USA > California > The history of Oregon and California & the other territories of the northwest coast of North America > Part 35
USA > Oregon > The history of Oregon and California & the other territories of the northwest coast of North America > Part 35
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
* President Monroe's message to Congress, with the accompanying documents, sent December 29th, 1818.
315
CONVENTION OF UNITED STATES AND GREAT BRITAIN.
1818.]
purchases from the natives south of the Columbia, which they alleged to have been made prior to the American revolution. They did not make any formal proposition for a boundary, but intimated that the river itself was the most convenient which could be adopted ; and that they would not agree to any which did not give them the harbor at the mouth of that river, in common with the United States."
It is needless here to repeat the proofs that Cook saw no part of the west coast of America south of Mount San Jacinto, near the 57th degree of latitude, which had not been already explored by the Spaniards ; with regard to the purchases from the natives south of the Columbia, alleged to have been made by British subjects prior to the revolution, history is entirely silent. The de- termination expressed on the part of the British government not to assent to any arrangement which did not give to Great Britain the mouth of the Columbia, was at least unequivocal, and was sufficient to show that all arguments on the American side would be unavailing. It was, accordingly, at length agreed that all territories and their waters, claimed by either power, west of the Rocky Mountains, should be free and open to the vessels, citizens, and subjects, of both for the space of ten years ; provided, however, that no claim of either, or of any other nation, to any part of those territories, should be prejudiced by the arrangement.
This convention having been completed, it was signed by the plenipotentiaries on the 20th of October, 1818, and was soon after ratified by the governments of both nations .* The compromise contained in its third article, with regard to the territories west of the Rocky Mountains, was, perhaps, the most wise, as well as the most equitable, measure which could have been adopted at that time ; considering that neither party pretended to possess a perfect title to the sovereignty of any of those territories, and that there was no prospect of the speedy conclusion of any arrangement with regard to them, between either party and the other claimants, Spain and Russia. The agreement could not certainly, at the time, have been considered unfavorable to the United States ; for, although the North-West Company held the whole trade of the Columbia country, yet the important post at the mouth of that river was restored to the Americans without reservation, and there was every reason for supposing that it would be immediately re-
* See the third article of the convention of October, 1818, among the Proofs and Illustrations, in the latter part of this History, under the letter K, No. 2.
316
FLORIDA TREATY BETWEEN U. STATES AND SPAIN.
[1818.
occupied by its founders : and it seemed, moreover, evident that the citizens of the United States would enjoy many and great advantages over all other people in the country in question, in eon- sequence of their superior facilities of access to it, especially since the introduction of steam vessels on the Mississippi and its branches.
In the same year, a negotiation was carried on at Washington, between the governments of the United States and Spain, in which the question of boundaries on the north-west side of America was likewise discussed. The Spanish minister, Don Luis de Onis, began by declaring that " the right and dominion of the crown of Spain to the north-west coast of America as high as the Californias, is certain and indisputable ; the Spaniards having explored it as far as the 47th degree, in the expedition under Juan de Fuca, in 1592, and in that under Admiral Fonte, to the 55th degree, in 1640. The dominion of Spain in these vast regions being thus established, and her rights of discovery, conquest, and possession, being never dis- puted, she could scarcely possess a property founded on more re- spectable principles, whether of the law of nations, of public law, or of any others which serve as a basis to such acquisitions as compose all the independent kingdoms and states of the earth." Upon these positive assertions, the American plenipotentiary, Mr. J. Q. Adams, secretary of state, did not consider himself required to offer any comment ; and the origin, extent, and value, of the claims of Spain to the north-western portion of America remained unquestioned during the discussion. The negotiation was broken off in the early part of the year, soon after its commencement ; it was, however, renewed, and was terminated on the 22d of February, 1819, by a treaty commonly called the Florida treaty, in which the southern boundaries of the United States were definitively fixed. Spain ceded Florida to the American republic, which relinquished all claims to territories west of the River Sabine, and south of the upper parts of the Red and the Arkansas Rivers; and it was agreed that a line drawn on the meridian from the source of the Arkansas northward to the 42d parallel of latitude, and thence along that parallel westward to the Pacific, should form the northern boundary of the Spanish possessions, and the southern boundary of those of the United States, in that quarter, - " His Catholic majesty ceding to the United States all his rights, claims, and pretensions, to any territories north of the said linc."
The provisions of this treaty, particularly those relating to limits, appear to have been as nearly just as any which could have been
317
TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND SPAIN.
1818.]
framed ; and, as an almost necessary consequence, they were not received with general satisfaction by either nation. The Spanish government withheld its ratification of the treaty for nearly two years ; and within a year after that ratification had been made, the authority of Spain was extinguished in every portion of America which she had formerly possessed contiguous to the boundary thus established in 1819 .* The territories immediately adjoining that boundary on the south, including Texas, New Mexico, and Califor- nia, then became attached to the Mexican republic, with which power the United States subsequently concluded a treaty confirm- ing the limits settled with Spain.
With regard to the extent of the territory west of the Rocky Mountains, and the validity of the title to it thus acquired by the United States, it will be convenient here to introduce some observa- tions : as the British government has since maintained that the only rights possessed by the United States in that part of America are those derived from Spain through the Florida treaty ; and that they are merely the rights secured to Spain, in common with Great Britain, in 1790, by the Nootka convention.
* The third article of the Florida treaty, defining the boundary as settled, will be found among the Proofs and Illustrations, in the latter part of this volume, under the letter K, No. 3. The whole correspondence is contained in the documents accompa- nying President Monroe's message to Congress of February 22d, 1819. Great skill, as well as knowledge of the subject, is displayed in the notes of each of the plenipoten- ciaries, particularly in those of Mr. Adams, who moreover exhibits, in every part, that earnestness arising from profound conviction of the justice of his cause, which has so much weight even in diplomacy.
Many curious facts relative to the negotiation have subsequently been brought to light, especially in the Memoir published by the Spanish plenipotentiary, in his defence, after his return to Spain, in 1820. He there shows clearly, that he was by no means convinced that the territory in dispute beyond the Sabine did not properly form a part of Louisiana; and he declares expressly, that his principal object in the long corre- spondence which he kept up on that subject, was to gain time. In fact, during the summer of 1818, while the correspondence was partially suspended, (with the same object of gaining time, no doubt,) the Spanish government formally applied to that of Great Britain for aid, or at least for its mediation, in the affair ; to which Lord Castle- reagh immediately and decidedly answered in the negative, at the same time advising the Spanish government to cede Florida to the United States, and to make any other arrangement which might be deemed proper, without delay. The Chevalier de Onis, in his Memoir, claims the praise of his nation for having exchanged the small and com- paratively unimportant province of Florida for the rich and productive territory of Texas. "I will agree," he adds, " that the third article might, with greater clearness, have been expressed thus -' In exchange the United States cede to his Catholic majesty the province of Texas,' &c. - but as I had been for three years maintaining, in the lengthened correspondence herein inserted, that this province belonged to the king, it would have been a contradiction to express, in the treaty, that the United States cede it to his majesty."
318
DURATION OF THE NOOTKA CONVENTION. [1819.
That the Nootka convention expired on the declaration of war by Spain against Great Britain in 1796, and could not have been after that period in force, except in virtue of a distinct and formal renewal by the same parties - is consonant with the universal practice of civ- ilized nations, and especially of Great Britain, as manifested during the well-known negotiations between her government and that of the United States, in 1815, respecting the Newfoundland fishery. Mr. Adams, the American plenipotentiary, on that occasion, insisted that his countrymen should continue, not only to fish on the Banks of Newfoundland, but also to land on the British American coasts for the same purpose, as they had done before the war of 1812, by the treaty of 1783, although that treaty had not been renewed by the treaty of Ghent, at the termination of the war - upon the ground that the treaty of 1783, by which Great Britain acknowledged the independence of the United States, was " of a peculiar nature, and bore, in that nature, a character of permanency, not subject, like many of the ordinary contracts between independent nations, to abrogation by a subsequent war between the same parties." To this the British minister, Lord Bathurst, answered, that, " if the United States derived from the treaty of 1783 privileges from which other independent nations, not admitted by treaty, were excluded, the duration of those privileges must depend on the duration of the instrument by which they were granted; and if the war abrogated the treaty, it deter- mined the privileges. It has been urged, indeed," continues his lordship, " on the part of the United States, that the treaty of 1783 was of a peculiar nature, and that, because it contained a recognition of American independence, it could not be abrogated by a subse- quent war between the parties. To a position of this novel nature Great Britain cannot accede. She knows of no exception to the rule, that all treaties are put an end to by a subsequent war between the same parties : she cannot, therefore, consent to give to her diplo- matic relations with one state a different degree of permanency from that on which her connection with all other states depends. Nor can she consider any one state at liberty to assign to a treaty, made with her, such a peculiarity of character, as shall make it, as to duration, an exception to all other treaties, in order to found on a peculiarity thus assumed an irrevocable title to all indulgences which have all the features of temporary concessions." The British minister, indeed, admitted that recognitions of right in a treaty might be considered as perpetual obligations : and, refer- ring to the terms of the treaty of 1783, he showed that the right of
319
THE NOOTKA CONVENTION EXPIRED IN 1796.
1819.]
the Americans to fish on the banks of Newfoundland (that is to say, in the open sea) was there distinctly acknowledged, while the liberty to use the British coasts for the same purpose was conceded to them ; and that, although the right subsisted in virtue of the independence of the United States, the liberty expired on the declaration of war in 1812, and could not again be enjoyed, without the express con- sent of Great Britain. It may be added that the position thus assumed by the British government was maintained throughout the negotiation ; at the end of which, the liberty to take and cure fish on certain parts of the British American coasts, so long as they should remain unsettled, was secured to the citizens of the United States, in common with British subjects, forever, by the first article of the convention of October 20th, 1818 .*
Applying to the Nootka convention the rule thus enforced by Great Britain in 1815, with all its exceptions in their widest sense, there can be no question that this compact was entirely abrogated by the war between that power and Spain, begun in October, 1796. On analyzing the convention, it will be seen that the first, second, and eighth articles relate exclusively to certain acts, which were to be forthwith performed by one or both of the parties, and which having been performed, as they all were, before 1796, those articles became dead letters. By the third article, " it is agreed, in order to strengthen the bonds of friendship, and to preserve, in future, a perfect harmony and good understanding between the two contracting parties," that their respective subjects shall not be disturbed or molested in navigating or fishing in the Pacific or Southern Oceans, or in land- ing on the coasts of those seas in places not already occupied, "for the purpose of carrying on their commerce with the natives of the country, or of making settlements there ; " under certain restrictions, nevertheless, to the specification of which the fourth, fifth, and sixth articles are entirely devoted : the remaining seventh article merely indicating the course to be pursued in cases of infraction of the others. The Nootka convention thus contains nothing which can be construed as a perpetual obligation, no assertion or recogni- tion of right, which can be deemed irrevocable ; but is, as a whole, and in each of its separate stipulations, a concession, or series of concessions. To navigate and fish in the open sea, and to trade and settle on coasts unoccupied by any civilized nation, are indeed rights claimed by all civilized nations : Spain, however, did not
* Correspondence annexed to President Monroe's message to Congress of Deceni- ber 29th, 1818.
320
THE NOOTKA CONVENTION EXPIRED IN 1796.
[1819.
acknowledge these rights as existing in any other power with regard to the Pacific and Southern Oceans and their American coasts ; and, by the Nootka convention, she merely engaged to desist from the exercise of privileges claimed by her in those seas and coasts, so far as British subjects might be affected by them, on condition that Great Britain should desist from the exercise of privileges claimed by her, in the same quarters of the world. After the abrogation of the convention by war, each nation might again assert and exercise the privileges claimed by it before the conclusion of the compact; and neither could be regarded as bound by any of the restrictions defined in that instrument, until they had been formally renewed by express consent of both the original parties.
The war begun by Spain against Great Britain, in 1796, con- tinued, with the intermission of the two years of uncertainty suc- ceeding the peace of Amiens, until 1809, when those nations were again allied, in opposition to France. Since that period, they have remained constantly at peace with each other. The only engage- ment made between them for the renewal of treaties subsisting before 1796, is contained in the first of the three additional articles to the treaty of Madrid, signed on the 24th of August, 1814, wherein " It is agreed that, pending the negotiation of a new treaty of com- merce, Great Britain shall be admitted to trade with Spain, upon the same conditions as those which existed previously to 1796; all the treaties of commerce, which at that period subsisted between the two nations, being hereby ratified and confirmed." Thus the Nootka convention could not have been in force at any time between Octo- ber, 1796, and August, 1814; nor since that period, unless it were renewed by the additional article above quoted. That the first part of this article related only to trade between the European dominions of Great Britain and Spain, is certain, because no trade had ever been allowed, by treaty or otherwise, between either kingdom, or its colonies, and the colonies of the other, except in the single case of the Asiento, concluded in 1713, and abrogated in 1740, agreeably to which the British South Sea Company supplied the Spanish colonies with negro slaves during that period ; and because, more- over, by an article in the treaty of Madrid, to which the above- quoted article is additional, " In the event of the commerce of the Spanish American colonies being opened to foreign nations, his Catholic majesty promises that Great Britain shall be admitted to trade with those possessions, as the most favored nation." The second part of the additional article is evidently intended merely in confir-
321
THE NOOTKA CONVENTION EXPIRED IN 1796.
1819.]
mation and completion of the first, which would otherwise have want- ed the requisite degree of precision ; and it certainly could not have embraced the convention of 1790, except so far as related to the commerce of each of the parties on the unoccupied coasts of Amer- ica, and the settlements made by each for that special purpose.
Had the convention of 1790 been expressly renewed and con- firmed in 1814, it would still have been inoperative, except with regard to subjects and establishments of the contracting parties. The governments of Great Britain and Spain might have again agreed that their subjects should reciprocally enjoy liberty of access and trade, in all establishments which either might form on the north-west coasts of America ; but neither power could have claimed such rights in places on those coasts then occupied by a third nation.
It has been already shown that, after the abandonment of Nootka Sound by the Spaniards, in March, 1795, no settlement was made, or attempted, by them in any of the countries on the western side of America north of the Bay of San Francisco ; and that, during the period between that year and 1814, many establishments were formed in those countries by Russians, British, and citizens of the United States. The Russians extended their posts from Aliaska eastward to Sitka, and even fixed themselves within a few miles of the Bay of San Francisco. The British founded their first establish- ment west of the Rocky Mountains, in 1806, on the upper waters of Fraser's River, near the 54th degree of latitude. The Columbia was surveyed by order of the government of the United States, with a view to its occupation, in 1805; and their citizens made estab- lishments on that river successively in 1808, 1810, and 1811, of which the principal were, in 1813, taken by the British, and in 1818, restored to the Americans, agreeably to the treaty of Ghent. Under such circumstances, the title of Spain to the countries north of the Bay of San Francisco, however strong it may have been in 1790 or 1796, in virtue of discoveries and settlements, must be allowed to have become considerably weaker in 1819, from disuse, and from submission to the acts of occupation by other powers. Thus, whilst it may be doubted that either of those powers could in justice claim the sovereignty of the country occupied by its sub- jects without the consent of Spain, the latter could not have claimed the exclusive possession of such country, or have entered into com- pacts with a third power, respecting trade, navigation, or settlement, in it, agreeably to any recognized principle of national law. Still less could Great Britain have claimed the right to exclude other
.
41
322
[1819.
LONG'S EXPEDITION TO THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS.
nations from the sovereignty of the regions traversed by the Co- lumbia, in which her subjects had made no discoveries, and which had been first occupied by the United States, unless upon the ground of conquest during war ; and this ground became untenable after the treaty of Ghent, as distinctly acknowledged by the British government in the fact of the restoration of Astoria.
Thus, whilst the title to the countries north of the 42d parallel of latitude, derived by the United States from Spain, through the Florida treaty, was undoubtedly imperfect, - though not from any possible effect of the Nootka convention, as insisted by the British government in 1826, - yet that title, in addition to those previously possessed by the Americans, in virtue of their discoveries and set- tlements in the Columbia countries, appears to constitute a right of occupation in their favor, stronger than could be alleged by any other nation, if not amounting to an absolute right of sovereignty.
Immediately after the signature of the Florida treaty, an expedi- tion for the purpose of examining the country drained by the Missouri and its branches was organized by Mr. Calhoun, then secretary of war of the United States, on a scale of equipment more complete, in every respect, than any of those previously made to that part of America. The party, comprising a large number of officers, men of science, soldiers, and other persons, under the command of Major Stephen Long, quitted Pittsburg on the 60th of May, 1819, in a steam vessel which had been specially con- structed for the purpose, and pursued their route down the Ohio, and up the Mississippi and Missouri, examining many interesting points in their way, as far as Council Bluffs, on the last-mentioned river, eight hundred and fifty miles above its confluence with the Mississippi. Near this place they spent the winter, and lost several of their men from scurvy ; and, in the spring of 1820, orders were received from Washington, in consequence of which, many of the objects proposed were abandoned, and the operations were re- stricted to tracing the Platte and Arkansas Rivers to their sources. They accordingly, in June, proceeded up the valley of the Platte, a very shallow stream, as its name imports, to the confluence of its north and south branches or forks, distant about three hundred and twenty miles from its mouth, and then continued along the south fork, to its sources in the Rocky Mountains, near the 40th degree of latitude. Here, on the 13th of July, Dr. James, the botanist of the expedition, ascended a mountain, named after him James's Peak, the height of which was estimated, though on data by no
323
STERILITY OF THE CENTRAL REGIONS OF AMERICA.
1820.]
means sufficient, at not less than eight thousand five hundred feet above the ocean level ; and then, striking the head-waters of the Arkansas, which also flows from the same mountain, they de- scended the valley of that river to its junction with the Mississippi. Much information was obtained, through this expedition, respect- ing the geography, natural history, and aboriginal inhabitants, of the countries traversed, all of which was communicated to the world in an exact and perspicuous narrative, published by Dr. James in 1823. One most important fact, in a political point of view, was completely established by the observations of the party ; namely, that the whole division of North America, drained by the Missouri and the Arkansas, and their tributaries, between the meridian of the mouth of the Platte and the Rocky Mountains, is almost entirely unfit for cultivation, and therefore uninhabitable by a people depending upon agriculture for their subsistence. The portion of this territory within five hundred miles of the Rocky Mountains, on the east, extending from the 39th to the 49th paral- lels of latitude, was indeed found to be a desert of sand and stones ; and subsequent observations have shown the adjoining regions, to a great distance west of those mountains, to be still more arid and sterile. These circumstances, as they became known through the United States, rendered the people and their repre- sentatives in the federal legislature more and more indifferent with regard to the territories on the north-western side of the continent. It became always difficult, and generally impossible, to engage the attention of Congress to any matters connected with those countries : emigrants from the populous states of the Union would not banish themselves to the distant shores of the Pacific, whilst they could obtain the best lands on the Mississippi and its branches at mod- erate prices ; and capitalists would not vest their funds in establish- ments for the administration and continued possession of which they could have no guarantee. From 1813 until 1823, few, if any, American citizens were employed in the countries west of the Rocky Mountains ; and ten years more elapsed before any settle- ment was formed, or even attempted, by them in that part of the world.
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.