1808-1812.
Crisis in the Company's Affairs -- No Dividend Paid -- Petition
to Lords of the Treasury -- Factors Allowed a Share in the
Trade -- Canada Jurisdiction Act -- The Killing of MacDonnell
-- Mowat's Ill-treatment -- Lord Selkirk -- His Scheme laid
before the Company -- A Protest by Thwaytes and others -- The
Project Carried -- Emigrants sent out to Red River -- Northmen
Stirred to Reprisal.
England was again at war with France. Napoleon had placed an embargo
on English commerce, and to the uttermost corner of Europe was this
measure felt. Tons of the most costly furs, for which there was no
market, lay heaped in the Company's warehouse. The greatest difficulty
was experienced in procuring servants, especially seamen, and when
these were procured, they were often seized by a press-gang; shares
began to decline in value; numerous partners were selling out their
interests, and no strong man appeared at the head of affairs.
In 1808 no dividend was paid, chiefly the result of the
non-exportation of the Company's furs to the Continent of Europe.
There were the accumulations of furs imported during 1806, 1807 and
1808 lying in the warehouse without prospect of sale.
The pressure still continued and at last, in 1809, the Company was
driven to petition the Chancellor of the Exchequer for transmission to
Lords of the Treasury, setting forth the Company's position and its
claims on the nation.
[Sidenote: The Company in difficulties.]
"Accumulated difficulties," it said, "have pressed hardly on the
Company and we ask assistance to maintain a colony that till now has
found within itself resources to withstand the pressure of all former
wars and to continue those outfits on which six hundred Europeans and
their families and some thousands of native Indians depend for their
very existence.
"We assure your worships that it was not until all those resources
were exhausted that we came to the resolution of making the present
application."
The petition recited that after having received their charter the
Company had colonized such parts of newly granted territories as
appeared most convenient for carrying on their commerce with the
natives. This commerce "consisted in the barter of British
manufactures for the furs of animals killed by the different tribes of
Indians who were within reach of factories and gradually extended
itself till, as at the present moment, the manufactures of Great
Britain are borne by the traders of Hudson's Bay over the face of the
whole country from Lake Superior to the Athabasca.
"The trade is at present pursued by the export of furs, gunpowder,
shot, woollens, hardware and other articles, which together with large
supplies of provisions for the factories, constitute an annual outfit
consisting wholly of British manufactures and British produce of from
£40,000 to £50,000, in return for which we receive the furs of bears,
wolves, foxes, otters, martens, beaver and other animals, together
with some oil and articles of inferior value. The cargoes are sold at
public sale. The beaver and some few inferior furs, together with the
oil, are bought for home consumption and sell for about £30,000, but
the fine furs were, till after the sale of 1806, bought by the fur
merchants for the fairs of Frankfort and of Leipsic for Petersburg,
and before the present war, for France. Since that year there has not
been a fur sold for exportation, and as a proof to your worships that
the deficiency of buyers did not arise from our holding back for a
higher market, we sold in 1806 for seven shillings per skin furs that
in the more quiet state of Europe in 1804 had brought us 20s. 3d., and
which for years previous to that time had sold for a similar price;
and other depreciation pervaded in about the same proportion the whole
of those furs calculated only for the foreign market, and in some
instances furs were sold for a less price than the duties we had paid
for them.
"Since that period no orders have been received from abroad, and our
warehouses are filled with the most valuable productions of three
years' import that if sold at the prices of those years before the
closing of the ports on the Continent would have produced us at least
£150,000.
"It may be objected to us, that we were improvident in pursuing under
such circumstances a trade which must so inevitably tend to ruin. But
a certainty that a considerable quantity of furs found their way to
New York, and an earnest zeal for the preservation of trade which by
the conduct of the Hudson's Bay Company had been secured to this
country for a century and a half, prompted us to every exertion to
maintain the footing we had established, and the annually increasing
amount of our trade gave us just grounds to look forward with
confidence to the opening of the northern ports of Europe as the
period when all our difficulties would cease; an event which, anterior
to the battles of Austerlitz or of Jena, was looked for with the most
sanguine expectation.
"Above all were we impelled by the strongest motives to continue these
supplies which were necessary for the subsistence of six hundred
European servants, their wives and children, dispersed over a vast and
extended field of the North American Continent, and who would not be
brought to Europe under a period of three years as well as those upon
whom the many Indian nations now depend for their very existence.
"The nations of hunters taught for one hundred and fifty years the use
of fire-arms could no more resort, with certainty, to the bow or the
javelin for their daily subsistence. Accustomed to the hatchet of
Great Britain, they could ill adopt the rude sharpened stone to the
purposes of building, and until years of misery and of famine had
extirpated the present race, they could not recur to the simple arts
by which they supported themselves before the introduction of British
manufactures. As the outfits of the Hudson's Bay Company consist
principally of articles which long habit have taught them now to
consider of first necessity, if we withhold these outfits, we leave
them destitute of their only means of support. The truth of this
observation had a melancholy proof in the year 1782, when from the
attack made upon the settlements by La Pérouse, and the consequent
failure of our supplies, many of the Indians were found starved to
death.
[Sidenote: Petition of the Company.]
"It was not only from the firm conviction that we felt of the
necessity of European manufactures to the present existence of whole
nations of North American Indians that we considered ourselves bound
by the most powerful ties to exert every effort in their favour; but
also that we might continue to them those advantages which would
result to their religious as well as civil welfare from the
progressive improvements, and a gradual system of civilisation and
education which we have introduced throughout the country;
improvements which are now diffusing the comforts of civilized life,
as well as the blessings of the Christian faith to thousands of
uninstructed Indians, and would in their completion, we can
confidently assert, have tended to the future cultivation of lands,
which from experiments we found capable of growing most of the grains
of Northern Europe, and from their climate adapted to the culture of
hemp and flax, and from the labour of those families who would have
been induced to settle at our factories, might soon have brought to
this country the produce of the boundless forests of pine that spread
themselves over almost the southern parts of our possessions.
"To realize these not visionary schemes, but sure and certain plans,
founded upon the progressive civilization of the natives, were objects
not to be given up without the most urgent necessity, and the hope
that the ruler of the French Empire could not forever shut out our
trade from Europe, induced us to resort to every means within our
power to preserve the advantages resulting to ourselves and to the
Indians, and to the British nation.
"We have exhausted those funds which we set apart for their
completion; we have pledged our credit till we feel, as honest men,
that upon the present uncertainty we can pledge it no farther, and we
throw ourselves upon your Worship's wisdom to afford us that temporary
assistance which we cannot ask at any other hands.
"Were we to resort to the early history of our settlements, we might
lay the foundations of just claims upon the public to assist our
present wants. We could show instances of most destructive attacks by
the French upon our factories. Our forts and military works, mounted
with a numerous and expensive artillery for the defence of the colony
against their future operations, were destroyed and the guns ruined.
And particularly was a most grievous loss occasioned to us by the
predatory attack of La Pérouse about the conclusion of the American
War, which caused the distress to which we have above alluded.
"Against these pressures when our trade flourished we were able to
hold up, and we found within ourselves those resources which defeated
the enemy's views and continued to Great Britain the trade we had
established.
"And it is not until pressed to our last resort that we ask of your
Lordships that assistance with which we may confidently hope to
preserve our trade until the continent may be again opened, when we
shall be delivered from those difficulties under which we are now
sinking."
The petition was signed by Wm. Mainwaring, Governor; Joseph Berens,
Deputy Governor; George Hyde Wollaston, Thomas Neave, Job Mathew
Raikes, Thomas Langley, John Henry Pelly, Benjamin Harrison, John
Webb.
In April the Adventurers petitioned the King in Council to reduce
duties on furs to one-half, or trade must suffer extinction. No profit
was derivable, it said, on marten, wolf, bear, wolverine and
fisher-skins.
To this petition the Office of Committee of Privy Council for Trade,
Whitehall, replied in the following February, that the memorial of the
Hudson's Bay Company contained no proposition on which the Lords of
this Council could "offer any opinion to the Lords of Treasury."
[Sidenote: Small Government assistance.]
As their petition was denied, the Company now boldly prepared a
request and asked for a loan of £60,000, and that time be extended for
paying the duties on furs imported until the continental market
re-opened. To this request an answer was returned, allowing twelve
months storage of furs free of duty and promising drawbacks as if
storage had only been for one year, but stating that there were no
funds out of which a loan could be made without special authority of
Parliament.
It was clear that the Company was in very low water, and that some new
salutary policy was demanded. By way of a beginning, barter was
abolished as a basis of trade, and money payments ordered. At the same
time the Adventurers stole a leaf out of the book of the North-West
company, and new regulations, comprising thirty-five articles, were
made in the early months of 1810, for carrying on the business in
Hudson's Bay.
The principle of allowing to their chief officers a considerable
participation in the profits of their trade was admitted. It was found
absolutely necessary to adopt some step of this sort, as nothing of
such a measure could be sufficient to stem the torrent of aggression
with which they had been assailed by the North-West company; and their
absolute ruin must have ensued if some effectual means had not been
taken, not only to rectify some of the abuses which had crept in under
the former system, but also to rouse their officers to a more
effectual resistance of the lawless violence practised against them.
The total lack of jurisdiction in the Indian country, as the territory
which was the scene of the operations of the fur-traders was called,
permitted crime to go unpunished, and numerous representations were
made in respect to the evils of this practical immunity from
punishment. In Sir Alexander Mackenzie's letter of the 25th of
October, 1802, he says that, in view of the improbability of the two
companies amalgamating, a jurisdiction should be established as
speedily as possible, to prevent the contending fur companies from
abusing the power either might possess, so as to secure to each the
fruits of fair, honest and industrious exertion; it would also, he
believed, tend to put a stop to the increasing animosity between the
two companies. Mr. Richardson, of the other company, also pressed for
the establishment of a competent jurisdiction and instanced the case
of one of the clerks in his company who had killed a clerk of the
other in defending the property in his care. The young man had come to
Montreal to be tried, but there being no jurisdiction there for such
trial, "he remains in the deplorable predicament that neither his
innocence nor his guilt can be legally ascertained." He also proposed
that a military post should be established at Thunder Bay, on Lake
Superior, as an additional means of securing peace.
Repeatedly had the Grand Juries of Quebec and Montreal called
attention to this want of jurisdiction. In one report the number of
people from the Canadas, chiefly from Lower Canada, was urged as one
reason for establishing in the Indian country a court of competent
jurisdiction for the trial of offences committed in these territories,
including Hudson's Bay.
[Sidenote: Plea for establishment of jurisdiction.]
"The very heavy expense," observes the report, "incident to the
conveyance of offenders from the Territory of Hudson's Bay to England,
with the necessary witnesses on both sides, and the cost of
prosecution and defence, must generally operate, either to prevent
recourse to a tribunal across the ocean, and thereby stimulate to
private retaliation and revenge, or where such course can or shall be
had, the guilty may escape punishment, and the innocent be sacrificed
from the distance of time and place of trial, the death or absence of
witnesses, or other causes; and the mind cannot contemplate without
horror the possible abuses to which such circumstances might give
rise; as in the instance of a prosecutor coming from and at a remote
day, when the accused may be destitute of pecuniary means, and the
exculpatory evidence may either be dead, removed, or be otherwise
beyond his reach, who at all events (however innocent he may finally
be found) will have undergone a long and painful confinement, far
removed from his family and connections, and perhaps ruinous to every
prospect he had in life."
Sir Robert Milnes strongly supported the representation of the Grand
Jury, and added that "Under such circumstances every species of
offence is to be apprehended, from Trespasses to Murder," and also
that "the national character of the English will be debased among the
Indians, and the numerous tribes of those people will in consequence
thereof be more easily wrought upon by foreign emissaries employed by
the Enemies of Great Britain."[88]
In consequence of these representations Lord Hobart promised that
immediate steps should be taken to remedy the existing state of
affairs. But Milnes became impatient for a decision, and writing in
September, 1803, to the Under-Secretary, he reminded him of the
promise, the great increase and extent of the fur-trade rendering such
an Act daily more necessary. The Act to give jurisdiction to the
Courts of Upper and Lower Canada had, however, been assented to on the
11th of the preceding month.
[Illustration: VOYAGEURS TRACKING CANOES UP A RAPID.]
[Sidenote: Canada Jurisdiction Act.]
The first case brought to trial under the Act became celebrated. In
the autumn of 1809 William Corrigal was the trader at a Company's post
near Eagle Lake. On the 15th of September a party of North-Westers
established an encampment about forty yards from the Company's post,
under one of their clerks, Aeneas MacDonnell. In the evening an Indian
arrived in his canoe to trade with Corrigal and to pay a debt which he
owed him. As he was not able to defray the whole amount, Corrigal
accepted the canoe in part payment. The Indian requested that it might
be lent to him for a few days, which was agreed to; and the Indian
spent the night at the post with his canoe. In the morning he received
in advance some more merchandise, such as clothing for his family and
ammunition for his winter hunt. When he finally departed, three of the
Company's servants were sent down to the wharf with the canoe and the
goods. On their way they were observed by a number of Northmen,
including MacDonnell, who went immediately down to the lake, armed
with a sword and accompanied by a voyageur named Adhemer, armed with a
brace of pistols. Upon pretence that the unhappy Red man was indebted
to the North-West company, they proceeded to seize and drag away the
canoe and the merchandise to their own wharf. Corrigal observing this,
commanded two of his men, James Tate and John Corrigal, to go into the
water and prevent the seizure, and as they approached on this mission
MacDonnell drew his sword and struck two blows at Tate's head. The
latter was unarmed, and warded the blows with his wrist, which was
severely gashed. He then received another deep wound in the neck,
which felled him to the ground. In the meantime Adhemer had seized
John Corrigal (who was also unarmed) and presenting a cocked pistol at
his head, swore that if he went near the canoe he would blow out his
brains.
Several of the Company's servants who were near the spot, perceiving
what was going on, and observing that the rest of MacDonnell's men
were collecting with arms, ran up to their own house, which was only
about forty or fifty yards from the lake, for weapons of defence.
MacDonnell next attacked John Corrigal, who to escape him ran into the
lake. Finding the water too deep, however, he was soon obliged to make
a turn towards the shore. His pursuer wading after him, aimed a blow
at him with his sword, cut his arm above the elbow and laid the bone
bare. He followed this up with a tremendous blow at his head, which
Robert Leask, one of the Company's servants, fortunately warded off
with the paddle of his canoe, which was cut in two by the blow. The
North-West leader in a fury now attacked another servant named Essen,
aimed a blow at him with his sword, which, however, only struck his
hat off. But in making his escape Essen fell into the water. Before he
could recover himself another Canadian aimed a blow at his head with a
heavy axe, which missed its aim, but dislocated his shoulder, so that
he could make no use of his arm for over two months after this
affray.
[Sidenote: Killing of MacDonnell.]
MacDonnell and Adhemer, the one with a drawn sword and the other with
a cocked pistol, continued to pursue several other of the Company's
servants towards the fort, when one of them, named John Mowat, whom
MacDonnell had previously struck with his sword, and was preparing to
strike again, shot MacDonnell on the spot.
[Sidenote: Trial of Mowat.]
MacDonnell's body was carried away, and the parties separated,
Corrigal fearing a further attack. On the 24th, a partner of the
North-West Company, named Haldane, arrived in a canoe with ten men,
and on the following day another partner, McLellan, also arrived. They
came to the gates of the stockades, behind which Corrigal and his men
had barricaded themselves, and demanded the man who had shot
MacDonnell. They declared that if the person was not immediately given
up they would either shoot every one of the Company's men, or get the
Indians to kill them, were it even to cost them a keg of brandy for
each of their heads! Mowat now stepped forward and acknowledged that
he was the man, and that he would shoot MacDonnell again in the same
circumstances. Much to his surprise the North-Westers announced their
intention of taking him and two witnesses down to Montreal for trial.
Mowat was thereupon put in irons. From the 2nd of October, when they
arrived at Rainy Lake, the unhappy man was generally kept in irons
from six in the morning till eight in the evening, and during the
night until the 14th of December. During the whole winter he was kept
in close confinement, and the two witnesses, Tate and Leask, who had
voluntarily accompanied him, were themselves subjected to much insult
and indignity, and were obliged to submit to every species of drudgery
and labour in order to obtain a bare subsistence. In June the whole
party, including Corrigal, arrived at Fort William, the chief
trading-post rendezvous of the North-Westers. Here Mowat was
imprisoned in a close and miserable dungeon, about six feet square,
without any window or light of any kind whatsoever, and when he
finally reached Montreal he was in a most pitiable condition. The
witnesses were seized on a charge of aiding and abetting the murder
of MacDonnell, and this upon the oath of one of the North-West
half-breeds. The Hudson's Bay Company had at this time no agent or
correspondent at Montreal or any place in Canada, and it was not until
the end of November that the Honourable Adventurers heard of the
prosecution being carried on against their servants. Immediate steps
were taken for their protection, and counsel engaged for the defence.
Mowat and his witnesses were indicted for murder. The grand jury found
a true bill against Mowat, but not against the others, and Tate and
Leask were accordingly discharged.[89]
In spite of the evidence, the jury brought in a verdict of
manslaughter. The judge, however, had charged them to find it murder.
Mowat was sentenced to be imprisoned six months and branded on the
hand with a hot iron. After his discharge, two years from the time he
was first put in irons at Eagle Lake, Mowat proceeded from Canada to
the United States in order to return to England, but was never heard
of again. He is supposed to have been drowned by the breaking of the
ice in one of the rivers he had to cross on his way.
[Sidenote: The Earl of Selkirk.]
Such was the situation in the early years of the century. At this time
there rose a name destined to be of more than local fame, that of
Thomas Douglas, fifth Earl of Selkirk, a young man of benevolent
character, whose feelings had been deeply moved by the sufferings of
his countrymen in the Scottish Highlands. Nor was the nobleman's
compassion excited without cause. A compulsory exodus of the
inhabitants of the mountainous regions in the county of Sutherland was
in progress. The tale of expulsion of a vast number of poor tenantry
from the estates of the Duchess of Sutherland, which they and their
ancestors had looked upon as their own without the necessity of rent
and taxes, may be heard to-day from some white-haired old grandfather,
who had it from the lips of his sire, in the far north of Scotland.
The system of rents and land-management as it prevails to-day all over
the Highlands had only then been put in force, and the squatters were
driven to seek their homes as best they might in the remote and
sequestered places of the earth. Selkirk encouraged this emigration as
the only remedy; and having endeavoured in vain to secure the active
co-operation of the Government, resolved to settle a colony on waste
lands granted him in Prince Edward Island. The better to ensure
success, he went in person to oversee the whole enterprise. Gathering
together about eight hundred of these poor people, who bade a
melancholy farewell to their heather-robed hills, they arrived at
their future home early in September, 1803.
[Illustration: LORD SELKIRK.]
Selkirk visited Montreal in this and also in the following year on
matters connected with his philanthropic undertaking, and on both
occasions evinced the heartiest interest in the great territory to the
north-west which formed the theatre of action for the two rival
fur-trading companies.
The Prince Edward Island colony continuing to prosper, Lord Selkirk
now conceived the plan of forming a colony on the banks of the Red
River, in Rupert's Land.[90] In order to execute his project with a
greater assurance of success, he again, in 1805, addressed the British
Government and nation, pointing out the successful issue of his colony
as an example of the excellent results which would attend a further
exodus of the superfluous population.
Time went on and the execution of the plan being still in abeyance,
the great decline in Hudson's Bay stock suggested an idea to Selkirk.
He submitted the charter to several of the highest legal authorities
in England, and got from them the following:
"We are of the opinion that the grant of the said contained charter is
good, and that it will include all the country, the waters of which
run into Hudson's Bay, as ascertained by geographical observations.
[Sidenote: Legal opinion on the Company's charter.]
"We are of opinion that an individual holding from the Hudson's Bay
Company a lease or grant in fee simple of any part of their territory,
will be entitled to all the ordinary rights of landed property in
England, and will be entitled to prevent other persons from occupying
any part of the lands; from cutting down timber and fishing in the
adjoining waters (being such as a private right of fishing may subsist
in), and may (if he can peaceably or otherwise in due course of law)
dispossess them of any buildings which they have recently erected
within the limits of their property.
"We are of opinion that the grant of the civil and criminal
jurisdiction is valid, though it is not granted to the Company, but
to the Governor and Council at their respective establishments. We
cannot recommend, however, it to be exercised so as to affect the
lives or limbs of criminals. It is to be exercised by the Governor and
Council as judges, who are to proceed according to the laws of
England.
"The Company may appoint a sheriff to execute judgments and do his
duty as in England.
"We are of opinion that the sheriff, in case of resistance to his
authority, may collect the population to his assistance, and put arms
into the hands of his servants for defence against attack, and to
assist in enforcing the judgments of the courts; but such powers
cannot be exercised with too much circumspection.
"We are of opinion that all persons will be subject to the
jurisdiction of the court, who reside or are found within the
territories over which it extends.
"We do not think the Canada Jurisdiction Act (43 George III.) gives
jurisdiction within the territories of the Hudson's Bay Company, the
same being within the jurisdiction of their own governors and
council.[91]
"We are of opinion that the Governor (in Hudson's) might under the
authority of the Company, appoint constables and other officers for
the preservation of the peace and that the officers so appointed would
have the same duties and privileges as the same officers in England,
so far as these duties and privileges may be applicable to their
situation in the territories of the Company." This was signed by Sir
Samuel Ronully, Mr. Justice Holroyd, W. M. Cruise, J. Scarlett and
John Bell. There could be thus no question of Selkirk's right. The
Company's charter, amongst other provisions, expressly forbids all
English subjects from entering, without license or authority, upon the
territories of the Hudson's Bay Company. The Governor and Company only
are empowered to grant such authority and on them also is conferred
the right of establishing castles, fortifications, forts, garrisons,
colonies, plantations, towns and villages, in any parts or places
within the limits of their territory. They had also the right of
sending ships of war, men or ammunition, to their colonies,
fortifications or plantations, and of appointing governors, commanders
and officers over them.
Selkirk began by purchasing several thousand pounds worth of shares in
the Company.
Late in 1810 he made a formal proposition to the Company, a
proposition previously made and rejected, for a settlement to be made
within its territory. This time some of the Honourable Adventurers
began to see that the scheme might be fraught with salvation for
themselves.
Lord Selkirk was asked to lay before the committee the terms on which
he would accept a grant of land within the Hudson's Bay territories,
"specifying what restrictions he would be prepared to consent to be
imposed on the settlers." Also what security he would offer to the
Company against any injury to its trade or to its rights and
privileges.
Lord Selkirk responded to this, and his proposals were agreed to,
subject to final approbation of a general court of all the
Adventurers.
[Sidenote: Selkirk's project.]
It now dawned upon the wiser spirits that here was being offered them
the means for the Company's salvation. Nevertheless, the traditional
opposition of the Company to any project of the kind still lingered,
and was not easily disposed of. For weeks the meetings in committee
resounded with appeals to "traditional policy," to "loyalty to the
noble, the ancient founders," to "a spirit of reverence for the
history of our Company," but all to no purpose. Selkirk was to carry
the day. A general court was convened, by public notice, in May 1811,
when the stockholders were informed that the Governor and Committee
considered it beneficial to their general interests to grant Lord
Selkirk 116,000 square miles of their territory, on condition that he
should establish a colony and furnish, on certain terms, from amongst
the settlers, such labourers as would be required by the Company in
their trade.
In order to give the partners a further opportunity of making
themselves fully informed of the nature of the proposed measure, an
adjournment of the court took place. In the meanwhile notice was given
to all the stockholders that the terms of the proposed grant were left
at the secretary's office for their inspection.
This interval was the opportunity of McGillivray and his friends.
In certain quarters, no pains or misrepresentations were spared by
persons associated with the North-West Company to prejudice the public
mind against it. The newspapers teemed with falsehoods representing
the country as cold or barren, as a dreary waste or interminable
forest, unfit to be the abode of men and incapable of improvement.
Selkirk was accosted in Pall Mall by a friend who remarked: "By God,
sir, if you are bent on doing something futile, why do you not sow
tares at home in order to reap wheat, or plough the desert of Sahara,
which is nearer."
Old servants of the Company came forward to dispel these calumnies,
and seeing their first falsehoods destroyed, Selkirk's enemies now
proceeded to follow new tactics. They spoke with feigned alarm
concerning the hostile disposition of the aborigines; they lamented
with affected sympathy and humanity the injuries and slaughters to
which the colonists would be exposed from the savages.
At the adjourned meeting the proposition was again discussed amidst
the greatest excitement and tumult, and adopted. A memorial or protest
was however entered against the measure, bearing the signature of six
of the proprietors.
[Sidenote: Opposition by agents of the North-West Company.]
Of these six signing the protest, three were persons closely connected
with and interested in the rival commercial concerns of the North-West
Company of Montreal; and two of the three were, at the very moment,
avowed London agents of that association. These had become proprietors
of Hudson's Bay stock only eight and forty hours before the general
meeting. They were not indeed possessed of it long enough to entitle
them to vote at the meeting; but their names now being entered in the
Company's books, though the ink was scarcely dry with which they were
inserted, they felt themselves competent to formally raise their
voices in condemnation of those measures which the committee of
directors unanimously, and the general court by a great majority, had
approved of.
Their design in acquiring the Company's stock was obvious. However
circuitous the stratagem might be, it was clear that they had thus
become proprietors of one commercial company for the purpose of
advancing the fortunes of another, and a rival concern.[92] The
stratagem did not altogether fail, for Lord Selkirk's agents were yet
to encounter much friction in distant quarters supposed to be
friendly, and required to be obedient to the orders of the Company.
When the vote was taken, it was found that for the question there
appeared holders of stock valued at £29,937; against it, £14,823. The
Earl, himself, voted "for"--£4,087; the principal opponent of the
scheme being one William Thwaytes, whose interest was represented at
£9,233.
At this meeting a memorial was read violently opposing the scheme,
signed by Thwaytes and four or five others. According to them, the
main objections were:--(_a_) Impolitic; (_b_) Consideration
inadequate; (_c_) Grant asked for very large proportion of Company's
holding, viz.: 70,000 square miles, or about 45,000,000 acres; (_d_)
Should be a public sale, if any, not a private contract with a member
of the Company; (_e_) No penalty for failure to find settlers; (_f_)
Colonization unfavourable to the fur-trade; private traffic would be
carried on with the United States of America.
The Earl proposed to find a number of effective men as servants to the
Hudson's Bay Company in return for a grant of land, viz., two hundred
men for ten years, from 1812, who would every year be ready to embark
between May 1st and July 1st at an appointed place in Scotland.
The Company were to pay wages to each man not exceeding £20. Should
the Earl fail, he agreed to forfeit £10 per man short of two hundred.
As to proposed grants of land to settlers, two hundred acres were to
be given to labourers or artificers; one thousand acres to a master of
a trading-house. The Company were, of course, to have full rights of
access to all the surrendered districts.
[Sidenote: Earl Selkirk's proposal accepted.]
The customs duties, exports and imports, payable by settlers were not
to exceed five per cent, at Port Nelson, unless it happened that a
higher duty was levied at Quebec. The duties so to be levied were to
be applied to the expense of Government police, communication between
Lake Winnipeg and Port Nelson, etc., and not to be taken as profits
for the Company. The show of hands was in favour of the proposal; but
a protest was handed in to the Governor by Thwaytes and others. In
spite of this, on the 13th of June, the deed was signed, sealed and
delivered by the secretary on behalf of the Company.
The lands were defined by deed as situate between 52° 30' north
latitude and 102° 30' west longitude, a map being affixed to the
deed.
In reading this protest, one who was ignorant of the true state of
affairs would have been led to believe that the partners concerned had
no object so dear to them as the welfare and prosperity of the
Hudson's Bay Company. These gentlemen appeared to be animated by the
most thorough devotion and zeal, as they stood together declaiming in
loud, earnest tones against the errors into which their beloved
Company was falling, and pouring out their sympathy to the emigrant
settlers who might be lured to their destruction by establishing
themselves on the lands so granted "out of reach," to employ their own
phrase, "of all those aids and comforts which are derived from civil
society;" and so it did truly appear to many then as it has done
since. But let us examine those signatures, and lo, the wolf obtrudes
himself basking in the skin of a lamb!
The grant was thus confirmed. The opposition had found itself
powerless, and Selkirk was put into possession of a territory only
5,115 square miles less than the entire area of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland.[93]
The grant secured, Selkirk at once despatched agents to Ireland and
throughout the highlands of Scotland, to engage servants, some for the
Company's service, others for general labourers in the colony. These
last were known as "his lordship's servants," and were engaged for a
term of years, at the expiration of which they became entitled to one
hundred acres of land, free of cost. They were placed under the charge
of Miles McDonnell, who received a joint appointment from Selkirk and
the Company, as first Governor of the new colony.
[Sidenote: Selkirk's immigrants arrive.]
The first section of the immigrant party arrived at York Factory late
in the autumn of 1811.[94] This post was then in charge of William
Auld, who, as we have seen, occupied the position of Superintendent of
the Northern Department of Rupert's Land. After a short residence at
the fort, where they were treated in a somewhat tyrannical and
high-handed fashion by the Governor, who had scant sympathy for the
new _régime_, the party were sent forward to Seal Creek, fifty miles
up Nelson River. Governor McDonnell and one Hillier, in the character
of justice of the peace, accompanied them thither, and preparations
were at once made for the erection of a suitable shelter.
[Illustration: STORNAWAY.
(_The Hebrides._)]
McDonnell experienced a great deal of trouble during the winter with
the men under his charge, for a mutinous spirit broke out, and he was
put to his wits' end to enforce discipline. He put it all down to the
Glasgow servants. "These Glasgow rascals," he declared to Auld, the
Governor of York Factory, "have caused us both much trouble and
uneasiness. A more stubborn, litigious and cross-grained lot were
never put under any person's care. I cannot think that any liberality
of rum or rations could have availed to stop their dissatisfaction.
Army and navy discipline is the only thing fit to manage such fierce
spirits."
But the Irish of the party were hardly more tractable. On New Year's
night, 1812, a violent and unprovoked attack was made by some of the
Irish on a party of Orkneymen, who were celebrating the occasion.
Three of the latter were so severely beaten that for a month the
surgeon could not report their lives entirely out of danger. Four of
the Irishmen concerned in this assault were sent back home. "Worthless
blackguards," records the Governor; "the lash may make them
serviceable to the Government in the army or navy, but they will never
do for us."
On the subject of the Orkney servants of the Company all critics were
not agreed. Governor McDonnell's opinion, for instance, was not
flattering:--
"There cannot," he reported, "be much improvement made in the country
while the Orkneymen form the majority of labourers; they are lazy,
spiritless, and ill-disposed--wedded to old habits, strongly
prejudiced against any change, however beneficial. It was with the
utmost reluctance they could be prevailed on to drink the spruce juice
to save themselves from the scurvy; they think nothing of the scurvy,
as they are then idle, and their wages run on.... It is not uncommon
for an Orkneyman to consume six pounds or eight pounds of meat in a
day, and some have ate as much in a single meal. This gluttonous
appetite, they say, is occasioned by the cold. I entirely discredit
the assertion, as I think it rather to be natural to themselves. All
the labour I have seen these men do would scarcely pay for the
victuals they consume. With twenty-five men belonging to it, the
factory was last winter distressed for firewood, and the people sent
to tent in the woods."[95]
[Sidenote: Opposition by the Nor'-Westers.]
Meanwhile, leaving the shivering immigrants, distrustful of their
officers and doubtful of what the future had in store for them, to
encamp at Seal Creek, let us turn to the state of affairs amongst the
parties concerned elsewhere, particularly amongst the Nor'-Westers.
Simon McGillivray, who was agent in London for that Company, watched
all Selkirk's acts with the utmost distrust, and kept the partners
continually informed of the turn affairs were taking. He assured them
that Selkirk's philanthropy was all a cloak, designed to cover up a
scheme for the total extinction of the Hudson's Bay Company's rivals.
The colony was to be planted to ruin their trade. It was an endeavour
to check the physical superiority of the Nor'-Westers and by means of
this settlement secure to the Hudson's Bay Company and to himself, not
only the extensive and sole trade of the country within their own
territories, but a "safe and convenient stepping-stone for
monopolizing all the fur-trade of the Far West."
The partners in Montreal were stirred to action. Regarding Lord
Selkirk's motives in this light, they warmly disputed the validity of
the Hudson's Bay Company's Charter and of the grants of land made to
him. It was decided to bring all the forces of opposition they
possessed to bear on this "invasion of their hunting grounds."
FOOTNOTES:
[88] Canadian Archives.
[89] It has been noted that several partners of the North-West concern
were upon the grand jury which found the bill of indictment, and out
of four judges who sat upon the bench, two were nearly related to
individuals of that association.
[90] Already, in April, 1802, Lord Selkirk had addressed a letter and
memorial to Lord Pelham, the Home Secretary, detailing the
practicability of promoting emigration to Rupert's Land. "To a colony
in these territories," he concluded, "the channel of trade must be the
river of Port Nelson."
[91] In the course of a letter reporting on the disputes between the
Hudson's Bay Company and the North-Westers, Commissioner Coltman
attributed the disasters in the territories to the Company having held
in abeyance its right to jurisdiction and that this neglect was the
reason for passing the act of 1803. This letter is in the Canadian
Archives, _v._ Report 1892.
[92] "I have," writes Sir Alexander Mackenzie from London, 13th April,
1812, "finally settled with that Lord (Selkirk). After having prepared
a bill to carry him before the Lord Chancellor, it was proposed to my
solicitor by the solicitor of his Lordship that one-third of the stock
that was purchased on joint account before I went to America,
amounting to £47,000, and the balance of cash in his Lordship's hands,
belonging to me, should be given up to me; of this I accepted, though
I might have obliged his Lordship to make over to me one-third of the
whole purchase made by him in this stock, which at one time I was
determined to do, having been encouraged thereto by the house of
Suffolk Lane and countenanced by that of Mark Lane. But these houses
thought it prudent to desist from any further purchases."
Mackenzie says that by a verbal understanding with Mr. McGillivray,
his purchase of the Hudson's Bay stock belonged to the North-West
Company, and that, if Mr. McGillivray himself had been there, a sum of
£30,000 might have been invested in that stock, "all of which Lord
Selkirk purchased, and if he persists in his present scheme, it will
be the dearest he yet made.
"He will put the North-West Company to a greater expense than you seem
to apprehend, and had the Company sacrificed £20,000 which might have
secured a preponderance in the stock of Hudson's Bay Co., it would
have been money well spent."
[93] The district thus granted was called Assiniboia, a name
undoubtedly derived from the Assiniboine tribe and river, yet alleged
by some at the time to be taken from two Gaelic words "osni" and
"boia"--the house of Ossian.
[94] "None of the young men," says McDonnell, "made any progress in
learning the Gaelic or Irish language on the voyage. I had some drills
of the people with arms, but the weather was generally boisterous, and
there were few days when a person could stand steady on deck. There
never was a more awkward squad--not a man, or even officer, of the
party knew how to put a gun to his eye or had ever fired a shot."
[95] Governor McDonnell's observations are not always to be relied
upon. For instance, he says in one report, "I am surprised the Company
never directed a survey to be made of the coast on each side of
Hudson's Straits. From the appearance of the country there must be
many harbours and inlets for vessels to go in case of an accident from
ice, want of water, etc. We were often, ourselves, much in doubt for
the accomplishment of our voyage, and had we been under the necessity
of putting back, must have suffered for want of water. Two of the
ships, without any additional expense, might execute this survey on
the voyage out, with only the detention of a few days, one taking the
north and the other the south shore." Such a survey had been made as
early as 1728. Mention has already been made of Captain Coats, who, in
1739, prepared a chart of the Straits and Bay. To some of the older
captains in the service, the Straits were as well-known as the harbour
of Stromness.