USA > California > The history of Oregon and California & the other territories of the northwest coast of North America > Part 42
USA > Oregon > The history of Oregon and California & the other territories of the northwest coast of North America > Part 42
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
As it would be impossible, within a reasonable space, to present clearly all the views of the different members of the Senate, who took part in this discussion, nothing more will be here attempted than to indicate, generally, the most striking points touched by each.
Mr. Linn, as the proposer of the bill, explained and defended each of its provisions, on the grounds of their justice, of their compatibil- ity with the existing diplomatic arrangements, and of their efficiency for the attainment of the end in view, namely, - the possession of these extensive and valuable territories, by the United States, to which they belong of right. After recapitulating the various grounds
380
[1843.
DEBATES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
of that right, he contended that the Americans had been deprived of the privileges of the joint occupancy, secured to them by the existing convention of 1827, in consequence of the encroachments of the Hudson's Bay Company, which, under the direct protection of the British government, had taken actual possession of the whole terri- tory beyond the Rocky Mountains. Great Britain, he insisted, was there employing the same policy and mechanism, of a great trading company, by means of which she had made her way to the domin- ion of India : she had already practically taken possession of all that she ever claimed south and north of the Columbia; her agents have directly avowed that she would not give up the estab- lishments which she had encouraged her subjects to form there ; and as a farther proof of her intentions, the Hudson's Bay Company had, within a few years, founded farming settlements, on an extensive scale, from which large exports of provisions are made to the Russian posts, and the Sandwich Islands. The bill proposed, con- tinued Mr. Linn, does not pretend to dispossess Great Britain of what she now holds ; it does not define the territory of the United States. Can that power object to proceedings on the part of the United States, similar to her own ? She has extended her jurisdic- tion over Oregon, has built forts, and set up farming and other establishments. Why cannot the Americans do the same ?
Mr. Sevier, considered that the justice of the claims of the United States being admitted, there should be no delay in taking possession of the country claimed, for which the only means were, to provide an adequate amount of population, within the shortest time. The inducements held out to settlers by the bill, were trifling, when compared with the difficulties to which they would be subjected ; and not only should the lands be granted to them, and forts be built, and garrisoned for their protection, but, if necessary, a railroad should be made from the Missouri to the Columbia, as he contended might be done, for two millions of dollars, over which emigrants might be conveyed in two or three days.
Mr. Benton, in defence of the bill, entered at length into the his- tory of discovery and settlement, on the west coasts of North Amer- ica, also presenting and reviewing the various conventions between civilized nations, with regard to it. He considered the right of the United States, to the territories south of the 49th parallel of latitude, as determined by the possession of Louisiana, the northern boundary of which he asserted to have been fixed at that parallel, by commis-
381
DEBATES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
1843.]
sioners, appointed agreeably to the treaty of Utrecht; and he was prepared for war, if necessary, rather than surrender any part of the territory, thus rightfully belonging to his country, the agricultural, commercial and political advantages of which he described in detail, displaying the same minute and accurate knowledge with regard to its geography and resources, as he had shown respecting its history.
Mr. Morehead supported the same views. Examining the con- vention of 1827, he conceived, that it provided only for temporary occupation ; but that the felling of forests, the construction of regu- lar habitations, the fencing in of fields, the regular improvement of the soil, the fitting up of mills and workshops, and, added to all these, the erection of forts to protect them, as had been done by the British, in Oregon, meant something more, and were intended to constitute a lasting, and, of course, exclusive occupation of the places thus appropriated. Now these are not merely the acts of the Hudson's Bay Company ; they are done under the sanction of the British government, and they form the system adopted everywhere by that government, for territorial encroachment, especially against nations capable of resisting a direct attack.
Mr. Woodbury took a view, somewhat different, of the bearing of the convention of 1827, which he regarded as leaving to each party the right to settle, provided the trade were left free to both ; in support of this construction, he cited the declarations of the British ministers, during the negotiations on that subject, and the stipulation proposed by them, - that " neither party should assume, or exercise any right of sovereignty or dominion over any part of the country," and - that " no settlement then existing, or which might in future be made, should ever be adduced by either party, in sup- port, or furtherance of such claims of sovereignty, or dominion." On these grounds, he considered that the bill should pass, and that the United States should no longer hesitate to exercise rights, which Great Britain did not scruple to exercise herself.
Mr. Phelps concurred with Mr. Woodbury, in his construction of the convention of 1827, which he conceived, would not be violated by the section of the bill, providing for grants of land to settlers. The grants proposed, are but prospective. Citizens of the United States are invited to settle in Oregon, and, after having resided there five years, certain portions of land are to be secured to them. Within those five years, the questions of right to the territory will have been determined, and if those who have acted on the faith of
382
DEBATES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. [1843.
the invitation, do not then receive the advantages promised, their government will, of course, be bound to indemnify them.
Mr. Young was also convinced of the right of the United States to the territory claimed by them beyond the Rocky Mountains ; and would give his full support to the bill, which he conceived in no The point at variance with the stipulations of the convention.
grant of lands was promised, and not to be directly made. It was the constant custom of this government, not to make the final grant, until all conflicting title had been extinguished, as evinced by the treaties with Indian tribes, for the acquisition of their titles to lands : Great Britain, knowing this, could not object, but would consider that the measure is provisional, and that as a negotiation was pending for the adjustment of boundaries west of the Rocky Moun- tains, no grant could be made until that question had been settled.
Mr. Mac Roberts dwelt particularly on the importance to the claims of the United States, of the convention of 1790, between Great Britain and Spain ; the fifth article of which, according to his construction, assured to Spain the sovereignty of all the coasts and territories on the Pacific, south of Nootka Sound.
Mr. Henderson regarded the act of the British parliament, ex- tending the jurisdiction of the courts of Canada over Oregon, to be an act of possession, and implying either no such legal equalities on the part of the United States, or that they also had their tribunals, asserting their rights of jurisdiction ; which latter state of things, would be a conflict of jurisdictions, incapable of being reconciled.
Mr. Huntingdon, though firmly convinced of the rights of the United States to the territory in question, and of the propriety of making them good, so soon as possible, could not but consider the bill as an infringement of the existing convention with Great Britain. An exercise by either government, of the sovereign right to grant lands, would be incompatible with that freedom and openness of the territory to the people of both nations, which was the capital object of the convention. Such a gift of lands was the highest act of territorial sovereignty ; both parties could not exercise it at once, and the people of the one not exercising it, must, of necessity, be excluded, not only from the enjoyment of what was stipulated as free to both, but from the territory itself, except on terms of suffer- ance and inferiority. The present state of things should undoubt- edly be ended, but in the manner provided by the convention, namely, - by giving immediate notice to Great Britain of the inten-
383
DEBATES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
1843.]
tion of the United States to abrogate that convention, at the expi- ration of a year.
Mr. Mac Duffie opposed the bill in toto. He insisted, that its adoption would be a violation of the convention with Great Britain ; as its tendency was, and could be no other than to take possession of the country, and to make ready by all means and appliances, to maintain that possession. It was an invitation to the citizens of the Union - not to carry on the fur-trade, nor to do that which the convention permits - but to settle permanently. For such a meas- ure, he denied that any emergency then called. The question had slept for many years, whilst the United States were at the height of their prosperity ; and it was most imprudent to bring it up now, when their condition was far otherwise, and to brandish the sword in the face of a powerful opponent, when there was every proba- bility that the matter might be arranged peaceably by negotiation. He said, that Great Britain had done nothing which indicated an intention to establish for herself an exclusive occupation. Her forts were nothing more than stockades, made by her traders, for their protection against Indians ; and the only mode in which her sub- jects have interfered with American citizens has been by under- selling them in the commerce with the natives. He then proceeded to inquire what advantages the United States could derive from the territories of which it was proposed, at these hazards and costs, to take possession. He represented the whole region beyond the Rocky Mountains, and a vast tract between that chain and the Mississippi, as a desert, utterly without value for agricultural pur- poses, and which no American citizen should be condemned to in- habit, unless as a punishment ; and he combated the idea, that steam could ever be employed to facilitate communications across the continent, between the Columbia countries and the States of the Union. The expenses which the passage of the bill must entail, would, he conceived, be incalculable, whilst no returns could be expected for them. The fur-trade, if advantageous, could benefit only a few capitalists, for whose advancement the agriculture, com- merce, and industry of the whole republic should not be taxed. In conclusion, he entreated the Senate to pause - to wait a year or two years, in order to see what might be done by peaceful means, and without a ruinous waste of resources.
Mr. Calhoun presented a summary of the ground of the claims of the United States and of Great Britain to the territories in question,
384
DEBATES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. [1843.
and of the arrangements attempted, as well as of those made ; and, reviewing the provisions of the bill, he conceived that it directly violated the subsisting convention on the subject between the two nations. The American government, it is true, does not, by this bill, confer grants of land upon its citizens, but it binds itself to do so; and that engagement forms a complete reality as to assuming possession. Upon examining all the acts of Great Britain, with re- gard to those countries, he could find nothing in them of equal ex- tent and force ; the act of parliament of 1821 merely extends the jurisdiction of British laws over British subjects, and authorizes no possession. He could not but anticipate a breach of the peace with Great Britain, if the part of the bill then before the Senate, relating to grants of land, were carried into effect ; all its other provisions he regarded favorably, and he was resolved to contribute, so far as lay in his power, to the maintenance of all the rights of the United States which could be exercised conformably with the convention of 1827. With regard to the value of the territory to the United States, he differed with his colleague (Mr. Mac Duffie). He be- lieved the possession of the countries of the Columbia to be impor- tant in many respects ; but he considered that the time was not come, when their occupation should be attempted, at the risk of a war with the most powerful nation of the earth. The advance of the citizens of the Union over the western regions, had been already rapid, beyond all the calculations of the most sanguine statesmen ; no extraordinary means were required from their government to accelerate it. He was desirous to give to the bill all the attention which its importance required ; and he hoped that it would be re- committed to the committee on Foreign Relations, whose report would doubtless throw additional light on the subjeet.
Mr. Rives likewise presented a historical review of the circum- stances on which the titles of the United States and Great Britain were founded. Great Britain had taken measures to occupy the country in question, the United States had taken none, and their right might thus have been considered in time as waived, but for the convention which preserved it untouched. It was time that the United States should act on the subject ; and if the bill could be recommitted and reported again, without the clause for granting lands to settlers, he would give it his hearty support : but considering that provision as inconsistent with the terms of the existing conven- tion with Great Britain, he could not approve it in its present form.
385
DEBATES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
1843.]
Mr. Choate opposed the provision in the bill for grants of land ; but in all other particulars he was entirely in favor of it. He con- tended that, agreeably to the convention of 1827, still subsisting, neither government, as a government, could do any thing to divest the citizens or subjects of the other of the enjoyment of the common freedom of the country; and if the subjects or citizens of either made establishments there, they did so at their own risk, and neither government was called to interfere. If this bill were passed, its effect must be to hinder some part of the territory from being open, except as regards American citizens. He was willing that the United States should, as Great Britain had done, and as permitted by the convention, extend their jurisdiction over all the countries to which the bill applies, and erect forts where needed ; but not do more. If they had not done so earlier, it was to be attributed to their own supineness, not to the injustice of the other party. In conclusion, he recommended, either that notice be given to Great Britain of the intention of the United States to abrogate the con- vention at the end of a year ; or - better still - that a negotiation be immediately commenced, by means of which, the only material subject of difficulty with that power, may be terminated amicably.
Mr. Berrien objected to the bill proposed, on many grounds, as to its principles and its details. The question was one of the ut- most gravity, - of a future empire, to be founded in the west, by the institutions and commerce of the United States, - a question, with which weighty considerations are complicated, including an important compact with a foreign power. That power has its own views on this question, at variance with those of the United States, but on which she doubtless believes as fully. This bill, however, supposes all the right to be on the side of the Union, which is thus legislating upon an ex parte decision. The territory, which forms the subject of the discussion, is a barren and savage region, as yet unoccupied by the people of either nation, except for hunting, fish- ing, and trading with the natives ; all which are conducted freely and'equally by the people of both nations, under the faith of a con- vention to that effect : and by the side of this compact a bill is placed, which assumes and engages to give the soil itself, and all that goes with it, not merely for the term of the duration of the convention, but " as long as the grass shall grow or the waters shall flow." The patents, thus granted, would bar all British subjects from particular spots ; and the act of granting them being a clear
49
386
DEBATES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. [1843.
and positive appropriation, by the American government, of that domain, would certainly be a violation of the compact. It has been alleged, that the patents are not immediate, but provisional ; that the government pledges itself to issue them to those entitled to receive them, at the end of five years: but there is no difference between these two forms of the act of a government - of a per- petual body ; the parties are put into present possession, and pro- tection is promised to them there. The bill, moreover, violates the faith of the political contract at home, by interfering with the treaty-making power of the executive. The adjustment of the matter by negotiation with Great Britain, is only postponed, in order that it may be soon resumed, with the prospect of accommodation ; and it is most inexpedient, at such a moment, to interfere with the legitimate organ of the government, for such functions. Were the bill passed, it would warrant, in his opinion, the exercise, by the President, of the qualified veto, given to him by the constitution, for the protection of the peculiar prerogative of his office.
Mr. Archer directed his attention chiefly to what he considered as the two great points presented for consideration by this bill ; namely - the consistency of the provision for granting allodial titles to lands in Oregon, with the stipulations of the Convention of 1837 --- and the general policy of accelerating the settlement of that territory by the people of the United States. Upon the first point he shewed, by reference to the proceedings and results of the several negotia- tions between the United States and Great Britain on the subject, that the title to the territory had been the only question discussed ; that no agreement on that question had ever been attained, and that the two governments, finding it impossible to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion, had, by the convention, dissoluble at the pleasure of either, left the country equally free to the people of both. The title was thus in suspense, and with it were suspended all the privileges flowing therefrom, except those of temporary use; most especially was suspended the right to grant a property in the soil: and if this were not the true meaning and intention of the agreement, it was vain and useless. No breach of the contract on the part of Gayr t Britain had been proved; the people of that nation had i. ded gained advantages in trade over the citizens of the United States : yet it was not by constraint or intimidation, but by greater dexterity in business, which involved no contravention of stipulations, and could authorize no contravention on the other side. If the present
387
DEBATES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
1843.]
bill should become a law, the United States must be prepared to maintain and execute all its provisions ; and Great Britain, though like the United States, directly interested in the continuance of peace, would, if she viewed the measures in question as an infringe- ment of the Convention, stand upon that point, when she might not stand upon the value of the territory. War might be the conse- quence, and it was proper to consider on which side the advantages would be in the contest, and what would be its results. In any case, whether or not war should ensue, the question of the posses- sion of Oregon could only be decided by negotiation ; and if, at the end of a war, the United States should obtain all that they here claim, it would be but a poor recompense for the evils and costs incurred. With regard to the policy of accelerating the settlement of the territory west of the Rocky Mountains, by American citizens, Mr. Archer coincided nearly in opinion with Mr. Mac Duffie ; he con- sidered that territory as of little value to any nation ; the part near the coast alone contained land fit for agricultural purposes, and there were no harbors which were or could be rendered tolerable. The United States had seven hundred millions of acres of land east of the Rocky Mountains still vacant, of which a large portion was more fertile and salubrious than any other lands, wherever they might be, even in Oregon ; these should be occupied before the population could with reason be urged to establish themselves in the latter country. In conclusion, he had no objection to the extension of the jurisdiction of the United States to the Pacific, in the manner pro- posed by the bill, or to the erection of forts on the Columbia, if they should be found necessary ; or to any other measure which might be taken pari passu with Great Britain, not inconsistent with reciprocal stipulations : but he should oppose the provision respecting grants of land, not only for the reasons already given, but also because it would tend to defeat the very object of the bill, namely, - the ultimate possession of the country west of the Rocky Mountains by the Uni- ted States.
To the objections thus made to his bill, Mr. Linn replied at 3- +h, displaying considerable ingenuity of argument, particularly wit. . e object of shewing that all which was thereby openly pro- posed had been already done in a covert manner by Great Britain. He dwelt on the great importance of the Oregon countries, - on the vast extent of lands on the Columbia and its tributary streams, which were said to exceed in productiveness any in the States of
388
DEBATES IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. [1843.
the Union, - and on the number and excellence of the harbors on those coasts, the use of which was imperatively required by the American whaling vessels employed in the adjacent ocean, -on the facility with which travel and transportation might be effected across the continent, by means of ordinary roads at present, and by railroads hereafter ; and he produced a number of letters, reports, and other documents from various sources, confirming all these statements. Finally, he appealed to the honor and generosity of the nation, for its protection to the American citizens already established in Oregon, who had gone thither in confidence that such aid would be extended to them, and were groaning under the oppressions of the Hudson's Bay Company.
Previous to the final vote, Mr. Archer endeavored to have the clause, respecting the grants of lands, struck out; but his motion did not prevail, and on the 3d of February, 1843, the bill was passed by the Senate, twenty-four being for, and twenty-two against it. It was immediately sent to the House of Representa- tives, in which a report against its passage was made by Mr. Adams, the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs ; the session, however, expired, without any debate on the subject in that house .*
During the many years in the course of which the question of the occupation of Oregon by the United States was frequently dis- cussed in Congress, nothing whatever was said on that subject, in the British Parliament, before . 1843. The debates on Mr. Linn's bill, in which the whole policy of the American government, its means and intentions, its strength and its weakness, were minutely set forth and communicated to the world, did not however fail to elieit some observations from the leaders of the two parties in the House of Commons. Whilst the treaty recently concluded at Washington, relative to boundaries east of the Lake of the Woods, was before that body, frequent allusions were made to the measures proposed in Congress " for immediately taking forcible possession " of Oregon, and to the spirit of the American people on that subject, as indicated by the speeches, and the passage of the bill for those measures, in the Senate .; Lord Palmerston, the leader of the op-
* This was destined to be the last effort of Mr. Linn, for the advancement of the cause to which he had so long devoted his powerful energies. He expired on the 3d of October, 1843, at his residence in St. Genevieve, Missouri, without warning, and probably without a struggle.
t Debates in Parliament, March 21st, 1843.
389
REVIEW OF THE CONVENTION OF 1827.
1843.]
position to the ministry, pronounced, that if this bill were to pass, and be acted on, it would be a declaration of war ; it would be the invasion and seizure of a territory, in dispute, by virtue of a decree, made by one of the parties in its own favor: he moreover con- ceived, that the passage of such a bill by the Senate, a body comprising among its members a large portion of the men of the greatest weight and most distinguished ability in the United States, showed a most excited condition of the public mind in that country. In answer to this, Sir Robert Peel, the Premier, simply said, that a proposition had been addressed to the American government, for considering the best means of effecting a conciliatory adjustment of the questions with regard to Oregon ; and if the bill had passed the legislature of the Union, it would not have received the sanc- tion of the executive, which had given to the British government the strongest assurances of anxiety, to settle those questions by negotiation.
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.