USA > California > The history of Oregon and California & the other territories of the northwest coast of North America > Part 34
USA > Oregon > The history of Oregon and California & the other territories of the northwest coast of North America > Part 34
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 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53
39
306
CHAPTER XV.
1814 To 1820.
Restitution of Astoria to the United States by Great Britain, agreeably to the Treaty of Ghent - Alleged Reservation of Rights on the Part of Great Britain - First Negotiation between the Governments of Great Britain and the United States, respecting the Territories west of the Rocky Mountains, and Convention for the joint Occupancy of those Territories - Florida Treaty between Spain and the United States, by which the Latter acquires the Title of Spain to the North- West Coasts - Colonel Long's exploring Expedition to the Rocky Mountains - Disputes between the British North-West and Hudson's Bay Companies - Union of those Bodies - Act of Parliament extending the Jurisdiction of the Canada Courts to the Pacific Countries - Russian Establishments on the North Pacific - Expeditions in Search of Northern Passages between the Atlantic and the Pacific - Death of Tamahamaha, and Introduction of Christianity into the Sandwich Islands.
THE capture of Astoria by the British, and the transfer of the Pacific Company's establishments on the Columbia to the North- West Company, were not known to the plenipotentiaries of the United States at Ghent, on the 24th of December, 1814, when they signed the treaty of peace between their country and Great Britain. That treaty contains no allusion whatsoever to the north- west coasts of America, or to any portion of the continent west of the Lake of the Woods. The plenipotentiaries of the United States had been instructed by their government to consent to no claim on the part of Great Britain to territory in that quarter south of the 49th parallel of latitude, for reasons which have been already
stated ; and, after some discussion, they proposed to the British an article similar in effect to the fifth article of the convention signed, but not definitively concluded, in 1807, according to which,* a line drawn along that parallel should separate the territories of the powers so far as they extended west of the Lake of the Woods, provided, however, that nothing in the article should be construed as applying to any country west of the Rocky Mountains. The British plenipotentiaries were willing to accept this article, if it were also accompanied by a provision that their subjects should have access to the Mississippi River, through the territories of the United
* For the reasons and the convention here mentioned, see chap. xiii.
307
THE UNITED STATES CLAIM ASTORIA.
1815.]
States, and the right of navigating it to the sea ; but the Americans refused positively to agree to such a stipulation, and the question of boundaries west of the Lake of the Woods was left unsettled by the treaty.
It was nevertheless agreed, in the first article of the treaty of . Ghent, that " all territory, places, and possessions, whatsoever, taken by either party from the other during the war, or which may be taken after the signing of this treaty, excepting only the islands hereinafter mentioned, [in the Bay of Fundy,] shall be restored without delay ; " and, in virtue of this article, Mr. Monroe, the secretary of state of the United States, on the 18th of July, 1815, announced to Mr. Baker, the chargé d'affaires of Great Britain at Washington, that the president intended immediately to reoccupy the post at the mouth of the Columbia. This determination seems to have been taken partly at the instance of Mr. Astor, who was anxious, if pos- sible, to recommence operations on his former plan in North-West America ; but no measures were adopted for the purpose until September, 1817, when Captain J. Biddle, commanding the sloop of war Ontario, and Mr. J. B. Prevost, were jointly commissioned to proceed in that ship to the mouth of the Columbia, and there "to assert the claim of the United States to the sovereignty of the adjacent country, in a friendly and peaceable manner, and without the employment of force." *
A few days after the departure of Messrs. Biddle and Prevost for the Pacific, on this mission, Mr. Bagot, the British plenipotentiary at Washington, addressed to Mr. J. Q. Adams, the American secretary of state, some inquiries respecting the destination of the Ontario, and the objects of her voyage ; and, having been informed on those points, he remonstrated against the intended occupation of the post at the mouth of the Columbia, on the grounds "that the place had not been 'captured during the late war, but that the Americans had retired from it, under an agreement with the North- West Company, which had purchased their effects, and had ever since retained peaceable possession of the coast ;" and that " the territory itself was early taken possession of in his majesty's name, and had been since considered as forming part of his majesty's dominions ; " under which circumstances, no claim for the restitution of the post could be founded on the first article of the treaty of Ghent. At what precise time this possession was taken, or on
* See President Monroe's message to Congress of April 15th, 1822, and the accom- panying documents.
308
G. BRITAIN DENIES THE CLAIM OF THE U. STATES. [1818.
what grounds the territory was considered as part of the British dominions, the minister did not attempt to show.
Mr. Bagot at the same time communicated the circumstances to his government, and they became the subjects of discussion between Lord Castlereagh, the British secretary for foreign affairs, and Mr. Rush, the American plenipotentiary at London. Lord Castlereagh proposed that the question respecting the claim to the post on the Columbia should be referred to commissioners, as many other dis- puted points had been, agreeably to the treaty of Ghent ; to which Mr. Rush objected, for the simple reasons - that the spot was in the possession of the Americans before the war; that it fell, by bel- ligerent capture, into the hands of the British during the war; and that, " under a treaty which stipulated the mutual restitution of all places reduced by the arms of either party, the right of the United States to immediate and full repossession could not be impugned." The British secretary, upon this, admitted the right of the Ameri- cans to be reinstated, and to be the party in possession, while treating on the title ; though he regretted that the government of the United States should have employed means to obtain restitution which might lead to difficulties. Mr. Rush had no apprehensions of that kind; and it was finally agreed that the post should be restored to the Americans, and that the question of the title to the territory should be discussed in the negotiation as to limits and other matters, which was soon to be commenced. Lord Bathurst, the British secretary for the colonies, accordingly sent to the agents of the North-West Company at the mouth of the Columbia a despatch, directing them to afford due facilities for the reoccupation of the post at that point by the Americans ; and an order to the same effect was also sent from the Admiralty to the commander of the British naval forces in the Pacific.
The Ontario passed around Cape Horn into the Pacific, and arrived, in February, 1818, at Valparaiso, where it was agreed between the commissioners that Captain Biddle should proceed to the Columbia, and receive possession of Astoria for the United States, Mr. Prevost remaining in Chili for the purpose of transact- ing some business with the government of that country, which had also been intrusted to him. Captain Biddle accordingly sailed to the Columbia, and, on the 9th of August, he took temporary pos- session of the country on that river, in the name of the United States, after which he returned to the South Pacific.
In the mean time, Commodore Bowles, the commander of the
309
ASTORIA RESTORED TO THE UNITED STATES.
1818.]
British naval forces in the South Sea, received at Rio de Janeiro the order from the Admiralty for the surrender of the post on the Columbia to the Americans. This order he transmitted to Captain Sheriff, the senior officer of the ships in the Pacific, who, meeting Mr. Prevost at Valparaiso, informed him of the contents of the order, and offered him a passage to the Columbia, for the purpose of completing the business, as it certainly could not have been done by Captain Biddle. This offer was accepted by the American commissioner, who proceeded, in the British frigate Blossom, to the Columbia, and entered that river in the beginning of October ; and Mr. Keith, the superintending partner of the North-West Company at Fort George, or Astoria, having also received the order, from the colonial department at London, for the surrender of the place, the affair was soon despatched .* On the 6th of the month, Captain Hickey and Mr. Keith, as joint commissioners on the part of Great Britain, presented to Mr. Prevost a paper declaring that, in obe- dience to the commands of the prince regent, as signified in Lord Bathurst's despatch of the 27th of January previous, and in con- formity to the first article of the treaty of Ghent, they restored to the government of the United States, through its agent, Mr. Prevost, the settlement of Fort George, on the Columbia River; and Mr. Prevost, in return, gave another paper, setting forth the fact of his acceptance of the settlement for his government, agreeably to the
* President Monroe's message to Congress of April 17th, 1822, accompanied by Mr. Prevost's letter, dated Monterey, November 11th, 1818. The two papers above mentioned are of so much importance, that they are here given at length.
The act of delivery presented by the British commissioners is as follows : -
" In obedience to the commands of his Royal Highness the Prince Regent, signi- fied in a despatch from the right honorable the Earl Bathurst, addressed to the part- ners or agents of the North-West Company, bearing date the 27th of January, 1818, and in obedience to a subsequent order, dated the 26th of July, from W. H. Sheriff, Esq., captain of his Majesty's ship Andromache, we, the undersigned, do, in conform- ity to the first article of the treaty of Ghent, restore to the Government of the United States, through its agent, J. B. Prevost, Esq., the settlement of Fort George, on the Columbia River. Given under our hands, in triplicate, at Fort George, (Columbia River,) this 6th day of October, 1818.
"F. HICKEY, Captain of his Majesty's ship Blossom. "J. KEITH, of the North-West Company."
The act of acceptance, on the part of the American commissioner, is in these words : - " I do hereby acknowledge to have this day received, in behalf of the Government of the United States, the possession of the settlement designated above, in conformity to the first article of the treaty of Ghent. Given under my hand, in triplicate, at Fort George, (Columbia River,) this 6th of October, 1818.
"J. B. PREVOST, Agent for the United States."
310
PRETENDED RESERVATION OF THE BRITISH.
[1818.
above-mentioned treaty. The British flag was then formally low- ered, and that of the United States, having been hoisted in its stead over the fort, was saluted by the Blossom.
The documents above cited - the only ones which passed between the commissioners on this occasion -are sufficient to show that no reservation or exception was made on the part of Great Britain, and that the restoration of Astoria to the United States was complete and unconditional. Nevertheless, in a negotiation between the governments of those nations, in 1826, relative to the territories of the Columbia, it was maintained by the plenipoten- tiaries of Great Britain,* that the restoration of Astoria could not have been legally required by the United States, in virtue of the treaty of Ghent, because the place was not a national possession, nor a military post, and was not taken during war ; but “ in order that not even the shadow of a reflection might be cast upon the good faith of the British government, the latter determined to give the most liberal extension to the terms of the treaty of Ghent; and in 1818, the purchase which the British Company had made in 1813 was restored to the United States ; particular care being, however, taken, on this occasion, to prevent any misapprehension as to the extent of the concession made by Great Britain." In support of this last assertion, two documents are produced, as having been addressed, in 1818, by the British ministers to their own agents, and which, though never before published, or communicated in any way to the United States, were considered by the plenipotentiaries, in 1826, as putting the " case of the restoration of Fort Astoria in too clear a light to require further observation." One of these documents is presented as an extract from Lord Castlereagh's despatch to Mr. Bagot, dated February 4th, 1818, in which his lordship says, " You will observe, that whilst this government is not disposed to contest with the American government the point of possession, as it stood in the Columbia River, at the moment of the rupture, they are not prepared to admit the validity of the title of the government of the United States to this settlement. In signifying, therefore, to Mr. Adams the full acquiescence of your government in the reoccupa- tion of the limited position which the United States held in that river at the breaking out of the war, you will, at the same time, assert, in suitable terms, the claim of Great Britain to that territory, upon which the American settlement must be considered an encroach-
* Statement presented by the British plenipotentiaries to Mr. Gallatin, among the Proofs and Illustrations, letter H. See hereafter, chap. xvi.
311
PRETENDED RESERVATION OF BRITISH RIGHTS.
1818.]
ment : " the plenipotentiaries add that " this instruction was ex- ecuted verbally by the person to whom it was addressed." The other document purports to be a copy of the despatch from Lord Bathurst to the partners of the North-West Company, mentioned in the Act of Delivery, presented by Messrs. Keith and Hickey, direct- ing them to restore the post on the Columbia, " in pursuance of the first article of the treaty of Ghent," in which the words " without, however, admitting the right of that government to the possession in question " appear in a parenthesis .*
Without inquiring, at present, whether or not Astoria was a national possession of the United States, agreeably to the rules and definitions laid down by writers on national law, there can be no difficulty in showing that it was such according to the principles and practice of Great Britain; and for that purpose, it is necessary merely to refer to the circumstances attending the dispute between that power and Spain, in 1790, when the British government re- quired from Spain the surrender of a territory discovered by her navigators, and occupied by her forces, on the ground that it had, previous to such occupation, become the property of British sub- jects. Whether Astoria was a military post or not, could be of no consequence, as the treaty of Ghent provides for the restoration of " all territory, places, and possessions, whatsoever, taken by either party from the other, during the war," except those on the Atlantic side of America specially named ; and that the establishments on the Columbia were so taken by the British during war, has been sufficiently proved. The right of the United States to make settle- ments on the Columbia, existed previous to the foundation of As- toria, in virtue of the discoveries and explorations of their private citizens and public officers ; and that right could not be lessened, by any subsequent acts of their citizens, without the consent of their government. The agents of the Pacific Company, in expec-
* The following is a copy of this despatch, as given in the British statement, which will be found among the Proofs and Illustrations, in the latter part of this volume, under the letter H: -
" DOWNING STREET, January 27th, 1818.
" Intelligence having been received, that the United States sloop of war Ontario has been sent by the American government to establish a settlement on the Columbia River, which was held by that State on the breaking out of the last war, I am to acquaint you that it is the Prince Regent's pleasure, (without, however, admitting the right of that government to the possession in question,) that, in pursuance of the first article of the treaty of Ghent, due facility should be given to the reoccupation of the said settlement by the officers of the United States; and I am to desire that you would contribute, as much as lies in your power, to the execution of his Royal High- ness's commands. I have, &c. &c.,
" BATHURST."
312
BRITISH VIEWS OF NATIONAL FAITH.
[1818.
tation of the arrival of an overpowering British force, sold their " establishments, furs, and stock in hand," * to the North-West Com- pany ; but they did not, nor could they, alienate the right of domain of the United States, which continued as before that transaction, until the British forces arrived, and took possession of the country by right of conquest. The same circumstances might have oc- curred with regard to places near the head of the Mississippi, or in Maine ; and Great Britain would not have been bound more strong- ly by the treaty of Ghent to restore such places than to restore the establishments on the Columbia.
With regard to the two documents, which the British plenipo- tentiaries consider as putting " the case of the restoration of Astoria in too clear a light to require further observation," -that is to say, as establishing the fact of a reservation of right to that place on the part of Great Britain,-it will not be difficult to show that they are both insufficient, and, indeed, wholly inadmissible, as evidence in " the case." The United States have no more concern with the private despatches of the British ministers to their agents, than with the private opinions of those ministers ; and the attempt to represent such communications as reservations of right on the part of Great Britain to the very territory which she was then in the act of re- storing to the United States, expressedly in pursuance of a treaty, is alike at variance with the common sense and the common morals of the day. No arguments are required to show that, if such reser- vations were allowable, all engagements between nations would be nugatory, and all faith at an end. With regard to the assertion of the British claim to Astoria, which is said to have been verbally made by the British envoy at Washington to Mr. Adams - in the first place,t " it is not stated how the communication was received, nor whether the American government consented to accept the restitution with the reservation, as expressed in the despatch to the envoy ; " and it is certainly by no means consonant with the usages of diplomatic intercourse at the present day, to treat verbally on questions so important as those of territorial sovereignty, or to consider as suf- ficient protests and exceptions made in that manner, and brought forward long after, without acknowledgment of any kind on the part of those to whom they are said to have been addressed. The only communication received by the American government, on the
* See Proofs and Illustrations, letter G, No. 2.
t Mr. Gallatin's counter statement, during the negotiation in 1826, communicated to the Congress of the United States, with President Adams's message of December 12th, 1827.
313
BRITISH VIEWS OF NATIONAL FAITH.
1818.]
occasion of the restitution of Astoria, is explicit: " We, the under- signed, do, in conformity to the first article of the treaty of Ghent, restore to the government of the United States the settlement of Fort George, on the Columbia River ; " and this direct and unqualified recognition of the right of the United States cannot be affected by subsequent communications to or from any persons.
It may also be remarked, that although the British government, in 1826, pronounced as sufficient a reservation contained in a secret despatch from one of its own ministers to one of its own agents, and withheld from the other party interested in the matter, yet, in 1834, the same government pronounced the reservation contained in the Declaration publicly presented by the Spanish ambassador at Lon- don, in 1771, on the conclusion of the dispute respecting the Falk- land Islands, " not to possess any substantial weight," * inasmuch as it had not been noticed in the Acceptance presented by the British government in return. The circumstances connected with the last- mentioned transaction have been already so fully exposed, that it is unnecessary to repeat them here.
Immediately after the conclusion of the surrender of Astoria, Mr. Keith presented to Mr. Prevost a note containing inquiries - whether or not the government of the United States would insist upon the abandonment of the post by the North-West Company,t before the final decision of the question as to the right of sove- reignty over the country; and whether, in the event of such a
* Letter from Viscount Palmerston to Señor Moreno, envoy of Buenos Ayres at London, dated January 8th, 1834. See the note in p. 111, containing a sketch of the circumstances of the dispute respecting the Falkland Islands.
t. The buildings, and, indeed, the whole establishment at Astoria, had been consid- erably increased, since it came into the hands of the North-West Company. Accord ing to the plan and description of the place sent by Mr. Prevost to Washington, the factory consisted, in 1818, of a stockade made of pine logs, twelve feet in length above the ground, enclosing a parallelogram of one hundred and fifty by two hundred and fifty feet, extending in its greatest length from north-west to south-east, and defended by bastions or towers at two opposite angles. Within this enclosure were all the buildings of the establishment, such as dwelling-houses, magazines, store- houses, mechanics' shops, &c. The artillery were two heavy eighteen-pounders, six six-pounders, four four-pound carronades, two six-pound cohorns, and seven swivels, all mounted. The number of persons attached to the place, besides a few women and children, was sixty-five, of whom twenty-three were whites, twenty-six Sandwich Islanders, (or Kanakis, as they are generally called in the Pacific,) and the remainder persons of mixed blood, from Canada. In 1821, these buildings were all destroyed by fire ; and since that period, the principal establishment of the British traders west of the Rocky Mountains has been Fort Vancouver, on the north side of the Columbia, about one hundred miles from the sea. Fort George now consists of only three or four log-houses, occupied by a Hudson's Bay trader.
40
314
NEGOTIATION AT LONDON.
[1818.
decision being in favor of the United States, their government would be disposed to indemnify the North-West Company for any improvements which they might, in the mean time, have made there. On these points, Mr. Prevost, having no instructions, could only reply, as he did, to the effect - that his government would, doubtless, if it should determine to keep up the settlement, satisfy any claims of the North-West Company which might be conformable with justice and the usages of civilized nations. After a few days more spent on the Columbia, the Blossom quitted the river with Mr. Prevost, whom she carried to Peru, the post remaining in the hands of the British traders, who have ever since continued to occupy it.
Whilst these measures for the restitution of Astoria were in progress, a negotiation was carried on, at London, between the plenipotentiaries of the American and British governments, for the definitive arrangement of many questions which were left unsettled by the treaty of Ghent, including those relating to the boundaries of the territories of the two nations west of the Lake of the Woods .* Messrs. Rush and Gallatin, the plenipotentiaries of the United States, proposed - that the dividing line between those territories should be drawn from the north-western extremity of that lake, north or south, as the case might require, to the 49th parallel of latitude, and thence along that parallel west to the Pacific Ocean. The British commissioners, Messrs. Goulburn and Robin- son, after a discussion in which they endeavored to secure to British subjects the right of access to the Mississippi, and of navigating that river, agreed to admit the line proposed as far west as the Rocky Mountains ; and an article to that effect was accordingly inserted in the projet of a convention.
The claims of the respective nations to territories west of the Rocky Mountains were then considered. Messrs. Rush and Galla- tin " did not assert that the United States had a perfect right to that country, but insisted that their claim was at least good against Great Britain ; " and they cited, in support of that claim, the facts of the discovery of the Columbia River, of the first exploration from its sources to its mouth, and of the formation of the first establishments in the country through which it flows, by American citizens. Messrs. Goulburn and Robinson, on the other hand, affirmed " that former voyages, and principally that of Captain Cook, gave to Great Britain the rights derived from discovery ; and they alluded to
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.