Spokane County, Washington - Chapter 1: Early History of Washington, 1900

A brief .sketch or resume of tlie "Oregon question" seems appropriate in a history of any section of the territory included in that discussion. Dr. Barrows calls it the "struggle for possession." Xo c|uestion has ever arisen, perhaps, that came so near precipitating a war between Great Britain and the United States without the actual conflict of arms. It was a question that included all points of international diplomacy and negotiation between the United States and Great Britain regarding title to the Northwest country, and pertained especially to the territory now included in the state of Washington, for the country north of the Columbia river was what Great Britain especially coveted.

Prior to 1818 the Hudson's Bay Company, a powerful corporation, chartered by the British crown. Charles II, in 1670, invaded the Oregon territory, including what are now the states of Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Montana, with traders, hunters and trap])ers. Their possessions were fortified with commercial and sons from the United States found their way into the territory, which led to the discussion as to the ownership of the country. Our great statesmen had very inadequate conceptions of the \-alue and importance of the territory invohed in the discussion. This is e\'idenced in their expressions.

The National Intelligencer in the earlyforties published these words : "Of all thecountries upon the face of the earth Oregon is one of the least favored by heaven.. It is almost as barren as Sahara, and quite as unhealthy as the Campagna of Italy," And Senator Dayton, of New Jersey, proceeded to say, "God forbid that the time slKnikl ever coiue when a state on the shores of the. Pacific, with its interests and tendencies of trade all looking toward the Asiatic nationsof the East, shall add its jarring claims to our already distracted and overburdened confederacy." Evidently the continental idea had not yet reached the senate of these United States.

Daniel Webster said: "What do we want with this vast worthless area, this region of savages and wild beasts, of deserts, of shifting sands and whirlwinds of dust, of cactus and prairie dogs? To what use could we ever hope to put these great des-

"What can we ever hope to do with the -western coast, a coast of three thousand miles, rock-bound, cheerless and uninviting, and nr)t a harbor on it? What use have we for such a country? Mr. President, I will never vote one cent from the public treasury to place the Pacific C(^ast one inch nearer Boston than it is now."

"The ridge of the Rocky mountains may be named as a convenient, natural and e\'erlasting boundary. Along this ridge the western limit of the Republic should be drawn, and the statue of the fabled god Ternii-r.us sliould be erected on its highest peak. ne\er to l)e tlirown down."

These expressions are not to l;e wondered at when we realize that nearly all information pertaining to the country had been received through representatives of the Hud.son's Bay Company or through persons influenced by them. They had advisedly, for selfish purposes, described it as a "miasmatic wilderness, uninhabitable except l)y savage beasts and more saviige men." This was done in order to prevent the settlement of white people in the country, ndiich they knew would ultimately interfere with their lucrative fur traffic with the aborigines of the land.

Both Great Britain and the United States lieing apparently unprepared for definite action, in 181S, a treaty of joint occupation was entered into iiy which "The northwest coast of America \vestward of the Stony Mountains shall be o]5en to the subjects of the two contracting powers, not to be construed to the prejudice of any claim which either of the high contracting parties may have to any part of said country." This treaty was extended indefinitely in 1827, with the provision that after

1838 either party could abrogate it by giving' the other one year's notice. Under this treaty the Hudson's Bay Company's shrewd representatives exercised every strategy conceivable to prevent immigration from the United States and succeeded to a great extent for some time. But increasing knowledge of the value of the country stimulated the indomitaljle frontiersn\en to move westward. Despite the despicable efforts of the Hudson's Bay Company to arrest wagons, break plowshares, freeze out settlers, and l)y a system of overland forts and seaport surveillance i)re\ent every step that tended toward the actual occupancy of tlie country, a sufficient number of Americans had settled before 1844 to force upon the United States the question of title. In the year mentioned Mr. Calhoun, then secretary of sute, demanded of the British government a specific statement of its claims to the Oregon territory. Great Britain replied by renewing a claim already matlc in 1824, namely, "That the boundary line between the possessions of the two ccnmtries should be the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude to w here it intersects the northeastern branch of the Columbia river, then down the middle channel of that river to the .'-ea. " This claim, if allowed, would have given Great Britain not only British Columbia but also the greater part of the state of Washington. Great Britain based its claim upon the exploration of the Columbia by \'ancouver after Gray hatl discovered it, and upon the occupancy of the country by the Hudson's Bay Company for traffic in furs. The United States vested its claim on Captain Gray's discovery of the Columbia river, on the Louisiana i)urchase, on the e.xplorations of Lewis and Clarke, tracing the Columbia from its source to its mouth, on the settlement of Astoria, on the treaty with Spain in 1818 and on the treaty with Mexico in 1S28. ^h. Calhoun rejected th.e claim of Great Britain and proposed the forty-ninth parallel from the Rockies to the sea as the division between the two countries. The

Democratic convention of 1844 declared for the annexation of Texas and also "that our title to the Oregon territory was clear and unquestionable, and that no part of the same should be ceded to Great Britain." The "shibboleth" of the Democratic party during that -campaign, relative to the Oregon question, was "fiftv-four forty, or fight." An effort was made to abrogate the treaty of 1S27 and it seemed for a time that war between Great Britain and the United States was inevitable. The proposal of the British minister. Mr. Packenham, to submit the question in dispute to arbitration was respectfully declined, and the final result of negotiations was the treaty of 1S46. whereby the forty-ninth parallel originallv proposed by Mr. Calhinm was accepted l:y Great Britain as the boundary between the two countries. Pr(jvision was made in this treaty that when the boundary reached the waters of the Pacific coast it should run down the middle of the channel which separates the continent from \'ancouver island, and thence southerly through the same channel and Fuca straits to the sea. Xo map or chart being attached to the treaty, according to which the line could be drawn, a vexatious cnntmversy amse which came very near involving the two countries in war. The contention related to the location of the middle of the channel which sei)arates the continent from \'ancouver island. Great Britain insisted that it was in the Rosaria straits or channel, while the United States contended that it was in the Canal de Haro. Each party adhered to its position through a protracted and vehement correspondence upon the subject. Between these channels was an area of about four hundred s(|Uftre miles, including st\eral i)r(.)minent islands com]5rising land area of about one hundred and seventy scjuare miles which was the bone of contention on the part of l)oth parties. After a prolonged debate of tJie question, each parly determincil to have its own way: by the treaty of Washington in 1871 it was agreed that Emperor Williaiu of Gern'iany, as arbitrator, should decide which of tlie two claims was most in accordance with the treaty of 1846. He decided in favor of our claim, thus giving the United States an undisl'uta1)le claim to the island of San Juan and the other islands around it. Although the Hudsou's Bay Company took possession of all the country west of the Rocky mountains and on both sides of the Columbia ri\'er. yet Great Britain did not assert posse.-^sion of that part of I the country now constituting the state of Oregon. But it is evident that if the title was good iiorth. it was et[ually good south of the river. Furthermore, if the title of the United States was good as to what is now Oregon and Washington, why not equally good for all the territi iry, including British Columbia ? Careful and candid students of the situation have contended that the proposition of Calhoun in 1844 to surrender to Great Britain all the territory north of the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude was made in the interest of sla\-ery. The less there was of this territory, the number of free states to be admitted into the Union would be less. If he had not committed our government to such unfortunate, and wdiat some have designated as "disgraceful" ofTer. it is quite probable that British Columbia would be to-day, what manv would deem desirable in view of its growing importance, a part of the United States.