying : 'Your name, if
you please ; how many in the family and what do you desire ?' Upon
receiving an answer the doctor wrote an order, directing him where
to go to have it filled, then called up the next man, and so on until
we were all supplied. He told us the account of each man would
be sent to Oregon City, and when we took a claim and raised wheat
we could settle the account by delivering wheat at that place. Some
few who came after us got clothing. Such was the case with every
boat load and all those who came by land down the trail. If he
had said, 'We have these supplies to sell for cash down,' I think
we would have suffered. After we had our orders filled we went on
board the boat which was to take us to Linnton (a place Governor
McCarver started, expecting to build up a large city in the near
future). "We found the doctor in a towering rage; he was giving it to
Hess right and left. It appeared that the doctor had come to the
river to see the boat. He found it, as he supposed, full of wagons,
and as he had given strict orders that only bedding, clothing, camp
equipment, etc., should be brought with the immigrants, and that
none should be left, he believed that Hess was making an extra price
by bringing wagons. We commenced getting into the boat and

386 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
climbing on top of the wagons. When all were in there was not
an inch of spare room left. The doctor stook looking on until we
were out on the river; he evidently expected to see the boat sink.
Soon we heard him call out: 'Mr. Hess! All right, sir.'
"When we started for Oregon we were prejudiced against the
Hudson's Bay Co., and Dr. McLoughlin, being Chief Factor of the
company, came in for a double share of that feeling. I think a
great deal of this was caused by reports of missionaries and ad
verse traders, imbuing us with a feeling that it was our mission to
bring this country under the jurisdiction of the stars and stripes.
But when we found him anxious to assist us, nervous at our situa
tion in being so late, and doing so much without charge, letting us
have of his store and waiting without interest until we could make
a farm and pay him from the surplus products of such farm, the
prejudice heretofore existing began to be rapidly allayed. We did
not know that every dollar's worth of provisions, etc., he gave us,
all advice and assistance in every shape, were against the positive
orders of the Hudson's Bay Co., and in the end he had to pay the
Hudson's Bay Co. every dollar that he had trusted to the settlers
of this country. In this connection I am sorry to say that thou
sands of dollars virtually loaned by him to settlers at different
times intthese early days was never paid, as an examination of his
books and papers will amply testify." . . . "In the first few
years after the permanent settlement commenced all classes asked
the advice of the doctor as to the best course to pursue with refer
ence to the many constantly arising questions. It appeared by com
mon consent that he was practically the first Governor of the great
North Pacific Coast. No man ever fulfilled that trust better than
Dr. John McLoughlin. He was always anxious over the Indian
problem. No one understood the Indian character better than he
did. All the Indians knew him as the great 'White Chief,' and be
lieved whatever he said could be depended on ; that he was not their
enemy, but was strictly just with them in everything; could punish
or reward, as he thought best, and no trouble grew out of it. But
with the settlers the case was different. Their intercourse with the
Indians led to more or less complications. Unprincipled whites
would take advantage; they made and sold them a vile compound
called 'Blue Ruin,' the use of which not only led to intoxication,
but seemed to arouse all that was bad in both white and red man.
Dr. McLoughlin frequently had to use all his power to keep peace
and harmony between the two races. Many believed if the doctor's
warnings and advice had been followed much of our trouble with
the Indians would not have occurred. His advice to Dr. Whitman,
when he understood how the Indians were acting, was to 'leave the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 337
place immediately ; not to trust them, delay was dangerous ; leave,
and don't go back until the Indians feel better toward you.' If this
advice had been acted upon that terrible massacre would not have
taken place and there would have been no Cayuse war. Yet after
these events occurred no man did more to bring the Indians to jus
tice and avenge the murder of Dr. Whitman and others than Dr.
McLoughlin." Concerning what Minto says of the settlement of the Puget
Sound region (which was begun by this 1844 migration in 1845),
it is to be observed that it was fully expected by the Hudson's Bay
Co. and by Englishmen generally that the Columbia River would
be the boundary, and nothing was more natural and proper, there
fore, than that this English corporation should seek to dissuade
Americans from settling north of the Columbia ; and that there was
no improper action in this regard is shown by Minto's statement
that it was "against the almost hostile opposition of the Hudson's
Bay Co., against the earnest advice and with the express statement
of Dr. McLoughlin, the Chief Factor, that they (the company he
represented) could give them no aid, not even employment."
Now, as McLoughlin was then and had been for twenty years
the only representative of the Hudson's Bay Co. residing in the
Oregon Territory, "whose word was the end of the law" as to the
policy and aims of the Hudson's Bay Co., it is plain that there was
nothing more of this "almost hostile opposition of the Hudson's
Bay Co." to these American settlers in what the Hudson's Bay
Co. regarded as certain to soon become English territory than is
contained in the declaration that "McLoughlin earnestly advised
them against making the settlement, and declared that the Hud
son's Bay Co. could give them no aid, not even employment."
As to the actual experience of this first American colony in the
Puget's Sound region (of which Joseph Watt was not a member),
while I find no contemporaneous evidence, we have the sworn testi
mony of Michael T. Simmons, who was the leader of the first com
pany of American settlers there, given September 1, 1865, in the
"Case of the Puget's Sound Agricultural Co. vs. the United States,"
Vol. IL, p. 40, as follows :
"Int. 3. 'What do you know of assistance rendered to the early
settlers in the country; if so, to what extent was it rendered?'
"Ans. 'I know that they were very kind to all the settlers;
every assistance that we asked for we got. I was sent by my party
to ask for things, and what we asked for we generally got. We got
seed wheat, peas, oats, potatoes, pigs and chickens, and in some in
stances cows were loaned, which were afterward purchased by the

388 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
settlers ; without the assistance of the company I hardly know what
we who came north of the Columbia would have done.' "
Mr. Simmons also testified in the "Case of the Hudson's Bay Co.
vs. the United States" (Vol. I., pp. 129-139), as follows:
"Int. 17. 'State in what manner the Indians from Fort Hall to
the end of your journey treated you, and to what influence you
ascribe that treatment?' (This relates to his experience as a mem
ber of the overland migration of 1844. — W. I. M.)
"Ans. 'The Indians were very friendly and treated us very well
all the way from Fort Hall to Vancouver, and I attribute that treat
ment to the influence of the Hudson's Bay Co.'
"Int. 14. 'What, if any, assistance was afforded to you person
ally, and to other emigrants in the way of boats, to come down the
Columbia River with goods, provisions, grain for sowing, employ
ment, etc, in 1844?'
"Ans. 'I was loaned a batteau to bring my family down the
river free of charge, and the company treated other emigrants in
the same manner; they let us have provisions, seed grain and breed
ing pigs; they also gave us employment getting saw logs, making
shingles and staves to pay for what we got.' "
This, please bear in mind, was in 1844, in all the fury of the
"54 deg. 40 min. or fight" canvass for the Presidency which resulted
in the election of James K. Polk to the Presidency, and Simmons,
who was a native of Kentucky and a prominent citizen of Wash
ington Territory, farmer, merchant, ship owner, owner of a grist
and saw mill, seven years United States Indian Agent and member
of the Oregon Legislature in 1849, gives this testimony when twenty
years' time certainly had given him ample opportunity for reflec
tion, and at a time, just at the close of the civil war, when the preju
dice against the Hudson's Bay and Puget Sound Agricultural Com
panies, as against everything British, was at its highest all over
the country, and especially in the Old Oregon Territory. Of Sim
mons' personal character Hon. Elwood Evans, the historian of Ore
gon and Washington, says in a sketch of his career : "To no fellow-
being did he ever intentionally commit a wrong. All the early
comers to Puget Sound will ever treasure the remembrance of his
unstinted hospitality and his ever-ready and active zeal in contrib
uting to the comfort of every settler. To the extent of his means
none more than he contributed to the establishment of schools,
churches and roads and other public benefits" (Transactions Ore
gon Pioneer Assn., 1886, pp. 87-98).
As to Watt's statement that "we did not know that every dol
lar's worth of provisions, etc, he gave us, all advice and assistance
in every shape, was against the positive orders of the Hudson's Bay

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 389
Co., and in the end he had to pay the Hudson's Bay Co. every dollar
that he had trusted to the settlers of the country," it is only neces
sary to say, as in the case of the criticism which Capt. Spaulding
of the ship Lausanne made of the policy of the company, as here
inbefore quoted and commented upon by me (see pp. 379-380 ante)
that in what he testified of the kindness of Dr. McLoughlin to the
emigrants and the assistance which he rendered them, not out of
his private means, but out of the stores under his control as the
superintendent of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s whole business in the Ore
gon Territory, Mr. Watt speaks of what he knew from his own per
sonal experience and observation, while as to the question of what
the positive orders of the Hudson's Bay Co. were, and whether or
not Dr. McLoughlin acted contrary to them and was made to pay
the company every dollar that he had trusted to the settlers of this
country, Mr. Watt, never having been in the position of a director
or other official of the Hudson's Bay Co., and not pretending to
have any information from any inspection of their official records,
is merely repeating hearsay on this matter, and that as Dr. Mc
Loughlin visited England in 1838, six years after Wyeth's first
party reached Oregon and four years after his second party, with
the Methodist missionaries and Townsend and Nuttall, the natural
ists, reached Oregon, and also Hall J. Kelley's party of American
settlers reached Oregon, and three years after Rev. Samuel Parker
reached Oregon and was so hospitably entertained by Dr. McLough
lin and all the other Hudson's Bay Co.'s officials, and two years
after Whitman, Spalding and Gray reached Oregon, and as Dr. Mc
Loughlin returned in 1839 with his powers undiminished, and as in
1841 Sir George Simpson, the absolute Governor of all the Hudson's
Bay Co.'s affairs in America from 1822 to 1857 (Cf. his testimony
before select committee of Parliament in 1857, quoted by Cushing in
his argument in Vol. IX., Hudson's Bay Co. and Puget's Sound
Agricultural Co. vs. United States, supplement, p. 9), reached Ore
gon on a tour of inspection of all the Hudson's Bay Co.'s posts and
officers there and returned to London in the autumn of 1842, and
left McLoughlin's powers undiminished, and as those powers re
mained undisturbed till he resigned in the autumn of 1845, it is
simply incredible, with the rigid discipline always maintained by
that company over all its agents and employes, that this hearsay
part of Mr. Watt's statement can be correct, the more especially as
the sworn testimony of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s officers in Oregon,
Messrs. James Douglas and Archibald McKinlay, men of the high
est character and men who were in position to know the exact truth
about the matter, squarely contradicts this hearsay statement of
Watt. (Cf. "The Case of the Hudson's Bay Co. and Puget's Sound

390 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
Agricultural Co. vs. the United States," Vol. I., pp. 60-61, for Doug
las, and 103-104 for McKinlay's testimony, quoted on p. 397 infra.)
The migration of 1845 consisted of about 2,500 souls, with be
tween 500 and 600 wagons, and among them was Joel Palmer, cap
tain of a company that started from Independence, Mo., and had
about forty wagons (see "Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn., 1877,
pp. 54 and 55). Palmer returned to the States in 1846 with five
companions, and in 1847 returned to Oregon with his family and
remained there the rest of his long and honored life. His "Journal
of Travels Over the Rocky Mountains to the Mouth of the Columbia
River, made during the years 1845 and 1846, by Joel Palmer, also
a letter from the Rev. H. H. Spalding, Cincinnati, J. A. and U. P.
James, 1847," is the only contemporaneous account of that journey
so far as I have been able to ascertain. On p. 42, under date of
August 8, 1845, he says : "We traveled but five miles, which brought
us to Fort Hall. . . . Capt. Grant is now the officer in com
mand ; he has the bearing of a gentleman."
(P. 112) Palmer says: "After breakfast we visited the fort"
(i. e., Vancouver), where we had an introduction to Dr. McLough
lin, the Governor of the Hudson's Bay Co. He appears to be much
of a gentleman and invited us to remain during the day, but as we
were upon an excursion down the river we only remained to make
a few purchases."
(Idem, pp. 62-64) Palmer gives an account of the unfortunate
outcome and hard experiences of an expedition led by one S. L.
Meek, who induced about 200 families to turn off from the regular
route at Malheur River, about half-way from Fort Hall to Fort
Walla Walla, and try a new route to The Dalles. After telling how
they narrowly escaped death from starvation and that about twenty
of them died from disease previous to their arrival at The Dalles,
and as many more after their arrival there, Palmer goes on as fol
lows: "It has been stated that some members of the Hudson's Bay Co.
were instrumental in this expedition, but such is not the fact.
Whilst I was at Fort Hall I conversed with Captain Grant respect
ing the practicability of this same route, and was advised of the
fact that the teams would be unable to get through. The individual
in charge at Fort Boise also advised me to the same purport. The
censure rests, in the origin of this expedition, upon (S. L.) Meek"
(who was a thoroughly patriotic American, like his brother, the
noted Col. Jos. L. Meek. — W. I. M.), "but I have not the least doubt
but he supposed they could get through in safety. I have under
stood that a few of the members controlled Meek, and caused him
to depart from his original plan."

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 391
(Idem, pp. 116-118) Palmer describes the Oregon Territory,
and stating the population he goes on : "The settlers are laboring
under great disadvantages on account of not being able to obtain
a sufficient amount of farming implements. The early settlers were
supplied at the Hudson's Bay Co.'s stores, and at prices much less
than these now charged for the same articles. At that time the
supply was equal to the demand; but since the tide of emigration
has turned so strongly to this region the demand is much greater
than the supply. This may be said of almost every kind of goods
or merchandise. The supply of goods in the hands of the American
merchants has been very limited, being the remnant of cargoes
shipped round upon that coast more for the purpose of trading with
the Indians than with the cultivators of the soil.
"Great complaints have been made by the merchants trading in
that quarter that they were not able to compete with the Hudson's
Bay Co., and this is the cry even at home, but the fact is the prices
were much lower before these American merchants went into the
country than they are now.
"Their mode of dealing is to ask whatever their avarice demands
and the necessities of the purchaser will bear. And not being satis
fied with an open field, they have petitioned the Hudson's Bay Co.
to put a higher price upon their goods, as they were selling lower
than the American merchants wished to sell. In accordance with
their request the Hudson's Bay Co. raised the price of goods when
sold to an American, but sold them at the old prices to British sub
jects. This arrangement was continued for two years, but an Amer
ican can now purchase at the fort as cheap as any one. These facts
I obtained from various sources, and when apprised of the prices of
goods in that country they were not hard to be believed.
"I paid for a pair of stoga shoes, made in one of the eastern
States, and a very common article, four dollars and fifty cents. The
price for a common coarse cotton flag handkerchief, which can be
had in Cincinnati for five or ten cents, fifty cents. The price of
calico ranges from thirty-one to eighty-seven and a half cents a
yard; common red flannel, $1.50 a yard; a box of percussion caps
(containing two hundred and fifty), two dollars and fifty cents;
coarse boots, eastern made, six to eight dollars; calfskin, ten to
twelve dollars; coarse half hose, one dollar; dry goods generally
ranging with the above prices. Iron was selling at twelve and a
half cents a pound. Tools of all kinds are very high ; so that what
ever may be said against the company for putting down the prices
to destroy competition by breaking up other merchants cannot be
'sustained by the facts of the case.' That they prevent them from
raising the prices there can be no doubt, and if the American mer-

392 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
chants had the field clear of competition the prices would be double
what they now are. They have not capital to enable them to keep
a supply nor to purchase the surplus of the country.
"The Hudson's Bay Co. are the only purchasers to any extent,
for there are no others who have the necessary machinery to manu
facture wheat, which is the staple of the country at present. The
American merchants buy a few fish, hides and lumber, but in such
limited quantities as to be of very little advantage to the country.
A few American merchants with a little capital would give an im
pulse to trade, encourage the settlers, make it a profitable business
to themselves and add much to the character of the country."
In Transactions Oregon Pioneer Assn., 1877, pp. 46-59, is an
address by Hon. Stephen Staats, one of the 1845 migration, and on
p. 52 he says : "We reached Oregon City in thirteen days from The
Dalles (two of which we were without food), and on our arrival
those of us in advance were kindly and hospitably received by old
Dr. McLoughlin. He immediately furnished us with provisions
without money and without price, and extended to us favors which
we were ever ready to reciprocate. I am not one of those who wish
to cast reflections on the character of Dr. McLoughlin or wish to
impute to him anything wanting in the kindest feelings toward the
emigrants of 1845. For well do I know that but for him many
would have been more embarrassed in making provision for the com
ing winter's necessities than they were, and I have yet to see the
emigrant of 1845 who, when speaking of the "old man doctor," does
not speak in high commendation of his action toward the emigrants
of that year."
This, it should be remembered, was in 1845, not only after all
the fury of the "fifty-four forty or fight" campaign of 1844 had re
sulted in the election of James K. Polk to the Presidency, but after
the news of his inauguration and the disturbing paragraph about
Oregon in his inaugural address had reached these Hudson's Bay
Co.'s officers in Oregon, and when, if ever, they might naturally
have been expected to oppose Americans settling in Oregon.
As the report of the trial of the Hudson's Bay Co. and the
Puget's Sound Agriculaural Co. vs. the United States is such an
exceedingly rare document that few historical students can easily
get access to it, it seems best to copy here all the testimony given
in that case by all the Americans who went to Oregon before 1846
that bears upon the treatment Americans received from the Hud
son's Bay Co. and that company's treatment of the Indians, together
with so much of the testimony of Sir James Douglas and Archibald
McKinlay of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s witnesses as covers these points.
My references to the volumes will be as they are numbered in

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 393
the State Department Library at Washington (for they were pub
lished as pamphlets, part of them in Montreal and part in Wash
ington, and with no volume numbers).
I have been able to learn of the existence of but four sets besides
my own, viz.: In the libraries of (1) the State Department at
Washington; (2) the Law Library, Albany, N. Y. ; (3) H. H. Ban
croft's Library, San Francisco; (4) Yale College Library, New
Haven, Conn.
The claims of these two companies originated in the third and
fourth articles of the treaty of 1846.
As we have seen from the testimony of Rear Admiral Charles
Wilkes (Cf. pp. 356-364 ante) he, about 1846, estimated the value of
all these "possessory rights, farms, lands, etc.," at a half a million
dollars, and advised the representatives of the Hudson's Bay Co. in
Washington to have that amount inserted in the treaty, which they
declined to do, hoping to get more.
At various times between 1846 and 1860 the United States Gov
ernment sought to buy out the claims of the Hudson's Bay Co. and
the Puget's Sound Agricultural Co. In 1852 Secretary of State
Daniel Webster was willing to pay $1,000,000 in full settlement,
and probably but for his untimely death in November, 1852, a set
tlement would have been made on that basis (Cf. Vol. IIL, Hud
son's Bay Co. vs. United States, pp. 222-3).
The Indian wars in Eastern Oregon in the years 1848 to 1859,
and the occupation of various posts of the Hudson's Bay Co. by the
United States troops, diminished their business and profits in the
Old Oregon Territory, and finally, in 1860, being notified by Gen.
Harney, then in command of the United States troops there, that
under the instructions of Secretary of War Floyd it became his
duty to inform them that their rights on American soil had been
terminated, they deemed it wise (in June, 1860), to retire altogether
from the territory of the United States, but under protest to pre
serve their rights (Cf. Vol. I., Hudson's Bay Co. vs. United States,
pp. 189-91, 417).
Feeling that the United States Government was depreciating the
value of their claims by acts of hostility to which they were power
less to offer resistance, and President Buchanan having in conversa
tion with Lord Lyons, British Minister at Washington, on "July 11,
1860, suggested that the best and most expeditious mode of set
tling the question would be for the companies to state at once the
lowest sum for which they would sell their rights to the United
States," Lord John Russell called on the Governor of the Hudson's
Bay Co. to fix the amount which they would ask for the extinction
of their claims ; whereupon the Governor named $650,000 as their

394 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
minimum price, but Lord Russell advised him in view of all the
circumstances to reduce their claims to $500,000, which they agreed
to do, and Lord Lyons communicated this offer to Gen. Lewis Cass,
our Secretary of State, on December 10, 1860 (Cf. Hudson's Bay
Co. vs. United States, Vol. VIL, pp. 282-4), and there can be no
doubt but what this offer would have then been accepted but for
the excitement following the election of Lincoln and the secession
movement during the winter of 1860-61. The claims still remain
ing a source of great irritation between the two nations, on July 1,
1863, a treaty was made between the United States and Great Brit
ain, which provided for the appointment of a commissioner by each
nation, with power for the choice by them of an umpire, which com
mission was to proceed to hear the evidence and award the amount
due from the United States to the Hudson's Bay Co. and Puget's
Sound Agricultural Co., which award was to be final and conclusive,
and in full payment of all claims of every kind that the two compa
nies had under and by virtue of the treaty of 1846. The commis
sion was constituted as follows:
Commissioner on the part of the United States, Alexander S.
Johnson ; on the part of Great Britain, John Rose ; umpire, Benj. R.
Curtis; counsel, on the part of the United States, Caleb Cushing;
on the part of Great Britain, Charles Dewey Day and Edward
Lander. The taking of evidence began at Victoria, Vancouver Island,
August 5, 1865, and ended August 24, 1867. Witnesses were exam
ined in British Columbia, at several places in Oregon, and also in
Washington Territory, in Montreal, New York City, Detroit, Mich.,
Washington, D. C, Cincinnati, Ohio, New Orleans, La., Goldsboro,
N. C, the Tortugas, and London, England. The United States
called more than 100 witnesses, including almost every prominent
army officer that had ever been stationed in Oregon, among them
Generals U. S. Grant, Phil Sheridan, Gordon Granger, Alfred Pleas-
anton, Rufus Ingalls, James A. Hardie, C. C. Augur, David H. Vin
ton and Benj. Alvord, also Admiral Charles Wilkes and Commander
Gibson of the United States Navy.
Caleb Cushing was beyond question the best qualified man in the
United States for the post of counsel in this case, not merely from
his acknowledged standing as one of the ablest lawyers in the land,
but from his intimate connection with the discussion of the Oregon
boundary question, in Congress and out of it, in the years 1828 to
1846. In Chapter VI. we have mentioned his four articles in the North
American Review, and quoted from his famous report and supple
mental report (Cf. pp. 202-203 ante).

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 395
At about this time also Mr. Cushing was interested with some
other Massachusetts men in a cargo of merchandise shipped to Ore
gon for trading purposes, and so came directly into competition with
the Hudson's Bay Co.
In November, 1845, in a lecture before the Boston Lyceum
(which was promptly published in this country and republished
by William Clowes & Sons, London, England), he reiterated very
forcibly the statements of his report to the House of Representa
tives about the ease of the occupation of Oregon by the people of
the United States and the practical impossibility of its coloniza
tion, as the world then looked, by Great Britain. (A copy of the
London edition of this lecture is in the Boston Public Library, No.
2 of shelf No. 4478, 31.) With all this special preparation and
study of the whole question of the Oregon Territory, and the rela
tion of the Hudson's Bay Co. to its settlement by Americans, noth
ing is plainer than that if Mr. Cushing could have found any trust
worthy evidence of any wrongful acts by that company toward
American missionaries, explorers or settlers, he would have brought
forward the evidence thereof, since if they had, prior to 1846, vio
lated the rights of American citizens under the treaties of 1818 and
1827, and more especially if any proof could have been adduced
that they were responsible for the Whitman massacre (which took
place on November 29, 1847, more than a year after knowledge of
the treaty of 1846 had been received there), he would have been
able to entirely defeat their claims to any compensation from our
Government. (The news of the treaty of 1846 settling the boundary
reached Oregon City and was printed in an extra of the Oregon
Spectator, a semi-monthly, and then the only paper published west
of the Missouri, for Thursday, November 12, 1846. A file of the
Spectator is in the San Francisco Public Library, where I exam
ined it.)
The claims presented by the Hudson's Bay Co. aggregated at
flrst $3,822,036.67, and by a motion to amend there was added to
this the sum of $459,900, making $4,281,936.67 (Cf. Vol. IIL, Hud
son's Bay Co. vs. United States, pp. 14 and 15), and the Puget's
Sound Agricultural Co. claimed a further sum of $1,168,000 (Cf.
Memorial of Puget's Sound Agricultural Co., Vol. IV.), making a
total of $5,449,936.67. There was room for much honest difference
of opinion as to the value of many of the items of these claims, and
also as to whether or not the claimants had a right to claim any
thing for such items as the rights to trade and the right to navigate
the Columbia, since they continued to trade and navigate the Co
lumbia long after the treaty was made, but finally the commission
ers, after one of the most thorough judicial investigations ever

396 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
given to any matter of dispute, on September 10, 1869, awarded to
the Hudson's Bay Co. $450,000 and the Puget's Sound Agricultural
Co. $200,000, or in all $650,000, which, it will be noticed, is the pre
cise amount that the Governor of the Hudson's Bay Co. had first
informed Lord John Russell was the minimum amount they would
be willing to accept in the autumn of 1860.
Of the more than 2,000 pages of testimony in this case by far
the greatest part possesses no general interest, being merely esti
mates of the value of the land and the improvements thereon at the
several posts of the company south of 49 degrees, and the condition
of the buildings and the relations between the company and the
more unscrupulous settlers (some of them Americans and some of
them discharged employes of the companies), who had "squatted"
on the land claimed by the companies, and torn down their fences,
and stolen their cattle ; and of the futile efforts of the companies to
secure redress from the frontier courts, which they soon found to
be "places where justice was dispensed with" whenever a "free
American citizen" or any other "squatter" was defendant and the
"blasted British monopoly" was plaintiff.
The Hudson's Bay Co. were at great disadvantage from the
death of most of those who were thoroughly conversant with all
the facts which they desired to establish — Dr. McLoughlin, Peter
Skeen Ogden, James Birnie, P. C. Pambrun, F. Ermatinger, Paul
Frazer, John D. B. Ogilvy, Adolphus Lee Lewes, John McLeod,
Thomas McKay, X. Payette and Archibald McDonald all had died
before the trial began.
Whether or not their evidence would have increased the amount
of the award no one can tell, but certainly if they or even McLough
lin, Ogden, Birnie, Pambrun, Ermatinger, McLeod and McKay had
been living a flood of light would have been thrown upon many
points of great interest to all students of Oregon history.
Let us examine such points in the testimony of the witnesses as
bear upon the subject of this chapter.
Sir James Douglas, who, with P. S. Ogden, was in charge of the
business of the company in Oregon after the resignation of Dr.
McLoughlin in the autumn of 1845, and who subsequently was the
Governor of Vancouver Island, and who had no connection with the
Hudson's Bay Co. after 1850, testified at Victoria, Vancouver
Island, August 10, 1865, as follows (Hudson's Bay Co. vs. United
States, Vol. I., pp. 49-61) :
"Int. 13. 'State if you can what was done by the Hudson's Bay
Co. in exploring the country, opening roads, improving the Indians,
and assisting the early settlers in Oregon.'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 397
"Ans. 'The Hudson's Bay Co. were certainly put to a very great
expense in exploring the country, in making roads, in establishing
an effective control over the Indian tribes and bringing them into
friendly relations with the whites, and thus rendering the country
habitable for settlers ; substantial benefits, which, judging from the
precedents afforded by the settlement of the territory of the United
States of America, and of Her Majesty's Colonies, are never attained
without great sacrifice of life and a large outlay of money. A ref
erence to the Hudson's Bay Co.'s books will prove that besides the
general kindness extended to the first American settlers who trav
eled by the overland route to Oregon, material aid was largely dis
pensed to them in clothing, agricultural implements and seed grain,
without which they could hardly have succeeded in establishing the
country. If my memory serves me right the value of the supplies
furnished to these early settlers amounted to a very large sum,
and I am informed that a large portion of it has never been repaid.'
"Cross Examination.
"Int. 25. 'Do you not know that the officers and servants of the
Hudson's. Bay Co. were careful to impress the minds of the natives
with the difference between Englishmen, called "King George's
Men," and Americans, known as "Boston Men," and that in the
wars or difficulties with the Indians this operated to the prejudice
of the American settlers and authorities?'
"Ans. 'On the contrary, the very reverse of that is the case. I
can attest that the Hudson's Bay Co. invariably exerted all their
influence to protect white men of every nationality, and would
have given the shelter of their establishments to an American citi
zen equally with their own countrymen. The distinctions known
among the Indians as to the nationality of the English and Ameri
cans was not derived from the Hudson's Bay Co., but, I believe,
from American citizens themselves.'
"Int. 26. 'Is it true that it was with great difficulty the Gov
ernor and Directors of the Hudson's Bay Co. in London were im
pressed with the change in affairs on this coast in the settlement
of the country ; and did not Dr. McLoughlin have much trouble and
annoyance in settling his accounts because he had encouraged such
settlements, instead of devoting himself to the fur trade ex
clusively?' "Ans. 'I am not aware that the Directors of the Hudson's Bay
Co., whatever may have been their private opinions, ever opposed
the settlement of the country or issued orders to that effect to their
agents here ; neither have I ever heard before the present time that
Dr. McLoughlin had been held responsible in any manner for sup
plies furnished or encouragement given to settlers from the United

398 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
States' " (Hudson's Bay Co. vs. United States, Vol. I., pp. 54-55, 60-
61). Archibald McKinlay, the staunch Scotch Presbyterian, who was
in charge of Fort Walla Walla from July, 1841, to February, 1846,
testified August 24, 1865 (Idem, pp. 72-104) :
(P. 78) "Int. 20. 'What was the conduct of the Indians toward
the whites passing through the Snake country?'
"Ans. Wery inoffensive and kind to the whites. I should not
have been afraid to travel myself or allow any of my men to travel
alone through that country from Fort Hall to Vancouver, or in any
direction as far northwest of the Rocky Mountains as Babine Lake
in British Columbia.'
(P. 79) "Int. 23. 'Where did you go after leaving Fort Nez
Perces in 1846, and where did you reside the greater portion of the
time before you left the employ of the company; in what business
were you engaged for a portion of the time after leaving the com
pany, and where did you reside?'
"Ans. 'I left Nez Perces (i. e., Fort Walla Walla) early in
February, 1846, and I think I arrived at Vancouver on the 25th of
the same month, and remained at Vancouver until I went to Ore
gon City between the 13th and 20th of March, and took charge of
the company's business there, and remained there until the 20th of
April, 1849. My furlough began and I was absent from the coun
try until June, and returned to Vancouver, and remained there un
til I went into business in Oregon City as commission and general
merchant, in partnership with George T. Allan and Thomas Lowe,
under the firm name of Allan, McKinlay & Co., and continued in
partnership until the fall of 1861. The latter part of this time the
business was carried on at the mill at Champoeg. The partnership
in real property continued until the spring of 1863. During the
greater part of this time I was at Vancouver as often as once or
twice a month, and when in commission business went there often.'
"Cross-examination. (P. 90) "Int. 16. 'Do you not know that a white man was
killed by the Indians in the Snake country in 1841; and did not
the company always have an armed escort with their brigades go
ing up and coming back between Fort Vancouver and Fort Hall?
Would you have us believe that all the stories of perilous adventure
by trappers and travelers of which we have read are made out of
whole cloth?'
"Ans. 'The man was killed, not in the Snake country, but at
Kamloops, in British Columbia. This was not the result of general
hostility among the Indians, but a personal difficulty with one man
growing out of a superstition of the Indian with reference to medi
cine. After this I traveled all through that country in a company

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 399
of three and could have traveled alone equally well. The servants
of the company accompanying the brigades were not generally re
quired to carry arms ; many did so for the purpose of shooting game
and defending themselves if necessary. I have heard of armed es
corts being used at times, but never saw one.'
(P. 93) "Int. 39. 'Do you not believe from the statements of
emigrants and the agents of the company that the boats in 1844
were not furnished to the emigrants, but were furnished to un
principled Americans, who proceeded to charge the emigrants for
their passage and freight down the river, which was in many cases
collected?' "Ans. 'In 1844 some men who had crossed the plains came to
Vancouver and represented that the emigrants were suffering for
means to get down the river. Dr. McLoughlin, who was then in
charge, gave them the company's boats, they saying they would vol
unteer to take them up and assist the emigrants. The boats made
a number of trips, Dr. McLoughlin understanding that all was
gratuitous. I afterward understood, however, that those who re
ceived the boats did charge some of the emigrants for their passage.'
(Pp. 103-4) "Int. 11. 'Have you not heard Dr. John McLough
lin state that he had difficulty with the officials of the company in
London in (p. 104) settling his accounts, because of the credits
given to settlers, and that he was charged with some part of this
indebtedness because he had suffered it to be barred by the statute
of limitations?' "Ans. 'I have not; he knew better.'
"Int. 12. 'Was not much of the indebtedness which remained
unpaid due from the Canadian French settlers who came before the
general migration to Oregon; and was not some due from dis
charged servants of the company?'
"Ans. 'To the best of my recollection a part of the unpaid debts
were due from such persons, but I think their proportion was
small.' "
Mr. McKinlay retired from the service of the Hudson's Bay Co.
in 1851 and became a naturalized American citizen.
We have already examined the testimony of Admiral Wilkes
and M. T. Simmons (Cf. pp. 1. 356-358, 1. 386-387 ante).
Let us now examine that of the various witnesses summoned for
the United States who went to Oregon before 1846, taking them in
the order of their arrival there.
The first was the noted Joseph L. Meek (whose ride to the States
from Oregon, starting on January 4, 1848, was a vastly more daring
deed than Whitman's ride). His testimony is found in Vol. V.,
Hudson's Bay Co. vs. United States, pp. 62-97.

400 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
As an American trapper, employed from 1829 to 1835 by Smith,
Sublette and Jackson and the Rocky Mountain Fur Co., and for
five years thereafter as a free trapper in the eastern part of the Old
Oregon Territory, he naturally had a very strong prejudice against
the Hudson's Bay Co., which appeared throughout his direct ex
amination, but being an honest man, on cross-examination, when
questions were put that compelled him to think carefully, he put
aside his prejudices. He was the first United States Marshal for
the Oregon Territory, holding that office nearly five years, officiat
ing as such at the trial and execution of the Indians who were
found guilty of the Whitman massacre. Knowing all the evidence
adduced at that trial, his own daughter having been one of the cap
tives then made by the Indians and rescued a month later by the
Hudson's Bay Co., if any one knew anything about the causes of
that sad tragedy it was Col. Meek, and had there existed any evi
dence showing that the Hudson's Bay Co. or the Catholics insti
gated it or were in any way responsible for it, Meek would have
known it and surely would have used it in his testimony to defeat
the claim of that company for compensation by the United States,
but not a word of any such stuff appears in the following, which is
all of his testimony bearing on the relation of the Hudson's Bay Co.
to the American exploration, occupation and settlement of Oregon:
"Int. 3. 'When did you first come on to the western slope of the
Rocky Mountains, and in what capacity?'
"Ans. 'In the month of August, 1829 ; in the capacity of hunter
and trapper.'
"Int. 4. 'How long did you follow that business, and in what
sections of the country?'
"Ans. 'I followed it nearly eleven years; we was bounded, gen
erally, on the west by the Blue Mountains ; on the east, by the forks
of the Platte; south, by the river Gila, and north, by the north
branches of the Missouri, and into the Okanagan country.'
"Int. 7. What influence did the Hudson's Bay Co. exercise
over the Indians in the section where you operated, with reference
to American trappers and traders ; state such facts as occur to you
in this connection?'
"Ans. 'The Hudson's Bay Co. exercised a great influence over
the western Indians — that is, the Cayuses, Nez Perces, Flatheads
and Spokanes, and through there; they had no influence over the
Indians east of the Rocky Mountains at all and way south. They
could do almost anything with the Indians. I know of one party
that was robbed by the orders of one of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s men,
the commander of Fort Walla Walla ; the party was robbed and the
furs brought back to the post and sold. I was not with that party ;

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 401
that was my understanding about the matter; that was what the
Indians said, and what the whites said that was robbed.'
"Int. 14. 'In the early settlement of the agricultural lands of
the Willamette Valley, and what was then Oregon generally, what
encouragement or discouragement was experienced by Americans
from the Hudson's Bay Co.?'
"Ans. 'When I first came down, in 1840, they discouraged set
tlements by the Americans, that is especially north of the Colum
bia River; they expected the Columbia River to be the boundary
line; they would not let us go north of the Columbia River, but al
ways advised us to go south into the Willamette Valley. There
were some men that got cattle; Mr. Walker and Mr. Doty got cat
tle; there were but five or six of us here then; they got oxen and
cows.' "Int. 15. 'Were cattle sold or loaned to the settlers; if loaned,
upon what terms?'
"Ans. 'They were loaned, not sold; the Hudson's Bay Co. had
no cattle to sell ; they were to return the cattle with the increase.'
"Int. 16. 'Up to what date did the company continue to dis
courage the settlement of Americans in Oregon?'
"Ans. 'Up to about 1843 or 1844.'
"Int. 17. 'What condition, if any, did the company impose upon
you, and those settlers with you in the Tualitin plains, before they
gave their consent?'
"Ans. 'The condition was that we were to let the Indians alone ;
not to raise no fuss with them, and not to trade with them — that
is, for furs.'
"Int. 19. 'What, in your judgment, caused the change in the
tactics of the company in 1843-44, with reference to American set
tlers?' "Ans. 'I thought it was on account of the emigration, so many
coming in here, and the American squadron having just been here.'
"Cross-examination."Int. 1. 'State whether the influence of the Hudson's Bay Co.
over the Indians was not salutary and beneficial.'
"Ans. 'Certainly it was in all this lower country.'
"Int. 2. 'Was not that influence exerted uniformly and promptly
for the protection of the early immigrants and settlers?'
"Ans. 'It certainly was.'
"Int. 3. 'Can you give the names of the party who said they
were robbed by the orders of one of the Hudson's Bay Co. men?'
"Ans. 'I can, some of their names— Wilkins, Robinson and Mc-
Dofy, three of them I remember well.'
"Int. 4. 'In whose employ were these men at the' time?'

402 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Ans. 'Captain Wyeth's.'
"Int. 5. 'State the time, place and circumstances of this al
leged robbery.'
"Ans. 'I don't think I can exactly; it must have been in 1834
or 1835; I think they told me it was on the head waters of Day's
River; I don't know what the circumstances were.'
"Int. 6. 'Who was at that time the commander of Fort Walla
Walla?' "Ans. 'Mr. Pambrun.'
"Int. 7. 'Did you ever hear him say anything about the matter?'
"Ans. 'Never a word.'
"Int. 8. 'Did you see him frequently after it occurred?'
"Ans. 'I seen him, not very frequently, though several times.'
"Int. 9. 'Did you ever ask him anything in regard to it?'
"Ans. 'Never; I don't think I ever did.'
"Int. 10. 'Did the men who said they had been robbed state
any reason for such an order of Mr. Pambrun?'
"Ans. 'They stated various reasons about it; the main reason
that they said was because they wouldn't trade their beaver with
Mr. Pambrun at Walla Walla. Another reason was that one of the
men had stolen a woman from Walla Walla and run off with her.
What we call stealing a woman is taking a wife when you can get
her; that's what we call petit larceny in the mountains.'
"Int. 11. 'Was not the capture or stealing of a woman regarded
by the Indians as an act of hostility, provoking their revenge?'
"Ans. 'If she had been stolen from the Indians it would have
been considered so by them ; but as she was stolen from the whites,
the Indians, generally, had nothing to do with it.'
"Int. 12. 'From whom was this woman stolen?'
"Ans. 'I think she was stolen from some of the Hudson's Bay
men.' "Int. 13. 'Was she recaptured by the Indian party?'
"Ans. 'I think not.'
"Int. 14. 'Was not the attack upon these men under the circum
stances generally regarded among mountain men as an act of jus
tice?' "Ans. 'I think not, sir ; no, sir.'
"Int. 15. 'Do you know whether any of the principal officers of
the company approved of that act?'
"Ans. 'All that I ever heard speak of it condemned it — that is,
the principal officers, the bourgeois.'
"Int. 16. 'Did you ever hear that Mr. Pambrun ordered it, ex
cept from the men who were robbed?'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 403
"Ans. 'I heard it from the Indians, the nation that done it, and
the men, that is all I ever heard say so.'
"Int. 17. 'What tribe did it?'
"Ans. 'The Cayuses and Walla Wallas, I think.'
"Int. 18. 'Do you not know that Indians are very artful in mak
ing up stories of that sort to shield themselves?'
"Ans. 'Yes, Indians are very artful in making up stories, but
there are not many of those Indians that dare make up a story
against a Hudson's Bay bourgeois at those times.'
"Int. 22. 'Do you believe that this alleged robbery would have
taken place if it had not been for the stealing of the Indian woman ?'
"Ans. 'I do not know whether it would or not.'
"Int. 23. 'Were not most of the troubles between the mountain
men and the Indians caused by quarrels about Indian women?'
"Ans. 'No, sir.'
"Int. 24. 'Was not that a cause of difficulty in many instances?'
"Ans. 'I think not, sir; no, sir.'
"Int. 25. 'Did you ever hear of any other robbery, such as this
mentioned, in which any blame was imputed by rumor or otherwise
to any officer of the company?'
"Ans. 'I think not ; no, sir.'
"Int. 28. 'Do you not believe that the great reason why the
Indians respected and feared the company and its men was because
of their knowledge that the company had power to punish any
wrong; and also because the company had always instructed its
agents to act fairly and justly toward the Indians?'
"Ans. 'The upper Indians had no knowledge of the kind, except
by the company cutting off their supplies when they did wrong.
Some time after Fort Hall fell into the company's hands they had
complete dominion over that country, Indians and all. I think they
always instructed their agents to act fairly toward the Indians.
The name of the company passed me through to Fort Bridger in
1848; when the Indians came to me I told them that Tom McKay
was behind with a large party, going to Fort Hall to trade ; I wore
the Hudson's Bay dress out and out.'
"Int. 29. 'Was this trip, in 1848, the one you made as messen
ger to the United States Government to ask aid in suppressing hos
tilities?' "Ans. 'Yes, sir.'
"Int. 30. 'Did not the officers of the company, at all its posts,
do everything in their power for your protection, convenience and
comfort on that trip?'
"Ans. 'Yes, sir; I had an order from Dr. McLoughlin to that
amount.'

404 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Int. 33. 'Did not the Cayuse war follow as the consequence of
the massacre of Dr. Whitman and his family?'
"Ans. 'Yes, sir; that was the cause of the Cayuse war.'
"Int. 34. 'State who rescued the survivors of that massacre.'
"Ans. 'Peter Skeen Ogden, Chief Factor of the Hudson's Bay
Co.' "Int. 35. 'Did he not go up, personally, with a company before
the Provisional Government had time to act in the matter?'
"Ans. 'Yes, sir ; when the news arrived at Vancouver he equipped
a party and went direct up in person and bought the survivors and
brought them down ; he gave presents to the Indians ; I think there
were about sixty came down in the boats.'
"Int. 36. 'When you say that the company discouraged settle
ments north of the Columbia River, state whether it was not on the
ground that if the land north of the Columbia should be assigned
to Great Britain, American settlers might lose their nationality.'
"Ans. 'I don't know about that; I know they would not let us
settle on the north side ; so far as nationality was concerned, I don't
think they cared anything about it.'
"Int. 37. 'Did they hinder settlers going north of the Colum
bia, except upon lands which they claimed to occupy?'
"Ans. 'I think not, sir ; they claimed the whole country, though,
north of the Columbia?'
"Int. 41. 'Did not the company advise settlers to go to the Wil
lamette Valley, so that being together they might be better enabled
to protect themselves from Indian hostilities?'
"Ans. 'They always advised them to go to the Willamette, but
I always thought it was to keep them out of their way at Vancou
ver and from settling that country.'
"Int. 42. 'Was not the land in the Willamette as good as that
north of the Columbia?"
"Ans. 'I think the land in the Willamette as good as that north
of the Columbia for raising wheat.'
"Int. 43. 'Was not one reason stated by Dr. McLoughlin for his
advice that if they scattered about they would be in greater danger?'
"Ans. 'That was one of his reasons.'
"Int. 44. 'Do you not now believe that the advice given by Dr.
McLoughlin to the settlers was the best for their interests that he
could give?'
"Ans. 'I think his advice was pretty good then, but it has proved
very bad since.'
"Int. 45. 'How has it proved bad?'
"Ans. 'The first settlers were deprived of the most valuable part
of the country.'
"Int. 46. 'Which was that?'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 405
"Ans. 'That was all the lower country, places near to the river,
along the Willamette, below the falls; but I believe the doctor
meant his advice for the good of the settlers at the time.'
"Int. 47. 'Why were the lands along the Willamette River be
low the falls the most valuable lands in Oregon?'
"Ans. 'It is so near to market and conveniences of getting to
them; but I must add that they didn't look so convenient in those
days as they do now with big farms and towns on them.'
"Int. 48. 'Have not the markets all grown up since that time?'
"Ans. 'No, sir; the wheat market was better that day than it
is now.' "Int. 49. 'Were not prairie lands which produced wheat more
valuable to the settlers than heavily timbered lands on the river
banks?' "Ans. 'They were, at that time, to raise wheat on.'
"Int. 50. 'Were they not for everything which it was profitable
to raise?' "Ans. 'Yes, sir.'
"Int. 51. 'Did you not, in 1850-1851, write a letter to Dr. John
McLoughlin, in reply to some questions sent to you by him, stating
that his conduct while at the head of the company had greatly pro
moted the welfare and prosperity of the early settlers, and that but
for him you did not believe the settlers could have got through with
their difficulties, or words to that effect?'
"Ans. 'I think I did, sir.'
"Int. 52. 'Did not Lucier and others take lands along the river,
below the Willamette falls, and afterward abandon them and move
to the upper prairies?'
"Ans. 'I think they did ; I have heard so.'
"Int. 53. 'Do you know of any instance in which the company
refused to furnish stock to a respectable settler worthy of credit?'
"Ans. 'I don't think I do, sir.'
"Int. 54. 'Do you know of its refusing to furnish supplies to
emigrants or settlers who were worthy of credit?'
"Ans. 'Some they furnished with supplies, some they did not;
that is, certain kinds of supplies. If a man would take a claim he
could get seed wheat, plows, hoes, harrows, teeth, and so on it he
would show a disposition to go to work to raise wheat, which they
was the only market for.'
"Int. 55. 'Was not that market, if the only one, better than
none?' ..
"Ans. 'Yes, it was better than it is today, as far as supplies are
concerned.'

406 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Int. 58. 'Did you know anything of Jedediah Smith, who was
trading and trapping in Southern Oregon? State what you know
of his rescue, if anything; by whom, and when it was made.'
"Ans. 'I know Jedediah Smith very well, having served under
him in the Rocky Mountains; I think the rescue was made in 1828,
by Mr. McCloud of the Hudson's Bay Co. In 1829 I was detailed
by the company, in whose service I was, to hunt for him; we
crossed the Rocky Mountains, and found him in Pierre's Hole, on
the head of Snake River, with a party. He came and joined the
company then — the company of Smith, Jackson and Sublette — he
was one of the partners; he told me that he had been defeated at
the crossing of Rogue River, all his men killed but three, I think;
he made his way to Vancouver, and the company equipped and sent
out a party to get his property and rescue any of the party that
might be left; I think he remained the winter of 1828 with the
Hudson's Bay Co. ; in the summer of 1829 we met him on Snake
River.' "Int. 59. 'How much of his property was rescued, if you know?'
"Ans. 'That I do not know, how much; there were various
statements made about it; I don't remember exactly what Smith
said; I think he said very little was recovered; some beaver and
horses, mostly beaver.'
"Int. 60. 'How large a party was sent out for this purpose, and
how long were they absent?'
"Ans. 'I don't know exactly how many there were in the party ;
Smith said, I think, there were forty or fifty men ; I think they were
under the command of Thomas McKay; and he said he was going
to kill all the Indians out there ; and the order was countermanded
and Mr. McCloud was sent in his place ; I don't remember how long ;
I think they were out several months; Smith and Black told me
often, but I don't remember.'
"Int. 61. 'Did not Smith express great gratitude to the com
pany because it had done so much for him, especially as he was a
rival fur trader?'
"Ans. 'Smith always expressed great gratitude to the company
for the act they had done.'
"Int. 62. 'Did he say whether it was done without any charge?'
"Ans. 'Smith always said it was done without any charge, but
it was always disputed by the other partners, so much so that they
dissolved and sold out the next summer to the Rocky Mountain
Fur Co. and formed a new firm.'
"Int. 75. 'How long did you remain at Fort Hall at that time ?'
"Ans. 'I think I was there three days; it generally took one
to get drunk and two to get sober.'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 407
"Int. 98. 'Was not Fort Hall a place of general resort for emi
grants when they began to come to Oregon and California?'
"Ans. 'I think it was, sir; they generally passed Fort Hall.'
"Int. 99. 'Did not the position of that fort in the Indian coun
try have the effect of protecting the emigrant route?'
"Ans. 'I think it had, sir ; I suppose it was a great protection
to the emigrant route.'
"Int. 100. 'Was not the same true of Forts Boise and Walla
Walla?' "Ans. 'I don't think Fort Boise was of any consequence at all,
except the name of the Hudson's Bay Co.; that was a protection
along there. The emigrants hardly ever came by Walla Walla, but
I presume it was a protection.'
"Int. 107. 'In your judgment would not the emigrants, in all
probability, have had trouble with the Snake Indians at Boise but
for the fact that the company had a fort there?'
"Ans. 'They might have had trouble there; it was a trouble
some country along there for emigrants.'
"Int. 159. 'While Marshal of the United States for Oregon,
from 1849 to 1853, where did you find rooms for the courts at
Vancouver?' "Ans. 'I found rooms in Fort Vancouver; I got them from the
Chief Factor in charge.'
"Int. 160. 'Was their use furnished gratuitously?'
"Ans. 'I have no vouchers for money paid by me for the use
of those rooms, no charge having been made for their use.'
"Int. 161. 'Did not Mr. Ogden, Chief Factor, tell you that you
were welcome to use them whenever you wanted them?'
"Ans. 'Yes, sir; Mr. Ogden was very clever in that respect.'
"Int. 162. 'In your official life state whether you found any
residents of Oregon more prompt and willing to assist you when
necessary than the officers of the company?'
"Ans. 'No, sir; I never found any that was more prompt than
the officers of the Hudson's Bay Co.'
"Direct examination resumed:
"Int. 4. 'How many settlers, in 1840 and 1841, were able to get
seed wheat of the company?'
"Ans. 'I do not know ; most any man could get seed wheat that
showed a disposition to make a farm and raise wheat.'
"Int. 5. 'What condition, if any, did the company seek to im
pose upon those receiving seed wheat?'
"Ans. 'They imposed the condition that they would pay it back
again.' "Int. 6. 'Do you know of any farmer who was refused seed
grain by them? If so, state who it was.'

408 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Ans. 'I know some that were refused seed grain; Mr. George
Davis, Joseph L. Meek; I think, though, there were several others.'
"Int. 7. 'State whether you and these other men took claims
and wanted to make a start at farming or not.'
"Ans. 'Those other men — some of them — took claims and I took
a claim ; it is hard to tell what my object was when I took a claim.'
"Int. 8. 'Of the company of men first settling on the Tualitin
plains who were furnished with seed grain, so far as you know?'
"Ans. 'Mr. Doty, Mr. Walker and Mr. Newell.'
"Int. 9. 'Were they more respectable or more worthy of credit
than those who were refused?'
"Ans. 'I presume the company thought so.'
"Int. 10. 'State what you think about it.'
"Ans. 'So far as I myself was concerned, I thought I was as
worthy as any man that lived ; the other men were very worthy men,
as I thought.'
"Int. 11. 'Who were furnished with cattle by the company, and
as far as you know?'
"Ans. 'Mr. Walker, Mr. Doty, Mr. Griffin, Mr. Williams and
Mr. Kelsey.'
"Int. 12. 'Were the cattle sold or simply loaned?'
"Ans. 'I think they were loaned.'
"Int. 13. 'Was it not generally understood among the Ameri
can trappers that the Hudson's Bay Co. got a very large quantity
of Jedediah Smith's furs, for which he and they failed to account
to the company to which they belonged?'
"Ans. 'It used to be said so amongst the trappers in the moun
tains.' "Int. 14. 'If you remember, state the quantity which was thus
reported.' "Ans. 'It was always reported as about forty packs.'
"Int. 15. 'Give an estimate of the value of forty packs of beaver
at that time.'
"Ans. 'Forty packs of beaver at that time in the mountains
was worth about $20,000 ; I don't know what they would be worth
at Vancouver.' "Int. 16. 'State whether the dispute about this matter was the
cause of the dissolution of the firm of Smith, Jackson & Sublette,
to which you refer in your cross-examination.'
"Ans. 'I do not know; that was the report among mountain
men.' "Cross-examination resumed :
"Int. 1. 'What character did Jedediah Smith bear?'
"Ans. 'He bore a very high reputation for truth and veracity
and a gentleman.'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 409
"Int. 2. 'From what you know of his reputation do you believe
he was capable of conspiring with Dr. McLoughlin to defraud his
partners ?'
"Ans. 'I think he was a man of too great a reputation to be
guilty of any act of the kind.'
"Int. 3. 'How long did you know Dr. John McLoughlin, and
what was his reputation for truth and honesty during that time?'
"Ans. 'I got acquainted with John McLoughlin in the winter of
1840 ; I knew him from that time until he died ; he was a high-toned
gentleman; for truth and veracity he could not be beat.'
"Int. 4. 'From what you know of the character and honesty of
Dr. McLoughlin, do you believe he was capable of conspiring with
Jedediah Smith for the purpose of defrauding his (Smith's) part
ners, or to make money for the Hudson's Bay Co.?'
"Ans. 'I have no idea that the doctor was ever capable of any
such business.'
"Int. 9. 'When you and others were refused wheat by Dr. Mc
Loughlin, did he not say that he was willing to furnish it to any
who were farmers, but unwilling to sell it for other purposes?'
"Ans. 'I think he did ; I think he said he was willing to furnish
it for seed to farmers.'
"Int. 10. 'At that time had you done any farming in Oregon?'
"Ans. 'None.'
"Int. 11. 'Did you not afterward obtain at Vancouver such
things as you wanted to carry on your farm?'
"Ans. 'Yes, sir.'
"Int. 12. 'Do you not know that many of the settlers who
borrowed cattle from the company never returned them or paid the
company for them?'
"Ans. 'I know some men borrowed cattle there and never re
turned them.'
"Int. 13. 'Were not some of these the persons mentioned by
you in your previous testimony?'
"Ans. 'Yes, sir; Mr. Williams was one that I know of; Mr.
Griffin never returned his, I think.' "
It should be said with regard to all the testimony in these cases
that a very great amount of latitude was allowed and much hear
say and other testimony admitted that would have been excluded
under the strict application of the rules of evidence, presumably
because it was not to go before an ordinary jury, but before com
missioners who were all able lawyers, and who were to have ample
time to sit down and read, and study, and sift the evidence thor
oughly. Meek, it will be remembered, was one of the party who, in 1840,
outfitted at Fort Hall and drove through to Walla Walla the first

410 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
three wagons that ever went through to the Columbia (Cf. pp. 84-
88, ante).The next witness in order of time of arrival in Oregon was W.
H. Gray, and in Chapter III. of Book IL, infra, so much of his testi
mony is quoted as bears directly on the question of Whitman's ride
and Mr. Gray's qualifications for writing history and his utter in
difference to accuracy, even on so easily ascertained a point as
whether Millard Fillmore or John Tyler was President of the
United States in the spring of 1843.
Such other part of his testimony as concerns the relation of the
Hudson's Bay Co. to the occupation of Oregon by American mis
sionaries and settlers was as follows:
"Int. 3. 'In what capacity and for what purpose did you first
cross the Rocky Mountains?'
"Ans. 'I came in the capacity of secular agent, mechanic and
teacher to the mission of the A. B. C. F. M., then about being estab
lished in the country, in connection with Rev. H. H. Spalding and
Dr. Marcus Whitman and their wives.' "
In Chapter IV. of Book IL, infra, the total falsity of this claim
of Gray to having been "Secular Agent" of the A. B. C. F. M. Mis
sion is demonstrated by quoting from the Missionary Herald during
the existence of the mission its statements of his real position:
"Int. 5. 'When you first came to the country, and in the imme
diately following years, what was the policy of the Hudson's Bay
Co. with reference to the general settlement of Oregon by Ameri
cans? State any facts in your knowledge pertinent to this object'
"Ans. 'The policy of the company, as made known to me by
John McLeod, Thomas McKay, P. C. Pambrun, John McLoughlin,
James Douglas, Francis Ermatinger, and, I think, Mr. Simpson,
was to discourage and dissuade all American settlement in the
country; this policy was made known to me first at the rendezvous
on Green River by McLeod and McKay; afterward by Mr. Pam
brun, Ermatinger, Dr. McLoughlin and Mr. Douglas; first, in re
fusing to allow our mission to engage men such as was deemed
necessary to assist in erecting the mission establishments; after
ward, by Dr. McLoughlin and Mr. Douglas, in declining to allow
the mission to bring men or laborers from the Sandwich Islands in
their ships, which was a prominent reason for my being sent back
to the States to bring a reinforcement to the mission across the
mountains. In the mountains I obtained the consent of Mr. Erma
tinger to bring a carpenter and blacksmith, under a contract drawn
by him, for the services of the mission, upon conditions that those
men were to receive only the wages given to the servants of the
Hudson's Bay Co. and not to trade any goods they might receive

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 411
for their pay for services to the Indians for furs or interfere with
the company's trade in any manner.' "
As to the total falsity of all this about the Hudson's Bay Co.
opposing Americans settling in Oregon the evidence in this chapter
is conclusive. It will be noticed that of all the officers of the Hudson's Bay
Co. with whom he claims to have had these conversations James
Douglas was the only one then living, and that he testified that the
policy of the company was directly opposite to what Mr. Gray stated
it to have been on his alleged recollections, wholly unsupported by
a word of contemporaneous letters or diaries, about conversations
from seventeen to thirty years before.
"Int. 41. 'Have you ever had any conversation with the late Dr.
John McLoughlin about supplies and assistance furnished the early
settlers of the country and his consequent treatment by his supe
riors? If so, state when and what it was.'
"Ans. 'I have, both as regards the missionaries and settlers. In
the winter of 1836 and 1837 Dr. McLoughlin explained to me fully
the position in which he stood to the company and the difficulty he
would necessarily get into by furnishing supplies to missionaries or
settlers, and advised me, as I was about returning to the States, to
advise our board in reference to sending on supplies to the mis
sions — to our mission particularly referred to. He also said that
he was fearful that there would be complaints and difficulties grow
ing out of the supplies he had already furnished to the Methodist
missions; that whatever supplies we received from the company we
must consider them as an especial favor. Afterward, in 1845 and
1846, perhaps, when I was building a house for the doctor in Oregon
City, he told me that he had a falling out with the company in con
sequence of furnishing those supplies, and that he had left their
service; he said that they held him personally responsible for the
amount of the advances made to the Protestant missionaries and
settlers.' "Cross-examination :
"Int. 1. 'When did you have the last conversation with Dr. Mc
Loughlin ?'
"Ans. 'In the fall of 1847 ; I spent some two weeks of that
year in Oregon City.'
"Int. 2. 'Did he say that the company had charged him for the
supplies advanced to settlers or that he feared they would charge
him?' "Ans. 'My impression is that he said they had charged him,
and that he had to pay it.'

412 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Int. 3. 'In his conversation in the winter of 1836 and 1837
did not Dr. McLoughlin tell you that he was instructed by the com
pany to do no credit business?'
"Ans. 'Not at all; the supplies furnished to the mission were
not upon credit, but drafts drawn upon the board, payable in Lon
don.' "Int. 4. 'Did he ever refuse supplies to Dr. Whitman's mission ?'
"Ans. 'I do not think he did, to a limited extent'
"Int. 5. 'Did he ever refuse anything desired by Dr. Whitman?'
"Ans. 'To a certain extent he did refuse; that is, the supplies
were limited to what the company or he thought was sufficient for
our immediate wants.'
"Int. 6. 'Do you mean to swear that Dr. McLoughlin ever re
fused Dr. Whitman any favor for which he asked?'
"Ans. 'I mean to say that there was scarcely a single invoice
or bill calling for supplies for the mission that was sent to Van
couver and filled ; I know the first invoice made out was not filled.'
"Int. 7. 'In what respect?'
"Ans. 'In respect to goods and tools.'
"Int. 8. 'Did the company have the tools and goods that were
sent for to spare and dispose of?'
"Ans. 'The company had the most of the goods that we wanted ;
they stated that they could not spare them from the Indian trade.
Tools they only had a limited supply, and advised me to make out
my bills and forward them to London and they would be filled.'
"Int. 9. 'Who of the company refused to allow you to engage
such men as you wanted to erect buildings?'
"Ans. 'Mr. McLeod in the Rocky Mountains and Dr. McLough
lin objected to it in Vancouver.'
"Int. 10. 'What reason did they give?'
"Ans. 'The reason assigned was that those men would be trad
ing and interfering with Indians about the stations.'
"Int. 11. 'Was not the reason given that they had not the men
to spare?' "Ans. 'The reason assigned in the Rocky Mountains by McLeod
was that they preferred to supply the men necessary rather than
to allow the Americans to be brought from the mountains. Dr. Mc
Loughlin had not the men to spare.'
"Int. 12. 'How many men did you bring with you the first trip?'
"Ans. 'We brought but two men to Fort Hall ; one left at Fort
Hall.' "Int. 14. 'Did not Dr. McLoughlin, when he declined to allow
the mission to bring men from the islands, say that his vessels could
not bring the men the company needed?'
"Ans. 'I think not'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 413
"Int. 15. 'What reason did he give?'
"Ans. 'The principal reason was the liabilities of those men to
interfere with the mission labors and cause difficulty with the In
dians.' "Int. 16. 'Do you not know that the company was required to
give bonds to the Hawaiian Government for the safe return of the
islanders brought from Honolulu, and were therefore compelled to
keep them under their supervision?'
"Ans. 'I think they were not in 1836 and 1837 and perhaps
1838, but after that I think they were.'
"Int. 24. 'What did the improvements made by you that year
cost?' "Ans. 'They cost the American Board about $500 ; the mill ma
chinery was sent out by the board, and was extra.'
"Int. 25. 'Do you know the amount of damages claimed by the
American Board of the Government for the destruction of that
property?' "Ans. 'I do not know; I have understood that it was either
three or nine thousand dollars, including cattle and everything.'
"Int. 47. 'Have you not been conscious of an unfriendly feeling
toward the company and its agents ever since their refusal to em
ploy you and your wife?' (*. e., in 1839).
"Ans. 'Not on account of that transaction or refusal to employ
us.' "Int. 48. 'Do you mean to say that you and your wife and Dr.
and Mrs. Whitman did not make frequent and prolonged visits to
Walla Walla and Fort Vancouver?'
"Ans. 'I mean to say that me and my wife never visited Vancou
ver but once ; we were compelled, in consequence of a misunderstand
ing between Mr. Spalding and ourselves, to remain at Walla Walla
(or rather my wife was) during the winter of 1839 and 1840 some
two or three weeks, awaiting my return from Vancouver. On my
return we went directly to Dr. Whitman's station; we seldom vis
ited the fort afterward ; Dr. and Mrs. Whitman made frequent calls
upon Mr. Pambrun's family and occasionally visited Fort Van
couver. Between some of the gentlemen of the company, Dr. Whit
man and family, myself and family, there was always a cordial and
agreeable association and acquaintance, and we always felt that it
was private and had nothing to do with the affairs of the company.'
"Int. 49. 'Was the company on this coast known or represented
except by its agents at its posts?'
"Ans. 'There was always in our intercourse with the gentlemen
of the company a distinction kept up by themselves as to the man
ner in which we should regard them in our private business or social

414 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
relations and in their actions and business relations as connected
with the company.'
"Int. 50. 'Did you know the Hudson's Bay Co., except by its
representatives at its posts?'
"Ans. 'We always understood there was a double action, so far
as related to the gentlemen of the company and the company itself;
the question might be answered — we did.'
"Int. 51. 'Do you mean to say that the agents of the company
acted differently as private individuals and as agents?'
"Ans. 'I mean to say they acted in a double capacity.'
"Int. 52. 'In what capacity did you act?'
"Ans. 'I acted as secular agent to the mission of the A. B. C.
F. M.'
"Int. 58. 'Was it not of great advantage to the mission to have
the post at Walla Walla in their neighborhood and to find the In
dians there partially reclaimed from the habits of their savage life?'
"Ans. 'When that post was under the supervision and direction
of Mr. Pambrun and Mr. McKinlay it was a great advantage to both
the mission and fort ; as soon as it passed into the hands of Mr. Mc-
Bean it became the immediate cause, with other influences in that
section, of the destruction of the mission.'
"Int. 59. 'When did Mr. McBean take charge?'
"Ans. 'I am unable to say; it was after 1842.'
"Int. 60. 'When did you leave Dr. Whitman's?'
"Ans. 'In the fall of 1842.'
"Int. 61. 'Do you not know that Mr. McKinlay continued there
until 1846?'
"Ans. 'I do not; I saw him in Oregon City before 1846; I am
almost positive it was in 1845, residing there.'
"Int. 62. 'Were you at Whitman's or at Walla Walla between
1842 and 1848?'
"Ans. 'I think not.'
"Int. 63. 'In saying that McBean's occupation of the fort re
sulted in part as just stated by you, do you pretend to know any
thing about it or is your opinion based upon rumors?'
"Ans. 'My knowledge and opinions are based upon the testimony
which has been given and published in relation to the destruction
of that mission and the particular accounts which I have received
from the Indians in that section of the country since 1861, which
I believe to be substantially correct.'
"Int. 64. 'Are you as certain in regard to that statement as
you were that Fillmore was President in the winter of 1842 and
1843?' "Ans. 'I am considerably more certain than of that, as I have
more thoroughly studied the subject.'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 415
"Int. 65. 'Do you not know that Indians often fabricate stories
to suit their own purposes?'
"Ans. 'That depends altogether upon the object to be accom
plished.' "Int. 70. 'How much did it cost to bring Dr. Whitman's party
from the States, to send you home and bring you out again with
men and to purchase supplies at Vancouver before your mission
was built?'
"Ans. 'I am not able to say.'
"Int. 71. 'Could you have built the mission, supplied and pro
tected yourselves, but for the aid furnished by the company and
the fact that the company had establishments in the vicinity con
venient for your assistance?'
"Ans. 'We came to the country without any particular knowl
edge of and entirely independent of the company and expected to
establish our mission without any assistance from them. At the
American rendezvous we learned from Captain Wyeth, McLeod and
Mr. McKay that we could get supplies of the Methodist Mission and
also of the Hudson's Bay Co., and in consequence of this informa
tion we sold and threw away a large amount of supplies that we
were not able to get replaced at Vancouver; so far as the protec
tion of the company afforded, my impression is and always has been
that the mission of the Board and of the Methodists would have
been far more successful had there been no Hudson's Bay Co. in
the country.'
"Int. 72. 'Have you not made on several occasions statements
different from this contained in your last answer?'
"Ans. 'I have repeatedly said that the company's establish
ments being in the country was a great convenience both to the
missions and the settler, but never admitted, to my knowledge,
their being necessary.'
"Int. 165. 'Have you not during the last year been very busy
in making charges against the Hudson's Bay Co. and some of its
officers on account of matters occurring within the last twenty-
five years?'
"Ans. 'For something over a year I have been collecting up
facts, incidents and statements and all the histories I could get
hold of, for the purpose of giving an accurate and truthful history
of the early settlement of the country. In those facts, incidents
and statements I have given to the Hudson's Bay Co., all the mis
sions and all the individual persons that I have spoken or writ
ten about as near the truth as I have been able to collect, and have
also requested of all persons knowing any fact stated that was not
strictly true to forward the correction and it should have its weight
in the historical sketches being given.'

416 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Int. 166. 'Have you not during the last year made many and
grievous charges in print against the company?'
"Ans. 'I do not think I have made a single charge but what
is strictly true from the best knowledge and information I could
get.' "Int. 167. 'Will you not answer the last question, already asked
twice, without further evasion or equivocation?'
"Ans. 'I do not think I have evaded or equivocated in the least,
but have given what I conceive to be a plain, distinct and positive
answer to the question put'
"Int. 168. 'Do you consider yourself capable of writing an im
partial and unprejudiced history of the Hudson's Bay Co. in Ore
gon?' "Ans. 'That is for those who read the history to judge.'
"Int. 169. 'The question is with reference to your own judg
ment; will you answer it?'
"Ans. 'I cannot say ; I have not undertaken to write a history
of the Hudson's Bay Co., but of all events and general transactions
that have occurred within the country during the time I have been
in it, and particularly of events occurring up to the formation of
the country into a Territory of the United States.'
"Int. 170. 'Is your feeling such toward the company that you
believe yourself capable of acting toward it and its officers impar
tially and without prejudice?'
"Ans. 'I don't think feelings or prejudices have anything to do
with it, but facts are all I seek to know.' "
Gray's History of Oregon (p. 183) says: "The difficulty about
land had no existence in the minds or thoughts of the Indians till
the fall of 1839 and after the renewal of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s
license for twenty-one years. From that time forward a marked
change was manifest in the feelings of most of the gentlemen of the
company." It is a very curious coincidence that that was the precise time
when Gray flrst prepared to desert the A. B. C. F. M. Mission and
applied to the Hudson's Bay Co. for a position for his wife as
teacher at Vancouver and for himself in some capacity (presum
ably as carpenter) and was refused employment, and of this Rev.
C. Eells, in a letter dated October 3, 1842 (the day Whitman started
to the States without waiting for it as he had agreed to do), wrote
as follows: "Mr. Cornelius Rogers has said James Douglas, Esq.,
told him they would not give Mr. Gray a hearing because of the
want of evidence that the mission approved of such an arrange
ment being made."
While Mr. Gray thus discovered a change in 1839 "in the feel
ings of most of the gentlemen of the company" the letters herein-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 417
before quoted from all those who remained faithful to the mission
—Dr. and Mrs. Whitman, Rev. H. H. Spalding, Rev. C. Eells and
Rev. Elkanah Walker, show that no one of them discovered any
such change, but they all remained on the friendliest terms with
the company during the whole existence of the mission, i. e., eight
years after this time when Gray saw this change and more than
five years after he deserted his associates in September, 1842, in a
manner which Eells and Walker bitterly denounced as dishonor
able, in the before-mentioned letter of C. Eells, dated October 3,
1842 (which letter Walker indorsed as correct, especially in its
severe censure of Gray's course in deserting the mission). The
reader will do well to turn to p. 54, ante, and read Gray's letter of
January 10, 1838, to the Secretary of the American Board and com
pare what he then wrote about the Hudson's Bay Co. with this "tes
timony" twenty-eight years later.
Surely it is evident to every one who reads this testimony and
compares it with the contemporaneous letters and diaries herein
quoted that Gray's testimony on any matter connected with the
Hudson's Bay Co. is totally unworthy of any credence.
Caleb Cushing evidently thought so, for when the counsel for
the Hudson's Bay Co. and the Puget's Sound Agricultural Co. in
their arguments had denounced Gray in the bitterest possible lan
guage, Cushing in his argument, though defending with great vigor
the other witnesses whom they had attacked as being untrust
worthy, did not offer one word in support of Gray's attacks upon
the Hudson's Bay Co. nor defend his veracity in any way.
, The next witness is Hon. A. L. Lovejoy who, with Hastings,
came with White's migration in 1842 and was Whitman's com
panion on his ride to the States as far as Bent's Fort (near where
La Junta, Colo., now is), where he remained through the winter
and early spring and joined the 1843 migration near Fort Laramie
in July. He was a prominent citizen of Oregon all the rest of his
life, several times member of the Territorial Legislature, Speaker
of the House, President of the Council, member of the convention
which formed the State Constitution, Receiver of the Land Office,
etc. His testimony is found in Idem, pp. 17-20, and the following
are extracts from the same :
"Int. 4. 'Please state whether you were acquainted with Dr.
John McLoughlin, Peter S. Ogden, James Douglas and other fac
tors and managing agents of the Hudson's Bay Co. during your
early residence in Oregon.'
"Ans. 'I was well acquainted with Dr. McLoughlin, Mr. Ogden
and Mr. Douglas, more particularly with Dr. McLoughlin. I was
acquainted with some others.'

418 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Int. 5. 'What connection, if any, did these men and their em
ployes and servants, and those under their influence, have with the
formation of the provisional government of Oregon?'
"Ans. 'I always understood that they participated in common
with other citizens of the valley. Dr. Tolmie was a member of the
Legislature in 1846; H. M. Pierce was a member; A. McDonald was
a member in 1846. They generally voted at the elections.'
"Int. 6. 'State what, if anything, you have heard Dr. John Mc
Loughlin say with reference to his supplying emigrants at an early
day with food and clothing and seed for their farms, and the action
of his superiors with reference thereto?'
"Ans. 'At an early day, Dr. McLoughlin furnished the emi
grants coming, a great many of them very destitute, with fuel and
clothing, seed grain and cattle, and they were to pay him when they
could ; it was a large amount, some seventy-five or eighty thousand
dollars, at least I so understood from him. I understood him to
say that he had acted against orders, that he had done it on his
own responsibility; that they complained that he had done it
against orders, and that he sold goods on credit without authority,
and that they did not do a credit business. He said further that
they proposed to charge him with this amount; he then said that
he claimed that if they charged him with this amount that he
claimed the profits that grew out of it ; that is the way he expected
to get even on it. I never knew what the company did in the
premises.' "Int. 7. 'State whether Dr. McLoughlin was pleased or dis
pleased with this conduct of his superiors in the Hudson's Bay
Co.?' "Ans. 'I should infer from his conversation that he was dis
pleased.' "Cross-examination :
"Int. 1. 'In the conversation with Dr. McLoughlin, referred to
by you in answer to the sixth direct interrogatory, did he not say
that he feared or supposed the company might charge him for giv
ing credit, rather than that its officers had proposed to do so?'
"Ans. 'I don't know that they had done it. The impression I
had is that they had threatened to do it, and he expected that they
would; I don't know that they did it.'
"Int. 5. 'In what year was the provisional government of Ore
gon organized?'
"Ans. 'The first steps were taken in 1843 ; in 1845 there was a
kind of a constitution adopted.'
"Int. 6. 'Was not the object of that government the mainte
nance of law and order and the adoption of measures to promote
the settlement and prosperity of Oregon?'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 419
"Ans. 'It was.'
"Int. 7. 'Did not the gentlemen you have named in your direct
examination as officers of the Hudson's Bay Co. co-operate as
heartily in the organization and support of that government as
other citizens of Oregon?'
"Ans. 'They did, and helped equally to bear the burdens.' "
This deposition was signed July 27, 1866, eight months after
Spalding had launched the Saving Oregon Theory of Whitman's
ride in the Pacific, but there is not a hint in all his testimony that
Lovejoy knew anything about any patriotic purpose in that ride,
though certainly if he did here was a most excellent opportunity
for putting that matter on permanent record in an official docu
ment of great weight, and where it would have much helped the
United States to have shown that the Hudson's Bay Co. in 1842
were striving to wrest Oregon from the United States, and that
Whitman prevented it and saved Oregon.
Similarly, if it were true that at Fort Hall the Hudson's Bay
Co. put impediments in the way of migration to Oregon, as asserted
by all the advocates of the Whitman Saved Oregon Legend, Lovejoy,
as one of the leaders of the first large migration overland (that of
1842, which started under Dr. Elijah White, but a little later de
posed White and chose Hastings and Lovejoy as leaders), was the
best possible witness to show it, but not a word of anything of that
sort is in his testimony.
Two of the leaders of the 1843 migration testified, viz. : Hon.
J. W. Nesmith, its orderly sergeant, and Hon. Jesse Applegate, the
captain elected for one of the two companies into which that mi
gration divided, when, on June 9, 1843, Peter H. Burnett was
obliged from sickness to resign the captaincy of the whole party.
Besides these J. G. Campbell, S. M. Gilmore, M. M. McCarver and
George Summers of the 1843 migration testified, but the testimony
of Gilmore and Summers did not in any way touch on anything per
tinent to this discussion and need not be noticed.
Nesmith's testimony was taken in Washington, D. C, May 15,
1866, and is found in Vol. VI., pp. 23-50, and I invite attention to
such parts thereof as are pertinent to this chapter.
"Int. 1. 'What is your name, age, place of residence and pres
ent occupation?'
"Ans. 'James W. Nesmith; aged forty-five years; residence, Polk
county, Oregon; occupation farmer, and at present United States
Senator.' "Int. 15. 'When did you see Fort Hall, and what was its con
dition when you saw it? Please describe the same as particularly
as you can, the character and condition of the fort and the build
ings, and their value, if you feel competent to state it.'

420 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Ans. 'I never saw Fort Hall but once. I stopped there four
or five days in the autumn of 1843. It was then rather a rude
structure, built of adobe, walled in with adobe, and within were
some rude buildings of the same, covered with poles and dirt, the
whole very rude and cheaply built. There was no lumber there of
any kind, sawed or hewn. They could have been built by the rudest
kind of labor; no skill was required in their construction. It was
a mere mixing of mud to make adobes and piling them up. At rea
sonable prices of labor, such as existed in the country at the time,
I should think Fort Hall, as I saw it in 1843, could have been built
for one thousand dollars.'
"Int. 28. 'How long have you been in Oregon and how long
have you been a member of the United States Senate?'
"Ans. 'I went to Oregon in 1843, and that has been my residence
ever since. I took my seat in the United States Senate the 4th of
March, 1861.'
"Int. 32. 'Have you held any public offices or positions prior
to your election as United States Senator? If so, please to describe
them.' "Ans. 'Yes, I have held several. In 1845 I was a judge under
the provisional government. In 1846 and 1847 I was a member of
the Legislature. In 1847 I commanded a company in the Indian
war. In 1853 I was appointed United States Marshal for the Ter
ritory of Oregon. In same year I commanded a company in Rogue
River war. In 1854 I was brigadier general of the Oregon mi
litia. In 1855 I commanded a regiment of volunteers in the Indian
war. In 1857 I was Superintendent of Indian Affairs for Oregon
and Washington, and held that office until 1859. That was the
last office I held until I came to the United States Senate.'
"Int. 33. 'You have stated that you were a superintendent of
the Indian affairs. Do you know the effect of the trade and inter
course with the Hudson's Bay Co. on their physical and social con
dition? If yea, please to describe it as fully as you can.'
"Ans. 'So far as the intercourse of the Hudson's Bay Co. with
the Indians is concerned, I think their policy is the best that was
ever adopted, that is with reference to the wants and interest of
the Indian. They operated upon his interests and his fears. So far
as I know they administered very strict justice. They had a tariff
of prices, and they paid one Indian the same as they paid another
for whatever he had to dispose of. They encouraged sobriety and
good conduct among the Indians, and when the Indians committed
outrages they punished them. Their punishment was not that of a
great military expedition, but they cut off their trade and made
the Indian feel his dependence upon them. They were an immense
monopoly and kept out individual enterprise and trade from the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 421
Indians. While they held that power they compelled the Indians
to submit to their own terms. In the absence of any competition
it was within their power to do this. They punished their own em
ployes for infractions against the rights of the Indians, and so far
as I know their contact with the Indians did not tend to demoral
ize or degrade them. The inculcation of sobriety and temperance
by the company resulted in its own benefit, that is, to the benefit of
the company, because while the Indian practiced those virtues he
had more to sell, and therefore increased the trade of the com
pany. The power of the company to keep out private or foreign
competition gave them the exclusive control of the Indians. The
Indians looked to the company as a government and a power. Dur
ing their occupancy of the country there was little or no intrusion
upon the Indian lands. The Indians retained the sites of their vil
lages, fisheries and hunting grounds; consequently they did not
diminish in numbers as they did after the country was thrown open
to general and promiscuous occupation.'
" 'After the power of the company to control the intercourse
between the Indians and the whites had ceased, I should say about
1846 or 1847, the Indians began gradually to diminish by reason of
their promiscuous contact with the whites. While the company en
forced a rigid control over them, I do not know of their having done
the Indians any injustice. The presence of this powerful monopoly
in the country exercised a deleterious influence against the United
States in controlling the Indians. In those remote regions the In
dians were more in the habit of recognizing the power of the com
pany than they were the Government of the United States. So far
as my knowledge extends to their social condition, I don't think
their efforts extended so much in the direction of civilizing the
Indian as it did in keeping him in a position where the greatest
benefits would be derived in a trade with him as a hunter and trap
per. A great many of the employes, and some of the officers of the
company, intermarried with the Indian women. The children, the
result of this connection, were in many instances educated in the
schools under the patronage of the company.'
"Int. 34. 'What was the effect of the policy of the Hudson's
Bay Co. on the development and settlement of the country, favor
able or otherwise?'
"Ans. 'I think the policy of the company was adverse to the
settlement of the country. I infer this from remarks made by the
officers of the company to myself and other early emigrants, as they
invariably underestimated the quality of the soil and the induce
ments for settlement and advised the early settlers generally to go
to California. This probably resulted from the fact that the set
tling of the country must invariably destroy their trade with and

422 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
their control over the Indian tribes. Upon the whole I think that
the company were very much averse to the occupation of the coun
try by American citizens.'
"Cross-examination :
"Int. 32. 'Had your party been delayed a month on the road
could they have reached Fort Vancouver that winter?'
"Ans. 'I think they could. It was a mild, open winter.'
"Int. 39. 'What was the labor you speak of at Fort Hall in
1843; was it not that of the emigrants who had crossed with you?'
"Ans. 'Some of the emigrants who went with me hired out at
Fort Hall to go out with trapping parties.'
"Int. 40. 'How many of them, and for how long a time; and
did they remain there during the winter?'
"Ans. 'There were two or three of them who hired out; I don't
know how long they remained. I tried to hire out myself.'
"Int. 85. 'Did you in 1845, at Oregon City, sign a paper con
taining this language, viz. :
" That this mixed population exists in the midst of numerous
and warlike tribes of Indians, to whom the smallest dissensions
among the white inhabitants would be the signal to let loose upon
their defenseless families all the horrors of savage warfare?'
"Ans. 'In 1845 the Legislature was in session in Oregon City.
They drew up a memorial to the Congress of the United States
which I, among others, signed. I have no positive recollection of
the language, but I think it did contain something of the character
contained in the question. We were exceedingly anxious for the
United States to extend its laws and jurisdiction over us.'
"Int. 86. 'Did this paper which you signed contain this passage,
now read to you, viz. :
" 'Although such has been the result thus far of our temporary
union of interests ; though we, the citizens of the United States, have
had no cause to complain either of exactions or oppression at the
hands of the subjects of Great Britain, but on the contrary, it is but
just to say that their conduct toward us has been most friendly,
liberal and philanthropic, yet we fear a long continuance of the
present state of things is not to be expected, our temporary gov
ernment being limited in its efficiency and crippled in its powers
by the paramount duty we owe to our respective Governments, our
revenues being inadequate to its support, and the almost total ab
sence, apart from the Hudson's Bay Co., of the means of defense
against the Indians, who, recent occurrences lead us to fear, enter
tain hostile feelings toward the people of the United States?'
"Ans. 'I have not seen that memorial since I signed it. I think
it is more than probable that it contained the statements in ques
tion. My impression is that it did.'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 423
"Int. 87. 'Did this paper which you signed contain this passage,
now read to you, viz. :
" 'Your memorialists would further inform your honorable body
that, while the subjects of Great Britain, through the agency of the
Hudson's Bay Co., are amply provided with all the munitions of
war, and can afford, by means of their numerous fortifications,
ample protection for themselves and their property, the citizens of
the United States are scattered over a wide extent of territory,
without a single place of refuge, and within themselves almost en
tirely destitute of every means of defense?'
"Ans. 'As I said before, I have not seen that memorial for
twenty-one years. I think it contained language similar to that
which you quote. We were endeavoring to make a strong case and
get protection. I recollect the memorial and the person who drew
it, and I have no doubt but what it contained substantially what
has been read.' "
The testimony of Hon. Jesse Applegate is in Vol. V., pp. 265-
312, and as will be seen he was strongly opposed to the payment of
any considerable sum to the Hudson's Bay Co. and Puget's Sound
Agricultural Co., and had worked industriously against the pay
ment of any larger sum than $50,000 (Cf. Vol. IIL, Memorial and
Argument, Hudson's Bay Co. vs. United States, Closing Argument
for Plaintiff, p. 37).
Remembering his strong bias against the claim, nothing is more
evident than that if he had witnessed anything in 1843 in the con
duct of Capt. Richard Grant, in charge of Fort Hall, or Payette in
charge of Fort Boise, or McKinlay in charge of Fort Walla Walla,
that was antagonistic to American interests, or that tended to de
ceive and retard the progress of the great migration of which he
was one of the acknowledged leaders, or if he had known anything
of Whitman's having done anything to save Oregon, and still more
if he had believed that the Hudson's Bay Co. had instigated the
Whitman massacre, he certainly would have introduced it in his
forty-eight pages of testimony.
Nearly all his testimony is a series of estimates of the value of
the property of the Hudson's Bay Co. at its various stations, which
of course does not concern us now, but I invite attention to the
following :
"Int. 1. 'State your age, residence and occupation.'
"Ans. 'Age fifty-five years; Yoncalla, Douglass County, Ore
gon'; farmer; formerly surveyor and civil engineer.'
"Int. 2. 'How long have you resided in Oregon, and at what
places?" "Ans. 'I have resided twenty-three years; six years in the Wil
lamette Valley, the remainder of the time in Umpqua Valley.'

424 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Cross-examination :
"Int. 9. 'Was not the post at Umpqua a convenience to the
early settlers, and do you not believe that the influence exerted
upon the Indians had been favorable to the security of the settlers?'
"Ans. 'I think the influence exerted over the Indians was every
where favorable to the early settlement of the country, and some
supplies were obtained at Fort Umpqua.'
"Int. 31. 'At that time was not Fort Walla Walla a station of
great importance to the emigrants, both for convenience and pro
tection ?'
"Ans. 'Mr. McKinlay had but few supplies in the fall of 1843
to spare to emigrants. Doubtless the fort, as a general place for
maintaining peace with the Indians, afforded protection to the emi
grants passing through.'
"Int. 177. 'From 1843 to 1849 state what, in your judgment,
was the influence of the company upon the settlement of the coun
try and the pacification of savages, and the protection of emigrants
and settlers.'
"Ans. 'The influence of the company was in all respects in
quired after most beneficial and salutary.'
"Int. 178. 'Was that influence in any respect subsequently
changed up to the time of the company's leaving in I860?'
"Ans. 'Not to my knowledge.'
"Int. 179. 'Are you the Jesse Applegate whose name appears
subscribed to a memorial of the legislative committee of Oregon,
dated June 28, 1845, and addressed to the Congress of the United
States?' "Ans. 'I am.'
"Int. 180. Were you not the author of that memorial?'
"Ans. 'I was a member of the committee that reported the me
morial.' This is the memorial on which Gray (Part II. , Chapter
IIL, infra) and Nesmith (pp. 419-422, ante) were questioned.
"Int. 181. 'Did you not write in October, 1851, a letter to Dr.
John McLoughlin containing the following paragraph?:
" 'As one of the early emigrants to Oregon, I am pleased to bear
evidence to your kindness and Christian philanthropy ; of those re
quiring assistance you have never exacted either a civil or religious
test; Catholics and Protestants, Americans and British, have been
equal sharers of your bounty, and are equally indebted to you for
protection and assistance; but the evidence of a private citizen is
unnecessary to establish the fact of the active and beneficial assist
ance you have ever rendered to American settlers in Oregon; the
acknowledgment of this fact contained in a memorial transmitted
to the Congress of the United States in 1845 is superior to all pri
vate testimonials; that document, signed by every officer of the

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 425
provisional government, legislative and executive and judicial, pays
a just tribute to the conduct of the Hudson's Bay Co. in Oregon,
which up to that time was under your superintendence.'
"Ans. 'I wrote such a letter, or a letter to that purport; I do
not remember the date.'
"Int. 182. 'Do you not believe that in the absence of protection
to the people of Oregon on the part of the American Government
up to the 4th of March, 1849, the assistance and support of the in
fant settlement furnished by the Hudson's Bay Co. was, if not
essential, of great importance to the very life of those settlements ?'
"Ans. 'Their concurrence in the provisional government for the
purpose of keeping peace was, in my opinion, indispensable.'
"Int. 220. 'Since the Hudson's Bay Co. made its claim against
the Government, in regard to which you have been testifying, have
you not written, published and expressed your earnest opposition
thereto?' "Ans. 'I have.'
"Int. 221. 'Have you not felt from that time to the present a
strong and earnest bias against the claim and have done all in your
power to weaken and defeat it?'
"Ans. 'I have.'
"Direct examination resumed:
"Int. 3. 'Would the bias you feel against the company's claim
in any way affect your judgment of the value of any particular
piece of property estimated by you, whether it belonged to the com
pany or not?'
"Ans. 'I do not think it would ; I do not think it has.'
"Int. 4. 'Does your opposition to the payment of the company's
claim go to the entire extent or only so much as you believe to be
unjust under the treaties upon which it is based?'
"Ans. 'So much only as I deem to be unjust.'
"Cross-examination resumed :
"Int. 1. 'Do you suppose that your judgment is more free from
the influence of strong and earnest bias than is that of other men
of intelligence?' "Ans. 'I do not feel myself more competent to decide upon the
question of my own prejudice than a lunatic upon his own sanity.' "
Mr. M. M. McCarver's testimony is in Idem, pp. 33-40, and the
following is all that concerns this discussion :
"Int. 1. 'State your age, residence and occupation.'
"Ans. 'Am fifty-eight years of age; residence, Portland, Oregon;
occupation, that of farmer, trader and miner.'
"Int. 2. 'When did you come to Oregon, and where have you
resided since?'

426 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Ans. 'I came to Oregon in 1843; have resided near Oregon
City and Portland most of the time since.'
"Int. 3. 'What offices did you hold under the provisional gov
ernment?' "Ans. 'I was a member of the Legislature and Speaker of the
House at the time of the passage of the organic law of Oregon in
1844, which was submitted to the people and adopted by them.'
"Int. 4. 'State what connection the officers of the Hudson's Bay
and Puget's Sound Agricultural Cos. had with the formation of
the provisional government, and whether they voted generally and
wielded an influence for or against the organic act you refer to.'
"Ans. 'Dr. McLoughlin, Douglas and others of the principal
officers of the company advised and assisted in the formation of
the government, and they and those under their influence, I believe,
generally voted for the organic act.'
"Int. 5. 'Who of their officers and agents served as members
of the Legislature or held other public positions under that Govern
ment?' "Ans. 'Dr. W. F. Tolmie was a member of the Legislature from
the Puget's Sound district; A. L. Lewis, and perhaps others, were
members \ Mr. Frank Ermatinger was Treasurer of the Territory.'
"Cross-examination :
"Int. 9. 'Do you not know that during the years of early emi
gration to Oregon that post (i. e., Fort Boise — W. I. M.) was of
great value as a means of protection and convenience to emigrants?'
"Ans. 'Yes, I have reason to believe it.'
"Int. 10. 'In your judgment would not the sufferings, loss of
life and loss of property have been much greater than they were
if the Hudson's Bay Co. had had no posts at Fort Boise and Fort
Hall?' "Ans. 'Yes, I believe it; they furnished supplies and furnished
horses when teams gave out.'
"Int. 11. 'Was there not an influence exerted upon the Indians
through the company at these establishments tending to save emi
grants from Indian hostilities?'
"Ans. 'I have every reason to believe it.'
"Int. 21. 'Was not the provisional government to which you
have referred organized without regard to national allegiance, for
the purposes of maintaining law and order, for mutual protection
and for promoting the settlement and prosperity of Oregon?'
"Ans. 'Yes, that was the understanding.'
"Int. 22. 'Did not the officers of the company co-operate actively
and harmoniously with the other residents of Oregon for these
ends?' "Ans. 'Yes, sir.'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 427
"Int. 23. 'Did not the furnishing of provisions, clothing, seed,
cattle and other articles by the company to the settlers greatly
assist in the early settlement of Oregon?'
"Ans. 'Most unquestionably.'
"Int. 24. 'At the time of the Whitman massacre and of the In
dian disturbance were not the agents of the company prompt and
active in their efforts to rescue sufferers and to punish the guilty?'
"Ans. 'They furnished provisions and ammunition to assist in
carrying on the war against the Cayuses, which followed the Whit
man massacre ; they assisted in rescuing the sufferers, but I do not
know that they took any part in punishing the guilty, except in
selling supplies to the provisional government as required; they
were trading in the country and desired the good will of both whites
and Indians.' "
Mr. J. G. Campbell's testimony is on pp. 228-233 of Vol. V., and
only the following concerns this discussion :
"Int. 1. 'State your age, residence and occupation.'
"Ans. 'Age forty-nine years; residence, Oregon City; account
ant.' "Int. 2. 'When did you first come to Oregon?'
"Ans. 'In the fall of 1843.'
"Int. 3. 'Were you ever in the employ of the Hudson's Bay Co. ?
If so, state where, and during what years?'
"Ans. 'In Oregon City in the year 1846, probably in 1845 and
in the beginning of 1847.'
"Cross-examination :
"Int. 5. 'Did not the company allow as high prices for wheat
and produce and sell goods as low as any trading-house in Oregon,
qualities being the same?'
"Ans. 'Taking the pro rata, they did so, decidedly.'
"Int. 6. 'In your judgment was not the existence of the com
pany and its business in Oregon of great advantage in promoting
the prosperity of the people and developing the resources of the
country?' "Ans. 'I have always considered it a great advantage to both
parties.' "Int. 7. 'If the company had not been here do you not believe
that the safety of the settlers would have been greatly endangered
or their prosperity retarded?'
"Ans. 'I do, very much so.'
"Int. 8. 'Do you not know that the company gave liberal credits
to settlers on their arrival when they were without means to sup
port themselves and their families?'
"Ans. 'They did.'

428 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"Int. 9. 'Did not the company extend those credits from year
to year, subsequently, if settlers were in needy circumstances?'
"Ans. 'I do not know that they extended any after 1846.'
"Int. 10. 'Do you not know that up to the time that you left the
company many of the settlers were indebted to the company for
supplies furnished to them?'
"Ans. 'I know they were.'
"Int. 11. 'Can you state about the amount of that indebtedness
as appeared upon what was called the settlers' balance?'
"Ans. 'I never saw a balance sheet after 1845; at the closing
of 1845 was due forty-odd thousand dollars, including a large
amount due from the missions.'
"Int. 14. 'Have you any means of knowing whether the debts
of which you speak in 1845 were ever paid in whole or in part?'
"Ans. 'They were paid in part; how big a part I don't know.'
"Int. 16. 'Do you know whether the company ever charged the
indebtedness of settlers to Dr. McLoughlin?'
"Ans. 'I never heard of their having done so.'
"Int. 17. 'Were you on intimate terms with Dr. McLoughlin
from 1845 until his death and residing in the same town with him?'
"Ans. 'I was.'
"Int. 18. 'Did you ever hear him speak of his relations with
the company after retiring from it, with reference to credits with
settlers ?'
"Ans. 'Yes, I have.'
"Int. 19. 'Did he ever say that he had been obliged to pay any
part of the debts due from settlers?'
"Ans. 'I never heard him say so.'
"Int. 20. 'While in the company's service were notes given by
settlers for what was due; if so, to whom were they made payable,
and why?'
"Ans. 'Notes were given, made payable to John McLoughlin,
C. F. (Chief Factor), and John McLoughlin, agent of the Hudson's
Bay Co. ; and the why was, I told the doctor they ought not to be
drawn in the Hudson's Bay Co.'s name, but in an individual's
name.' "Direct examination resumed:
"Int. 1. 'Do you not know that Dr. McLoughlin had great diffi
culty with the company on account of credits extended to the set
tlers, of which you have spoken?'
"Ans. 'The doctor considered that he had been very much
abused by the company in regard to its action on this matter of
credits.'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 429
"Int. 2. 'What offer, if you know, did the doctor make the com
pany with reference to these accounts; and state upon whose ad
vice this offer was made?'
"Ans. 'I do not know that he ever made any.'
"Int. 3. 'What, if anything, did Dr. McLoughlin tell you upon
the subject?'
"Ans. 'I decline to answer the question, as I do not desire to
make public confidential communications; I was clerk for the doc
tor and the company at the same time, keeping both sets of books.'
"Cross-examination resumed :
"Int. 1. 'How long did you continue to act as clerk or agent
for Dr. McLoughlin?'
"Ans. 'Until May, 1847.'"
Of the migration of 1844 only M. T. Simmons testified, and his
testimony so far as it bore at all on this discussion has already
been quoted (Cf. pp. 387-388, ante).
Of the migration of 1845 Messrs. William Barlow, W. W. Buck,
J. S. Rinearson, James Taylor and James Welch were called, but
only Mr. Buck's testimony (which is on pp. 209-218 of this same
Vol. V.) contains anything pertinent to this discussion, as follows:
(The testimony of the others being merely their estimates of the
value of the land and buildings, etc.)
"Int. 1. 'What is your age, residence and occupation?'
"Ans. 'Sixty-two years; Oregon City; president and superin
tendent of the Oregon City Paper Manufacturing Co. ; also in con
nection with my son carrying on a saw mill. I have been to some
extent a contractor of wooden buildings.'
"Int. 2. 'When did you come to Oregon and where did you first
locate?' "Ans. 'I arrived in Oregon in November, 1845 ; for a few months
stopped on what is called Scapoose Plains, six miles above the place
now known as St. Helen's ; after that in Portland until 1848 ; from
that time to the present in Oregon City.'
"Int. 19. 'Were you acquainted with Dr. John McLoughlin
during his lifetime? If so, state during what years.'
"Ans. 'I was acquainted with Dr. J. McLoughlin from Novem
ber, 1845, until he died in 1857.'
"Int. 20. 'Did you ever have any conversation with Dr. Mc
Loughlin about difficulties he had with the company's managers
(his superiors) growing out of advances made to the early settlers
in the country? If so, state what he said.'
"Ans. 'I had frequent conversations with the doctor, in which
he complained of being badly used by the settlers in consequence
of having advanced goods to them, and could not get his pay ; that

430 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
the company complained of him for making those advances ; I think
he said he had to assume a considerable amount himself.'
"Int. 21. 'What official positions have you held in Oregon?'
"Ans. 'I have been a member of the Legislature; President of
the Council under (the) Territorial Government; I was also for
some time one of the County Commissioners of this county and
afterward Territorial Treasurer.'
"Cross-examination :
"Int. 47. 'At what time were the conversations with Dr. Mc
Loughlin to which you have referred?'
"Ans. 'After the year 1848.'
"Int. 48. 'Are you certain that what the doctor said was not
that he feared the company might compel him to assume settlers'
debts because he had given credit contrary to orders?'
"Ans. 'That was the impression that I got from the doctor and
what I intended to have said in my direct answer; I am not posi
tive whether he said he feared the company would charge him or
had charged him.' "
At the 1880 meeting of the Oregon Pioneer Association Hon. J.
W. Nesmith delivered the annual address, in which (Transactions
1880, p. 26) is the following paragraph:
"I have in my possession a copy of a paper found among the
manuscripts left by Dr. McLoughlin. It was kindly furnished and
presented to me by his descendants. I had intended reading it to
you as a part of my address, but having already trespassed too long
upon your patience I shall hand the document to the secretary of
the society, with my indorsement of the truth of all its statements
that came within my own knowledge. I believe it to be the most
valuable contribution to our archives that we have ever received
from any quarter; and I desire to say, what I believe all old pio
neers will agree to, that the statements of this paper furnish a
thorough and complete vindication of Dr. McLoughlin's acts and
conduct, and that the integrity of his narrative cannot be impeached
by any honest testimony."
As comparatively few people can easily get access to the "Trans
actions Oregon Pioneer Association," and as no one can really un
derstand the settlement of Oregon without carefully reading this
document, it is herein inserted in full:
"Copy of a document found among the private papers of the
late Dr. John McLoughlin.
" 'In 1824 I came to this country to superintend the manage
ment of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s trade on the coast, and we came
to the determination to abandon Astoria and go to Fort Vancou
ver, as it was a place where we could cultivate the soil and raise
our own provisions.'

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 431
" 'In March, 1825, we moved there and that spring planted pota
toes and sowed two bushels of peas, the only grain we had, and all
we had. In the fall I received from New York (query, "York Fac
tory?") Factory a bushel spring wheat, a bushel oats, a bushel bar
ley, a bushel Indian corn and a quart of timothy, and all of which
was sown in proper time, and which produced well except the In
dian corn, for which the ground was too poor and the nights rather
cool, and continued extending our improvements.'
" 'In 1828 the crop was sufficient to enable us to dispense with
the importation of flour, etc'
" 'In 1825, from what I had seen of the country, I formed the
conclusion from the mildness and salubrity of the climate that this
was the finest portion of North America that I had seen for the
residence of civilized man, and as the farmers could not cultivate
the ground without cattle, and as the Hudson's Bay Co. had only
twenty-seven (27) head, big and small, and as I saw at the time no
possibility of getting cattle by sea, and that was too expensive, I
determined that no cattle should be killed at Vancouver except one
bull calf every year for rennet to make cheese till we had an ample
stock to meet all our demands and to assist settlers, a resolution
to which I strictly adhered, and the first animal killed for beef was
in 1838; till that time we had lived on fresh and salt venison and
wild fowl. From morality and policy I stopped the sale and issue
of spirituous liquor to the Indians, but to do this effectually I had
to stop the sale of liquor to all whites. In 1834, when Mr. Wyeth
of Boston came, he began by selling liquor, but on my assuring him
that the Hudson's Bay Co. sold no liquor to whites or Indians he
immediately adopted the same rule.'
" 'One night in August, 1828, I was surprised by the Indians
making a great noise at the gate of the fort, saying they had brought
an American. The gate was opened, the man came in, but was so
affected he could not speak. After sitting down some minutes to
recover himself he told that he was, he thought, the only survivor
of eighteen (18) men, conducted by the late Jedediah Smith. All
the rest he thought were murdered. The party left San Fran
cisco bound to their rendezvous at the Salt Lake. They ascended
the Sacramento Valley, but finding no opening to cross the moun
tains to go east, they bent their course to the coast, which they
reached at the mouth of Rogue River, then came along the beach
to the Umpqua, where the Indians stole their ax, and as it was the
only ax they had, and which they absolutely required to make rafts
to cross rivers, they took the chief prisoner and their ax was re
turned. Early the following morning Smith started in a canoe
with two (2) men and an Indian and left orders as usual to allow
no Indians to come into camp. But to gratify their passion for

432 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
women the men neglected to follow the order, allowed the Indians
to come into camp, and at an Indian yell five or six Indians fell
upon each white man. At the time the narrator, Black, was out of
the crowd and had just finished cleaning and loading his rifle.
Three (3) Indians jumped on him, but he shook them off, and see
ing all his comrades struggling on the ground and the Indians stab
bing them, he fired on the crowd and rushed to the woods, pursued
by the Indians, but fortunately escaped; swam across the Umpqua
and northward in the hopes of reaching the Columbia, where he
knew we were. But broken down by hunger and misery, as he had
no food but a few wild berries which he found on the beach, he de
termined to give himself up to the Killimoux, a tribe on the coast
at Cape Lookout, who treated him with great humanity, relieved
his wants and brought him to the fort, for which, in case whites
might again fall in their power, and to induce them to act kindly
to them, I rewarded them most liberally. But as Smith and his
two men might have escaped and" (query, might perish) "if we
made no search for them, at break of day the next morning I sent
Indian runners with tobacco to the Willamette chiefs to tell them
to send their people in search of Smith and his two men, and if
they found them to bring them to the fort and I would pay them,
and telling them if any Indians hurt these men we would punish
them, and immediately equipped a strong party of forty (40) well-
armed men. But as the men were embarking, to our great joy
Smith and his two men arrived.'
" 'I then arranged as strong a party as I could make to recover
all we could of Smith's property. I divulged my plan to none,
but gave written instructions to the officer, to be opened early'
(query only?) 'when he got to the Umpqua, because if known before
they got there the officers would talk of it among themselves, the
men would hear it, and from them it would go to their Indian wives,
who were spies on us, and my plan would be defeated. The plan
was that the officer was, as usual, to invite the Indians to bring
their furs to trade, just as if nothing had happened. Count the
furs, but as the American trappers mark all their skins, keep these
all separate, give them to Mr. Smith and not pay the Indians for
them, telling them that they belonged to him; that they got them
by murdering Smith's people.'
" 'They denied having murdered Smith's people, but admitted
they bought them of the murderers. The officers told them they
must look to the murderers for the payment, which they did; and
as the murderers would not restore the property they had received
a war was kindled among them and the murderers were punished
more severely than we could have done, and which Mr. Smith him
self admitted, and to be much preferable to going to war on them,

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 433
as we could not distinguish the innocent from the guilty, who, if
they chose, might fly to the mountains, where we could not find
them. In this way we recovered property for Mr. Smith to the
amount of three thousand two hundred dollars without any expense
to him, and which was done from a principle of Christian duty and
as a lesson to the Indians to show them they could not wrong the
whites with impunity.'
" 'In 1828 Etienne Lucier, a Willamette trapper, asked me if I
thought this would become a settled country. I told him wherever
wheat grew he might depend it would become a farming country.
He asked me what assistance I would afford him to settle down as a
farmer. I told him I would loan him seed to sow and wheat to
feed himself and family, to be returned from the products of his
farm, and sell him such implements as were in the Hudson's Bay
Co.'s store at fifty per cent, on prime cost. But a few days after he
came back and told me he thought there was too remote a prospect
of this becoming a civilized country, and as there were no clergy
men in the country he asked me a passage for his family in the
Hudson's Bay Co.'s boats, to which I acceded. He started in Sep
tember to meet the boats at the mountains ; the express came in too
late and he had to return, and went to hunt for the winter.'
" 'In 1829 he again applied to begin to farm. I told him that
since he had spoken to me I heard that several of the trappers
would apply for assistance to begin to farm, and that it was neces
sary for me to come to a distinct understanding with him to serve
as a rule for those who might follow. That the Hudson's Bay Co.
were bound under heavy penalties to discharge none of their ser
vants in the Indian country and bound to return them to the place
where they engaged them. That this was done to prevent vaga
bonds being let loose among the Indians and incite them to hos
tility to the whites. But as I knew he was a good, honest man, and
none but such need apply, and as if he went to Canada and unfor
tunately died before his children could provide for themselves they
would become objects of pity and a burthen to others. For these
reasons I would assist him to settle. But I must keep him and all
the Hudson's Bay Co.'s servants whom I allowed to settle on the
Hudson's Bay Co.'s books as servants, so as not to expose the Hud
son's Bay Co. and me to a fine, but they would work for themselves
and no service would be exacted from them.'
" 'Many of the Canadians objected to go to the Willamette, be
cause it was to become American territory, which I told them it
would, as the Hudson's Bay Co. in 1825 officially informed me that
in no event could the British Government claim extend south of
the Columbia, and that they were afraid they would not have the
same advantages as American citizens. I told them from the fer-

434 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
tility of the soil, the extent of prairie and the easy access from the
sea that the Willamette (they must admit) was the best and only
place adapted to form a settlement which would have a beneficial
effect on the whole country north of San Francisco, where we
could assist and protect them from the Indians in case of difficulty,
and as to advantages I did not know what they would have, but
this I knew, that the American Government and people know only
two classes of persons, rogues and honest men; that they punished
the first and protected the last, and it depended only upon them
selves to what class they would belong.'
" 'Others wanted to go and live with the relatives of their wives,
but as their children would be brought up with the sympathies and
feelings of Indians, and as the half-breeds are in general leaders
among Indians and they would be a thorn in the side of the whites,
I insisted they should go to the Willamette, where their children
could be brought up as whites and Christians, and brought to cul
tivate the ground and imbued with the feelings and sympathies of
whites, and where they and their mothers would serve as hostages
for the good behavior of their relatives in the interior. As Indians
judge of whites by themselves, and think if they injure whites on
their lands the whites would revenge it by murdering their Indian
relatives among them, and as the settlement increased by the addi
tion of Indian women and half-breeds the turbulence of the Indian
tribes would diminish, and certainly the Cayuse war would not
have been quelled so easily as it was if other half-breeds had not
joined the Americans; and I have great pleasure to be able to say,
what must be admitted by all who know them, that the Canadian
trappers and half-breeds who have settled as farmers are as peace
able, orderly, neighborly and industrious a set of men as any in
the settlement; and that so far the Canadian settlement has pro
duced and supplied three-fourths of the grain that has been ex
ported.' "'In 1832 Mr. Nathaniel Wythe (Wyeth) of Cambridge, near
Boston, came across land with a party of men, but as the vessel
he expected to meet here with supplies was wrecked on the way he
returned to the East with three (3) men. The remainder joined
the Willamette Settlement and got supplies and were assisted by
the Hudson's Bay Co.'s servants, and to be paid the same price for
their, wheat — that is, three shillings sterling (i. e., 72 cents) per
bushel — and purchase their supplies at fifty per cent, on prime
cost (i. e., first cost in London, England).'
" 'In 1834 Mr. Wyeth returned with a fresh party and met the
vessel with supplies here and started with a large outfit for Fort
Hall, which he had built on his way, and in 1836 he abandoned the
business and returned to the States, and those of his men that re-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 435
mained in the country joined the settlements and were assisted as
the others on the same terms as the Hudson's Bay Co.'s servants,
and in justice to Mr. Wyeth I have great pleasure to be able to
state that as a rival in trade I always found him open, manly, frank
and fair, and, in short, in all his contracts a perfect gentleman and
an honest man, doing all he could to support morality and encour
age industry in the settlement.'
"'In 1834 Messrs. Jason and Daniel Lee and Messrs. Walker
and P. L. Edwards came with Mr. Wyeth to establish a mission in
the Flathead country. I observed to them that it was too danger
ous for them to establish a mission ; that to do good to the Indians
they must establish themselves where they could collect them around
them, teach them first to cultivate the ground and live more com
fortably than they do by hunting, and as they do this teach them
religion; that the Willamette afforded them a fine field, and that
they ought to go there and they would get the same assistance as
the settlers. They followed my advice and went to the Willamette,
and it is but justice to these pioneers to say that no men, in my
opinion, could exert themselves more zealously than they did till
1840, when they received a large reinforcement of forty (40) or
more persons; then the newcomers began to neglect their duties,
discord sprung up among them and the mission broke up.'
" 'I made it a rule that none of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s servants
should be allowed to join the settlements unless he had fifty pounds
sterling before him, as he required that sum to supply him with
clothing and implements. He that begins business on credit is sel
dom so careful and industrious as he who does business on his own
means. By this I effected two objects — I made the men more saving
and industrious and attached them to their farms. If I had not
done so, they would have abandoned on the least difficulty. But
having their means invested on their improvements they saw if
they abandoned the loss would be theirs; they therefore persisted
and succeeded. When the settlement was formed, though the Amer-
can trappers had no means, they were assisted on credit, and all in
three years paid up from the product of their farms.'
" 'Every settler had as much wheat on loan as he wanted to be
gin with and I lent them each two cows, as in 1825 we had only
twenty-seven head, big and small, old and young.'
" 'If I sold they would of course be entitled to the increase and
I would not have the means to assist the new settlers and the set
tlement would be retarded, as those purchasers who offered me two
hundred dollars for a cow would put such a price on the increase
as would put it out of the power of poor settlers to buy. This
would prevent industrious men settling. For these reasons I would
not sell, but loaned, as I say, two cows to each settler, and in case

436 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
the increase of settlers might be greater than we could afford to
supply with cattle I reserved the right to take any cattle I required
(above his two cows) from any settler to assist new settlers.'
" 'To the Methodist Mission, as it was a public institution, I
lent seven oxen, one bull and eight cows with their calves.'
" 'In the beginning several settlers lost cattle, poisoned by eat
ing water hemlock. It has been said by the late Mr. Thurston, Dele
gate from Oregon, on the floor of Congress, that settlers paid for
dead cattle. This is a wanton falsehood, as it is well known to all
old settlers that no settler paid a cent for dead cattle ; it was a loss
to the company.'
" 'In 1836 we found means of forming a company to go to Cali
fornia for cattle. I took half the stock for the Hudson's Bay Co.,
so that by purchasing a larger number (as the expense of driving
five hundred or a thousand was the same) it would make the cattle
cheaper. Those of the settlers that had means put it in the stock;
those that had none engaged as drivers at one dollar per day, to be
paid in cattle at their actual cost. Mr. Slocum (Slacum), who
came here in a chartered vessel, gave them a passage gratis from
this place to San Francisco. Mr. Ewing Young was selected to con
duct the party. Mr. P. L. Edwards, who came with Messrs. Lee
of the Methodist Mission, but now a lawyer in California, was ap
pointed treasurer. They brought, I think, about seven hundred
head of cattle, which cost eight dollars per head rendered. In the
Willamette the settlers kept the tame and broken-in oxen they had
belonging to the Hudson's Bay Co. and gave their California wild
cattle in the place, so that they found themselves stocked with
tame cattle which cost them only eight dollars per head, and the
Hudson's Bay Co. to favor the settlers took calves in place of grown
up cattle because the Hudson's Bay Co. wanted them for beef.
These calves would grow up before they were required.'
" 'In 1840, as I already stated, the Methodist Mission received
a large reinforcement. I had selected for a claim Oregon City in
1829, made improvements on it and had a large quantity of timber
squared. The superintendent applied to me for a loan of it to build
a mission house. I lent them the timber and had a place pointed
out to them upon which to build. In 1840 the Methodist Mission
formed' a milling association and jumped part of my claim and be
gan to build a saw and grist mill. They assumed the right to judge
of my rights and said that I could not hold it as part of my claim,
though the stream that separates the islet from the main land is
not more than forty feet wide in summer. This island is what is
called "Abernethy Island" and is about  acres in extent.
In 1842 Mr. Waller, the resident missionary in the house to build
which I lent timber, which they never returned, and gave the ground

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 437
upon which to build, set up a claim to Oregon City in opposition
to me, but after some difficulty I paid them $500 and he gave it
up. I preferred to do this and have done with it rather than here
after trouble the Government with it.'
" 'In 1842 the first party of regular immigrants— about fifty-
came from the States. They got all the assistance they required,
but in 1843 most of them, not liking the country, went with their
leader — Mr. Hastings — to California.'
" 'In 1843 about 800 immigrants arrived from the States. I saw
by the looks of the Indians that they were excited and I watched
them. As the first stragglers were arriving at Vancouver in canoes
I was standing on the bank ; nearer the water there was a group of
ten or twelve Indians. One of them bawled out to his compan
ions: "It is good for us to kill these Bostons." Struck with the
excitement I had seen in the countenances of the Indians since
they had heard the report of the immigration coming, I felt certain
they were inclined to mischief and that he spoke thus loud as a
feeler to sound me and take their measure accordingly. I imme
diately rushed on them with my cane, calling out at the same time :
"Who is the dog that says it is a good thing to kill the Bostons?"
The fellow, trembling, excused himself : "I spoke without meaning
harm, but The Dalles Indians say so." "Well," said I, "The Dalles
Indians are dogs for saying so, and you also," and left him, as if
I had remained longer it would have had a bad effect. I had done
enough to convince them I would not allow them to do wrong to
the immigrants with impunity. From this Indian saying, in the
way he did, that The Dalles Indians said it was good to kill these
Bostons, I felt it my duty to do all I could to avert so horrid a
deed.' " 'Mr. P. L. Edwards, whom I mentioned came in 1834 with
Messrs. Lee and left in 1838, sent me a letter by Gen. McCarver,
stating he had given a letter of introduction to me to P. H. Burnett,
Esq. I immediately formed my plan and kept my knowledge of
the horrid design of the Indians secret, as I felt certain that if the
Americans knew it these men, acting independent of each other,
would be at once for fighting, which would lead to their total de
struction, and I sent two (2) boats with provisions to meet them;
sent provisions to Mr. Burnett and a large quantity of provisions
for sale to those who would purchase and to be given up to those
who had not the means, being confident that the fright I had given
(as I already stated) the Indians who said it was a good thing to
kill the Bostons was known at The Dalles before our boats were
there, and that with the presence of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s people,
and the assistance they afforded the immigrants, would deter the
Indians from doing them any wrong, and I am happy to be able to

438 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
say I entirely succeeded. At first I thought these Indians were
excited by some of the Iroquois Indians in the Hudson's Bay Co.'s
service and tried to find if so, but found nothing to enlighten me
on the subject'
" 'About a month after Dr. Whitman came from his mission
near Walla Walla to Vancouver, and as The Dalles was on his
way and as he had seen the principal men there, it occurred to me
that he might have heard of it and told him what I heard the In
dian say and how I had alarmed him, what I had done to deter
them and my suspicion that all this sprung from some of our ras
cally Iroquois, and that I was anxious to find that rascal out to
punish him as an example to deter others. "Oh," says the doctor,
"I know all about it." "You do, doctor," said I. "Yes," said the
doctor, "and I have known it for two years." "You have known it
for two years and you told me nothing! Pray tell me his name."
The doctor, seeing I was on the wrong scent, said: "His name is
Thomas Hill." After thinking for some time I replied : "The Hud
son's Bay Co. has no man of that name in the service." "Oh," says
the doctor, "Tom Hill, the Shawnee." This Indian, it is said, had
been educated at Dartmouth College in the States, had told the
Indians that a few Americans had come to settle on their lands;
that the Shawnees allowed them, but when the Americans were
strong enough they drove the Shawnees off and now the Shawnees
have no lands, and had urged the Indians to allow no Americans to
settle on their lands, which advice the Indians about Walla Walla
say the Cayuses are following to this day, and the Indians were
inclined to follow by killing the immigrants who first came, and
which I believe they would have done but for the decided and cau
tious manner that I acted. And the reason the Indian made use
of the expression he did was because I punished the murderers of
the Smith party and before acting they wanted to know how I
would treat them, and most certainly if I had not been most
anxious for the safety of the immigrants and to discharge to them
the duties of a Christian my ear would not have caught so quickly
the words, "It is a good thing to kill these Bostons," and acted as
I did. In fact, if the immigrants had all been my brothers and
sisters I could not have done more for them. I fed the hungry,
caused the sick to be attended to and nursed, furnished them every
assistance so long as they required it, and which some have not
paid to this day, though abundantly able, and for which, if they do
not pay, I am answerable to the Hudson's Bay Co. It may be said,
and has been said, that I was too liberal in making these advances.
It is not so, but it was done judiciously and prudently.'
" 'When the immigration of 1842 came, we had enough of bread-
stuffs in the country for one year, but as the immigrants reported

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 439
that next season there would be a greater immigration it was evi
dent if there was not a proportionate increase of seed sown in 1843
and 1844 there would be a famine in the country in 1845, which
would lead to trouble, as those that had families, to save them from
starvation would be obliged to have recourse to violence to get food
for them. To avert this I freely supplied the immigrants of 1843
and 1844 with the necessary articles to open farms and by these
means avoided the evils. In short, I afforded every assistance to
the immigrants so long as they required it and by management I
kept peace in the country and in some cases had to put up with a
great deal ; for instance, when the milling company jumped part of
my claim, the island upon which they built a mill and which sub
sequently Abernethy purchased, and when Williamson jumped part
of Fort Vancouver, as may be seen by my correspondence with the
provisional government on the subject and which occurred in the
presence of several American citizens, who I am happy to say
strongly expressed their disapproval of Williamson's conduct, and
which I am inclined to believe made him desist, and it will be seen,
to their credit, that the executive committee acted in a straightfor
ward, manly and correct manner, and it was by such conduct on
the part of respectable American citizens that peace and order
were maintained in the country. It is true several thought I was
too forbearing, but when I saw how much the good on both sides
would suffer if I acted differently, and that a war between Great
Britain and the United States might be caused by it, I considered
it my duty to act as I did, and by which I think I may have pre
vented a war between the United States and Great Britain. And
how have I been treated by both?'
" 'By British demagogues I have been represented as a traitor.
For what? Because I acted as a Christian; saved American citi
zens, men, women and children from the Indian tomahawk and
enabled them to make farms to support their families.'
" 'American demagogues have been base enough to assert that I
had caused American citizens to be massacred by hundreds by the
savages. I, who saved all I could. I have been represented by the
delegate from Oregon, the late S. R. Thurston, as doing all I could
to prevent the settling, while it was well known to every American
settler who is acquainted with the history of the Territory if this
is not a downright falsehood and most certainly will say that he
most firmly believes that I did all I could to promote its settle
ment and that I could not have done more for the settlers if they
had been my brothers and sisters, and after being the first person
to take a claim in the country and assisting the immigrants as I
have my claim is reserved, after having expended all the means I
had to improve it, while every other settler in the country gets his.

440 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
But as I felt convinced that any disturbance between us here might
lead to a war between Great Britain and the States I felt it my
bounden duty as a Christian to act as I did, and which I think
averted the evil, and which was so displeasing to some English
demagogues that they represented me to the British Government as
a person so partial to American interests as selling the Hudson's
Bay Co. goods in my charge cheaper to American than I did to
British subjects. On the other hand, though, if the American im
migrants had been my brothers and sisters I could not have done
more for them ; yet, after acting as I have, spending my means and
doing my utmost to settle the country, my claim is reserved, while
every other settler in the county gets his; and how much this has
injured me, is daily injuring me, it is needless to say, and certainly
it is a treatment I do not deserve and which I did not expect.'
" 'To be brief, I founded this settlement and prevented a war
between the United States and Great Britain, and for doing this
peaceably and quietly I was treated by the British in such a man
ner that from self-respect I resigned my situation in the Hudson's
Bay Co.'s service, by which I sacrificed $12,000 per annum, and
the "Oregon Land Bill" shows the treatment I received from the
Americans.' "
Lest any should suppose that the 1843 petition mentioned on
p. 333, ante, contains something which is really evidence of wrong
doing on the part of Dr. McLoughlin and the Hudson's Bay Co. I
will now quote it and Dr. McLoughlin's reply to it.
It was presented in the United States Senate by D. R. Atchison,
the successor of Senator Linn, on February 7, 1844, and on his
motion ordered printed, and on account of the puerility of its ac
cusations was never again acted upon in Congress.
It is Sen. Ex. Doc, Vol IIL, No. 105, 28th Cong., 1st Sess., and
on its title page reads : "February 7, 1844. Laid on the table and
ordered to be printed."
The reader will see on reading it why several of the best Ameri
can citizens in Oregon were ashamed of it and refused to sign it.
Its evident purpose was to assist the iniquitous scheme of Rev.
A. F. Waller and some of the more unscrupulous of his colleagues
in the Methodist Mission (which was then in its death throes, being
entirely broken up the following year) (Cf. Chapter IL, Part IL,
infra) to rob Dr. McLoughlin of his claim to the townsite and water
power at Willamette Falls, where he had located a claim in 1829,
not for the Hudson's Bay Co., but for himself individually, five
years before the first Methodists reached Oregon to establish a
mission.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 441
It goes without saying that under the treaty of 1827 any British
subject had exactly the same right to locate in any place in the
Oregon Territory that any American citizen had.
For full particulars of this scheme to jump Dr. McLoughlin's
claim and other things illustrating the sad decadence of the Metho
dist Mission after the arrival of the great reinforcement of 1839-40
Cf.: (a) Hon. J. W. Nesmith's Address, Transactions Oregon Pio
neer Association, 1880, pp. 19-22.
(b) Hon. Elwood Evans' "History of the Pacific Northwest,"
Vol. I., pp. 250-254.
(c) H. H. Bancroft's "History of the Pacific Coast," Vol. XXIV.
(being "Oregon," Vol. I.," pp. 203-225).
(d) Their action concerning The Dalles townsite, as stated by
United States Supreme Court and summarized in Chapter III. of
Book IL, infra.
For more than twenty-four years the authorship of this petition
was concealed, but on September 1, 1887, in a letter to Hon. Elwood
Evans, Robert Shortess claimed that he made the rough draft of it,
and that George Abernethy, the steward of the Methodist Mission,
wrote it in the form in which it was sent, but would not consent
that it should be circulated in his handwriting. (Cf. Evans' "His
tory Pacific Northwest," Vol. I., p. 243.) It was dated March 25,
1843, and signed by sixty-five persons.
Shortess, who never cut any figure in Oregon affairs after the
organization of a territorial government, was probably in this a
mere catspaw for those who were greedy to appropriate that which
by every principle of law and equity belonged to Dr. McLoughlin.
It is no wonder that the authors and circulators of it were ashamed
to allow Dr. White, the sub-Indian agent, to have a copy of it. "A
petition started from this country today, making bitter complaints
against the Hudson's Bay Co. and Gov. McLoughlin. In referring
to it— as a copy was denied — I shall only say had any gentleman
disconnected with the Hudson's Bay Co. been at half the pains and
expense to establish a claim to the Willamette Falls very few would
have raised an opposition. His half-bushel measure I know to be
exact according to the English imperial standard. The gentlemen
of this company have been fathers and fosterers of the colony, ever
encouraging peace, industry and good order, and have sustained a
character for hospitality and integrity too well established to be
easily shaken." (Cf. White's report to Commissioner of Indian
Affairs, quoted on pp. 172-201 of "White's Ten Years in Oregon."
Date, April 1, 1843).
"The Petition of 1843 :

442 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
"To the Honorable the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress Assembled:
"We, the undersigned, settlers south of the Columbia River, beg
leave respectfully to represent to your honorable body:
"As has been before represented to your honorable body, we
consider ourselves citizens of the United States and acknowledge
the right of the United States to extend its jurisdiction over us;
and the object of the present memorial is to ask that the protection
of the United States may be extended to us as soon as possible.
"Hitherto our numbers have been small, and the few difficulties
that arose in the settlement were speedily and satisfactorily set
tled. But as our settlement increases in numbers so our difficul
ties increase in number and importance, and unless we can have
laws to govern us that will be respected and obeyed our situation
will be a deplorable one. Where the highest court of appeal is the
rifle safety in life and property can not be depended on.
"The state of the country, its climate, resources, soil, produc
tions, etc., have already been laid before your honorable body in
Captain Wyeth's memoir and in former memorials from the in
habitants of this place.
"Laws are made to protect the weak against the mighty, and
we feel the necessity of them in the steps that are constantly taken
by the honorable Hudson's Bay Co. in their opposition to the im
provement and enterprise of American citizens. You have been
apprised already of their opposition to Captain Wyeth, Bonneville
and others; and we find that the same spirit dwells with them at
the present day. Some years ago when the Hudson's Bay Co.
owned all the cattle in Oregon they would not sell on any condi
tions, but they would lend their cows to the settler — he returning
to the company the cows loaned, with all the increase; and in case
of the death of a cow, he then had the privilege of paying for it.
But after the settlers, at great risk and expense, went to California
and purchased for themselves and there was a fair prospect of the
settlement being supplied, then the Hudson's Bay Co. were willing
to sell at lower prices than the settlers could sell.
"In the year 1842, feeling the necessity of having mills erected
that could supply the settlement with flour and lumber, a number
of the inhabitants formed themselves into a joint stock company,
for the purpose of supplying the growing wants of the community.
Many of the farmers were obliged to leave their farms on the
Wallamet and go six miles above Vancouver on the Columbia River,
making the whole distance about sixty miles, to get their wheat
ground, at a great loss of time and expense. The company was
formed and proceeded to select a site. They selected an island at
the falls of the Wallamet and concluded to commence their opera-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 443
tions. After commencing they were informed by Dr. McLoughlin,
who is at the head of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s affairs west of the
Rocky Mountains, that the land was his and that he (although a
chief factor of the Hudson's Bay Co.) claimed all the land on the
east side of the Wallamet, embracing the falls down to the Clacka
mas River, a distance of about two miles. He had no idea, we pre
sume, that the company would succeed. However, he erected a
shed on the island after the stuff was on the island to build a house,
and then gave them permission to build under certain restrictions.
They took the paper he wrote them containing his conditions, but
did not obligate themselves to comply with the conditions, as they
did not think his claim just or reasonable.
"Many projects had been started by the inhabitants, but for
want of means and encouragement failed. This fate was predicted
for the milling company. But after much labor and difficulty they
succeeded in getting a sawmill erected and ready to run and en
tered into a contract to have a grist mill erected forthwith. And
now, as they have succeeded, where is the Hudson's Bay Co.? Dr.
McLoughlin employs hands to get out a frame for a sawmill and
erect it at Wallamet Falls; and we find as soon as the frame is up
the gearing, which has been made at Vancouver, is brought up in
boats; and that which cost a feeble company of American citizens
months of toil and embarrassment is accomplished by the chief
factor of the Hudson's Bay Co. in a few weeks. He has men and
means and it is said by him that in two weeks his mill will be
sawing. And what will be the consequence? Why, if the milling
company sells for $15 per thousand he can sell for $12; if they re
duce the price to $10 he can come to $8 or $5 or $2 per thousand.
He says he will have a grist mill started as soon as he gets the saw
mill in operation.
"All the wheat in Oregon they are anxious to get, as they ship
it to the Russians on the northwest coast. In the first place they
measured the wheat in a half-bushel, called by them imperial meas
ure, much larger than the standard measure of the United States.
This not answering they next proceeded to kick the half-bushel
with the foot to settle the wheat; then they brought up a measure
larger than the former one; and now they fill this measure, then
strike it three times with a stout club, then fill it up and call it fair
measure. Against such proceedings we need law that will be re
spected and obeyed.
"About twelve or fourteen years ago the Hudson's Bay Co.
blasted a canal a few feet to conduct water to a mill they were
going to build, the timber for which is now lying at the falls rot
ting. They, however, abandoned the thing altogether and built

444 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
their mills on the Columbia, about six miles above Vancouver, on
the north side of the river.
"In the year 1837, agreeably to orders left by Mr. Slacum, a
house was erected at the falls to secure the claim for him.
"In 1840 the Methodist Mission erected buildings at the falls
and stationed two families there and made a claim to sufficient
land for their buildings, not interfering with any others who might
wish to build. A short time previous to this Dr. McLoughlin had
a storehouse erected for the company, not occupied, however, far
ther than to store wheat and other articles in and as a trading
house during the salmon season.
"After this, in 1841, a shanty was erected and a man kept at
the falls, whose business it was to trade with the Indians for furs
and salmon and look out for the doctor's claim, he said, and to for
bid persons building at the falls, as some had built and others were
about building. This man was, and still is, a servant of the Hud
son's Bay Co.
"During the years 1841 and 1842 several families settled at the
falls, when Dr. McLoughlin, who still resides at Fort Vancouver,
comes on the ground and says the land is his and any person build
ing without his permission is held as a trespasser. Without refer
ence to any person's right or claim he employs a surveyor to run out
the plat; and as a bill was before the Senate of the United States
to grant to every white male inhabitant a mile square he has a mile
run out to suit his views and lays out a town plat at the falls and
calls it Oregon City. Although some, for peace sake, asked him for
the lots they had already in possession, and which he appeared very
willing to grant, the doctor now felt himself secure and posted up
the annexed paper (marked A), which is the original; and all who
had lots were required to pay Mr. Hastings five dollars for a deed
of land which they knew very well the grantor did not own, and
which we hope he never will, but that Congress will pass
a special act granting to each man his lot and improve
ments. Those that applied received (if they had a house
on the lot) a deed, a copy of which is annexed (marked B) ;
if they had no house, a bond was given for five dollars, a copy of
which is annexed (marked C). To those that applied and paid
their five dollars all was right with the doctor, while those who con
sidered his title to the land not good, and that therefore he had no
right to direct who should build and who should not, had their lots
sold to others. In one case the purchaser came to the original
claimant and ordered him to stop digging the ground which he was
preparing for a garden and commanded him to remove his fences,
as he had Dr. McLoughlin's bond in his pocket for the lots ; and if
he did not move the fence he would, and take forcible possession.

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 445
Those who desired to have no difficulty and did not apply for a
deed have lost their lots, the doctor's promise and all. And Mr.
Hastings (the doctor's agent) is now offering for sale the lots on
which part of the mission buildings stand, and if he succeeds in
finding a purchaser they must either contend or lose their build
ings. "Dr. McLoughlin has held claims in other places south of the
Columbia River; at the Tualatin Plains and Clackamas Plains he
had huts erected to prevent others from building, and such is the
power of Dr. McLoughlin that many persons are actually afraid to
make their situation known, thinking if he hears of it he will stop
their supplies. Letters were received here from Messrs. Ladd & Co.
of the Sandwich Islands in answer to a letter written by the late
Mr. Ewing Young for a few supplies, that orders were received for
bidding the company's vessels carrying any goods for the settlers
of Oregon. Every means will be made use of by them to break down
everything that will draw trade to this country or enable persons
to get goods at any other place than their store.
"One other item and we are done. When the United States Gov
ernment officers of distinction arrive Vancouver is thrown open and
every facility afforded them. They were even more condescending
to the settlers during the time the exploring squadron was in the
Columbia ; nothing was left undone to give the officers a high opin
ion of the honorable Hudson's Bay Co. Our Indian agent is en
tirely dependent on them for supplies and funds to carry on his
operations. "And now your memorialists pray your honorable body that
immediate action of Congress be taken in regard to this country
and good and wholesome laws be enacted for our Territory, as may,
in your wisdom, be thought best for the good of the American citi
zens residing here.
"And your memorialists will ever pray.
"Robert Shortess, A. E. Wilson, W. C. Remick, Jeffrey Brown,
E. N. Coombs, Rouben Lewis, George Davis, V. Bennett, J. Rekener,
T. J. Hubbard, James A. O'Neil, Jor. Horregon, William McCarty,
Charles Compo, John Howard, R. Williams, G. Brown, John Tur
ner, Theodore Pancott, A. F. Waller, J. R. Robb, J. L. Morrison, M.
Crawford, John Anderson, James M. Bates, L. H. Judson, Joel
Turnham, Richard H. Ekin, H. Campbell, James Force, W. H. Wil
son, Felix Hathaway, J. Lawson, Thomas J. Shadden, Joseph Gibbs,
S. Lewis, Jr., Charles Roy, William Brown, S. Davis, Joseph Yat-
ten, John Hopstatter, G. W. Sellomy, William Brown, A. Beers, J.
L. Parish, William H. Gray, A. D. Smith, J. C. Bridgers, Aaron
Cook, A. Copsland, S. W. Moss, Gustavus Hines, George W. Le-
Breton, Daniel Girtman, C. T. Arrendrill, A. Touner, David Carter,

446 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
J. J. Campbell, W. Johnson, John Edwards, W. Hauxhurst, W. A.
Pfieffer, J. Holman, H. B. Brewer, William C. Sutton. Sixty-five in
all." The exhibits accompanying the petition are not of the slightest
importance, being merely copies of deeds, contracts, etc., relating
to lots in Oregon City.
Concerning this petition Evans' "History of the Northwest
Coast" (Vol. I., pp. 246-47) has the following:
"That document was an arraignment of John McLoughlin for
his management of the Hudson's Bay Co.'s affairs, an accusation
of oppression and wrong to the Oregon pioneers and their families.
"(1) It charges that Dr. McLoughlin refused to sell cattle for
many years, and afterward sold at lower rates than settlers;
"(2) It refers to the Oregon City claim. It was valuable as a
townsite and for its wonderful water power. Such features made
it valuable to the Methodist Mission, to the American settler. The
petition denounces the doctor's acts of settlement as in bad faith;
that his claim is without a shadow of right. It asks that he may
be divested of interest, his claims be ignored and disregarded;
"(3) It complains that he can build mills and saw lumber
cheaper and does undersell the settler;
"(4) It alleges that in buying wheat he insisted upon good
measure ;
"(5) That those who had recognized his claim to Oregon City
and had obtained grants of lots from him he notified to comply
with their contract;
"(6) That the company's vessels were not allowed to bring
goods from the Sandwich Islands to the settlers;
"(7) That the company's officers were more hospitable to vis
iting officials and persons of distinction than to private citizens.
"Simple justice to the memory of the dead demands quoting Dr.
McLoughlin's own comments upon those imputations upon his per
sonal integrity and method of dealing. Of the cattle policy and
the Oregon City claim more extended discussion cannot be avoided.
As soon as Dr. McLoughlin had been informed of the charges made
in the petition he thus referred to them (Letter to Lansford W.
Hastings, April 10, 1843) :
" 'First, as to my opposing them in purchasing cattle, it is false.
Mr. Lee' (i. e., Rev. Jason Lee, who would not sign the petition)
'knows how false this is. Every one knows who was then in the
country that so anxious was I to replenish the country with cat
tle that I killed none till 1838 and would sell none, because, as I
told them, they would kill them and not allow them to increase.
But I lent cattle to every man who wanted to settle, for which,
when they had them, I took wild cattle from California, and of

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 447
which fully one-third died a short time after we got them. As to
kicking or striking the half -bushel, it is the custom in that part of
Canada where I have been. The measure is the imperial measure
and which ought to contain seventy pounds of good wheat. Talking
some time ago with Dr. White, in case the cooper might have made
a mistake, I had a half-bushel measured by an imperial copper half-
pint measure (sent here for the purpose) in the presence of Dr.
White, and though it was exactly the measure with water, yet I
find, filled with wheat, it does not weigh seventy pounds; and as
our wheat is as good as any I know I infer that the measure is
smaller than it ought to be, which is caused by the copper measure
having been knocked a little on the side, and is therefore smaller
than size. The truth is when I was first asked the price of wheat
I said two shillings and sixpence, as I calculated a bushel to weigh
sixty pounds ; but finding on measuring that it weighed seventy-two
pounds I told them without their asking it I would give three shil
lings per bushel.'
" 'I thought that my character as an honest man was beyond
suspicion; when I find who those are who have cast these reflec
tions on me I shall have no dealings with them, as I will not deal
with people who suspect my integrity. As to reports if they sold
their boards for twenty dollars per thousand I would sell them for
fifteen dollars per thousand and undersell them, it is false; and as
to the Hudson's Bay Co. and I opposing the interests of citizens,
really the citizens are themselves the best judges if we did so or
not. And I am certain if they are so lost to a sense of what is due
to truth as to make such an assertion it is useless for me to say
anything; but I feel confident that I can easily prove it is not so,
and that a very large majority will support me in it. As to the peti
tion if the document went no further than this place I would be
silent ; but when I consider where it is to go and to whom it is to be
presented, respect to them and to myself makes it my duty to take
notice of it.' "
"Persistent refusal by Dr. McLoughlin to sell cattle to the Ore
gon Methodist Mission and to settlers had caused great disaffection
to the company. Dr. McLoughlin thus referred to the course adopted
by him and rigidly adhered to until 1838 (Cf. for this p. 435, ante) :
"The reason offered by Dr. McLoughlin, which was that there was
insufficient stock in the country ; that importation was most expen
sive and hazardous, and that all that there was in the country should
be preserved to secure increase, was unavailing. To the settler it
was not satisfactory to be told that the company's start had been
a few head driven at vast expense and danger along the coast from
the Russian establishments on Bodega Bay in California; that
those establishments most begrudgingly spared them, their Call-

448 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
fornia settlements being only intended to supply their northern
trading posts; that the colonial law of California prohibited the
exportation of female cattle. The scarcity of cattle, the dissatis
faction of settlers because of this refusal to sell, continued until
the importation of stock by the California company. Referring to
that enterprise Dr. McLoughlin's statement is to be found on p.
436, ante.
As we have already seen from the testimony of J. W. Nesmith,
Jesse Applegate (pp. 419-423 and 424-5, ante), and W. H. Gray
(Chapter III. of Part IL, infra), on the 28th of June, 1845, they
with all the other members of the provisional government of Oregon
signed another petition to Congress (which is Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 8,
29th Cong., 1st Sess.) which, unlike this petition of 1843, stated the
exact truth as to the relations between the two nationalities in Ore
gon as follows (Cf. their testimony on cross-examination) :
"We, the citizens of the United States, have no cause to com
plain either of exactions or oppression at the hands of the sub
jects of Great Britain, but on the contrary it is but just to say their
conduct towards us has been most friendly, liberal and philan
thropic" The gold discoveries in California drew thither in 1849 a large
part of the most energetic and brilliant men in Oregon, and so it
came to pass that when in that year the first election for a Dele
gate to Congress was held none of the first-class men who were
in the earlier migrations remained to contest for the place, and S.
R. Thurston, a young lawyer from Maine, who had only reached
Oregon with the migration of 1847, was put forward as the candi
date of the Methodist Mission clique, and receiving 470 out of a
total of 973 votes (which was probably less than one-quarter of the
legal voters), was duly elected to represent as a Delegate in Con
gress what is now Oregon, Washington, Idaho and parts of Mon
tana and Wyoming.
Thurston was venomously antagonistic to McLoughlin and the
Hudson's Bay Co., repeating on the floor of Congress Spalding's
shameful and baseless slander that the Hudson's Bay Co. instigated
the Whitman massacre (Cf. Cong. Globe, H. of R., Dec. 26, 1850)
and declaring:
"In every move to promote the settlement and internal improve
ment of Oregon Dr. McLoughlin and the Hudson's Bay Co. to a
man have been opposed, until they were absolutely compelled by
force of circumstances to yield. The history of that company in
Oregon is no less oppressive and unjust, as regards American citi
zens, than was that of their ancestors in 1776."
As no one was there to defend the Hudson's Bay Co. and Mc-

ACQUISITION OF OREGON 449
Loughlin these outrageous falsehoods resulted in accomplishing
what Thurston sought to do, and in the Donation Land Law,
passed by Congress September 27, 1850, the possessory right of
every claimant to a mile square of land in the Territory of Oregon
was confirmed except McLoughlin's, although every one held by
precisely the same tenure as his and although his antedated all the
others by from five to twenty years.
McLoughlin's claim was reserved and donated to the Territory
of Oregon for a university. Dr. McLoughlin died in the autumn
of 1857 at Oregon City, his old age embittered by this shameful in
justice, but to the honor of the Oregon people in 1862 the Legisla
ture refused longer to be a party to such a grievous wrong and for
the merely nominal consideration of $1,000 restored the Oregon
City claim to the heirs of the "good old doctor," the true "Father
of Oregon." (For full discussion of this Cf. Chapter XXXI., Vol. I., Evans'
"History of the Pacific Northwest")
Are we to understand from the evidence adduced in this chap
ter that McLoughlin, McKinlay, Douglas, Grant, Pambrun, Payette,
Ogden, McDonald, Lewes, Birnie, Ermatinger and the other chief
factors and chief traders of the Hudson's Bay Co. desired American
settlers and missionaries to occupy Oregon? Not at all. They
were British subjects, and unquestionably, as all loyal British sub
jects ought to have done, they hoped and expected that the English
title would be established to that part of Oregon north and west of
the Columbia. But they also unquestionably knew that under the
treaty of joint policy of 1818, renewed in 1827, American citizens
had exactly the same rights in Oregon that British subjects had,
and their interests were so vast in that territory that that "enlight
ened selfishness" which ever characterized the policy of the Hud
son's Bay Co. would of itself have caused them to strictly observe
the spirit of that treaty and treat Americans with justice. But,
beyond this, several of these men, notably McLeod, McKay, Mc
Loughlin, McKinlay, Douglas, Ogden, Grant, McDonald, Pambrun
and Lewes, were men of great natural ability and high character,
fit to rank among "Nature's noblemen," measured by any reason
able standard, and their broad humanity and natural nobility of
character manifested itself in their whole course, as shown by the
evidence herein quoted.
They also knew well what the advocates of the Whitman Saved
Oregon Legend have never yet learned (witness Mowry's "Marcus
Whitman," published in 1901; Rev. M. Eells' "Reply to Professor
Bourne," 1902; Rev. Joseph R. Clark's "Leavening the Nation,"
1903; D. O. Shelton's "Heroes of the Cross in America," 1904), viz.:

"450 ACQUISITION OF OREGON
That by i the express terms of the treaties of 1818 and 1827, as un
derstood by both Governments, no posts or settlements that the
subjects or citizens of either nation might establish while these
treaties remained in force could settle or in the least degree affect
the right of either nation to any part of the Oregon Territory.
The question is not what did the Hudson's Bay Go. desire? For
undoubtedly they desired, and ought to have desired, that Ameri
cans should not be in Oregon at all, but that it should be a part
of the British dominions.
The question is "What did the Hudson's Bay Co. do when that
which they did not desire happened, and Americans came into the
Oregon Territory as fur traders, missionaries, scientific explorers,
travelers, government exploring expeditions and settlers?"
That is the question which I have sought to answer in the only
way in which historical questions can be settled, by quoting the
best possible evidence, to-wit: All the contemporaneous testimony
that I have been able to discover of those Americans themselves,
with a little later evidence from prominent Oregon pioneers, all of
them of the highest character, all of them having no interest in the
Hudson's Bay Co., and all men whose Americanism is undoubted,
and all of them men who had exceptional facilities for knowing
what were the real facts in the case.

[End of Vol. I.]

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 02802 7507

YAir
KLG-GCMP HI
AMERICAN HISTORY
MJCfiOFUMSNC?
SW»PORTiE> »Y m*