USA > California > A history of California: the American period > Part 16
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44
Two questions next demand an answer-to what extent were these reports of British purpose based upon substantial fact; and how far were they believed and acted upon by President Polk in his California policy?
The first question can be answered with a fair degree of definiteness. At the time the California situation was approaching a crisis, the government of Great Britain, for once in its long history, had become temporarily satiated with colonial possessions and was not keenly enough in-
181
CALIFORNIA, GREAT BRITAIN AND U. S.
terested in California to engage in an active campaign for annexation. This did not mean, however, that the persistent rumors of British plans were mere products of the American imagination, manufactured as annexation propaganda, or the result of national hysteria. For as a matter of fact, every report of this kind of any consequence had behind it sufficient truth to justify its acceptance by the American public.
The warning, so frequently voiced, that Mexico planned a cession of California to England to cancel or guarantee her debt to British creditors, rested upon an official agree- ment entered into in 1837. Under the terms of this arrange- ment, English holders of Mexican bonds, instead of being paid in cash, a commodity of which Mexico lived in chronic want, were to be given land, of which Mexico had an infinite supply, for colonization purposes. In speaking of this plan the British Minister to Mexico, Sir Richard Pakenham, after calling attention to the impossibility of colonizing other portions of Mexico, wrote as follows in the summer of 1841:
"I believe there is no part of the world offering greater natural advantages for the establishment of an English colony than the province of Upper California; while its commanding position on the Pacific, its fine harbours, its forests of excellent timber for ship building as well as for every other purpose, appear to me to render it by all means desirable from a political point of view, that California, once ceasing to belong to Mexico, should not fall into the hands of any power but England; and the present debil- itated condition of Mexico and the gradual increase of foreign population in California render it probable that its separation from Mexico will be effected at no distant period."
The project urged by Pakenham from Mexico City, as previously stated, was one of the chief grounds of Amer- ican anxiety. Another was the presence of the Hudson's Bay Company in the province. This company was not only sending trapping parties down from Oregon, but had recently established a regular trading post at San Francisco and was seeking large grants of land from the California
182
A HISTORY OF CALIFORNIA
government, while its employees were cultivating farms, building mills, and otherwise showing their intention of making the company's occupation permanent. That this interest in the political future of California was not a mere figment of the American imagination is clearly seen in the following extract from a letter written by Sir George Simp- son, the powerful head of the Hudson's Bay Company, who was then on a tour around the world. Incidentally, the letter was designed for the eyes of the British Cabinet. It was written from Honolulu in March, 1842, after Simp- son's visit to the San Francisco station. In it he said of California :
"The country from its natural advantages, possessing, as it does, the finest harbor in the Northern Pacific, in the Bay of San Francisco, and capable, as it is of maintaining a population of some millions of agriculturists might become invaluable to Great Britain as an outlet to her surplus population, as a stronghold and protection to her commerce and interests in these seas, and as a market for her manufactures; and as the principal people in the country and indeed the whole population seem anxious to be released from the Republic of Mexico. . .. I have reason to believe they would require very little encouragement to declare their independence of Mexico and place themselves under the protection of Great Britain. Indeed it has been communicated to me, confidentially, and I feel authorized to say that the presence of a British cruiser on the coast with a private assurance of pro- tection from Great Britain and appointments being given to the present higher authorities and officials which would not involve a larger sum than a few thousand pounds per annum, would be sufficient inducement to declare themselves independent of Mexico and claim the protection of Great Britain."
This sympathetic attitude of many of the California leaders towards Great Britian, to which Simpson referred, was another disturbing element to the American peace of mind.
The activities of such British officials as the English Minister, Pakenham, in Mexico City; of Barron, Consul at Tepic; and of Admiral Seymour, in command of a British squadron in the Pacific, also furnished a substantial founda-
183
CALIFORNIA, GREAT BRITAIN AND U. S.
tion for the common belief that England had designs upon California. Whatever may be said as to the indifferent attitude of the British government itself toward the province during this period, it is nevertheless certain that most British officials, both in Mexico and in California, were actively engaged, either with outright plans for annexation, or with measures to defeat the ambitions of the United States.
Under these conditions, it would seem both natural and excusable for Americans, who had no means of penetrating these secrets of the British Cabinet, to accept the attitude of the English agents as a correct index of the purpose of the British government, especially as the peculiar tradition of that government was a tradition of colonial expansion.
Nor was the British government itself, even in the brief period from 1842 to 1846, when she seems to have fallen away temporarily from her settled imperial policy, entirely indifferent to the annexation of California. On December 31, 1844, Lord Aberdeen, who then held the Foreign Office, wrote Bankhead at Mexico City and Barron at Tepic in a tone very similar to that employed by Buchanan in his letter to Larkin of October 17, 1845. Though his government would not aid a movement for independence, wrote Aberdeen in these despatches, nor promise, even after successful revolt, the protectorate for California which Barron had previously urged; yet it was none of the business of the British gov- ernment to discourage such a rebellion, nor of British officials to warn Mexico of the likelihood of its occurrence. Bank- head, indeed, was cautioned specifically against giving any information about California affairs to Mexican officials; and Barron was instructed to make the Californians under- stand " that Great Britian would view with much dissatisfac- tion the establishment of a protectoral power over California by any other foreign state."
With this sketch of the manifestations of English inter- est in California before Polk came into office for a back- ground, it is pertinent to ask how far the latter's policy was influenced by the possibility-or rather probability-of
184
A HISTORY OF CALIFORNIA
British designs conflicting with his own plans of annexation. The answer to this question cannot be as definite as the answer to a mathematical problem. But enough evidence is at hand to show that nearly every movement Polk made with regard to California was, in some measure, based upon the English situation.
In the first place, entirely apart from the California issue, Polk's suspicions of Great Britian were fed by many springs. The Oregon controversy had not bred a spirit of friendliness between the two countries; and for more than two years the press on either side of the Atlantic had been carrying on a mutual campaign of criticism and vituperation. British influence had also appeared here, there, and everywhere in the critical issue of Texas annexation. Besides these more definite and concrete factors, there was the bitter anti-British feeling so prevalent in the southwest of Andrew Jackson's day. Polk, protégé, friend, and political disciple of the hero of New Orleans, was certainly not likely to be overly charita- ble in his judgments of English policy.
Polk's plans for annexation were not fully matured before reports of British designs on California, similar to those which had come to Tyler, began to reach Washington. The administration's agent, William S. Parrott, wrote from Mexico on May 13, 1845:
"Great Britain has greatly increased her Naval Forces in the Pacific, the object of which as stated is to take possession of and hold Upper California, in case of war between the United States and Mexico."
A little later Parrott also called Polk's attention to a plan by which a "young Irish Priest by the name of McNamarrah" hoped to colonize California with immigrants from his own country. Late in 1844 the details of this plan, which after- wards received considerable fame as the cause of Frémont's activities in connection with the settler's revolt, were laid be- fore Bankhead who had taken Pakenham's place as British Minister to Mexico. Bankhead apparently took only an in- different interest in them; but McNamarrah (or McNamara as
185
CALIFORNIA, GREAT BRITAIN AND U. S.
the name is properly spelled) pressed the idea so successfully before the Mexican government that he was permitted to go to California to carry out his dream. On July 4, 1846, so Polk was told, the California Assembly voted the young Irishman a grant of 3,000 leagues for colonizing purposes. This act, said Larkin, the President's informant, constituted "a new feature in English policy and a new method of obtaining California."
Other despatches from Mexico in the late summer and fall of 1845 brought additional reports of British activities in California. But the most vigorous warning on the sub- ject was contained in a communication to the State Depart- ment from Larkin at Monterey. This despatch, dated July 10, 1845, was received at Washington early in October. Its influence upon the administration was strikingly shown in much of the correspondence the State Department sub- sequently had with its agents both in Mexico and in England.
In his letter Larkin pointed out three definite instances of British activities in California. The first of these was the part played by the Hudson's Bay Company in the Micheltorena revolution. The second was the financial aid supplied the Mexican government by two British houses in Mexico for sending an expedition to put down any revo- lution that Americans might organize in the province. And the third was the appointment of a British agent, who, ostensibly serving in a consular capacity, was really set to carry out some secret plans against the interests of the United States in California.
The British agent, to whom Larkin referred in this com- munication, was James Alexander Forbes, a resident of California for many years.1 His interest in extending English control over the province may be judged from the following extract from a letter he addressed to Barron at Tepic, on September 4, 1844:
"I feel myself in duty bound to prevent this fine country from falling into the hands of any other foreign power than that of England. I repeat that it is impossible for Mexico to hold Cali-
1 This Forbes was not the author of the History of California, previously referred to.
186
A HISTORY OF CALIFORNIA
fornia for a much longer period, and if the Govt. of Great Britain can with honor to itself and without giving umbrage to Mexico, ex- tend its protection to California, ... I should presume that it would be impolitic to allow any other nation to avail itself of the present critical situation in California for obtaining a footing in this country."
Forbes afterwards showed his zeal on England's behalf by organizing juntas favorable to British interests among the Californians, and by protesting against Frémont's presence in the province at the time of the Hawk's Peak affair.
About this time, also, reports came to the administration of another movement, the success of which would quite certainly defeat American ambitions on the Pacific. This was the plan of establishing a monarchy in Mexico and calling in a European prince to occupy the newly created throne. John Black, United States Consul in Mexico City, first drew Polk's attention to the movement in a despatch dated December 30, 1845. According to the report, a revolution had already been started to carry out the mon- archist program which France, Spain, and England were pledged to support. As a matter of fact, both Bankhead, the British Minister, and Aberdeen, were well disposed toward the movement; and as corroboration of Black's report, word came from the American Ambassador in Lon- don, Louis H. McLane, that the leading powers of Europe were planning "to compose the Mexican trouble by giving her a Monarchial form of government and supplying the monarch from one of their own family." It was afterwards rumored that the new sovereign would be the Spanish prince, Henry, the rejected suitor of Queen Isabella.
What McLane and Black had written was further con- firmed by despatches from Dimond, American Consul at Vera Cruz; and later by reports from John Slidell. The chief object in setting up this monarchy, according to semi- official information, was to defeat the Texas and California program of the United States by European intervention.
While these various reports were reaching Washington, and the British agents in Mexico were vigorously urging
187
CALIFORNIA, GREAT BRITAIN AND U. S.
the importance of the California situation upon their home government, the Mexican representatives in London were anxiously seeking English aid to defeat the program of the United States. The British Cabinet, by this time bravely over its indifference to the fate of California, was almost as eager as Mexico to find some course of action which, while not involving war, would effectually block American expansion on the Pacific. The Mexican representative in London, who bore the interesting name of Murphy, believed that if the Oregon question were once adjusted and England could secure the slightest cooperation from France, she would not balk even at the use of force to prevent California from falling into American hands.
Various plans were brought forward by the British and Mexican diplomats under which England, while remaining nominally at peace, might be made the custodian of Califor- nia, especially in case of war between Mexico and the United States. One of these called for the cession of 50,000,000 acres of land in the province to a British company; another, pro- posed by Lord Aberdeen, involved the establishment of an independent government in California, which should be rec- ognized by Mexico and guaranteed by England and France.
In California, also, affairs were progressing in a way to give increasing reason for uneasiness to the American government, could they have been fully known. Here the leaders in the British cause were James Forbes, Vice- Consul, and Admiral Seymour of the English fleet. Seymour, especially, was anxious to secure the consent of his superiors for active measures in the California issue; but owing to the nature of his instructions he had to content himself with sending one of his vessels, the Juno, under Captain Blake, to California waters to counteract so far as possible the growing peril of American intrigue. Blake carried out his orders, with the aid of Forbes, to the best of his ability, working especially to influence Pio Pico and other southern leaders against the idea of an American protectorate.
About this time, also, a call was issued by the California officials for a meeting at Santa Barbara on June 15th, 1846, of
188
A HISTORY OF CALIFORNIA
a consejo general to deal with the desperate situation which the province faced. It was commonly believed that this assembly would declare California independent and seek the protection of some outside power-England, France, or the United States.2
Learning of this, Admiral Seymour himself sailed from San Blas to California to make, if possible, a last stand for the British cause. The die, however, had already been cast. When Seymour reached Monterey, he found Commodore Sloat securely in possession, and the American flag floating over the quiet town.
Enough has already been said to show that President Polk had ample reason for believing that England was deter- mined to possess California. While there is no direct evi- dence to show that he deliberately brought on the Mexican War as a means of defeating this contingency, by hastening American occupation of the province, there is at least sufficient grounds to make such reasoning wholly logical. And whether one is warranted in going quite so far as to say that the report of British activities in California led the administration to turn from a waiting policy (which gave every evidence of eventual success had the English factor been removed), to one of immediate conquest, there at least runs through all the diplomatic correspondence of the time an insistent note of alarm over this threatened danger.
In Buchanan's despatch of October 17, 1845, appointing Larkin Polk's confidential agent, great emphasis is laid upon British interests in California. Larkin is repeatedly warned to " exert the greatest vigilance " to prevent a
2 The French government, like the British and the American, cher- ished its own ambitions to acquire California. It contented itself, how- ever, aside from diplomatic maneuv- ering in Mexico, with sending an occasional representative to investi- gate conditions in the province. The most important of these, after the close of the Spanish régime, were Petit Thouars and Duflot de Mofras.
The former, in command of the frigate Venus, in which he was mak- ing a voyage around the world for scientific purposes, touched on the California coast in 1837. Mofras came direct from Mexico on a quasi- official mission in 1841. Both Mofras and Petit Thouars afterwards pub- lished interesting accounts of their observations and experience in Cali- fornia.
189
CALIFORNIA, GREAT BRITAIN AND U. S.
European nation from acquiring possession of the province; and assured, in the most definite language, that the President "could not view with indifference the transfer of California to Great Britain or any other European Power."
Similarly, McLane, the American Ambassador at London, was told that a great flame "would be kindled throughout the Union should Great Britain obtain a cession of Cali- fornia from Mexico or attempt to take possession of that province." Slidell, having been informed that the United States would use every means to prevent California from falling into European hands, was instructed to ascertain whether Mexico had any intention of ceding it to France or England and to exert all his energies "to prevent an act, which if consummated, would be fraught with danger to the best interests of the United States."
In Polk's public utterances, also, this fear of English ad- vance into the province found a foremost place. Indeed it became the distinct motive for his re-affirmation and en- largement of the Monroe Doctrine-one of the first steps, incidentally, by which that famous policy has grown to its present significant position. And certainly there was no trace of hypocrisy in Polk's words when he thus wrote at the close of the Mexican War, regarding the acquisition of California :
"The immense value of ceded territory does not consist alone in the amount of money for which the public lands may be sold . . . the fact that it has become a part of the Union and cannot be sub- ject to a European power, constitutes ample indemnity for the past."
One wonders, indeed, what might have been the effect upon the destiny of the United States if, during those critical months preceding the Mexican War, a more imperialistic cabinet had come into power in England and a less resolute man had been President of the United States.
This chapter has been based chiefly on the monograph of Cleland, already cited; and on Adams, E. D., British interests in California, in the American historical review, XIV, 744-763.
CHAPTER XV
THE BEAR FLAG REVOLT
PRIOR to the Mexican War, the American residents of California were divided into two distinct classes. In Mon- terey and other coast ports, and in the interior around Los Angeles, were many American merchants and some land- holders who had become closely identified through business relations, friendship, or even marriage, with prominent California families. Many of these Americans, indeed had become naturalized Mexican citizens. Such men might regard the Californian as inefficient in government and neglectful of great economic opportunities; but they neither despised him as an individual nor feared him as a ruler. And if inde- pendence were to be sought, they preferred to make common cause with him against Mexico, rather than to treat him as an enemy.
The other class of American settlers, however, were of a very different mind. Coming to California from the frontier states of the west and southwest, they brought with them an instinctive prejudice against everything of Spanish origin- a prejudice somewhat older than American independence, born of all sorts of influences-of racial differences, of con- flicting territorial claims, of bitter religious animosities, of border conflicts, of historical tradition, of contempt and hatred which had their origin, perchance, as far back as the days of Drake and Hawkins, when English freebooters looted the Spanish treasure ships, and when English sailors died of nameless tortures in Spanish jails.
This attitude was particularly characteristic of the settlers of the Sacramento Valley. Forming almost a community by themselves and having but little contact with the native Californians, they were restive under Mexican authority
190
191
THE BEAR FLAG REVOLT
and over-anxious to assert their Anglo-Saxon superiority. Among them, too, were the bitter memories of the recent atrocities of Mexican troops in Texas-memories which even to-day the lapse of nearly a hundred years has scarcely ef- faced from the border states. Consequently, with all the self- assurance of the American settlers along the Sacramento, there was intermingled a deep-seated fear of the fate that might await them if the California officials, through treachery or surprise, should get the foreigners of the province com- pletely under their control.
Indeed, while the Californians as a whole never dreamed of resorting to such harsh measures to hold the Americans in check, some color was given to this fear by a few isolated instances. More than one fur trader, like Smith and the Patties in the preceding decade, had been unpleasantly dealt with on the ground that he had violated some pro- vision of Mexican law. More recently still, a very consider- able body of foreigners had been brutally seized and sent to Mexico by the California authorities. The details of this incident, commonly spoken of as the Graham affair, were briefly as follows:
In the spring of 1840 rumor got abroad that a number of foreigners, American trappers chiefly, with some English citizens of rather undesirable reputation, were planning a movement for independence. These men were in California without passports, contrary to Mexican law; but they might have staid on unmolested, as did many another foreigner in violation of the same law, if they had not made themselves obnoxious to the local officials. Typical of the lot was Isaac Graham, the Tennessee trapper, whose name has already appeared in these pages in another connection. Like many another American of his calling, Graham had little regard for the dignity of California law, and probably less respect for those empowered to administer it. He had also intermeddled with local politics and acquired consider- able fame for his participation in the revolution of 1836. His attitude had subsequently become so domineering that Alvarado and Castro, whom he had supported in the revolu-
192
A HISTORY OF CALIFORNIA
tion, were determined to get rid of him and his kind by any means at their command.
Accordingly one night, when Graham was asleep, a com- pany of soldiers under Castro's orders surrounded his cabin, and when he appeared in the doorway, fired point blank at the startled American. Luckily for Graham, none of these shots took effect, though his shirt was burned by the powder in a number of places. He was then unceremoniously seized and carried off to jail. In similar manner, about a hundred other foreigners were arrested in various parts of California and thrown into prison.
After a farcical trial, some forty of the prisoners were then placed in irons and shipped down the coast to San Blas, suffering severely on the voyage from harsh treatment and because of insufficiency of food, water, and fresh air. Upon reaching Tepic, they were kept in confinement while their case was being disposed of in Mexico City. Here the pressure of the British and American governments was effectually exerted to secure their release; and Graham and many of his companions were returned to California at Mexican ex- pense. In addition, nearly all the victims of the affair filed large claims against the Mexican government for their illegal arrest and harsh treatment.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.