An illustrated history of Skagit and Snohomish Counties; their people, their commerce and their resources, with an outline of the early history of the state of Washington, Part 12

Author: Inter-state Publishing Company (Chicago, Ill.)
Publication date: 1906
Publisher: [Chicago] Interstate Publishing Company
Number of Pages: 1172

USA > Washington > Skagit County > An illustrated history of Skagit and Snohomish Counties; their people, their commerce and their resources, with an outline of the early history of the state of Washington > Part 12
USA > Washington > Snohomish County > An illustrated history of Skagit and Snohomish Counties; their people, their commerce and their resources, with an outline of the early history of the state of Washington > Part 12

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).

The United States claimed theoretically that it was the possessor of a vested right to absolute sovereignty over the entire Oregon territory, and in all the negotiations after the signing of the treaty of Florida, its ambassadors claimed that the title of their country was clearly established. The fact, however, that joint occupancy was agreed to at all after 1828 could hardly be construed in any other light than as a confession of weakness in our title, notwithstanding the unequivocal stipulations that neither party should attempt anything in derogation of the other's claims, and that the controversy should be determined upon its merits as they existed prior to 1818. If the United States came into possession of an absolute title in 1819. why should it afterward permit occupation by British subjects and the en- forcement of British law in its domain ?

The United States' title, as before stated, rested upon three foundation stones-its own discoveries

INTRODUCTORY

and explorations, the discoveries and explorations of the Spaniards, and the purchase of Louisiana. While it was not contended that any of these con- veyed exclusive right, the position of our country was that each supplemented the other ; that, though while vested in different nations they were antag- onistic, when held by the same nation, they, taken together, amounted to a complete title. The title was therefore cumulative in its nature and had in it the weakness which is inherent under such con- ditions. It was impossible to determine with definite- ness how many partial titles, the value of each being a matter of uncertainty, would cumulatively amount to one complete title. And however clear the right of the United States might seem to its own states- men, it is evident that conviction must be pro- duced in the minds of the British also if war was to be avoided.

These facts early came to be appreciated by a clear-visioned, well-informed and determined little band in congress. The debates in that body, as well as numerous publications sent out among the people, stimulated a few daring spirits to brave the dangers of Rocky mountain travel and to see for themselves the truth with regard to Oregon. Reports from these reacted upon congress, enabling it to reason and judge from premises more nearly in accordance with facts. Gradually interest in Oregon became intensified and the determination to hold it for the United States deepened. While the country never receded from its conviction of the existence of an absolute right of sovereignty in itself. the people resolved to establish a title which even the British could not question, to win Oregon from Great Britain even in accordance with the tenets of her own theory. They determined to settle and Americanize the territory. In 1834, and again in 1836, an element of civilization was introduced of a vastly higher nature than any which accompanied the inroads of the Hudson's Bay Company em- ployees and of trappers and traders. We refer to the American missionaries spoken of in former chapters. The part which these had in stimulating this resolution of the American people has been and will be sufficiently treated elsewhere. The results of Whitman's midwinter ride and labors and of the numerous other forces at work among the people were crystallized into action in 1843, when a great, swelling tide of humanity, pulsating with the restless energy and native daring so character- istic of the American, pushed across the desert plains of the continent, through the fastnesses of the Rocky mountains, and into the heart of the disputed terri- tory. Other immigrations followed, and there was introduced into the Oregon question a new feature, the vital force and import of which could not be denied by the adverse claimant. At the same time the American government was placed under an increased obligation to maintain its right to the valley of the Columbia.

But we must return now to the diplomatic history of the controversy, resuming the same with the negotiations of 1831. Martin Van Buren was then minister at London. He received instructions rela- tive to the controversy from Edward Livingston, secretary of state, the tenor of which indicated that the United States was not averse to the presence of the British in the territory. While they asserted confidence in the American title to the entire Oregon territory, they said: "This subject, then, is open for discussion, and, until the rights of the parties can be settled by negotiations, ours can suffer nothing by delay." Under these rather lukewarm instructions, naturally nothing was accomplished.

In 1842 efforts to adjust the boundary west of the Rocky mountains were again resumed, this time on motion of Great Britain. That power requested on October 18th of the year mentioned that the United States minister at London should be furnished with instructions and authority to renew negotiations, giving assurance of its willingness to proceed to the consideration of the boundary subject "in a perfect spirit of fairness, and to adjust it on a basis of equitable compromise." On November 25th Daniel Webster, then secretary of state, replied "that the president concurred entirely in the expe- ciency of making the question respecting the Oregon territory a subject of immediate attention and negotiation between the two governments. He had already formed the purpose of expressing this opinion in his message to congress, and, at no distant day, a communication will be made to the minister of the United States in London."

Negotiations were not, however, renewed until October, 1843, when Secretary Upshur sent instruc- tions to Edward Everett, American minister to Lon- don, again offering the forty-ninth parallel, together with the right of navigating the Columbia river upon equitable terms. In February of the ensuing year. Hon. Richard Packenham, British plenipotentiary, came to the American capital with instructions to negotiate concerning the Oregon territory. No sooner had the discussion fairly begun than a melan- choly event happened, Secretary Upshur being killed on the United States vessel Princeton by the explo- sion of a gun. A few months later his successor. John C. Calhoun, continued the negotiations. The arguments were in a large measure a repetition of those already advanced, but a greater aggressiveness on the part of the British and persistency in deny- ing the claims of the United States were noticeable. As in former negotiations, the privilege accorded by the Nootka convention was greatly relied upon by Great Britain, as proving that no absolute title was retained by Spain after the signing of the treaty. hence none could be assigned. One striking state- ment in Lord Packenham's correspondence was to the effect that "he did not feel authorized to enter into discussion respecting the territory north of the forty-ninth parallel of latitude, which was under-

THE OREGON CONTROVERSY

stood by the British government to form the basis of negotiations on the side of the United States, as the line of the Columbia formed that of Great Britain." He thus showed all too plainly the animus of his government to take advantage of the spirit of compromise which prompted the offer of that line and to construe such offer as an abandonment of the United States' claim to an absolute title to all the Oregon territory. It is hard to harmonize her action in this matter with the "perfect spirit of fairness" professed in the note of Lord Aberdeen to Mr. Webster asking for a renewal of negotiations. No agreement was reached.

During the sessions of congress of 1813-4 memorials, resolutions and petitions from all parts of the union came in in a perfect flood. The people were thoroughly aroused. In the presidential elec- tion which occurred at that time the Oregon question was a leading issue. "Fifty-four, forty or fight" became the rallying cry of the Democratic party. The platform framed in the Democratic national convention declared: "Our title to the whole of Oregon is clear and unquestionable. No portion of the same ought to be ceded to England or any other power; and the reoccupation of Oregon at the earliest practical period is a great American measure." The position of the Whig party was milder and less arrogant, but equally emphatic in its assertion of belief in the validity of the United States' title. The fact that the Democrats carried in the election, despite the warlike tone of their platform and campaign, is conclusive evidence that the people were determined to hold their territory on the Pacific coast regardless of cost. "Never was a government more signally advised by the voice of a united people. The popular pulse had been felt. and it beat strongly in favor of prompt and decisive measures to secure the immediate reoccupation of Oregon. It equally proclaimed that 'no portion thereof ought to be ceded to Great Britain."" In January, 1845, Sir Richard Packenham, the British minister, proposed that the matter in dispute be left to arbitration, which proposal was respectfully declined. So the administration of President Tyler terminated without adjustment of the Oregon difficulty.

Notwithstanding the unequivocal voice of the people in demand of the whole of Oregon, James Buchanan, secretary of state under President Polk, in a communication to Sir Richard Packenham, dated July 12. 1845, again offered the forty-ninth parallel, explaining at the same time that he could not have consented to do so had he not found him- self embarrassed, if not committed. by the acts of his predecessors. Packenham rejected the offer. Buchanan informed him that he was "instructed by the president to say that he owes it to his country. and a just appreciation of her title to the Oregon territory, to withdraw the proposition to the British government which has been made under his direc-

tion : and it is hereby accordingly withdrawn." This formal withdrawal of the previous offers of compro- mise on the forty-ninth parallel, justified as it was by Great Britain's repeated rejections, left the Polk administration free and untrammeled. Appearances indicated that it was now ready to give execution to the popular verdict of 1844. The message of the president recommended that the year's notice, required by the treaty of 1822, be immediately given, that measures be adopted for maintaining the rights of the United States to the whole of Oregon, and that such legislation be enacted as would afford security and protection to American settlers.

In harmony with these recommendations, a reso- lution was adopted April 21, 1846, anthorizing the president "at his discretion to give to the govern- ment of Great Britain the notice required by the second article of the said convention of the 6th of August, 1827, for the abrogation of the same."

Acting in accordance with the resolution, Pres- ident Polk the next day sent notice of the determina- tion of the United States "that, at the end of twelve months from and after the delivery of these presents by the envoy extraordinary and minister plenipoten- tiary of the United States at London, to her Britan- nic Majesty, or to her Majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, the said convention shall be entirely annulled and abrogated."

On the 21th of December, 1845, Sir Richard Packenham had submitted another proposal to arbitrate the matter at issue between the two gov- ernments. The proposal was declined on the ground that to submit the proposition in the form stated would preclude the United States from making a claim to the whole of the territory. On January 11th of the following year, a modified proposal was made to refer "the question of title in either govern- ment to the whole territory to be decided; and if neither were found to possess a complete title to the whole, it was to be divided between them accord- ing to a just appreciation of the claims of each." The answer of Mr. Buchanan was clear and its language calculated to preclikle any more arbitration proposals. He said: "If the government should consent to an arbitration upon such terms, this would be construed into an intimation, if not a direct invi- tation to the arbitrator to divide the territory between the two parties. Were it possible for this government, under any circumstances, to refer the question to arbitration, the title and the title alone, detached from every other consideration, ought to be the only question submitted. The title of the U'nited States, which the president regards clear and unquestionable, can never be placed in jeopardy by referring it to the decision of any individual, whether sovereign, citizen or subject. Nor does he believe the territorial rights of this nation are a proper subject of arbitration."

But the British government seems now to have become determined that the question should be

INTRODUCTORY

settled without further delay. The rejected arbi- tration proposal was followed on the 6th day of June. 1846, by a draft of a proposed treaty sub- mitted by Sir Richard Packenham to Secretary of State Buchanan. The provisions of this were to the effect that the boundary should be continued along the forty-ninth parallel "to the middle of the channel which separates the continent from Vancouver island ; and thence southerly through the middle of said channel and of Fuca's strait to the Pacific ocean." It stipulated that the navigation of the Columbia river should remain free and open to the Hudson's Bay Company and to all British subjects trading with the same ; that the possessory right of that company and of all British subjects south of the forty-ninth parallel should be respected, and that "the farms, lands and other properties of every description belonging to the Puget Sound Agricul- tural Company shall be confirmed to said company. In case, however, the situation of these farms and lands should be considered by the United States to be of public importance, and the United States gov- ernment should signify a desire to obtain possession of the whole, or any part thereof, the property so required shall be transferred to the said government at a proper valuation, to be agreed upon between the parties."

Upon receipt of the important communication embodying this draft, the president asked in advance the advice of the senate, a very umusual, though not an unprecedented procedure. Though the request of the president was dated June 10th, and the con- sideration of the resolution to accept the British proposal was not begun until June 12th, on June 13th it was "resolved ( two-thirds of the senators present consenting ), that the president of the United States be, and is hereby, advised to accept the pro- posal of the British government, accompanying his message to the senate, dated June 10, 1846, for a convention to settle the boundaries, etc., between the United States and Great Britain, west of the Rocky or Stony mountains." The advise was, however. "given under the conviction that, by the trne con- struction of the second article of the project, the rights of the Hudson's Bay Company to navigate the Columbia would expire with the termination of their present license of trade with the Indians, etc .. on the northwest coast of America, on the 30th day of May, 1859."

The wonderful alacrity with which this advice was given and with which five degrees, forty minutes of territory were surrendered to Great Britain, is accounted for by some historians (and no doubt they are correct) by supposing that the "cession" was made in the interests of slavery. The friends of that institution were unwilling to risk a war with Great Britain which would interfere with the war with Mexico and the annexation of Texas. Their plan was to acquire as much territory from which slave states could be formed as possible, and

they were not overserupulous about sacrificing terri- tory which must ultimately develop into free states. But for unfortunate diplomacy, "it is quite probable that British Columbia would be to-day, what many would deem desirable in view of its growing importance, a part of the United States."

Notwithstanding the great sacrifice made by the United States for the sake of peace, it was not long until war clouds were again darkening our national skies. The determining of the line after it reached the Pacific ocean soon became a matter of dispute. Hardly had the ratifications been exchanged when Captain Prevost, for the British government, set up the claim that Rosario was the channel intended in the treaty. The claim was, of course, denied by Mr. Campbell, who was representing the United States in making the survey line. It was contended by him that the Canal de Haro was the channel mentioned in the treaty. Lord Russell, conscious no doubt of the weakness of his case, proposed as a compromise President's channel, between Rosario and De Haro straits. The generosity of this proposal is obvious when we remember that the San Juan islands, the principal bone of contention, would be on the British side of this line. Indeed, Lord Lyons, the British diplomatic representative in the United States, was expressly instructed that no line should be accepted which did not give San Juan to the British. The position of the United States was stated by Secretary of State Lewis Cass, with equal clearness and decisiveness. Efforts to settle the matter geographically proved unavailing and diplomacy again had to undergo a severe test.

For a number of years the matter remained in abevance. Then the pioneer resolved to try the plan he had before resorted to in the settlement of the main question. He pushed into the country with wife and family. The Hudson's Bay Company's representatives were already there, and the danger of a clash of arms between the subjects of the queen and the citizens of the United States, resident in the disputed territory, soon became imminent. Such a collision would undoubtedly involve the two countries in war.

In the session of the Oregon territorial legis- lature of 1852-3, the archipelago to which San Juan island belongs was organized into a county. Taxes were in due time imposed on Hudson's Bay Com- pany property, and when payment was refused, the sheriff promptly sold sheep enough to satisfy the levy. Recriminations followed as a matter of course and local excitement ran high. General Harney, commander of the department of the Pacific, inaugu- rated somewhat summary proceedings. He landed over four hundred and fifty troops on the island, and instructed Captain Pickett to protect American citizens there at all cost. English naval forces of considerable power gathered about the island. Their commander protested against military occupancy. Pickett replied that he could not, under his orders.

THE CAYUSE WAR

permit any joint occupancy. General Harney, how- ever, had acted without instructions from the seat of government, and the president did not approve his measures officially, though it was plainly evident that the administration was not averse to having the matter forced to an issue.

At this juncture, the noted General Scott was sent to the scene of the difficulty, under instructions to permit joint occupancy until the matter in dispute could be settled. Harney was withdrawn from command entirely. Finally, an agreement was reached between General Scott and the British governor at Vancouver that each party should police the territory with one hundred armed men.

Diplomacy was again tried. Great Britain proposed that the question at issue be submitted to arbitration, and she suggested as arbiter the pres- ident of the Swiss council or the king of Sweden and Norway or the king of the Netherlands. The proposition was declined by the United States. For ten years longer the dispute remained unsettled. Eventually, on May 8, 1811, it was mutually agreed to submit the question, without appeal, to the arbitrament of Emperor William, of Germany. George Bancroft, the well-known historian, was

chosen to present the case of the U'nited States, and it is said that "his memorial of one hundred and twenty octavo pages is one of the most finished and unanswerable diplomatic arguments ever produced." The British also presented a memorial. These were interchanged and replies were prepared by each contestant. The emperor gave the matter careful and deliberate attention, calling to his assist- ance three eminent jurists. His award was as fol- lows : "Most in accordance with the true interpreta- tion of the treaty concluded on the 15th of June, 1846, between the governments of her Britannic Majesty and the United States of America, is the claim of the government of the United States, that the boundary line between the territories of her Britannic Majesty and the United States should be drawn through the Haro channel. Authenticated by our autograph signature and the impression of the Imperial Great Scal. Given at Berlin, October 21. 18:2." This brief and unequivocal decree ended forever the vexatious controversy which for so many years had disturbed friendly feelings and endangered the peace of the two great Anglo-Saxon peoples. No shot was fired; no blood was shed; diplomacy had triumphed.

CHAPTER VII

THE CAYUSE WAR

Long before the settlement of the Oregon ques- tion, signs of another struggle for ownership of the country had become distinctly visible. The Indian had begun to perceive what must have been fully apparent to the tutored mind of the more enlight- ened race, that when the sturdy American began following the course of empire to westward, that harsh, inexorable law of life, the survival of the fittest, would be brought home to the red man. He had begun to feel the approach of his own sad fate and was casting about for the means to avert the coming calamity or, if that could not be, to delay the evil hour as long as possible.

Although no large immigration had entered the Oregon country prior to 1843, that of the preceding year numbering only one hundred and eleven, the few settlers of Oregon had already become appre- hensive for the safety of their brethren en route to the west, and Sub-Indian Agent White had sent a message to meet the immigrants of 1813 at Fort

Hall, warning them to travel in companies of not less than fifty and to keep close watch upon their property. The reason for the latter injunction be- came apparent to the travelers in due time, for the Indians, especially those who had become accus- tomed to white people by reason of their residence near the mission. were not slow to help themselves to clothing, household goods, cattle or horses, when an opportunity was offered. However, the fact that none of the immigrants settled near the mission had a quieting effect upon the Indians of that neigh- borhood.

In 1844 an Indian named Cockstock, with a small following. made hostile demonstrations in Oregon City. Failing to provoke a quarrel with the white residents, he retired to an Indian village across the river and endeavored to incite its occu- pants to acts of hostility. In this he failed. It appears that formerly Cockstock had visited the home of Dr. White, purposing to kill him for a

INTRODUCTORY

real or fancied wrong, but, his intended victim being absent, he had not been able to do greater damage than to break the windows of the sub-agent's house. An unsuccessful attempt had been made to arrest him for this offense, and he was now bent on calling the Americans to account for their audacity in pursuing him with such intent. With an interpre- ter he returned to the Oregon City side. He was met at the landing by a number of whites, who doubtless meant to arrest him. In the excitement firearms were discharged on both sides and George W. Le Breton, who had.served as clerk of the first legislative committee of Oregon, was wounded. The other Indians withdrew to a position on the bluffs above town and began shooting at the whites, who returned their fire with such effectiveness as soon to dislodge them. In the latter part of the fight two more Americans were wounded, one of whom died, as did also Le Breton, from the effects of poison from the arrow points. The Indian loss was Cockstock killed and one warrior wounded. Aside from this, there was no serious trouble with Indians in the Willamette valley during the earlier years, though frequently the Indian agent was called upon to settle disputes caused by the appro- priation by Indians of cattle belonging to white menl.

Prior to 1842. a number of indignities had been offered to Dr. Whitman at his mission station at Waiilatpu, near where Walla Walla now is. These he had borne with Christian forbearance. During the winter of 184? he went east. Some of the Indians supposed that he intended to bring enough of his people to punish them for these offenses. He did bring with him in the summer of 1843 nearly nine hundred people, none of whom, however, were equipped for Indian warfare or of a militant spirit. As no offense was offered the Indians and not an acre of their lands was appropriated by these whites. the quiet of the upper country was not disturbed. But the mission was thereafter practically a failure as far as its primary purpose was concerned, as was also that of Rev. H. H. Spalding in the Nez Perce country.

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.

An illustrated history of Skagit and Snohomish Counties; their people, their commerce and their resources, with an outline of the early history of the state of Washington, Part 12

Author: Inter-state Publishing Company (Chicago, Ill.) Publication date: 1906 Publisher: [Chicago] Interstate Publishing Company Number of Pages: 1172

Author: Inter-state Publishing Company (Chicago, Ill.)
Publication date: 1906
Publisher: [Chicago] Interstate Publishing Company
Number of Pages: 1172