Conflict of Nations for Possession of the River
The Six Nations at First Engaged in the Conflict--The Three Left in
it--Claims by Sea of Spain, England, and the United States--Claims by
Land--Rivalries of the Great Fur Companies--Capture of Astoria by the
English--Its Restoration to the United States--Appearance of Fort
George in 1818--Joint Occupation Treaty of 1818--Florida Treaty of
1819--Treaty with Russia in 1825--Forces on the Side of England and
those on the side of the United States--American Triumph
Inevitable--Policy of the Hudson's Bay Company in Contrast with that
of the American Immigration--Indifference of the American
Government--Utterances of Some American Statesmen--Doings of the
American People--Gathering of the Little American Colony in the
Willamette Valley--Need of Government--First Meeting at
Champoeg--Advice of Commodore Wilkes that they Delay--The "Wolf
Meetings"--Second Meeting at Champoeg, and Establishment of the
Provisional Government--Its Chief Provisions--Thornton's Account of
the "Hall" at Champoeg--Peter H. Burnett--Dr. McLoughlin's
Position--Triumphs of the American Immigrant over the Great Fur
Company--McLoughlin and Whitman--Movements of Diplomacy between
England and the United States--Webster, Linn, Benton, and
Calhoun--Inconsistent Positions of the Democratic Party--Polk and the
Platform of 54 Degrees 40 Minutes, or Fight--Near Approach of
War--Compromise on the Line of 49 Degrees--Momentous Nature of the
Issue--Triumph of American Home-builders.
Earlier chapters of this volume have already developed some of the
essential elements in the complicated strife of the maritime nations of
the world for possession of the land of the Oregon. This brief chapter
will endeavour to recapitulate and group those steps, and to trace the
course of events by which the line finally was drawn on the parallel of 49
degrees.
As we have seen, the many-named river, and the fact that it was the key to
a vast region and that the shores of the ocean contiguous to it seemed to
abound in the finest of furs, was a lure to Portuguese, Frenchman,
Russian, Spaniard, Englishman, and American. The first three became early
eliminated from the conflict, and the last three fought the triangular
battle to its ending with the final result that Uncle Sam inserted his
broad shoulders between Mexico and the 49th parallel, and thus controls
the choicest land of the sunset slope of the continent.
Spain, England, and the United States each had a valid claim to Oregon.
Spain, by the partial discovery of the River by Heceta in 1775, by the
voyages of Bodega and Arteaga in the same year and again in 1779, and by
the voyage of Valdez and Galiano around Vancouver Island in 1792, together
with many other voyages of a less definite nature by illustrious
navigators, as Malaspina, Bustamente, Elisa, and others, had a strong
position. Yet she had failed to clinch her discoveries or to take
effective possession.
Great Britain could point to the elaborate examinations of Cook and
Vancouver. The latter had made a minute investigation of the noble group
of waters whose outlet preserves the name of the old Greek pilot of
Cephalonia, Juan de Fuca; and his Lieutenant Broughton had entered the
Columbia River and proceeded over a hundred miles up the stream. The
nomenclature given to both the River and the Sound regions by Vancouver
had been the first in any sense complete. So England, too, had a strong
claim.
And what were the claims of the United States? First and foremost was the
discovery by Robert Gray of the River and his actual twenty-five-mile
ascension of it in May, 1792. He had gone much farther than Heceta, who
had only looked in, but he had not gone so far as Broughton. The latter
indeed, claimed, and his government followed him in the claim, that Gray
had not really been in the River at all, but was only in an estuary of the
sea into which the River flowed. But that, to any one who has seen the
River, is too much of a forced construction to stand serious examination.
Moreover, Gray antedated Broughton by some months.
Turning from sea claims to land claims, England could point to Alexander
Mackenzie as having crossed the continent in 1792, and as having reached
the veritable ocean at Cascade Inlet. But it again was a very strained
construction to extend that claim so far as to include the lower Columbia
Valley. The United States could justly advance as a sufficient offset, the
expedition of Lewis and Clark in 1804. In 1811 David Thompson had
traversed the entire length of the Columbia for the British flag, only to
find the Astor Company already established under the Stars and Stripes at
the mouth of the River. From these essential facts out of many, we can
easily draw the conclusion that no one of these three contestants could
justly be too arrogant and exclusive. Some degree of modesty was befitting
each.
We have already seen the rivalries of the great fur companies, the
Hudson's Bay and the North-western of the British, and the Pacific of the
Americans, and the effect of the War of 1812 on their fortunes. As a
result of that war the Pacific Fur Company sold out to the North-westers,
and a few years later the North-westers united with the Hudson's Bay
Company under the name of the latter. To all appearance the Yankee was
worsted, and the Briton in possession of the River.
But the Treaty of Ghent in 1815, closing the War of 1812, provided that
all territory taken by either party should be restored. The boundary line
west of the Lake of the Woods was left undrawn. John Jacob Astor now
applied to the Government to restore his captured property on the
Columbia, stating that if again in possession, he would resume his former
operations. The United States Government accordingly notified Great
Britain of its intention to re-occupy the fort at the Columbia's mouth.
For two years the communication lay unanswered. In September, 1817, the
sloop-of-war, _Ontario_, Captain J. Biddle, was despatched to the Columbia
with Mr. J. B. Provost as special agent, under instructions to assert the
claim of the United States to the territory of the River. This decisive
move compelled Great Britain to come out from under cover. A long and
tedious diplomatic warfare ensued. Meanwhile the _Ontario_ was pursuing
her long journey around Cape Horn. In 1818, an agreement was reached to
the effect that Astoria should be formally restored to the United States,
but that the North-western Fur Company should be allowed to remain in
actual possession. Captain Biddle of the _Ontario_ had left Mr. Provost in
Chile and had proceeded to the Columbia to take possession. Captain
Sheriff, commandant of the British ships in the Pacific, being in
Valparaiso, in H. M. S. _Blossom_, learning of Mr. Provost's presence
there, conceived the happy thought that it would be an international
courtesy to invite Mr. Provost to accompany him to Astoria. Accordingly on
October 1, 1818, the _Blossom_ pushed her bow across the Bar, and on the
6th the formal ceremony of transfer from the Union Jack to the Stars and
Stripes took place. Captain J. Hickey of the _Blossom_ represented Great
Britain, Mr. J. Keith acted for the North-west Fur Company, while Mr.
Provost stood for the United States. It seems to have been a very
good-natured affair throughout. Placards were posted at the capes on both
sides of the River declaring the change of sovereignty. Fort George was
quite a powerful structure at that time, consisting of a strong stockade
of fir logs twelve feet high, enclosing a parallelogram one hundred and
fifty by two hundred and fifty feet, having within it dwellings, shops,
store houses, and magazines. On the walls were two eighteen-pound cannon,
six six-pounders, four four-pound carronades, two six-pound cohorns, and
seven swivels. The day of transfer must have been a very picturesque day
among the many such in Astoria's history. We can imagine the soft October
haze floating over Cape Hancock, and the long, lazy swell of six thousand
miles of sea, thundering across Point Adams.
One interesting feature of Mr. Provost's presence at Astoria was his
observation of the bar at the entrance of the River. This had generally
been represented to the world as something frightful. It is often so
represented at the present time. Mr. Provost in a letter to Secretary of
State, John Quincy Adams, says that there is a spacious bay, by no means
so difficult of ingress as has been represented. He states that there is
a bar across the mouth of the River, at either extremity of which there
are sometimes appalling breakers; but that there is a channel of nearly a
league in width with a depth of twenty-one feet at the lowest tides. He
thinks, therefore, that with proper buoys the access to vessels of almost
any tonnage may be rendered secure. This statement in regard to the Bar is
of much interest as furnishing a basis for comparison with the present
conditions. The depth at low tide now is about twenty-six feet, the
increase probably being due to the jetty.
The logic of the restoration of Astoria to the United States, while at the
same time the British Fur Company was left in practical possession, was
realised in the Joint Occupation Treaty of 1818. By this singular
arrangement it was agreed that any country on the north-west coast of
America that may be claimed by either power shall be open for ten years to
the vessels, citizens, and subjects of the two powers.
In 1819 another very important step was taken; viz.: the Florida Treaty
with Spain. By this, Spain retired to the line of 42 degrees, ceding to
the American Republic all her rights above that line. With her own claims
joined to those of Spain, the Republic would seem to be able to snap her
fingers at England. But, with characteristic tenacity, the latter power
made ready to insist all the more strenuously upon her claims. In 1825
England and the United States agreed with Russia upon the line of 54
degrees 40 minutes, as the southern line of Russian claims. With Spain and
Russia out of it, Oregon was left for England and the United States to
fight over. The Joint Occupation Treaty was to last ten years, with the
privilege of renewal. Meanwhile what were the factors in the struggle for
possession? There was on the side of England the Briarean monopoly of the
Hudson's Bay Company, supported by a disciplined and intelligent
government. But the English people were not in it. On the American side
the Government was strangely indifferent. There were several ambitious
attempts to control the situation by American trading and fur companies.
But the essential forces were the American immigrant, the American
missionary, the Declaration of Independence, and the ox-team. Those were
the champions of America. They were the Davids against the Goliaths of
British monopoly. At first thought it seemed that Goliath would have a
"walk-over." The case seemed hopeless for the Americans.
But to the deeper observer, American triumph was inevitable. It was the
Age of Democracy. The conception both of popular government and of
individual ownership of land, with which went the corollary of "equal
opportunities for all men and special privileges for none," was graven
deep upon American character. With these things there went, of necessity,
the disapproval of slavery and the support of free labour. Still further
there went, by the same logic, the doctrine of unity and continental
expansion. These various influences have constituted the broad foundation
on which were reared the towers and battlements of American nationality.
In previous chapters we have outlined the operations of the Hudson's Bay
Company, the coming of the missionaries, and the immigrations of
Americans. The policy of the Hudson's Bay Company was to keep the country
a wilderness, to maintain amicable relations with the Indians, and to
depend mainly on the fur-trade for the great profits of their enterprise.
The policy of the American immigrants was to build homes, cities, roads,
steamboats, mills, develop the country, crowd out the natives, and depend
on mining, farming, stock-raising, lumbering, for their profits; not
profits of a monopoly located in a distant money centre, but profits of
the individual worker on his own land. The difference was world-wide. It
represented two different conceptions of government and of life itself.
But though the American people had the manifest destiny of expanding to
the Pacific, the Government was strangely supine. We say "strangely," but
it was not so strange after all. Congress was dominated by the South in
the interest of slavery, and by the East in the interest of the tariff.
Calhoun usually led the South, and he weighed everything in the scales of
slavery. Webster governed Eastern sentiment largely, and he spoke for New
England manufacturers. It is true that Clay was at all times a power in
the councils of the nation, and Clay's constant word was nationalisation
and expansion. But even Clay was so committed to the tariff that he did
not always appreciate the possibilities of the "West-most West." The
Presidents of the period from 1819 to 1846 were from the South or the
Atlantic seaboard and not usually inclined to regard the far West with
special interest.
The American people were away ahead of the American government in the
struggle for possession of Oregon. A few of the utterances of leading
statesmen of that period as significant of their conception of Oregon,
may be given here. Benton, who became later the greatest champion of
Oregon, was so imperfectly informed in 1825 that he spoke thus: "The ridge
of the Rocky Mountains may be named as a convenient, natural, and
everlasting boundary. Along this ridge the western limit of the Republic
should be drawn, and the statue of the fabled god Terminus should be
erected on its highest peak, never to be thrown down." But Benton
improved, for later referring to the Columbia, he said, "That way lies the
Orient." Webster said of Oregon: "What do we want of this vast, worthless
area, this region of savages and wild beasts, of shifting sands and
whirlwinds of dust, of cactus and prairie dogs. To what use could we ever
hope to put these great deserts or these great mountain ranges,
impenetrable and covered to their base with eternal snow? What can we ever
hope to do with the western coast, a coast of three thousand miles,
rock-bound, cheerless, and uninviting, and not a harbour on it? What use
have we of such a country? Mr. President, I will never vote one cent from
the public treasury to place the Pacific Coast one inch nearer Boston than
it is now." And that was "God-like Dan!" Dayton expressed himself thus:
"God forbid that the time should ever come when a State on the shores of
the Pacific, with interests and tendencies of trade all looking toward the
Asiatic nations of the East, shall add its jarring claims to our
distracted and already overburdened confederacy." The _National
Intelligencer_ doubtless expressed a common sentiment in the following:
"Of all the countries upon the face of the earth, Oregon is one of the
least favoured by nature. It is almost as barren as Sahara and quite as
unhealthy as the campagna of Italy."
Such an estimate by American statesmen was all right to the Hudson's Bay
Company. They wished such an estimate and had taken pains to foster it.
But while the gullible American statesmen were thus accepting just the
version which their rivals were disseminating, the hard-handed and
hard-headed, though not hard-hearted frontiersmen of Missouri and Illinois
and Iowa were packing their ox-teams and starting across the desert for
that Sahara on the Columbia River. Also one Marcus Whitman, a missionary
physician of the Walla Walla, was floundering in the snows of the Sierra
Madre and crossing the Arkansas through broken ice, in order to tell the
benighted statesmen what the land of the Oregon really was like. The
American people were busy, and the statesmen looked askance. And so, a few
here and a few there, by trail or ship, adventurers, missionaries,
sailors, trappers, there was formed a gathering in the Willamette of the
advance guard of American home-builders. They began to call out of the
wilderness to Uncle Sam.
As a result of the coming of the missionaries and of the small
immigrations of the thirties and early forties, together with the
settlement in the Willamette Valley of various French-Canadian employees
of the Hudson's Bay Company, there was enough of a population to demand
some sort of organised society.
W. H. Gray made a summary of population in 1840 to consist of two hundred
persons, of whom a hundred and thirty-seven were American and sixty-three
Canadian. Up to 1839 the only law was the rules of the Hudson's Bay
Company. In that year the Methodist missionaries suggested that two
persons be named as magistrates to administer justice according to the
ordinary rules of American law. This was the first move looking to
American political organisation. In 1839 and 1840 memorials were presented
to the Senate by Senator Linn of Missouri at the request of American
settlers praying for the attention of Congress to their needs. But, not
content with lifting their voices to the home land, they proceeded to
organise for themselves.
At that time, Champoeg, a few miles above the falls of the Willamette and
located pleasantly on the west bank of that river, was the chief
settlement. There, on the seventh of February, 1841, a gathering of the
settlers was held "for the purpose of consulting upon steps necessary to
be taken for the formation of laws, and the election of officers to
execute them." Jason Lee, the Methodist missionary, was chairman of the
meeting, and he outlined what he deemed the needed method of establishing
a reign of law and order. The meeting proved rather a conference than an
organisation and the people dispersed to meet again at the call of the
chairman.
A week later an event occurred which brought most forcibly to the minds of
the settlers the need of better organisation. This was the death of Ewing
Young, one of the most prominent men of the little community. He left
considerable property, with no known heirs and no one to act as
administrator. It became clear that some legal status must be established
for the settlement. Another meeting was held, in which it was determined
that a government be instituted, having the officers usual in an American
locality. The work of framing a constitution was entrusted to a committee,
in which the five different elements, the Methodist missionaries, the
Catholics, the French Canadians, the independent American settlers, and
the English, had representation. The committee was instructed to confer
with Commodore Wilkes of the American Exploring Squadron, just at that
time in the River, and Dr. McLoughlin, the Hudson's Bay magnate. Wilkes
advised the settlers to wait for added strength and for the United States
Government to throw its mantle over them. The committee decided that his
advice was sound and indefinitely adjourned. Constitution building rested
for a time along the shores of the Willamette.
In 1841 and 1842, two hundred and twenty Americans reached Oregon,
doubling the population.
The Americans were ill at ease without a government and kept agitating the
question of another meeting. But the English and the Catholic influences
opposed this. Some diplomacy was needed. The irrepressible Yankees were
equal to it. They determined to draw the settlers together under the
announcement of a meeting for the purpose of discussing the means of
protecting themselves against the ravages of the numerous wild beasts of
the valley. W. H. Gray was the leading spirit in this enterprise. In a
most picturesque and valuable account of it, John Minto has developed the
thought that the founding of the Oregon State bore a striking resemblance
to that stage in the Roman state, subsequently celebrated in the festival
of Lupercalia, wherein the first organisation was for defence against the
wild beasts. So the Willamette witnessed again the gathering of the
clans, Americans, English, French, half-breeds, Catholics, Protestants,
Independents, all coming together to protect themselves against the bears,
cougars, and wolves. The meetings were usually known thereafter as the
"wolf meetings."
James O'Neil was made chairman of this historic gathering. With the
astuteness characteristic of American politicians, a previous
understanding had been made between Mr. O'Neil and the little coterie of
which Mr. Gray was the manager, that everything should be shaped to the
ultimate end of raising the question of a government. As soon, therefore,
as the ostensible aim of the meeting had been attained, W. H. Gray arose
and broached the all-important issue. After declaring that no one could
question the wisdom and rightfulness of the measures looking to protecting
their herds from wild beasts, he continued:
How is it, fellow-citizens, with you and me, and our wives and
children? Have we any organisation on which we can rely for mutual
protection? Is there any power in the country sufficient to protect us
and all that we hold dear, from the worse than wild beasts that
threaten and occasionally destroy our cattle? We have mutually and
unitedly agreed to defend and protect our cattle and domestic animals;
now, therefore, fellow-citizens, I submit and move the adoption of the
two following resolutions, that we may have protection for our lives
and persons, as well as our cattle and herds: _Resolved_ that a
committee be appointed to take into consideration the propriety of
taking measures for the civil and military protection of this colony;
_Resolved_ that this committee consist of twelve persons.
There spoke the true voice of the American state-builder, the voice of the
Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The resolutions were
passed and the committee of twelve appointed, mainly Americans. The
committee met at the Falls of the Willamette, which by that time was
becoming known as Oregon City. Unable to arrive at a definite decision,
the committee issued a call for a general meeting at Champoeg on May 2d.
Pending the meeting, there was a general policy of opposition developed
among the French Canadians in the interest of the Hudson's Bay Company and
England. This opposition threatened the overthrow of the entire plan. It
was, however, checkmated in an interesting fashion. George W. Le Breton
was one of the leading settlers and occupied a peculiar position. He was
of French origin, from Baltimore to Oregon, and had been a Catholic. His
existing affiliations were with the Americans. He was keen, facile, and
well educated. He discovered that the Canadians had been drilled to vote
"No" on all questions, irrespective of the bearing which such a vote might
have on the leading issue. Le Breton accordingly proposed that measures be
introduced upon which the Canadians ought to vote "Yes." These tactics
were carried out. The Canadians were confused thereby. Le Breton watched
developments carefully and, becoming satisfied that he could command a
majority, rose and exclaimed, "We can risk it, let us divide and count!"
Gray shouted, "I second the motion!" Jo Meek, famous as one of the
Mountain Men, stepped out of the crowd and said, "Who is for a divide? All
in favour of an organisation, follow me!" The Americans speedily gathered
behind the tall form of the erstwhile trapper. A count followed. It was a
close vote. Fifty-two voted for, and fifty against. The Americans would
have been outvoted had it not been that Le Breton, with two French
Canadians, Francois Matthieu and Etienne Lucier, voted with them. The
defeated Canadians withdrew, and the Indians, who lined the banks of the
River to discover what strange proceedings the white men were engaged in,
perceived from the loud shouts of triumph that the "Bostons" had won.
Though the victory was gained by so scanty a margin, it was gained, and it
was decisive. It was one of the most interesting events in the history of
Oregon or the United States, for it illustrates most vividly the inborn
capacity of the American for self-government.
The new government went at once into effect. The constitution formulated
by the committee and adopted by the meeting at Champoeg provided that the
people of Oregon should adopt laws and regulations until the United States
extended its jurisdiction over them. Freedom of worship, habeas corpus,
trial by jury, proportionate representation, and the usual civil rights of
Americans were guaranteed. Education should be encouraged, lands and
property should not be taken from Indians without their consent. Slavery
or involuntary servitude should not exist.
The officers of government consisted of a legislative body of nine
persons, an executive body of three, and a judiciary of a supreme judge
and two justices of the peace, with a probate court and its justices, and
a recorder and treasurer. Every white man of twenty-one years or more
could vote. The laws of Iowa were designated to be followed in common
practice. Marriage was allowed to males at sixteen and females at
fourteen. One of the most important provisions was the land law. This
permitted any individual to claim a mile square, provided it be not on a
town site or water-power, and that any mission claims already made be not
affected, up to the limit of six miles square. This land law was framed
upon the general conception of the proposed Linn bill already brought
before Congress. The land law allowed land to be taken in any form, but
since there was no existing survey, each man had to make his own survey.
The first elected executive committee consisted of David Hill, Alanson
Beers, and Joseph Gale. Within a year an amendment was made to the
constitution providing for a governor. George Abernethy, a former member
of the Methodist mission, was chosen to fill the place.
Outer things were pretty crude in the little colony on the Willamette,
though brains and energy were there in abundance. J. Quinn Thornton
expressed himself as follows on the "Oregon State House," which he says
was in several respects different from that in which laws are made at
Washington City:
The Oregon State House was built with posts set upright, one end set
in the ground, grooved on two sides, and filled in with poles and
split timber, such as would be suitable for fence rails, with plates
and poles across the top. Rafters and horizontal poles, instead of
iron ribs, held the cedar bark which was used instead of thick copper
for roofing. It was twenty by forty feet and therefore did not cover
three acres and a half. At one end some puncheons were put up for a
platform for the president; some poles and slabs were placed around
for seats; three planks, about a foot wide and twelve feet long,
placed upon a sort of stake platform for a table, were all that was
believed necessary for the use of the legislative committee and the
clerks.
There are several facts in connection with the inauguration of this
Provisional Government of Oregon which are almost equal to itself in
interest. One of these is that Peter H. Burnett, a lawyer and the most
notable member of the emigration of 1843, rendered the opinion that, by
the spirit of American institutions, the Provisional Government might be
regarded as possessing valid authority. Going in a few years to
California, Mr. Burnett incorporated the same principles into the
government of that State and became its first governor.
Another most significant fact was the attitude of the Hudson's Bay
Company. That great organisation was of course opposed to American
ownership and to the Provisional Government. At first, the management
under Sir James Douglas (Dr. McLoughlin had been superseded by Douglas
because of his supposed leaning toward the Americans) affected to ignore
the government framed at Champoeg, declaring loftily that the company
could protect itself. Dr. McLoughlin, in his very interesting account of
this, says that the Americans adopted in 1845 a provision in the
constitution that no one should be called to do any act contrary to his
allegiance. This provision struck him as designed to enable British
subjects to join the organisation. Dr. McLoughlin was so pleased with the
wise and liberal spirit which this evinced that he prevailed on Douglas to
join the Provisional Government. The family was now complete. The American
farmers and immigrants and missionaries had triumphed over the autocratic
government of the great fur company. The American idea--government of the
people, by the people, and for the people--was vindicated. The local
battle was won for the Yankee.
Before leaving this great epoch of the history of the River, it will
interest the reader to know that Dr. McLoughlin, so conspicuous in the
story thus far, removed to Oregon City, and became an avowed American
citizen, living on the claim on which he filed at the Falls. Much trouble
subsequently arose between him and the Methodist mission people
represented by Rev. A. F. Waller. Harder yet, Congress was led by Delegate
Thurston of Oregon, to exclude him from the benefit of the Donation Land
Law. The final result was that the great-hearted ex-king of the Columbia
lost the most of his claim on the ground that he was an alien at the time
of taking it. The Hudson's Bay Company directors chose to disapprove his
acts in bestowing provisions upon the weary and hungry and ragged American
immigrants, and they charged him personally with the cost. This, in
addition to the loss of his claim, rendered him almost penniless and sadly
embittered his old age. He said that he supposed he was becoming an
American, but found that he was neither American nor British, but was
without a country. It is pleasant to be able to record the fact that the
Oregon Legislature restored his land in so far as the State controlled it,
but this was only just before his death.
Of all the brave and big-souled men who bore their part in redeeming
Oregon and the Columbia from the wilderness, John McLoughlin has stood at
the head of the column, side by side with Marcus Whitman, the American
physician and missionary. Though identified at first with rival interests
and conflicting aims, McLoughlin and Whitman had many traits in common,
and the story of their lives and life-work in Oregon should be written in
one chapter. No one that ever knew or sympathised with Oregon history has
failed to give his meed of praise to both Whitman and McLoughlin. No one
ever stood on the hill at Waiilatpu and viewed the mission home of Whitman
in the fertile vale of the Walla Walla, the scene of martyrdom and
anguish, without joining it in mind with the expanse of the Columbia at
Vancouver and recalling "Old Whitehead," and his large-minded and humane
lordship for twenty years of the land of the Oregon. Nor can one withhold
the thrill of indignation at the cold-blooded commercialism of the
Hudson's Bay Company, and at the petty ingratitude of some Americans,
which together brought darkness to the old hero's last days.
But though American Democracy was winning a bloodless triumph on the
Columbia, it seemed by no means certain that American diplomacy would win
on the Potomac. Webster, as Secretary of State under Harrison and during
part of Tyler's administration, represented the conservative councils of
the New England seaboard, and was inclined to yield to England in respect
to the Oregon boundary.
Senator Linn of Missouri was the most steadfast friend of American
occupancy. He was the one to frame land bills to encourage American
immigration, and in his hands the memorials of the settlers on the
Columbia had been placed. But in 1843, he died, with his work undone.
Benton, his colleague, had meanwhile become fully as pronounced, and he
pursued the same policy with uncompromising and volcanic energy.
But a curious and anomalistic alignment of interests and parties now
arose. The Oregon question became entangled with those of Texas and
slavery. Calhoun became Tyler's Secretary of State upon Webster's
resignation. While the Democrats in general were more inclined to western
expansion than the Whigs, yet the slaveholders of the South were much more
interested in Texas than in Oregon. The Provisional Government of Oregon
had prohibited slavery. Calhoun was ready to fight Mexico for the
possession of Texas, but he did not want to fight England for possession
of Oregon. Nevertheless, he did not dare to offend the West by a square
back-down on Oregon. He therefore adopted a policy of "masterly
inactivity." He believed that if war arose with England, we would lose
"every inch of Oregon," for England could hurry a fleet to the Columbia
River from China in six weeks, whereas American ships would have to double
Cape Horn, and an American army would have to cross the continent under
every disadvantage of transportation. But time, he believed, would win all
for the Americans.
In this conception, Von Holst thinks Calhoun was wise. Roosevelt in his
_Life of Benton_, thinks that the war, if there had been war, would have
been fought out in Canada, and that, while Calhoun was not wrong in
desiring delay, he should never have abated one jot in demanding all of
Oregon up to 54 degrees 40 minutes.
The Democratic platform on which Polk was elected President, demanded "54
degrees 40 minutes," and, in popular clamour, the words, "or fight," were
added. Oregon, Texas, and slavery were practically the issues on which
Polk was elected. His inaugural address declared our title to Oregon to be
"clear and unquestionable." Great excitement ensued, for if Congress stood
by the President, war was almost inevitable, unless England yielded. To
the surprise of the world, however, James Buchanan, the yielding, not to
say shifty, Secretary of State under the new administration, now announced
the willingness of our Government to compromise on the line of 49 degrees.
But here another complication ensued. Pakenham, the British envoy,
declined, in almost insulting terms, to accept 49 degrees. Polk thereupon
withdrew the proposition and in his next message stated that "no
compromise which the United States ought to accept can be effected." At
the same time he advised the cancellation of the Joint Occupation Treaty.
It seemed now that the conflict between the nations for the possession of
the River would surely eventuate in war. Senator Cass of Michigan fanned
the flame by a speech declaring that "War is almost upon us." The
committees on Foreign Relations in both House and Senate proposed
resolutions to notify England at once of the close of the Joint Occupation
Treaty. Excitement rose to fierce heat, and the standing of marine risks
and commercial ventures at once showed the popular sentiment. "Fifty-four,
forty, or fight!" was the spirit of Congress.
But now Calhoun found himself betwixt the devil and the deep sea. He did
not really wish to get all of Oregon, for fear of the effect on slavery.
Yet he dared not throw cold water on the tremendous spirits of patriotism
and ambition in the West demanding Oregon. A compromise was the only
recourse. Powerful men of the "Moderates" in both England and the United
States brought their influence to bear. Calhoun caused Lord Aberdeen,
Foreign Secretary of England, to understand that the President would again
take up the line of 49 degrees. Lord Aberdeen directed Pakenham to revive
the negotiations which had been somewhat rudely broken off. The Senate
reconsidered the situation more calmly and opened the way to a new treaty.
This was consummated and signed by President Polk on June 15, 1846, and
confirmed by the Senate on June 19th. The line of 49 degrees was accepted.
The Great River was divided by that line nearly equally between the two
nations, there being about seven hundred and fifty miles in American
territory and six hundred and fifty in British.
The decision of the ownership of the River was one of the most momentous
in American history. If we had not got Oregon, we probably would not have
got California. And without the Pacific Coast, the history of the Great
Republic would be essentially different, and the history of the world
would be essentially different.
The Oregon Question owed much of its interest to its very complicated
nature. It was at first a question between the governments of five
different nations, England, France, Russia, Spain, and the United States.
In time it became a question between England and the United States. Then
it was a question between Oregon immigrants and British Fur Company. Then
it became a question between slavery and freedom. This was still further
complicated by the fact that it was also a question between West, East,
and South. Different factions of different parties still further
complicated it. It was in truth a manifold question, and in its final
solution we read some of the most vital of American traits and movements.
Out of it all the settlers of the River may justly be said to have emerged
with highest credit. The American home-builder, the great Democracy of the
West, the inborn impulse to expand and to nationalise,--these were the
essential factors in the triumph. The settlers on the Willamette, the
constitution-makers of Champoeg, the immigrants and the missionaries, had
already gained the day before diplomacy took it up.