Description of the face of the country.--Agricultural and
mining productions.--Timber.--The Wallamet.--Columbia.--
Dalles.--Upper Columbia.--Mountains.--Rivers.--Mineral
wealth.--Climate.--The Northern Pacific Railroad.--
Conclusion.
Page 610
HISTORY OF OREGON.
CHAPTER I.
First discovery of the river.--Natives friendly.--British
ship.--Brig _Jennet_.--Snow _Sea Otter_.--The _Globe_.--
_Alert._--_Guatimozin._--_Atahualpa._--Lewis and Clarke.
--Vancouver.--Hamilton.--Derby.--_Pearl._--_Albatross._--First
house built in 1810.--Astor's settlement.--The _Tonquin_.--Astor's
Company betrayed to the Northwest Company.
In all countries it is difficult to trace the history of their early
discovery and settlement. That of Oregon is no exception. The Spanish
claim, and it is generally conceded, that they were the discoverers of
the coast, and gave names to the principal capes and to Fuca's Straits.
No evidence can be found in national archives, or among the native
tribes of the country, that gives the discovery of the Columbia River to
any civilized people but to the Bostons (Americans); so that, so far as
civil history or national testimony is concerned, we are without any,
except the conjectures of men as ignorant as ourselves. Hence we are
left to the alternative of searching the old logs of vessels and such
old books as have been written, and, in connection with the legends and
statements of the aborigines of the country, form an opinion as to its
discovery, and from such dates and conclusions commence its civil
history. That of Oregon begins eight years previous to the commencement
of the present century.
A ship, owned by Messrs. Barrell, Bulfinch & Co., of Boston, and
commanded by Captain Robert Gray, discovered and entered the mouth of
the third great river upon the American continent. It then had no name
known to the civilized world. This unselfish American, instead of
following the example of many contemporary British navigators by giving
his own name to the majestic river he had discovered, gave it that of
his noble ship, _Columbia_.
On the 7th of May, 1792, he discovered and ran in abreast of Cape
Hancock, and anchored, and on the 11th ran ten miles up this river on
the north side, which is now known as a little above Chinook Point, and
at 1 P.M. they came to anchor. On the 14th they weighed anchor and
ran, according to the ship's log, fifteen miles, which would bring them
up abreast of Tongue Point, where their ship grounded upon a sand bar
for a short time, but they backed her off into three fathoms of water
and anchored. By sounding they discovered that there was not sufficient
water to pass up the river in their present channel. Having filled all
their water-casks, repaired, painted, and calked the ship, and allowed
the vast numbers of Indians that thronged around them in the most
peaceable and friendly manner, to visit and traffic with them, on the
20th of May, 1792, they went to sea again.
On the 20th of October of this year, the _Chatham_, commanded by Captain
Broughton, of the British navy, entered the river. He grounded his ship
on what is now called the Sulphur Spit, and found in the bay the brig
_Jennet_, Captain Baker, from Bristol, Rhode Island. Captain Broughton
explored the river in his small boat as high up as the present site of
Vancouver, and left the river with his ship on the 10th of November.
In 1797, five years later, the snow _Sea Otter_, Captain Hill, from
Boston, visited the river.
In 1798, the ship _Hazard_, Swift, master, owned by Perkins, Lamb & Co.,
Boston, visited the river. This same ship visited the river again in
1801.
In 1802, this same Boston company sent the ship _Globe_, Magee, master,
to the river.
During the year 1802, a brisk, and something like a permanent American
trade appears to have been in contemplation by this Boston company. They
sent the ship _Caroline_, Derby, master, from Boston, and the ship
_Manchester_, Brice, master, from Philadelphia.
In 1803, Lamb & Company sent the ship _Alert_, Ebbets, master; also the
ship _Vancouver_, Brown, master. This year, the ship _Juno_, Kendricks,
master, from Bristol, Rhode Island, owned by De Wolf, entered the
Columbia River for trade.
In the year 1804, Theodore Lyman sent the ship _Guatimozin_, Bumsted,
master, from Boston. The Perkins Company sent the ship _Hazard_, Swift,
master, to the river the same year.
In 1805, Lyman & Company sent the ship _Atahualpa_, O. Potter, master,
from Boston. Lamb & Company sent the ship _Caroline_, Sturges, master,
from the same place.
On the 15th of November, 1805, Lewis and Clarke, with their party,
having crossed the Rocky Mountains under the direction of President
Jefferson, of the United States, arrived at Cape Hancock; remaining but
a few days, they crossed the Columbia River and encamped near the mouth
of a small river still bearing the name of these two explorers. They
left their encampment in March, 1806, and returned across the continent
and reported the result of their expedition to the government.
This expedition consisted of one hundred and eighty soldiers or enlisted
men. On arriving at the Mandan Village, on the Missouri River, in 1804,
they encountered the influence of the Northwest British Fur Company,
who, on learning their object, at once made arrangements to follow and
get possession of the country at the mouth of the Columbia River.
In 1806, soon after Lewis and Clarke left their encampment on their
return to the United States, the ship _Vancouver_, Brown, master,
entered the river, having been sent out by Thomas Lyman, of Boston, in
expectation of meeting Lewis and Clarke's party at the mouth of the
river. The Lamb Company sent the ship _Pearl_ the same year, under the
command of Captain Ebbets. Lyman, in addition to the _Vancouver_, sent
the brig _Lydia_, Hill, master, to the river, making three American
ships from Boston in the year 1806.
In 1807, the ship _Hamilton_ arrived in the river, sent by Thomas Lyman,
of Boston, L. Peters, master. The Perkins Company sent the _Hazard_,
Smith, master.
In 1808, the ship _Derby_, Swift, master, sent by the Perkins Company.
Lyman sent the ship _Guatimozin_, Glanville, master; both made
successful trips in and out of the river.
In 1809, the Perkins Company sent the ships _Pearl_ and _Vancouver_ into
the river, the former commanded by Smith, the latter by Whittimore.
In 1810, the ship _Albatross_, from Boston, T. Winship, master, entered
the river and sailed as high up as Oak Point, where the captain erected
a house, cleared a piece of land for cultivation, and planted a garden.
This year, John Jacob Astor, of New York, organized the Pacific Fur
Company, in connection with Wilson Price Hunt, of New Jersey. These two
gentlemen admitted as partners in the fur trade, Messrs. McKay,
McDougal, and David and Robert Stewart. These four last-mentioned
partners, with eleven clerks and thirteen Canadian voyageurs, and a
complete outfit for a fort, with cannon and small-arms, stores, shops,
and houses, with five mechanics, were all embarked on the ship
_Tonquin_, Captain Jonathan Thorn, master, in September, 1810, and
sailed for the Columbia River, where they arrived, March 24, 1811.
The present site of the town of Astoria was selected as the principal
depot for this American Fur Company, and called by them, in honor of the
originator of the company, ASTORIA. This establishment was soon in full
operation. The timber and thick undergrowth within musket range of the
establishment were cleared away, and a kitchen-garden planted outside
the stockade.
In the highly-interesting narrative of Gabriel Franchere, we read that,
"in the month of May, 1811, on a rich piece of land in front of our
establishment [at Astoria], we put into the ground twelve potatoes, so
shriveled up during the passage from New York that we despaired of
raising any from the few sprouts that still showed signs of life.
Nevertheless, we raised one hundred and nineteen potatoes the first
season. And, after sparing a few plants to our inland traders, we
planted fifty or sixty hills, which produced five bushels the second
year; about two of these were planted, and gave us a welcome crop of
fifty bushels in the year 1813."
They were cultivated at Astoria, by the old Northwest and Hudson's Bay
companies, in their little fort gardens. A few Indian chiefs were
presented with the seed, but no general distribution was made among
them, as they were considered as the Bostons' root, and no better than
those of the Indians, abounding in the country, which required less
labor to cultivate. Up to the time of the arrival of the American
missionaries, there never was an extra supply of potatoes in the
country. In other words, the potato was a luxury enjoyed by none except
the highest grades of the Fur Company's servants and distinguished
visitors; its cultivation was not generally encouraged by the company.
In October, 1810, after dispatching the _Tonquin_, Mr. Astor fitted out
the ship _Beaver_, twenty guns, Captain Sowles, master, with Mr. Clark,
six clerks, and a number of other persons, to join the establishment at
Astoria. The ship touched at the Sandwich Islands; Mr. Clark engaged
twenty-six Kanakas as laborers for the establishments on the Columbia
River, where the ship arrived, May 5, 1812.
On the 15th of July, 1813, Mr. David Thompson, under the direction of
the Northwest Canadian British Company, arrived at Astoria. I use the
word Canadian, as applied to the Northwest Fur Company, that was
established by the charter of Louis XIII. of France, 1630, in what was
then called Acadia, or New France, forty years before Charles of England
gave his charter to the Hudson's Bay Company. This Northwest Fur
Company, in the transfer of the sovereignty of Acadia, or New France, to
England, in 1714, at the treaty of Utrecht, was acknowledged as having a
legal existence, by both nations, and was allowed to transfer its
allegiance and continue its trade under the protection of the British
sovereign, as it had done under that of France.
As soon as the government and people of the United States entered upon
active measures to explore and occupy the country west of the Rocky
Mountains, this Canadian Northwest Fur Company dispatched Mr. Thompson
to explore the Columbia River, and make an establishment at its mouth;
but, on account of delays and mistaking the course of the various rivers
through which the party traveled, Mr. Thompson did not arrive at Mr.
Astor's American establishment till in July, 1813; his object was to
forestall Mr. Astor in the settlement of the country. He was received,
kindly treated, and furnished with such goods and supplies as he and his
party required, by Mr. McDougal, who was then in charge of Fort Astor,
and, in company with David Stewart, returned as high up the Columbia as
the Spokan,--Mr. Greenhow says Okanagon,--and established a
trading-post, while Mr. Thompson went among the Kootenai and Flathead
tribes, and established a trading-hut. It is due to those parties to
state that as late as 1836, a square, solid, hewed log bastion, erected
by Stewart's party, was still standing at Spokan, while no vestige of
the Thompson huts could be found in the Flathead country. At Spokan,
garden vegetables were produced about the fort, which the Indians in
that vicinity learned to appreciate, and continued to cultivate after
the fort was abandoned in 1825, having been occupied by the Northwest
and Hudson's Bay companies till that time.
In the spring of 1811, the chief agent of the Pacific Fur Company, Mr.
Hunt, with other partners, Crooks, McKenzie, and McClellen, with a party
of sixty men, started across the continent. They were extremely annoyed
by the opposition fur traders on their route, and also by hostile
Indians. Such of the party as did not perish by famine and hostile
Indians, and British fur traders, arrived at Astoria on the 28th of
January, 1812.
On the 5th of May following the arrival of Mr. Hunt's party, the ship
_Beaver_ arrived with the third installment of traders, clerks, and
Kanaka laborers. In consequence of the loss of the ship _Tonquin_, and
all on board except the Indian interpreter, in the Cliquot Bay, near the
entrance of the Straits of Fuca, by the treachery of the Indians in the
vicinity, Mr. Hunt embarked in the _Beaver_ for the Russian
establishment in August, 1812, effected an arrangement of trade with
them, and dispatched the ship to China. He continued in her till she
reached the Sandwich Islands, where he remained until June, 1813, when
the ship _Albatross_ arrived from Canton, and brought the news of the
war between the United States and Great Britain, and also that the ship
_Beaver_ was blockaded at Canton by a British ship of war. Mr. Hunt at
once chartered the _Albatross_ and sailed for the Columbia River, where
he arrived on the 4th of August, 1813.
On his arrival at Astoria he learned that it was the intention of his
partners, all of whom claimed to be British subjects (McDougal and
McKenzie having formerly been in the employ of the Northwest Company),
to sell to McTavish, of that company. Hunt embarked in the _Albatross_
for the Sandwich Islands, and from thence to the Washington Islands,
where he learned from Commodore Porter, then at those Islands, in the
frigate _Essex_, of the design of the British to seize all American
property on the Pacific coast. From thence he returned to the Sandwich
Islands, and chartered the brig _Pedler_, and arrived at Astoria in
February, 1814, and learned that soon after his departure in the
_Albatross_, in August, 1813, McTavish, with a party of the servants of
the Northwest Company, had arrived at Astoria, and, in connection with
McDougal, McKenzie, and Clarke, on the part of the American Pacific Fur
Company, and McTavish and Alexander Stewart, on the part of the Canadian
Northwest Company, had completed the sale of Astoria to that company,
and secured for themselves important positions in the service of the
latter company.
As a matter of fact and general historical interest, the amount and
value of property thus transferred is here given: Eighteen thousand one
hundred and seventy and one-fourth pounds of beaver, at two dollars per
pound, selling in Canton at that time at from five to six dollars per
pound; nine hundred and seventy otter skins, at fifty cents each,
selling at that time in Canton for five and six dollars per skin.
The expense of building Mr. Astor's establishment at Astoria, including
those at Okanagon and Spokan, with boats, _bateaux_, tools, cannon,
munitions, goods, transportation and salaries of clerks and men, etc.,
etc., was near two hundred thousand dollars, for which he received in
bills on Montreal about forty thousand, including the appraised value of
the furs at the fort, which was thirty-six thousand eight hundred and
thirty-five dollars and fifty cents; this would leave less than three
thousand one hundred and sixty-four dollars and fifty cents for the
improvements, boats, munitions, cannon, etc., for which the Hudson's Bay
Company, in 1865, claims of our government, for the old, rotten, and
abandoned post at Okanagon, nineteen thousand four hundred and sixty-six
dollars and sixty-seven cents; the post at Colville, still held in place
of the one built by Astor's company at Spokan, eighty thousand three
hundred dollars; the post at Fort George (Astoria), abandoned in 1849,
four thousand one hundred and thirty-six dollars and sixty-seven cents;
in all, for the three establishments, one hundred and three thousand
nine hundred and three dollars and thirty-four cents--quite a contrast
between the valuation of American property when in possession of British
fur traders, having been used for forty years by British subjects, and
abandoned as of little or no use to their trade, and that of American
property but lately brought into the country. It will be remembered
that Mr. Astor's Pacific Fur Company was commenced in 1810; that at the
time it was betrayed into the possession of this Canadian Northwest Fur
Company it had been in operation but two years, hence was new, and but
just ready to commence a profitable trade in the country.
The contract transferring this valuable property from American to
British owners, was signed on the 16th day of October, 1813, by Duncan
McDougal, J. G. McTavish, and J. Stewart, and witnessed by the principal
clerks of the establishment. On the 1st of December following, the
British sloop of war _Raccoon_, Captain Black, arrived in the river, and
proceeded to take formal possession of Astoria, by lowering the American
flag and hoisting that of Great Britain in its place, and changing the
name of the fort to that of Fort George.
Previous to the landing of the British soldiers, or King George's
warriors, an interview took place (as related by Ross Cox) between the
Indian warriors, with Concomly, their chief, at their head, and McDougal
and McTavish. On the arrival of the British war vessel in Baker's Bay,
the Indians, having learned that there was war between the King George
people and Bostons (Americans), they said, as they had always found the
Bostons friendly and liberal toward them, they were their friends, and
were ready to fight for them, to prevent the King George men from making
them slaves. They proposed to conceal themselves behind the rocks and
trees outside of the fort and to kill the King George soldiers with
their arrows and spears, while the men of the fort fought the ship and
small boats which they came in, with their big guns and rifles. McDougal
assured them that the King George warriors would not hurt them, and
advised them to be friendly with them, as they would do the people of
the fort no harm. Concomly and his warriors were only convinced that the
Bostons would not be made slaves by the King George warriors when they saw
the sloop leave the river without taking any of them away as prisoners
or slaves.
The treachery of the Canadian part of Astor's company, which was not
known to Mr. Astor, but provided for by the Northwest Canadian Company
before the party left Montreal, and consummated by McDougal and his
associates, in the absence of the American partners from the post, is
proved by journals, letters, and facts still extant.
CHAPTER II.
The country restored.--The order.--Description of
Astoria.--Different parties.--Northwest Fur Company.--Astor's
plan.--Conflict of the two British fur companies.--The
treaties.--The Selkirk settlement.--Its object.--The company
asserts chartered rights as soon as united.
As stated in our first chapter, the English government, by its Canadian
Northwest Fur Company, and the arrival of the British sloop of war,
_Raccoon_, during the war of 1812-13, took possession of Oregon, and
held it as British territory till it was formally restored to the United
States on the 6th of October, 1818, in these words:--
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. P. Provost, Esq., the settlement of Fort
George, on the Columbia River.
Given under our hands in triplicate, at Fort George (Columbia
River), this 6th day of October, 1818.
F. HICKEY, Captain H. M. Ship _Blossom_.
J. KEITH, of the N. W. Co.
The order from the Prince Regent of England to the Northwest Company to
deliver up the country to the American government, was issued on January
27, 1818, and complied with as above.
On the 17th of April, 1814, the Canadian Northwest Fur Company's ship,
_Isaac Todd_, reached Astoria, called Fort George.
According to the description sent to Washington by Mr. Provost, it
consisted of a stockade made of fir-logs, twenty feet high above the
ground, inclosing a parallelogram of one hundred and fifty by two
hundred and fifty feet, extending in its greatest length from northwest
to southeast, and defended by bastions, or towers, at two opposite
angles. Within this inclosure were all the buildings of the
establishment, such as dwelling-houses, magazines, storehouses,
mechanics' shops, etc.
The artillery were two heavy 18-pounders, six 6-pounders, four
4-pounders, two 6-pound coehorns, and seven swivels, all mounted.
The number of persons attached to the place besides the few native women
and children, was sixty-five; of whom twenty-three were white,
twenty-six Kanakas, and the remainder of mixed blood from Canada.
Of the party that crossed the Rocky Mountains with Mr. Hunt in 1811-12,
six remained in the country, and but five returned to the United States;
the remaining forty-five that started with him in his first expedition
were mostly destroyed by the influence of the two British fur companies
acting upon the Indians for that object.
These men, as independent trappers and petty traders among the Indians,
were considered by those companies as intruders and trespassers upon
their French and British chartered rights; hence none were allowed to
remain in the country but such as were under their control, or subject
to their rule.
From the time the Northwest Fur Company took possession of the country,
with few exceptions, we have no authentic account of the number of
vessels of any nation that visited the river, but we have reason to
believe that they would average two each year; and, from known facts, we
conclude that as soon as the post at Astoria was betrayed into the
possession of the Canadian Northwest Fur Company by McDougal and
associates, and the British government had taken formal possession of
the country, this Northwest Company, with McDougal and others equally
prominent, commenced to instill into the minds of the Indians a strong
hatred of American traders by sea or land, and to change as much, and as
fast as possible, the friendly feeling of the former toward the latter,
so as to continue to hold the permanent and absolute sovereignty of the
country, and make the Indians subservient to their commercial interests.
Mr. Astor says: "The plan by me adopted was such as must materially have
affected the interests of the Northwest and Hudson's Bay companies, and
it was easy to be foreseen that they would employ every means to
counteract my operations, and which, as my impression, I stated to the
executive of your department as early as February, 1813." This hatred of
Americans had been so assiduously impressed upon the minds of the
Indians, that one of their own vessels arriving in the river, being cast
away on Sand Island, all on board were murdered by the Indians, who
mistook them for Americans. The company sent a vessel from Vancouver (to
which place they had removed their stores and principal depot) to punish
the Indians, who had secured most of the wrecked property. The vessel
came down and sent shell and grapeshot into the Indian village,
destroying men, women, and children, landed their men and took such of
their goods as they could find, having gained satisfactory evidence of
the murder of the crew of the ship.
This view of the policy and practice of this Northwest and Hudson's Bay
Company, is further sustained by the inquiries which Mr. Keith felt it
incumbent on him to make of Mr. Provost, on the restoration of Astoria
to the Americans by the British authorities.
Mr. Keith was anxious to learn the extent of the rights of his company
to remain and trade in the country. It would seem, from the whole
history of these companies, that they felt their rights in the country
to be but temporary, that they were trespassers upon American interests,
and shaped all their arrangements accordingly.
It is an admitted historical fact that, while the Northwest Fur Company
of Montreal was extending its trade across the Rocky Mountains and
supplanting the American Pacific Fur Company of Mr. Astor, the Hudson's
Bay Company, with the assistance of Lord Selkirk's Red River settlement,
was cutting off their communication with these western establishments,
and that, in consequence of this Red River interference with their
trade, a deadly feud sprang up between the rival companies, in which
both parties enlisted all the men and Indians over whom they had any
influence, and frequently met in drunken and deadly strife, till they
had quite destroyed all profits in their trade, and rendered the Indians
hostile alike to friend and foe of the white race. So that, in 1821, the
British Parliament was compelled to notice their proceedings, and, on
the 2d of July, 1821, in an act bearing date as above, says of them:--
"Whereas, the competition in the fur trade between the governor
and company of adventurers of England trading into Hudson's Bay,
and certain associations of persons trading under the name of the
Northwest Company of Montreal, has been found, for some years
past, to be productive of great inconvenience and loss, not only
to the said company and association, but to the said trade in
general, and also of _great injury to the native Indians_, and of
other persons subjects of _his Majesty_; and whereas, the
_animosities_ and _feuds_ arising from such competition have also,
for some years past, kept the interior of America, to the
northward and westward of the provinces of Upper and Lower Canada,
and of the _Territories of the United States of America_, in a
state of _continual disturbance_; and whereas, many breaches of
the peace and violence extending to the _loss of lives_ and
considerable destruction of property have continually occurred
therein," etc. (See Greenhow's History of Oregon, p. 467.)
The broad policy of British fur traders is here stated in plain language
by their own government in a manner not to be mistaken. Their influence
upon the Indians was injurious. Their policy toward each other was war
and destruction to all opponents. The life and property of an opposing
trader must not come in competition with the profits of their trade with
Indians in any country.
How absurd it is for our government to spend millions of dollars to form
treaties with Indians who are constantly visited by these foreign Indian
traders and teachers, emissaries of a foreign power, who never breathed
an honest breath or spoke a truthful word! Feeble and insignificant as
they were, from 1813 to 1821 the whole Indian country of North America
fell under their blighting and withering influence. Divided as they
were, they were able to crush all honest competition, and _combine_ in
deadly combat against their own countrymen for the supremacy of the
Indian trade. Have they lost their power and influence by uniting the
elements of opposition in one vast fur monopoly? Nay, verily, as we
shall see.
To gain a correct understanding of the foreign policy relative to the
western portion of our country, it will be necessary to refer to the
early history of the two fur companies, and trace their connection with
France and England, which, notwithstanding the English government had
given up the country to France in 1696 in the treaty of Ryswick, and no
reservation was made on account of the Hudson's Bay Company--as they did
Oregon to the United States in the treaty of Ghent, in 1815, and made no
reservation on account of the Northwest Fur Company--still the Hudson's
Bay Company held on to a single post, called Albany, on the southwest
part of James Bay, for twenty-six years, as the Northwest and Hudson's
Bay fur companies did to Astoria and Oregon for forty-nine years.
In the wording of the treaty of Utrecht, in 1714, in which the country
was given back to England by France, there is one proviso that is not to
be overlooked, viz.: "It is, however, provided, that it may be entirely
free for the company of Quebec, and all others the subjects of the most
Christian king whatsoever, to go, by land or by sea, whithersoever they
please, out of the lands of the said bay, together with all their goods,
merchandise, arms, and effects, of what nature or condition soever,
except such things as are above reserved in this article," etc., the
exceptions referring to forts, cannon, and permanent war materials.
This French stipulation in the treaty of Utrecht, in 1714, is repeated
by the English diplomatist upon the Americans, in the third article of
the treaty of June 15, 1846, forming the basis of the claim urged
against our government in the treaty of 1864.
In the treaty stipulations between France and England in 1714, the
commercial rights of the French company of Quebec were secured to them.
From that time forward, the aggressive and oppressive policy of the
British Hudson's Bay Company was brought into collision, not only with
the French Northwest Fur Company, but with the United States and all
American fur companies and missionary and commercial enterprises coming
within their fur-trade influence.
It will be remembered that the Hudson's Bay Company, who claim their
existence and privileges from the charter of Charles II., as early as
1670, had, in forty-four years' time, only established (as Mr.
Fitzgerald says) "four or five insignificant forts on the shores of
Hudson's Bay to carry on a trade in furs with those Indians who resorted
thither;" while the French, for many years previous, had carried on an
active trade with the Indians, and had explored the country and extended
their posts up to the shores of the Saskatchewan, and over the Rocky
Mountains, on to the waters of the Columbia. The French carried on the
traffic by way of the St. Lawrence and the lakes to Fort William, on
Lake Superior, and through the Lake of the Woods into Lake Winnipeg, or
further south along the plains, crossing the course of the Red River;
this being the direct and only line of posts kept up by the French
Northwest Company, by which their food, goods, and furs were
transported. The Hudson's Bay Company carried theirs by way of Hudson's
Straits, around the coast of Labrador. In order to destroy and cut off
as much as possible the trade of this Northwest Company, Lord Selkirk,
in 1811-12, became a shareholder, and was allowed to claim, through the
directors of the company, sixteen thousand square miles of territory in
the Red River country, for the professed purpose of colonization.
This colony was planted directly in the line of the fur traffic of the
Northwest Company, against which the Hudson's Bay Company had encouraged
and carried on the most bitter hostility, enlisting both men and Indians
in a deadly feud between the two rival companies.
Our English writer remarks on page 57: "To those who had read the mutual
recriminations that had been bandied between these two bodies, it was a
strange sight to see the names of Messrs. McGillivray and Edward Ellice
associated with that of the Hudson's Bay Company,--to see men going
hand-in-hand who had openly accused one another of the foulest crimes,
_of wholesale robbery, of allowing their servants to instigate the
Indian tribes to_ MURDER _the servants of their rivals_,--this was a
strange sight. And to see gentlemen who had publicly denied the validity
of the company's charter, who had taken the opinion of the leading
counsel of the day against it, who had tried every means, lawful and
unlawful, to overthrow it, to see these same men range themselves under
its protection, and, asserting all that they had before denied,
proclaim its validity as soon as they were admitted to share its
advantages; who, without its pale, asserted the rights of British
subjects against its monopoly, and, within its pale, asserted its
monopoly against the rights of British subjects,--this, too, was a
strange sight. Yet to all this did the Hudson's Bay Company submit,
rather than subject their charter and their claims to the investigation
of a court of law."
The Hudson's Bay Company, one hundred and fifty years from the date of
its charter, asserted its right to the country, and, by virtue of the
privileges conferred in that charter, seized the supplies and goods of
the Northwest French Canadian Company, and confiscated them to its own
use. This resulted in a deadly war between the two companies, and was
carried on, neither party applying to the courts of the mother country
for a settlement of their difficulties; in fact, as has been shown by
reference to the charter of the Hudson's Bay Company, they had no legal
rights, because none were in existence at the date of their charter;
but, from the maneuvering of the company and the plausible efforts of
Lord Selkirk to colonize, civilize, and settle the Red River country,
they entered into his schemes, in order to crush the rival company and
secure the whole country to themselves. It is unnecessary to detail any
accounts of the horrid murders and infamous transactions that were put
on foot and perpetrated by these two companies. After a furious
contention, carried on for several years, "they bribed rivals whom they
could not defeat, and the two companies united and agreed to carry on
the fur trade together, to the exclusion of all others."
The Selkirk settlement was soon made to feel the withering influence of
the company that had located it in the country for a specific purpose,
_Neither, however, was there any compromise_ till its inhabitants had
been driven from their homes, its Governor (Semple) and seventeen of his
followers killed. Then a compromise was effected between the rival
companies, and they were united by an act of Parliament, under the title
of Honorable Hudson's Bay Company, in 1821,--a license given to Messrs.
William and Simon McGillivray, of the Northwest Company, and Edward
Ellice, of the Hudson's Bay Company. These corporate members and their
associates "were to share the profits arising from the fur trade, not
only from the Indian territories, but also from the Hudson's Bay
Company's proper territories of Rupert's Land." The privileges of this
company were limited to seven years. This carried them forward to 1828,
in which year their license (called a charter) was renewed for ten
years.
Our Indian missionary and American history commences in 1832, six years
before this combined Northwest and Hudson's Bay Company's license of
exclusive privileges to trade in British Indian Territory, and, jointly,
in the Oregon Territory, would expire. Our English historian and Sir
Edward Belcher are both mistaken when they attribute to the company the
asking for, or in any way encouraging, the American missionaries to come
to the country. This was an event wholly unknown to them, and brought
about by the Indians themselves, by sending a delegation of four of
their number to St. Louis, in 1832, to ask of the American people a
religious teacher. Lee, Parker, and Whitman heard the request, and
volunteered to make the effort to establish missions among them.
These missionaries all came across the Rocky Mountains unasked and
uninvited by any one in the service of that company.
CHAPTER III.
English Hudson's Bay effort to secure Oregon.--British claim to
Oregon.--Dr. McLaughlin's relation to the company.--Treatment of
Red River settlers.--A mistake.--Sir Edward Belcher.--Duplicity of
the Hudson's Bay Company.--A noble man.--An Englishman's opinion of
the Hudson's Bay Company.--Sir James Douglas's testimony.--J. Ross
Browne.--Duty of an historian.--Cause and effect.
Since commencing this work we have, by the kindness of friends who have
taken a deep interest in all that relates to this country, been
furnished with many valuable and important statements, documents,
pamphlets, papers, and books, all relating to its early history.
Of the whole catalogue, the most valuable information is contained in a
work entitled "An Examination of the Charter and Proceedings of the
Hudson's Bay Company, with Reference to the Grant of Vancouver's Island.
By James Edward Fitzgerald. London." Published in 1849.
The author of this book, though not having the personal knowledge of the
company, the Indians, and the country about which he writes requisite to
a complete history, has shown a correctness of statistical facts, a
comprehensive knowledge of his subject, an enlarged view of the British
colonial system, and a correct idea of the debasing practices and
utterly false positions of the Hudson's Bay Company not found in any
other writer.
Up to the time that this book of 293 pages fell into my hands, I did not
know that any writer entertained similar views with myself in relation
to this monstrous imposition upon the British and American people.
Mr. Fitzgerald has fortified his statements by his knowledge of the
English people, their laws and usages, and the casual outcroppings of a
system of unparalleled selfishness and despotism, carried on under the
guise of a Christian commercial company, whose professed object was to
extend commerce, and civilize and christianize the savage tribes of
North America, yet who have invariably held up their Christian chartered
privileges for the sole purpose of carrying on the most degrading and
inhuman practices with not only the savages, but with all civilized and
Christian men who have attempted to expose or even investigate their
conduct.
As we proceed with our history, we feel confident that we shall be able
to enlighten our readers on many dark subjects and transactions, and to
fully prove every statement we have made, or may yet make. Mr.
Fitzgerald has given us clearly and truthfully the English side of our
history as connected with this Hudson's Bay Company. The American part
of it the writer is gathering up, and, in giving it to the public, will
discard every statement that does not bear the impress of truth.
The reader will notice that our subject is extensive, that England and
America, commerce and Christianity, civilization and savagism, are all
involved and interested in it, and that Oregon, California, and British
and Russian America have all participated in it during the past and
present century; that we are tracing cause and effect and bringing to
light influences that, while producing their legitimate results, were
strange and unaccountable, because always kept under the selfish and
unscrupulous policy of this English corporation of fur traders.
By referring to the charter of the Hudson's Bay Company, we find that it
was given by Charles II., in 1670, granting to the "governor and company
and their successors the exclusive right to trade, fish, and hunt in the
waters, bays, rivers, lakes, and creeks entering into Hudson's Straits,
together with all the lands and territories not already occupied or
granted to any of the king's subjects, or possessed by the subjects of
any other Christian prince or State."
Forty years previous to the giving of this charter by Charles II., of
England, Louis XIII., of France, gave a charter to a French company, who
occupied the country called Acadia, or New France.
In 1632, Charles I., of England, resigned to Louis XIII., of France, the
sovereignty of the country then called Acadia, or New France.
Forty years after Louis XIII., of France, had given his charter, and
thirty-eight years after Charles I., of England, had given up his right
to the country, Charles II., of England, imitating the example of him
who wished to give the world and all its glory to obtain the worship of
the Saviour of mankind, gave to the Hudson's Bay Company what he had not
the shadow of a title to, as in the treaty of Ryswick, in 1697,
twenty-seven years after this charter of the Hudson's Bay Company had
been given, the whole country was confirmed to France, and no
reservation made on account of the Hudson's Bay Company.
Mr. Fitzgerald, on his 12th page, says: "It has often been asserted, and
is to a great extent believed, because there is very little general
information on this subject, that the _claim which Great Britain made to
the Oregon Territory was dependent upon, or, at any rate, strengthened
by, the settlement of the Hudson's Bay Company on the Columbia River_.
"Those who hold such an opinion will be surprised to learn that there
are many, and they well acquainted with the country itself, who assert
that the conduct and policy of the Hudson's Bay Company in the Oregon
Territory formed the chief part of the title which the United States had
to the country, which was gratuitously given to her by the settlement of
the boundary. What the United States owe to the company for its policy
on the west side of the Rocky Mountains is a question to which the
English public will some day demand a satisfactory answer.
"Dr. McLaughlin was formerly an agent in the Northwest Fur Company of
Montreal; he was one of the most enterprising and active in conducting
the war between that association and the Hudson's Bay Company. In the
year 1821, when the rival companies united, Dr. McLaughlin became a
factor of the Hudson's Bay Company. But his allegiance does not appear
to have been disposed of along with his interests, and his sympathy with
any thing other than British, seems to have done justice to his birth
and education, which were those of a French Canadian. This gentleman was
appointed governor of all the country west of the Rocky Mountains, and
is accused, by those who have been in that country, of having uniformly
encouraged the emigration of settlers from the United States, and of
having discouraged that of British subjects. _While the company in this
country (England) were asserting that their settlements on the Columbia
River were giving validity to the claim of Great Britain to the Oregon
Territory_, it appears that their chief officer on the spot was doing
all in his power to facilitate the operations of those whose whole
object it was to annihilate that claim altogether."
Mr. Fitzgerald has given us in the above statement an important fact,
and one that reveals to an American the deep-laid schemes of the English
government, which, by the influence of the Hudson's Bay Company, sought
to secure the Oregon Territory to itself. He also explains the conduct
of Dr. McLaughlin in his treatment of emigrants, as well as the relation
he sustained to that company. While, as Americans, we can admire and
applaud the conduct of a noble and generous "_Canadian-born_" _citizen_,
we at the same time can see the low, debasing, and mean spirit of the
Englishman, as manifested in the attempt to deprive the American
Republic of its rightful domain.
We shall have occasion to refer to the bringing into Oregon of the Red
River settlers, and as the result of that move, the unparalleled effort
of Dr. Whitman to defeat the British designs upon the country.
Mr. Fitzgerald explains that matter so well, that we could not do
justice to the truth of history not to quote him. He says, on the 14th
page of his work: "There is one story told, about which it is right that
the truth should be ascertained. It is said that a number of half-breeds
from the Red River settlement were, in the year of 1841-2, induced by
the company's officers to undertake a journey entirely across the
continent, with the object of becoming settlers on the Columbia River.
It appears that a number went, but on arriving in the country, so far
from finding any of the promised encouragement, the treatment they
received from Dr. McLaughlin was such, that, after having been nearly
starved under the paternal care of that gentleman, they all went over to
the American settlement in the Wallamet Valley."
This statement, while it affirms an important fact, gives a false
impression as regards Dr. McLaughlin. He, to our certain knowledge,
extended to the Red River settlers every facility within his power, and
all of those emigrants to this day speak of his kindness in the highest
terms. But not so of other leading or controlling members, who really
represented the English part and policy of that company. Those settlers
complained of the domineering and tyrannical treatment of their English
overseers, which was the cause of their leaving what they supposed would
eventually be the English part of Oregon Territory. They also became
sensible that the Hudson's Bay Company in Oregon was a different concern
from the Hudson's Bay Company in Rupert's Land; that, however small
their privileges were there, they were less on Puget Sound; and being
near an American settlement, they naturally sought its advantages and
protection.
Mr. Fitzgerald informs us that "these emigrants became citizens of the
United States, and it is further said were the first to memorialize
Congress to extend the power of the United States over the Oregon
Territory. For the truth of these statements we do not, of course vouch,
but we do say they demand inquiry."
This statement of Mr. Fitzgerald entitles him to be considered a candid
and fair writer, and one who is seeking for truth in reference to the
subject he is investigating. He has naturally imbibed the feelings of an
Englishman against Dr. McLaughlin, under the strong effort made by the
English Hudson's Bay Company to suppress and supersede the French
Canadian influence in it.
He says, on page 15: "Dr. McLaughlin's policy was so manifestly American
that it is openly canvassed in a book written by Mr. Dunn, one of the
servants of the company, and written for the purpose of praising their
system and policy."
Sir Edward Belcher also alludes to this policy. He says: "Some few
years since, the company determined on forming settlements on the rich
lands situated on the Wallamet and other rivers, and for providing for
their retired servants, by allotting them farms, and further aiding them
by supplies of cattle, etc. That on the Wallamet was a field too
inviting for missionary enthusiasm to overlook, but instead of selecting
a British subject to afford them spiritual assistance, recourse was had
to Americans, a course pregnant with evil consequences, and particularly
in the political squabble pending, as will be seen by the result. No
sooner had the American and his allies fairly squatted (which they deem
taking possession of the country), than they invited their brethren to
join them, and called on the American government for laws and
protection."
The American reader will smile at Sir Edward's little fling at the
_squatters_ in Oregon. He asserts a great truth in the same sentence
that he utters a positive falsehood. No member of the Hudson's Bay
Company, nor the whole company together, ever encouraged a single
American missionary to come to the country. Revs. Lee and Parker and Dr.
Whitman came without their invitation or aid. They were entirely
independent of the company, and were only suffered to remain, the
company not daring to drive them from the country on their first
arrival, as they all held the protection of the American government, as
Indian teachers, under the great seal of the Secretary of War. This
English fling at their own company is evidence of a jealousy existing
which could not be satisfied short of the utter extermination of all
American influence on this coast, and is further illustrated by this
same Sir Edward Belcher, in contrasting the treatment of Captain Wilkes
and his party with that of his own. He says (vol. 1, p. 297): "The
attention of the chief to myself and those immediately about me,
particularly in sending down fresh supplies, previous to my arrival, I
feel fully grateful for; but I can not conceal my disappointment at the
want of accommodation exhibited toward the crews of the vessels under my
command in a _British possession_." We old Oregonians are amused at Sir
Edward's ignorance of the Hudson's Bay Company's treatment of the
_crews_ of vessels, and servants of the company. We all know his crew
were allowed to associate freely with the native women in the country
and to distribute their rations of rum, and any other supplies they
might have, without any remonstrance from the company. Sir Edward
continues: "We certainly were not distressed, nor was it imperatively
necessary that fresh beef and vegetables should be supplied, or I should
have made a formal demand. But as regarded those who might come after,
and not improbably myself among the number, I inquired in direct terms
what facilities her Majesty's ship of war might expect, in the event of
touching at this port for bullocks, flour, vegetables, etc. I certainly
was extremely surprised at the reply that they were not in a condition
to supply. As any observation here would be useless, and I well knew
this point could be readily settled where authority could be referred
to, I let the matter rest. But having been invited to inspect the farm
and dairy, and been informed of the quantity of grain, and the means of
furnishing flour, and notwithstanding the profusion of cattle and
potatoes, no offer having been made for our crew, I regretted that I had
been led into the acceptance of private supplies; although, at that
time, the other officers of the establishment had told my officers that
supplies would of course be sent down."
Mr. Fitzgerald says "_the American policy of the Hudson's Bay Company_
would seem, from the above facts, to be more than a matter of
suspicion," while we Americans are only disposed to regard them as a
part of the _duplicity_ of that company in their effort _to deceive
their own countrymen_ as to the value of the country over which they had
ruled so long.
They had been too successful in deceiving all American writers to allow
their own countrymen to understand their secret policy. Sir Edward
Belcher and our English historian were equally misled in relation to the
_American policy of the Hudson's Bay Company_. It is true that Dr.
McLaughlin, though he was a French Canadian subject, had not lost his
American soul. The British iron had not driven the last noble sentiment
of humanity from his heart, nor his connection with that polluted
corporation of iniquity which pervades half the continent of North
America; for when he found that this Hudson's Bay Company was utterly
lost to humanity, he tells them to their teeth: "_Gentlemen, I will
serve you no longer_."
No true American historian will allow, without contradiction, that
corrupt company to hand down to future infamy the name of a noble and
generous servant, because their infamous policy was defeated by the
establishment of the American missions in the country. Dr. McLaughlin
did all that he could, honorably, to comply with their "system of
iniquity."
Our English author says, on page 19, in reference to the conduct of the
company: "They are convictions which have strengthened and deepened at
every step of the inquiry; convictions that the Hudson's Bay Company has
entailed misery and destruction upon thousands throughout the country
which is withering under its curse; that it has cramped and crippled the
energies and enterprise of England, which might have found occupation in
the directions from which they are now excluded; that it has stopped
the extension of civilization, and has _excluded the light of religious
truth_; that it has alienated the hearts of all under its oppression,
and made them hostile to their country; above all, that the whole and
entire fabric is built upon utterly false and fictitious grounds; that
it has not one shadow of reality in law or in justice; that there is not
the smallest legal authority for any one of the rights which this
corporation claims. It is this conviction which has urged me to submit
the statements and arguments contained in the following pages to the
consideration of the public; and to arraign before that tribunal, from
which in these days there is no escape,--the judgment of public
opinion,--_a corporation who, under the authority of a charter which is
invalid in law_, hold a monopoly in commerce, and exercise _a despotism
in government, and have so used that monopoly and wielded that power as
to shut up the earth from the knowledge of man, and man from the
knowledge of God_."
With the statements and convictions of this English author before us, we
will add a statement of Sir James Douglas, given in answer to
interrogatory 11 in the case of Hudson's Bay Company's Claim v. United
States, to give the reader a better idea of the power and influence of
that company in Oregon, in 1846.
Sir James says: "The Honorable Hudson's Bay Company had fifty-five
officers and five hundred and thirteen articled men. The company having
a large, active, and experienced force of servants in their employ, and
holding establishments judiciously situated in the most favorable
portions for trade, forming, as it were, a net-work of posts aiding and
supporting each other, _possessed an extraordinary influence with the
natives_, and in 1846 practically enjoyed a monopoly of the fur trade in
the country west of the Rocky Mountains, north and south of the
forty-ninth parallel of latitude. The profits of their trade," says this
witness, "from 1841 to 1846 were at least seven thousand pounds sterling
annually."
The fifty-five officers and five hundred and thirteen articled men of
the company, with their eight hundred half-breeds, and the Indians they
could command by the judicious position of their respective posts, were
deemed by them sufficient security for their trade, and a substantial
reason why they should not give up the country without making another
direct effort to drive the missionary and American settlements from it,
notwithstanding all their pretension to join in the provisional
government organized by the pioneer Americans in 1843.
The reader is referred to the discussion on the liquor question between
Judge Sir James Douglas and Mr. Samuel Parker, as found in the tenth and
eleventh numbers, first volume, of the _Spectator_, published June 11
and 25, 1845, and in another chapter of this work, and requested to keep
all these facts before the mind, so as not to lose sight of the
commanding influence, or, in other words, the commander, when we enter
upon the preliminary and immediate causes of the Whitman massacre, and
the Indian war that followed.
We have before us the original depositions in reference to the facts
stated, and also the attempt to excuse the principal actors in that
horrible transaction, as given by Brouillet in justification of the
course pursued by the Jesuit missionaries.
We have also the superficial and bombastic report of J. Ross Browne,
special agent of the Treasury Department, dated December 4, 1857,
containing a copy of this Jesuit history of the murder of Dr. Whitman.
In his remarks previous to giving Brouillet's history, he says: "In view
of the fact, however, that objections might be made to any testimony
coming from the citizens of the Territories, and believing also that it
is the duty of a public agent to present, as far as practicable,
_unprejudiced statements_, I did not permit myself to be governed by any
representations unsupported by reliable historical data."----"The fact
also is shown that, as far back as 1835, the Indians west of the Rocky
Mountains protested against the taking away of their lands by the white
race. That this was one of the alleged causes of the murder of Dr.
Whitman and family."
There are sixty-six pages in this report. Twelve of them are Mr.
Browne's, one page of official acknowledgment, and fifty-three from the
parties implicated.
The statements of Mr. Browne, of Mr. Fitzgerald, and the oath of Mr.
Douglas, are sufficient to show the ignorance, stupidity, and falsehood
incorporated in his report, were there no other historical facts to
convict him of ignorance in allowing such representations to be made in
an official document. In the proper place we will bring this report into
our history, with both sides of the question.
Were we to express an opinion of Mr. J. Ross Browne's report, with our
personal knowledge of what he pretends to relate, we would say he
ignored the people, the country, and the government whose agent he
claimed to be, and was reporting for the special benefit of the Roman
religion and British government, as these are extensively quoted as
historical data from which his report and conclusions are drawn.
The reader will understand our main object to be to give a full history
of all influences and prominent transactions and events that have
occurred in Oregon from 1792 to 1849.
To understand cause and effect, and the true history of the country, we
have to examine the facts as connected with actions, and also to trace
back the history of the actors, in order to see how far they may be made
responsible for the result of their actions.
Oregon, from the time of its discovery, has been a field where all the
influences of which we are writing have been living, active influences;
and they are by no means inactive or dead at the present time. Some of
them are more active now than they were in 1836.
A full knowledge of the past will enable us to guard the present and the
future. Our English writer has gathered his facts and drawn his
conclusions in London. We, upon this, our western coast, are witnesses
of the cause and results of his conclusions, and any statement he makes
we feel ourselves abundantly able to corroborate or correct.
As we proceed with our history we shall have frequent occasion to quote
Mr. Fitzgerald, as the best English evidence, in favor of our American
statements or positions. Since writing the above we have noticed a
lengthy article in the Edinburgh _Westminster Review_ for July, 1867,
giving a concise history of the Hudson's Bay Company, under the heading,
"The Last Great Monopoly." In that article the author has shown
extensive historical knowledge of the operations and influences of that
monopoly in that portion of our continent over which they have held
exclusive control.
He regards them as a blight upon the country, and an "incubus" to be
removed by national legislation. If our work had been published, we
should conclude that he must have drawn many of his facts from our own
observations. But this is not the case; hence the value to us of his
corroboration of the facts we affirm from personal knowledge.
CHAPTER IV.
Care of Great Britain for her fur companies.--Columbia Fur
Company.--Astor's second fur company.--Major Pilcher's fur
company.--Loss of the ship _Isabel_.--Captain Bonneville's
expedition.--Cause of his failure.--Captain Wyeth's, 1832.--Indians
ask for missionaries in 1833.--Methodist Mission.--Fort Hall
established.--Fort Boise.
By reference to the act of the British Parliament of June 2, 1821, it
will be seen that the affairs of the North American British Fur
companies were in a fair way to defeat all British interests in America.
To suppress these feuds among their own people became a matter of
national importance and policy.
To accomplish so desirable an object, Parliament, in the act above
referred to, extended the civil and criminal jurisdiction of Canada over
all the territories of the Hudson's Bay Company; in the thirteenth
article of the act, and in the fourteenth, repealed all that was before
taken away from that company, and confirmed absolutely all the rights
supposed to have been given by the original charter, as follows:--
SECTION 14. "And be it further enacted, that nothing in this act
contained shall be taken or construed to affect any right or
privilege, authority or jurisdiction, which the governor and company
of adventurers trading to Hudson's Bay are by law entitled to claim
and exercise under their charter; but that all such rights,
privileges, authorities, and jurisdictions, shall remain in as full
force, virtue, and effect, as if this act had never been made; any
thing in this act to the contrary notwithstanding."
This act, however just it may have been considered, certainly embodied a
large amount of national prejudice against the people of French or
Canadian birth, in exempting the territory of the Hudson's Bay Company
from its influence. It had a twofold effect: the one, to check feuds
among British subjects; the other, to unite them in one vast Indian
monopoly,--to license this united company to go forward with their
Indian political arrangements unmolested,--to punish and dispose of all
intruders upon their supposed, or asserted rights, as they might deem
for the interest of their trade, which, according to the charter of
Charles II., bearing date May 2, 1670, they were "at all times hereafter
to be personable and capable in law, to have, purchase, receive,
possess, enjoy, and retain lands, rents, privileges, liberties,
jurisdiction, franchises, and hereditaments of what kind, nature, or
quality soever they be, to them and their successors."
The whole trade, fisheries, navigation, minerals, etc., of the
countries, are granted to the company exclusively; all other of the
king's subjects being forbidden to _visit_, _hunt_, _frequent_, _trade_,
_traffic_, or _adventure_ therein, under heavy penalties; and the
company is moreover empowered to send _ships_, and to build
_fortifications_ for the defense of its possessions, as well as to _make
war or peace with all nations or peoples_ not Christian, inhabiting
those territories, _which are declared to be hence-forth reckoned_ and
_reputed_ as one of _his Majesty's_ plantations or colonies in America,
called Rupert's Land.
It will be remembered that as early as 1818, a question arose between
the United States and Great Britain, as to which was the rightful owner
of the Oregon country. The Northwest Fur Company were the only subjects
of Great Britain that had competed with the American fur companies in
the discovery or trade of the country. To ignore that company altogether
would weaken the British claim to Oregon by right of prior discovery and
occupancy. Hence, by uniting the two companies under an ancient English
charter, combining their united capital and numerical strength,
discarding all doubtful subjects, and confirming the absolute power of
their own British company, they could easily secure Oregon as British
territory. The wisdom and effect of this policy will be developed as we
proceed.
By the third article of the convention between the United States and
Great Britain, signed October 20, 1818, "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 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 disputes and differences among
themselves."
This convention secured at that time the Northwest Fur Company's
existence in the country, by the act uniting the two British fur
companies three years later. In 1821, the privileges here secured were
transferred and confirmed to the Hudson's Bay Company, who at once took
the most active and efficient measures to guard against any future
competition, by assessing and setting apart ten per cent. on their
capital stock, which was counted at L200,000, as a sinking fund for the
special purpose of opposing all competition in the fur trade by land or
water.
The convention above referred to shows that Great Britain held a
watchful eye over her fur traders in this distant country; and the act
of her Parliament in 1821, that she was disposed, in a direct manner, to
secure to her own people, as traders, the absolute sovereignty of the
country. While Great Britain was protecting and strengthening her fur
traders in North America, the American government was simply asserting
its prior rights to the Oregon country, founded upon its discovery and
subsequent purchase in what is termed the Louisiana purchase, from
France; the treaties and conventions only serving to encourage and
strengthen the British claim, while they used their influence, capital,
and power against all American competition and settlement in the
country.
In 1821, as was to be expected by the union of the two great British fur
companies, under the license of the British Parliament, and absolute
charter of Charles II., many of the servants, and especially such as
were found favorable to the American fur traders, or violently opposed
to the Hudson's Bay Company, were thrown out of employment. They
naturally sought to continue their wild Indian trade and habits, and
formed a company under the name of the Columbia Fur Company, extending
their operations up the Mississippi, Missouri, and Yellowstone rivers.
In 1826, they transferred their interests to Astor's second North
American Fur Company, of which John Jacob Astor was the head. This
company appears to have been commenced or organized in connection with
Mr. W. H. Ashley, in 1823, and under his direction extended its trade to
the south and west, along the Platte River, and passed into the Rocky
Mountains as far as Green River, being the first to discover its
sources, making a successful trading expedition that year.
In 1824, another expedition under Mr. Ashley explored the Rocky
Mountains as far south as Salt Lake, and built a fort on the borders of
a small lake, to which he gave his own name. In 1826, Mr. Ashley
transported a 6-pound cannon to his establishment near Salt Lake,
through what has since been termed Fremont's, or the south pass of the
Rocky Mountains, in a wagon. This establishment had in its employ over
one hundred men, and was remarkably successful and profitable to the
partners.
In 1826, Mr. Ashley sold all his interest to the Rocky Mountain Fur
Company, composed of Smith, Jackson, and Subleth, who extended their
trade into California, and as far north as the Umpqua River, in Oregon;
where Smith and his party were met by a professedly friendly party of
Indians, who murdered his men, seized his furs, and delivered them to a
party of men sent by the Hudson's Bay Company, under Mr. John McLeod and
Thomas McKay, to receive the furs and pay the Indians for their
services--as learned by the writer from eye-witnesses.
During this same year, 1827, Major Pilcher, with forty-five men, crossed
the Rocky Mountains, and, in 1828-9, traversed the western portion of
them as far north as Fort Colville. This fort had been established, and
farming operations commenced, in 1825. This party of Major Pilcher were
all cut off but two men, besides himself; his furs, as stated by himself
to the writer, found their way into the forts of the Hudson's Bay
Company.
In 1828, the brig _Owyhee_, Captain Demenses, and the schooner _Cowrey_,
Captain Thompson, entered and remained nearly a year in the Columbia
River, trading with the Indians. They were owned in Boston.
In 1830, the British ship _Isabel_ was lost on Sand Island--the second
known to have been wrecked on the bar, or in attempting to enter the
river. The crew were all saved, and it was the opinion of the company at
Vancouver that, had the crew remained with the ship, no great loss would
have been sustained.
In 1832, Captain Bonneville, of the United States army, on furlough,
started, with over one hundred men, on an expedition into the Rocky
Mountains. He crossed the mountains, and reached the Wallawalla Valley,
on the Columbia River; but, through the influence of the Hudson's Bay
Company, his men were nearly all induced to leave him, so that he was
obliged to abandon his property, and his expedition was a total failure,
except the little scientific knowledge of the country gained by it.
To charge the failure of Captain Bonneville directly to the Hudson's Bay
Company would not be strictly true; but their great influence over the
Indians was sufficient to prevent them from furnishing his party with
food or horses, while he was within reach of their forts. Hence, many of
his men became dissatisfied, and left him, till his party became too
weak to effect their return to the States with their valuable furs and
property. These eventually were lost, or fell into the hands of the
Indians, and through them, his furs reached the Hudson's Bay traders'
establishments.
This same year, 1832, Captain Nathaniel Wyeth, of Massachusetts, started
on an exploring expedition to the mouth of the Columbia River, with a
view of establishing a permanent trade in the Oregon country. He
traveled across the continent and gathered all the information requisite
for the undertaking, and returned to Boston in 1833; and in 1834, having
completed his arrangements, chartered the brig _May Dacre_, and
dispatched her with his own, and the goods of the Methodist Mission, for
the Columbia River.
The same year, some Flathead Indians, from a tribe in the midst of the
Rocky Mountains, went to St. Louis, and, through Mr. Catlin, an American
artist, made known their object, which was to know something more of the
white man's God and religion. Through the representations of these
Indians, the Methodist Episcopal Society in the United States
established their missions in Oregon, and the American Board sent their
missionaries among the Nez Perces, which, as will be seen, was the
commencement of the permanent settlement of the country. It appears from
the facts, briefly stated, that there had been eleven different trading
expeditions and companies, besides the Northwest and Hudson's Bay
companies, that had sought for wealth by making fur-trading
establishments in Oregon. All of them, including the Northwest and
Hudson's Bay companies, have retired from it, but the American
missionaries are residents of the country, and their influence and
labors are felt, notwithstanding other influences have partially
supplanted and destroyed the good impressions first made upon the
natives of the country by them. Still civilization, education, and
religion, with all the improvements of the age, are progressing, and the
old pioneer missionaries and settlers that were contemporary with them,
with a few exceptions, are foremost in every laudable effort to benefit
the present and rising generation.
In the month of March, 1833, a Japanese junk was wrecked near Cape
Flattery, in the then Territory of Oregon, and all on board, except
three men, were lost. Those three were received by Captain McNeal on
board the British ship _Lama_; taken to Vancouver, and thence sent to
England. Rev. Mr. Parker gives this, and another similar wreck on the
Sandwich Islands, as evidence of the origin of the natives of those
countries. But we give it for another object. The three Japanese were
taken to England, and, during their stay, learned the English language,
were sent back to Macao, and became the assistant teachers of Mr.
Gutzlaff, the English missionary at that place, and were the means of
opening their _own_ country to missionary and commercial relations with
other nations.
Captain Wyeth, with Revs. Jason and Daniel Lee, Cyrus Shepard, and P. L.
Edwards, the first missionary party, together with Doctor Nutall, a
naturalist, and J. K. Townsend, an ornithologist, sent out by a literary
society in Philadelphia, all under the escort furnished by Captain
Wyeth, crossed the mountains and reached the plain formed by the
Portneuf and Snake rivers. At their junction Captain Wyeth stopped, and
established Fort Hall, while the missionaries and scientific men of his
party, in company with an Englishman by the name of Captain Stewart, and
a party of Hudson's Bay traders, under the direction of Mr. McLeod and
McKay, proceeded to Fort Nez Perces (present name, Wallula). Thence they
traveled in Hudson's Bay _bateaux_ to Vancouver.
Captain Wyeth established his post on the Snake River, by erecting a
stockade of logs, and quarters for his men, and then proceeded to the
lower Columbia to receive his goods, which arrived in the _May Dacre_,
Captain Lambert, from Boston, about the time he reached Fort William, on
what is now known as Sauvies Island, a few miles below the mouth of the
Multnomah River, now called the Wallamet.
Rev. Mr. Lee and party made their first location about sixty miles from
the mouth of the Wallamet, near what is now called Wheatland, ten miles
below Salem.
Captain Wyeth received his goods, and commenced his trading
establishment, but found that, notwithstanding he was personally treated
by the principal officers of the Hudson's Bay Company with great
courtesy, yet it was evident that every possible underhanded and
degrading device was practiced, both with the Indians and with his men,
to destroy, as much as was possible, the value and profits of his trade.
In the spring and summer of 1835 he supplied his Fort Hall establishment
with goods.
During the year 1835, the Hudson's Bay Company erected a temporary post
about twelve miles up the Boise River, designed to counteract and
destroy as much as possible the American fur trade established by
Captain Wyeth, who continued his efforts less than three years; and,
having lost of the two hundred men who had been in his employ _one
hundred and sixty_ (as stated to Rev. Samuel Parker), and finding
himself unable to compete with this powerful English company, he
accepted Dr. McLaughlin's offer for his establishments, and left the
country in 1836.
In 1835, the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions sent
Rev. Samuel Parker and Dr. Marcus Whitman to explore the Oregon country,
with a view of establishing missions among the Indians west of the Rocky
Mountains.
These two missionaries reached the American rendezvous on Green River,
in company with the Rocky Mountain Fur Company's traders, under the
direction of Captains Drips and Fitzpatrick. From the American
rendezvous Mr. Parker continued his explorations in company with, and
under the protection of the Nez Perce Indians, till he reached old Fort
Wallawalla, now called Wallula; thence he continued in canoes to
Vancouver, while Dr. Whitman returned to the United States to procure
associates to establish the Nez Perce mission.
CHAPTER V.
Extent and power of Hudson's Bay Company.--Number of
forts.--Location.--Policy.--Murder of Mr. Black.--McKay.--Manner of
dealing with Indians.--Commander of fort kills an
Indian.--Necessity of such a course.--Hudson's Bay Company not
responsible for what their servants do.
Having briefly traced the operations of the two foreign fur companies in
Oregon, a knowledge of the location of their several trading
establishments will enable the reader to comprehend their power and
influence in the country.
Fort Umpqua was located in the extreme southwestern part of Oregon, near
the mouth of the river bearing that name. It was a temporary stockade
built of logs, overlooking a small farm in its immediate vicinity, was
generally occupied by a clerk and from four to eight Frenchmen.
Fort George (Astoria) already described.
They had a farm and small establishment at the mouth of the Cowlitz, and
a more extensive farm some twenty-five miles up that river.
Fort Vancouver,--a stockade, six miles above the mouth of the Multnomah,
or Wallamet River. This fort was the general depot for the southwestern
department, at which their goods for Indian trade were landed, and their
furs and peltries collected and shipped to foreign markets. There was
also a trading-house at Champoeg, some thirty-five miles up the Wallamet
River.
On the left bank of the Columbia River, near the 46 deg. of north latitude,
stood Fort Nez Perces, called Wallawalla, now Wallula,--a stockade,
accidentally burned in 1841, and rebuilt with adobes in 1841-2.
On the left bank of the south branch of the Columbia, or Snake River, at
the junction of the Boise, was located Fort Boise, built formerly, in
1834, with poles; later, with adobes.
Continuing up Snake River to the junction of the Portneuf, on its left
bank we find Fort Hall, built by Captain Wyeth; a stockade in 1834;
rebuilt by the Hudson's Bay Company, with adobes, in 1838.
Thence up the Columbia, Fort Okanagon, at the mouth of Okanagon River,
formerly a stockade, latterly a house or hut; and up the Spokan some
twenty miles, was the old Spokan Fort, built by Astor's Company, a
stockade with solid bastions.
Continuing up the Columbia to Kettle Falls, and two miles above, on the
left bank is Fort Colville, formerly a stockade, still occupied by the
Hudson's Bay Company.
Thence up the Columbia to the mouth of the Kootanie River, near the
forty-ninth parallel of latitude, is the trading establishment called
Kootanie House. Thence returning south, and ascending the Flathead
(Clark's) and Kootanie rivers, into what is now Montana Territory, is,
or was, the hut called Flathead House. Still higher up on the Columbia
was a small establishment, called the boat encampment, or Mountain
House.
Entering the country by the Straits of Juan de Fuca and Puget Sound, we
find Fort Nasqualla, formerly a stockade. Proceeding up Frazer River to
near the forty-ninth parallel, upon the left or south bank of the river
is Fort Langley, an extensive stockade. Thence up that river about
ninety miles, half a mile below the mouth of the Coquehalla, is Fort
Hope, a stockade. On the right bank of the Frazer, sixteen miles above,
is Fort Yale, a trading-house.
Thence proceeding up the Frazer, and on to the waters of Thompson River,
is Fort Kamloops; still further north and east, extending into New
Caledonia, are Forts Alexander, William, Garey, and Abercrombie.
On the southeastern part of Vancouver Island is Fort Victoria, formerly
a stockade. On the north side of the island is Fort Rupert, a stockade,
still in good repair.
On the mainland, near Portland Channel, is Fort Simpson. At the mouth of
the Stiken River, on Dundas Island, was formerly Fort Wrangle, a
stockade. Recently the establishment has been removed some sixty miles
up the Stiken River, and called Fort Stiken.
This, as will be seen, gives the company twenty-three forts and five
trading-stations. In addition to these they had trading-parties
extending south to California, southeast to Fort Hall and into Utah and
Arizona, east into the Blackfoot country (Montana) and the Rocky
Mountains, and north into New Caledonia and along the northwestern
watershed of the Rocky Mountains.
They also had two steamers, the _Beaver_ and _Otter_, to enter all the
bays, harbors, rivers, and inlets along the western coast of our
country, from Mexico on the south, to Russian America on the north,
employing fifty-five officers and five hundred and thirteen articled
men, all bound, under the strictest articles of agreement, to subserve
the interests of that company under all circumstances; being strictly
forbidden to acquire any personal or real estate outside of their
stipulated pay as servants of the company, and were subject to such
punishment for deficiency of labor or neglect of duty as the officer in
charge might see fit to impose, having no appeal to any source for
redress, as the original charter of Charles II., confirmed by act of
Parliament in 1821, clearly conferred on the company absolute control
over the country they occupied, and all in it.
As a matter of romance and adventure, many statements are made of
conflicts with Indians and with wild animals, all terminating favorably
to the interests of the company, confirming and strengthening their
absolute power over all their opponents; but as they do not properly
belong to a work of this character, they will be omitted, except where
they may be brought to illustrate a fact, or to prove the principles and
policy of the company.
As in the case of Mr. Black, a chief trader at Fort Kamloops, who had
offended an Indian, the Indian disguised his resentment, entered the
fort as a friend, and while Mr. Black was passing from the room in which
the Indian had been received, he was deliberately shot by him, and fell
dead. The Indian fled, and the fort was closed against the tribe. Not a
single article of trade or supplies was allowed to the tribe till the
murderer was given up, and hung by the company's men, when the fort was
opened and trade resumed.
In another case, near the mouth of the Columbia, a trader by the name of
McKay was killed in a drunken row with the Indians at a salmon fishery.
A friendly Indian gave information at head-quarters, when an expedition
was fitted out and sent to the Indian camp. The murderer, with a few
other Indians, was found in a canoe, but escaped to shore. They were
fired at, and one woman was killed and others wounded. Dr. McLaughlin,
being in command of the party, informed the Indians that if the murderer
was not soon given up, he would punish the tribe. They soon placed the
murderer in the hands of the party, who were satisfied of the guilt of
the Indian, and at once hung him, as an example of the punishment that
would be inflicted upon murderers of white men belonging to the company.
One other instance of daring and summary punishment is related as having
been inflicted by Mr. Douglas, while in charge of a fort in the midst of
a powerful tribe of Indians. A principal chief had killed one of the
company's men. Mr. Douglas, learning that he was in a lodge not far from
the fort, boasting of his murderous exploit, armed himself, went to the
lodge, identified the murdering chief, and shot him dead; then walked
deliberately back to the fort.
A compliance with licensed parliamentary stipulations would have
required the arrest of the murderers in all these cases, and the
testimony and criminals to be sent to Canada for conviction and
execution.
These cases illustrate, whether just or otherwise, the absolute manner
of dealing with Indians by the company. The following chapter gives us
the particulars of an aggravated case of brutal murder of the person in
charge of one of their extreme northwestern forts by the men under his
charge.
CHAPTER VI
Murder of John McLaughlin, Jr.--Investigation by Sir George Simpson
and Sir James Douglas.
Very different was the course pursued by Sir George Simpson and Mr. (now
Sir James) Douglas in the case of conspiracy and murder of John
McLaughlin, Jr., at Fort Wrangle, near the southern boundary of Russian
America.
In this case, Sir George Simpson went into a partial examination of the
parties implicated, and reported that Dr. John McLaughlin, Jr., was
killed by the men in self-defense. This report, from the known hostility
of Sir George to the father and son, was not satisfactory, and Esquire
Douglas was dispatched to Fort Wrangle, and procured the following
testimony, which, in justice to the murdered man and the now deceased
father, we will quote as copied from the original documents by Rev. G.
Hines.
Pierre Kanaquassee, one of the men employed in the establishment at the
time of the murder, and in whose testimony the gentlemen of the company
place the utmost reliance, gives the following narrative, in answer to
questions proposed by James Douglas, Esq., the magistrate that examined
him:--
Q. Where were you on the night of the murder of the late Mr. John
McLaughlin?
A. I was in my room, in the lower part of the main house, where I lived
with George Heron, in an apartment in the lower story, immediately under
the kitchen. My door opened into the passage which led to the apartment
of Mr. John McLaughlin in the second story.
Q. What occurred on the night of the murder?
A. I will tell you the whole story, to the best of my recollection.
A few days preceding the murder, five Indians from Tako, with letters
from Dr. Kennedy, arrived at the fort about midnight. The watchmen,
hearing the knocking, called Mr. John. When he got up, he mustered a few
hands to defend the gates, in case of any treacherous attack from the
Indians, whom they did not, as yet, know. They were then admitted into
the fort, delivered up their arms, according to custom, and were lodged
in a small room in the lower story of the main house. A day or two after
this, he beat, and put one of these Indians, a native of Nop, in irons,
as Peter was told, for having committed some theft in Tako. About eight
o'clock of the evening of the 20th of April, Mr. John gave liquor to the
Indians, and made them drunk; after which he called the white men, viz.,
Laperti, Pripe, Lulaire, Heroux, Bellinger, Simon, Fleury, McPherson,
Smith, and Antoine Kawanope. During this time, Peter was in his own,
which was the adjoining room, lying awake in bed, and overheard all that
passed. He heard Mr. John say to McPherson, "Peter is not among us.
Where is he?" McPherson replied, that he was in bed, and he was sent for
him by Mr. John. Peter, in consequence, went into the room, and saw all
the men seated in a ring, on the floor, around a number of bottles
standing within the ring, and the Indians lying dead drunk on another
part of the floor, Mr. John himself was standing outside of the ring,
and McPherson placed himself on the opposite side of the ring; neither
of them appeared to be partaking of the festivities of the evening but
were looking on, and forcing the people to drink. Antoine Kawanope was
seated on his bed, apart from the other men, perfectly sober, as he told
Peter afterward. Mr. John had ordered him not to drink, observing, "You
are not to drink at this time, as I am going to die to-night, and you
will help me in what I am going to do." On entering the room, Mr. John
told Peter to sit down with the other people, and ordered his servant,
Fleury, to give him a good dram, which he did, in a tin pan. Peter could
not drink the whole, and was threatened by Mr. John with violence if he
did not finish it. He succeeded in emptying the pan, by allowing the
liquor to run into the bosom of his shirt. Mr. John, in doing this, did
not appear to be angry, but in a half-playful mood. Peter remained there
about a quarter of an hour, during which time he was careful not to
drink too much, as a few hours previously Antoine had called at his room
and said, "My uncle, take care of yourself to-night; the master is going
to die." Peter said, "Who is going to kill him?" and Antoine said, "The
Bluemen," meaning the Kanakas, "are going to kill him." This, Peter
thought, was likely to be the case, as the men, some time before
Christmas preceding, had agreed among themselves to murder him, and had
signed a paper, which McPherson drew up, to that effect. Every one of
the men of the place agreed to the commission of this deed, Smith and
Heron as well as the others. Peter's name was signed by McPherson, and
he attested it by his cross. This paper was signed in Urbaine's house,
where the men severally repaired by stealth for the purpose, as Mr. John
kept so vigilant a watch upon them, that they were afraid he might
suspect their intentions if they were there in a body. The same
impression made him also remark, in a low tone of voice, to Laperti, on
his first entering the room, when he observed Mr. John forcing the
people to drink, "I really believe our master feels his end near, as he
never used to act in this manner." As above mentioned, after Peter had
been about fifteen minutes in the room where the men were drinking, Mr.
John retired, followed by Antoine. Mr. John had not on that occasion
drank any thing with the men, neither did he (Peter) ever see him, at
any time preceding, drink in their company. He, however, supposed that
he must have taken something in his own room, as he appeared flushed and
excited, but not sufficiently so as to render his gait in the least
unsteady. McPherson also did not taste any thing in the room. As soon as
Mr. John was gone, Peter also left the room, and went to bed in his own
room.
Peter was informed by Antoine that Mr. John, on leaving the room where
the men were drinking, went up-stairs to his own apartment, and he heard
him say to his wife, "I am going to die to-night." And he and his wife
both began to cry. Mr. John soon rallied, and observed, "Very well; if I
die, I must fall like a man." He then told Antoine to load his rifles
and pistols, and ordered him also to arm himself with his own gun. He
and Antoine then went out, and Peter thinks he heard the report of more
than fifteen shots. Antoine afterward told Peter that Mr. John fired at
Laperti, but missed him, and afterward ordered Antoine to fire at
Laperti. Antoine refused to do so, until his own life was threatened by
Mr. John, when he fired in the direction, without aiming at Laperti. He
also told the Kanakas to kill the Canadians, and it was in part they who
fired the shots that he (Peter) had heard. Peter then got up and placed
himself behind his door, and saw Mr. John come in and go up-stairs with
Antoine, when he took the opportunity of going out, armed with his gun
and a stout bludgeon, and found the men standing here and there on the
gallery watching an opportunity to shoot Mr. John. Laperti's position on
the gallery was fronting the door of the main house, toward which he had
his gun pointed; when Peter saw him, he was on his knees, the small end
of the gun resting on the top rail of the gallery, in readiness to fire.
Laperti exclaimed, on seeing Peter, "I must kill him now, as he has
fired two shots at me." Peter objected to this, and proposed to take and
tie him. Nobody answered him. At that moment, Smith came up to Laperti
and told him to hide himself or he would certainly be killed. Laperti
said, "Where can I hide myself?" and Smith said, "Come with me and I
will show you a place in the bastion where you can hide yourself," and
they went off together in the direction of the bastion at the corner of
Urbaine's house. Peter, after a few minutes' stay on the gallery,
returned to his house, as he had previously agreed upon with George
Hebram, who was lying sick in bed, and who had entreated him not to
leave him alone. At the door of the main house, he met Mr. John coming
out, followed by Antoine, who was carrying a lamp. Mr. John said to
Peter, "Have you seen Laperti?" Peter answered, "No, I have not seen
him;" and then Mr. John said, "Have you seen Urbaine?" And Peter again
answered that he had not. The minute before this, as he (Peter) was
returning from the gallery, he had seen Urbaine standing at the corner
of the main house, next to Urbaine's own dwelling, in company with
Simon. Urbaine said, "I don't know what to do; I have no gun, and do not
know where to hide myself." Simon said, "I have a gun, if he comes I
will shoot him, and will be safe." Mr. John, after Peter passed him,
said to Antoine, "Make haste, and come with the lamp," and proceeded
with a firm step to Urbaine's house, as Peter, who continued watching at
the door, saw.
After he saw them go to Urbaine's house, he proceeded toward his own
room, and he and Antoine called out, "Fire! fire!" The report of several
shots, probably five, immediately followed, and he heard Antoine
exclaiming, "Stop! stop! stop! He is dead now." Antoine afterward
related to Peter, that on reaching Urbaine's house, Mr. John ordered him
to go round by one corner, while he went round by the other, directing
Antoine to shoot any of the Canadians he might meet. Mr. John then
proceeded in a stooping position, looking very intently before him, when
a shot was fired from the corner of the house toward which he was going,
which caused his death, the ball having entered at the upper part of the
breast-bone, a little below the gullet, and come out a little below the
shoulder, having broken the spine in its passage. Peter was also told by
one of the Kanakas, that as soon as Mr. John fell, Urbaine sprung
forward from the corner of the house within a few paces of the body, and
put his foot savagely on his neck, as if to complete the act, should the
ball have failed in causing death. The Kanakas immediately asked Urbaine
who had killed the master. Urbaine replied, "It is none of your business
who has killed him!" Peter, who during this time had removed to his
house, seeing Heron go out without his gun, went out round the body, and
said, "My friend, we have now done what we long intended to do; let us
now carry the body back to the house." Urbaine, Laperti, Bellinger, and
other white men who were present replied, "When we kill a dog, we let
him lie where we kill him." And Antoine told him they had previously
given him the same reply to a similar proposition from him. Peter then
approached the body, and, with one hand under the neck, raised the head
and trunk, when a deep expiration followed, which was the last sign of
animation. He had previously perceived no signs of life, nor did he hear
any one say that any appeared after the deceased fell. The white men
being unwilling to assist him, he carried the body, with the aid of the
Kanakas, into the main house, where he had it stripped, washed clean,
decently dressed, and laid out. In doing so he received no help from any
but the Kanakas. The wounds made by the balls were very large, both
openings being circular, and severally three inches in diameter. The
body bled profusely, there being a deep pool of blood found around it,
which was washed away afterward by the Kanakas. Peter never heard that
he spoke or moved after he fell. There was a perpendicular cut on the
forehead, skin-deep, in a line with the nose, which Peter thinks was
caused by his falling on the barrel of his rifle, though Urbaine said
that he had received it from an Indian with his dog. It was, as Peter
supposes, about eleven o'clock, P.M., when he had done washing and
laying out the body; the watches had not then been changed, therefore he
thinks it could not be midnight. The people continued coming and going
during the night, to see the body, and Peter proposed praying over the
body, as is customary in Canada; but they objected, saying they did not
wish to pray for him. He did sit up with the body all night, having soon
after gone, first to Urbaine's and then to Lulaire's house, who each
gave him a dram, which he took, saying, "There is no need of drinking
now; they might drink their fill now." He soon afterward went to bed.
He inquired of Martineau, who also lived in the same room, if he had
fired at the deceased. He replied, that he had fired twice. He then
asked him if it was he that had killed him, and he said, "I do not know
if it was me or not." He (Peter) put the same question to several of the
other men whom he saw afterward; they all said that they had not shot
him, and Martineau afterward said that he had not directed his gun at
him, but had fired in the air.
The following morning he asked Antoine Kawanope if he knew who had
killed the deceased. He replied, "I know who killed him, but I am not
going to tell you, or any one else. When the governor comes, I will tell
him." He asked Antoine why he would not tell; he said he was afraid it
might cause more quarrels, and lead to other murders. He then advised
Antoine not to conceal it from him, as he would tell no one. Antoine
then said, he thought it was Urbaine who had done the deed. Peter
observed that Urbaine had no gun. Antoine replied, "I think it was
Urbaine, because as soon as the deceased fell, Urbaine rushed out from
his lurking-place at the corner of the house, where, I was informed by
the people, he always kept his gun secreted, with the intention of
shooting the deceased." Peter says Laperti, Urbaine, and Simon were all
concealed in the corner whence the shot came, and he thinks it to be one
of the three who fired it. Urbaine always denied having committed the
murder, and said, "I am going to the Russian fort for trial, and will
be either banished or hung. I will let the thing go to the end, and will
then inform upon the murderers."
Simon always said that he was never in the corner from whence the shot
was fired, and knew nothing about the matter; but Peter thinks that he
must have been there, as he saw him, as before related, at the corner of
the main house, when he promised to protect Urbaine; and from the
situation of the fort, he must have passed that spot with Urbaine, as
there was no other passage from the place where they had been standing.
Laperti also said he never fired at all. When Peter, as before related,
went upon the gallery after the first firing had ceased, while Mr. John
and Antoine had gone into the house, he saw all the men on the gallery,
except Pripe, Lulaire, and McPherson, and he asked each of them,
respectively, if they were going to shoot the master that night, and
they all answered (as well as himself), they would do so at the first
chance, except Pehou, a Kanaka, who would not consent to the murder.
Smith was then without a gun.
Before the Christmas preceding, Peter put the question to Smith, how he
should like to see him kill Mr. John? He replied, "I should like it very
well; I would have no objection, because his conduct is so very bad that
he can never expect to be protected by the company." Peter Manifree says
that Mr. John appeared to be aware of the plot formed by the men against
his life; as he supposes, through the information of Fleury, his
servant, who was aware of every thing that passed among them. Mr. John
had often said to the men, "Kill me, if you can. If you kill me, you
will not kill a woman--you will kill a man." And he kept Antoine as a
sentinel to watch his room. One evening George Heron proposed taking his
life, and said if he could find a man to go with him, he would be the
first to shoot him. Peter refused to go, and Heron watched a great part
of the night in the passage leading to Mr. John's room, holding his gun
pointed toward its door, with the object of shooting Mr. John if he
appeared, as he usually did at night when going to visit the watchmen;
but he did not go out that night, or Peter thinks that he would have
been shot by Heron. The following morning Peter asked Antoine if he
would defend Mr. John were he attacked by the people. Antoine said he
would not, and would be the first man to seize or shoot him, should any
attempt be made against his life or liberty. He put the same question to
McPherson; but McPherson said, "No, do not kill him till the governor
comes, by and by, and then we shall have redress."
Peter also says that all the unmarried men were in the habit of secretly
going out of the fort at night, contrary to order, to visit the Indian
camp, and that one evening, when he wished to go out, he met George
Heron on the gallery, who showed him where a rope was slung to the
picket, by which he might let himself down to the ground outside of the
fort, saying, "This is the way I and others get out, and you may do the
same without fear of detection." On the morning after the murder he went
into Urbaine's and Lulaire's house and got a dram in each of them, out
of two bottles of rum which he saw there. He said, "Now Mr. John is
dead, I shall go out of the fort and spend the day with my wife."
Urbaine replied, "No: no one shall go out of the fort. We keep the keys,
and we shall keep the gates shut." Peter was angry at this, and said to
Antoine, "When Mr. John was alive, he kept us prisoners, and would not
allow us to run after women; and now that we have killed him, the
Canadians wish to keep us as close as he did. I see we must raise the
devil again with these Canadians, before we can get our liberty."
Peter also says that one principal cause of their dislike to John, and
their plots against his life, was the strictness with which he prevented
their sallying from the fort in quest of women; that he flogged
Martineau for having given his blanket to a woman with whom he
maintained illicit commerce, and he also flogged Lamb and Kakepe for
giving away their clothes in the same manner. This, Peter says,
exasperated the men.
The day after the murder many of the men went up to Mr. John's room to
see the body, and McPherson remarked to them, that when the master was
living they were not in the habit of coming up there; but they did so
now that he was dead. On hearing this, Peter and Urbaine went away and
never returned. On their way to their own house, they met Pripe and
Bellinger.
Urbaine told them what McPherson had said, and in a threatening manner
said, "McPherson is getting as proud as the other, and will be telling
tales about us. We will not murder him, but we will give him a sound
thrashing." And Peter says that he soon after went to Smith and told him
to put McPherson on his guard, as the Canadians intended to attack him.
Smith asked Peter what he would do, now the master was dead, and Peter
said he would obey McPherson's orders. Smith replied, "That is good,
Peter. If we do not do so, we shall lose all our wages." All the
Canadians, and, he thinks, Simon, continued drinking the whole of the
day following the murder; the other men of the fort did not drink. He
thinks it was the remains of the liquor they had been drinking the
preceding night. Peter also says that, for a month previous to the
murder, Urbaine, Laperti, and Simon, were in the habit of getting drunk
every night on rum purchased from the Indians. Peter told them to take
care of themselves, because Mr. John would be angry if he knew it. Mr.
John took no notice of their conduct, because, as Peter thinks, he knew
of the plot against his life, and felt intimidated. He also says that
Laperti was excited against Mr. John on account of a suspected intrigue
which he carried on with his wife. The night following the murder, they
all went to bed quietly. The next day all was also quiet, and all work
suspended, except watching the Indians, which they did very closely, as
they were afraid they might be induced to attack the fort, on learning
that the master was no more. They continued watching, turn about. The
second day a coffin was made, and the corpse removed from the main house
to the bath, when McPherson gave the men a dram. The third day the
corpse was buried and the men had another dram. He does not know whether
the men asked for the dram, or whether McPherson gave it of his own
accord. The corpse was carried to the grave by Laperti, Pripe, Lulaire,
and some Kanakas, but Urbaine did not touch it; does not think it was
through fear. Peter often heard Laperti say, "I wish the governor was
here, to see what he would do." He also says there was no quarrel in the
room where they were drinking on the night of the murder; but he thinks
there might have been a quarrel after they left, as Pripe was put in
irons after that time. He also says that the Canadians must have fixed
on that night to murder him, and that Fleury told him so, which accounts
for his apparent dejection of mind, and of his having shed tears in
presence of his wife and Antoine, when he said, "I know that I am going
to die this night." He also thinks this might have led to the outbreak,
but of this he is not sure. It is a mere matter of opinion. Mr. John was
a little in liquor, but knew perfectly well what he was about. He never
saw him so far gone with liquor as not to be able to walk actively
about, except on one occasion, the preceding Christmas Eve, when he
appeared to walk unsteady, but nevertheless could mount the gallery.
They only knew he had tasted liquor from the excitement and changed
appearance of his countenance. He does not know who first suggested the
idea of murdering Mr. John.
Since the above disclosures were made, a few other facts have come to
light, which, however, do not materially affect the character of these
atrocities. Mr. John McLaughlin, Jr., was doubtless intemperate,
reckless, and tyrannical, and often unnecessarily cruel in the
punishments inflicted upon his men; but he was surrounded by a set of
desperadoes, who, for months before the arrival of the night, during the
darkness of which the fatal shot ushered him into the presence of his
Judge, had been seeking an opportunity to rob him of life. Some time
before this event, he flogged Peter for the crime of stealing fish.
Peter was exceedingly angry, and resolved upon the destruction of his
master. At a time to suit his purpose, he went to the bastion, where
were fire-arms, loaded to his hands, and rung the bell of alarm, with
the intention of shooting Mr. McLaughlin when he should make his
appearance. A man by the name of Perse came out to see what was the
matter, instead of the intended victim, when Peter fired, but missed
him, the ball hitting a post near his head. For this offense, Peter was
again seized, put in irons, and subsequently severely flogged, and
liberated. Nearly all the men had been flogged from time to time, for
various offenses, and all conspired against the life of their master. As
might have been expected, when the case was examined by Sir George
Simpson, the murderers attempted to cast all the odium upon Mr.
McLaughlin, doubtless for the purpose of exculpating themselves, in
which attempt they but too well succeeded, in the estimation of Sir
George. Whether the persons who procured his death would be pronounced,
by an intelligent jury, guilty of willful murder, or whether, from the
mitigating circumstances connected with these transactions, the verdict
should assume a more modified form, is not for me to determine. But it
can not be denied by any one, that the circumstances must be indeed
extraordinary that will justify any man, or set of men, to cut short the
probation of an immortal being, and usher him, with all his unrepented
sins, into the presence of his God.
This account illustrates English and Hudson's Bay Company's dealings
with Indians, and their treatment of men and murderers, both among the
Indians and their own people.
We are forced to acknowledge that we can not see the correctness of
moral principle in Mr. Hine's conclusions. There was unquestionably a
premeditated and willful murder committed by the men at that fort. We
can understand the motives of Sir George Simpson and Mr. Douglas, in
allowing those men to escape the penalty of their crime, from the amount
of pecuniary interests involved, and the personal jealousy existing
against Dr. McLaughlin and his sons, in the company's service. We know
of jealousies existing between Mr. Simpson and John McLaughlin, Jr., on
account of statements made in our presence at the breakfast-table, that
were only settled temporarily, while at Vancouver. These statements, and
the placing of this young son of the doctor's at that post, we are
satisfied had their influence in acquitting his murderers, if they did
not in bringing about the murder, which to us appears plain in the
testimony; and we so expressed our opinion, when the father requested us
(while in his office) to examine a copy of those depositions. We have no
hesitancy in saying, that we believe it to have been a malicious murder,
and should have sent the perpetrators to the gallows. We have never been
able to learn of the trial of any one implicated.
CHAPTER VII.
Treatment of Indians.--Influence of Hudson's Bay Company.--Rev. Mr.
Barnley's statement.--First three years.--After that.--Treatment of
Jesuits.--Of Protestants.--Of Indians.--Not a spade to commence
their new mode of life.--Mr. Barnley's
statement.--Disappointed.--His mistake.--Hudson's Bay Company
disposed to crush their own missionaries.
Rev. Mr. Beaver says of them: "About the middle of the summer of 1836,
and shortly before my arrival at Fort Vancouver, six Indians were
wantonly and gratuitously murdered by a party of trappers and sailors,
who landed for the purpose from one of the company's vessels, on the
coast somewhere between the mouth of the river Columbia and the confines
of California. Having on a former occasion read the particulars of this
horrid massacre, as I received them from an eye-witness, before a
meeting of the Aborigines Society, I will not repeat them. To my certain
knowledge, the circumstance was brought officially before the
authorities of Vancouver, by whom no notice was taken of it; and the
same party of trappers, with the same leader, one of the most infamous
murderers of a murderous fraternity, are annually sent to the same
vicinity, to perform, if they please, other equally tragic scenes. God
alone knows how many red men's lives have been sacrificed by them since
the time of which I have been speaking. _He also knows that I speak the
conviction of my mind, and may he forgive me if I speak unadvisedly when
I state my firm belief that_ THE LIFE OF AN INDIAN WAS NEVER YET, BY A
TRAPPER, PUT IN COMPETITION WITH A BEAVER'S SKIN."
One other case we will give to illustrate the conduct and treatment of
this company toward the Indians under their "_mild and paternal care_,"
as given, not by a chaplain, or missionary, but by Lieut. Chappel, in
his "Voyage to Hudson's Bay in H. M. S. _Rosamond_." He relates that on
one occasion, an English boy having been missed from one of the
establishments in Hudson's Bay, the company's servants, in order to
recover the absent youth, made use of the following stratagem:--
"Two Esquimaux Indians were seized and confined in separate apartments.
A musket was discharged in a remote apartment, and the settlers,
entering the room in which one of the Esquimaux was confined, informed
him by signs that his companion had been put to death for decoying away
the boy; and they gave him to understand at the same time that he must
prepare to undergo the same fate, unless he would faithfully pledge
himself to restore the absentee. The Esquimaux naturally promised every
thing, and, on being set at liberty, made the best of his way into the
woods, and, of course, was never afterward heard of. They kept the other
a prisoner for some time. At length he tried to make his escape by
boldly seizing the sentinel's fire-lock at night; but the piece going
off accidentally, he was so terrified at the report, that they easily
replaced him in confinement; yet either the loss of liberty, a
supposition that his countryman had been murdered, or that he was
himself reserved for some cruel death, deprived the poor wretch of
reason. As he became exceedingly troublesome, the settlers held a
conference as to the most eligible mode of getting rid of him; _and it
being deemed good policy to deter the natives from similar offenses by
making an example, they accordingly shot the poor maniac in cold blood_,
without having given themselves the trouble to ascertain whether he was
really guilty or innocent" (p. 156). We have quoted these two examples,
from two British subjects, to show the Hudson's Bay Company's manner of
treating the Indians, who were under their absolute control from the
mouth of the Umpqua River, in the extreme southwestern part of Oregon,
to the extreme northern point on the coast of Labrador, including a
country larger in extent than the whole United States.
This country had for two hundred and thirty years been in possession of
these two powerful and equally unprincipled companies, who had kept it,
as Mr. Fitzgerald says, "_so us to shut up the earth from the knowledge
of man, and man from the knowledge of God_."
But, we are asked, what has this to do with the history of Oregon, and
its early settlement? We answer, it was this influence, and this
overgrown combination of iniquity and despotism--this monster monopoly,
which England and America combined had failed to overcome,--that was at
last, after a conflict of thirty years, forced to retire from the
country, by the measures first inaugurated by Lee, Whitman, and the
provisional government of Oregon; and now this same monopoly seeks to
rob the treasury of our nation, as it has for ages robbed the Indians,
and the country of its furs.
They may succeed (as they have heretofore, in obtaining an extension of
their licensed privileges with the English government), and obtain from
the American government what they now, by falsehood, fraud, and perjury,
claim to be their just rights. If they do, we shall be satisfied that we
have faithfully and truly stated facts that have come to our knowledge
while moving and living in the midst of their operations, and that we
are not alone in our belief and knowledge of the events and influences
of which we write.
Before closing this chapter we will quote one other witness (a British
subject), the Rev. Mr. Barnley, a missionary at Moose Factory, on the
southwestern part of James Bay, to show the full policy of that company
toward British missionaries, and also to prove the assertion we make
that the Hudson's Bay Company, as such, is, in a measure, guilty of and
responsible for the Whitman and Frazer River massacres, and for the
Indian wars and the murder of American citizens contiguous to their
territory.
The missionary above referred to says: "My residence in the Hudson's Bay
territory commenced in June, 1840, and continued, with the interruption
of about eight months, until September, 1847." The Whitman massacre was
in November, 1847. Mr. Barnley continues: "My letter of introduction,
signed by the governor of the territory, and addressed 'To the Gentlemen
in charge of the Honorable Hudson's Bay Company's Districts and Posts in
North America,' in one of its paragraphs ran thus: 'The governor and
committee feel the most lively interest in the success of Mr. Barnley's
mission, and I have to request you will show to that gentleman every
personal kindness and attention in your power, and facilitate by every
means the promotion of the very important and interesting service on
which he is about to enter;' and, consequently, whatsoever else I might
have to endure, I had no reason to anticipate any thing but cordial
co-operation from the officers of the company.
"_For the first three years_ I had no cause of complaint. The
interpretation was, in many cases, necessarily inefficient, and would
have been sometimes a total failure, but for the kindness of the wives
of the gentlemen in charge, who officiated for me; but I had the best
interpreters the various posts afforded, the _supply of rum_ to Indians
was restricted, and the company, I believe, fulfilled both the spirit
and the letter of their agreement with us, as far as that fulfillment
was then required of them, and their circumstances allowed.
"In giving, however, this favorable testimony, so far as the first three
years are concerned, I must say, that in my opinion we should have been
informed, before commencing our labors, that the interpreters at some of
the posts would be found so inefficient as to leave us dependent on the
kindness of private individuals, and reduce us to the very unpleasant
necessity of taking mothers from their family duties, that they might
become the only available medium for the communication of Divine truth.
"But after the period to which I have referred, a very perceptible
change, _i.e._, in 1845, took place. [The company had decided to
introduce the Roman Jesuits to aid them in expelling all Protestant
missionaries and civilization from the Indian tribes.] There was no
longer that hearty concurrence with my views, and co-operation, which
had at first appeared so generally. The effect was as if the gentleman
in charge of the southern department had discovered that he was expected
to afford rather an external and professed assistance than a real and
cordial one; and, under his influence, others, both of the gentlemen and
servants, became cool and reluctant in those services of which I stood
in need, until at length the letter as well us the spirit of the
company's engagement with me failed." The reader will remember that
while Mr. Barnley was receiving this treatment at the Hudson's Bay
Company's establishment at Moose Factory, James Douglas and his
associates were combining and training the Indians in Oregon for the
purpose of relieving, or, to use the language of the Jesuit De Smet, "to
rescue Oregon from Protestant and American influence."
Mr. Barnley continues: "I was prohibited from entertaining to tea two
persons, members of my congregation, who were about to sail for England,
because I happened to occupy apartments in the officer's residence, and
was told that it could not be made a rendezvous for the company's
servants and their families." P. J. De Smet, S. J., on the 113th page of
his book, says: "_The Canadian-French and half-breeds who inhabit the
Indian territory treat all the priests who visit them with great
kindness and respect._" On page 313, he says of the Hudson's Bay
Company, just about this time: "In what manner can we testify our
gratitude in regard to the two benefactors [Douglas and Ogden] who so
generously charged themselves with the care of _transporting and
delivering_ to us our cases, without consenting to accept the slightest
recompense?--How noble the sentiments which prompted them gratuitously
to burden themselves and their boats with the charitable gifts destined
by the faithful to the destitute missionaries of the Indians!" These
last quotations are from letters of Jesuit missionaries, who were
brought to the Indian country by this same Hudson's Bay Company, and
furnished transportation and every possible facility to carry on their
missions among the Indians all over the American Indian country.
These missionaries have made no attempt to improve the condition of the
Indians, but have impressed upon their ignorant minds a reverence for
themselves and their superstitions. See Bishop Blanchet's reply to
Cayuse Indians, November 4, 1847, page 44 of Brouillet's "Protestantism
in Oregon;" also pages 34-5, Executive Doc. No. 38, J. Ross Browne, as
given below:--
"The bishop replied that it was the pope who had sent him; that he
had not sent him to take their land, but only for the purpose of
saving their souls; that, however, having to live, and possessing no
wealth, he had asked of them a piece of land that he could cultivate
for his support; that in his country it was the faithful who
maintained the priests, but that here he did not ask so much, _but
only a piece of land_, and that the priests themselves would do the
rest. He told them that he would not make presents to Indians, that
he would give them nothing for the land he asked; that, in case they
worked for him, he would pay them for their work, and no more; that
he would assist them neither in plowing their lands nor in building
houses, nor would he feed or clothe their children," etc.
At Moose Factory, Mr. Barnley says: "A plan which I had devised for
educating and training to some acquaintance with _agriculture_ native
children _was disallowed_, but permission was given me by the governor
in council to collect seven or eight boys from various parts of the
surrounding country, to be clothed, and at the company's expense. A
proposal made for forming a small Indian village near Moose Factory _was
not acceded to_; and, instead, permission only given to attempt the
location of one or two old men who were no longer fit for engaging in
the chase, _it being very carefully and distinctly stated by Sir George
Simpson that the company would not give them even a spade toward
commencing their new mode of life_. When at length a young man was found
likely to prove serviceable as an interpreter, every impediment was
interposed to prevent his engaging in my service, although a distinct
understanding existed that neither for food nor wages would he be
chargeable to the company. And the pledge that I should be at liberty to
train up several boys for future usefulness, though not withdrawn, was
treated as if it had never existed at all; efforts being made to produce
the impression on the mind of my general superintendent that I was, most
unwarrantably, expecting the company to depart from their original
compact, when I attempted to add but two of the stipulated number to my
household.----
"At Moose Factory, where the resources were most ample, and where
was the seat of authority in the southern department of Rupert's
Land, the hostility of the company (and not merely their inability
to aid me, whether with convenience or inconvenience to themselves)
was most manifest.
"The Indians were compelled, in opposition to their convictions and
desires, to labor on the Lord's day. They were not permitted to
purchase the food required on the Sabbath, that they might rest on
that day while voyaging, although there was no necessity for their
proceeding, and their wages would have remained the same.----
"At length, _disappointed, persecuted, myself and wife broken in
spirit_, and almost ruined in constitution by months of anxiety and
suffering, a return to England became the only means of escaping a
premature grave; and we are happy in fleeing from the _iron hand of
oppression_, and bidding farewell to that which had proved to us a
land of darkness and of sorrow.
"From the above statements you will perceive that if true in some
cases, it is not all, that the company have furnished the 'means of
conveyance from place to place.' They have not done so, at all
events, in the particular case mentioned, nor would they let me have
the canoe, lying idle as it was, when they knew that I was prepared
to meet 'the expense.'
"And equally far from the truth is it, that the missionaries have
been '_boarded, lodged, provided with interpreters and servants free
of charge_.'"
In this last statement, Mr. Barnley is mistaken, for, to our certain
knowledge, and according to the voluntary statement of the Roman
Jesuits, Revs. Bishop Blanchet, Demer, P. J. De Smet, Brouillet, and
many other Jesuit missionaries, they received from the Hudson's Bay
Company _board and lodging, and were provided with interpreters_,
catechist, transportation, and even houses and church buildings.
The only mistake of Mr. Barnley was, that he was either an Episcopal or
Wesleyan missionary or chaplain, like Mr. Beaver, at Fort Vancouver, and
he, like Mr. Beaver, was a little too conscientious as to his duties,
and efforts to benefit the Indians, to suit the policy of that company.
The Roman Jesuitical religion was better adapted to their ideas of
Indian traffic and morals; hence, the honorable company chose to get rid
of all others, as they had done with all opposing fur traders. What was
a civilized Indian worth to that company? Not half as much as a common
otter or beaver skin. As to the soul of an Indian, he certainly could
have no more than the gentlemen who managed the affairs of the honorable
company.
CHAPTER VIII.
Petition of Red River settlers.--Their requests, from 1 to
14.--Names.--Governor Christie's reply.--Company's reply.--Extract
from minutes.--Resolutions, from 1 to 9.--Enforcing rules.--Land
deed.--Its condition.--Remarks.
Before closing this subject we must explain our allusion to the Red
River settlement, and in so doing illustrate and prove beyond a doubt
the settled and determined policy of that organization to crush out
their own, as well as American settlements,--a most unnatural, though
true position of that company. It will be seen, by the date of the
document quoted below, that, four years previous, that company, in order
to deceive the English government and people in relation to the
settlement on the Columbia River, and also to diminish the number of
this Red River colony, had, by direction of Sir George Simpson, sent a
part of it to the Columbia department. The remaining settlers of
Rupert's Land (the Selkirk settlement) began to assert their right to
cultivate the soil (as per Selkirk grant), as also the right to trade
with the natives, and to participate in the profits of the wild animals
in the country. The document they prepared is a curious, as well as
important one, and too interesting to be omitted. It reads as follows:--
"RED RIVER SETTLEMENT,}
"August 29, 1845.}
"SIR,--Having at this moment a very strong belief that we, as
natives of this country, and as half-breeds, have the right to hunt
furs in the Hudson's Bay Company's territories whenever we think
proper, and again sell those furs to the highest bidder, likewise
having a doubt that natives of this country can be prevented from
trading and trafficking with one another, we would wish to have
your opinion on the subject, lest we should commit ourselves by
doing any thing in opposition either to the laws of England or the
honorable company's privileges, and therefore lay before you, as
governor of Red River settlement, a few queries, which we beg you
will answer in course.