DISCOVERIES IN THE OREGON TERRITORY.
We have received the following additional information in reference to the Oregon territory, from a correspondent whose knowledge and accuracy may be alike relied on.
"-" To THE EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOR.
.London, 24th February 1846.
SIR—In the very useful abstract given in the last number of your paper of the land expeditions from the Eastern side of the Rocky Mountains to the Oregon territory, there is an omission of one expedition made by Mr. David Thompson, which it is important to notice. Mackenzie's party in 1793 were the first civilized men who crossed the Rocky Mountains.
The next expedition was in 1800, when Mr. Thompson crossed the Rocky Moun- tains in latitude 51°, and reached the river which he named the bPGillivray. This you have omitted to notice. Another expedition was made by him in 1806, when the first establishment of civilized men West of the Rocky Mountains was made by him on Frazer's River. In 1811 Mr. Thompson again went West of the Rocky Mountains, and followed the main stream of the Columbia river to the sea.
Connected with this last expedition, Mr. Thompson mentions an important fact,—namely, that when he came to what was afterwards called Fort Astoria, he found "the British flag flying." This contradicts the common American account that it was a post of the United States Government. But in confirmation of the accuracy of Mr. Thompson, it should be remembered "that the United States Government, though earnestly solicited by Mr. Astor, refused to authorize or sanction his expedition," (see Twiss on the Oregon Question, p. 273.) Of ten of the partners six were British; and when the plan of their enterprise was com- municated to the British Minister at Washington, they were assured by him, "that in case of a war between the two nations, they would be respected as Bri- tish suleects and merchants." Was it therefore probable, that when it was from the British Minister alone they received the assurance of protection, that they should have hoisted the American flag? The statement of Mr. Thompson is no doubt the correct one,— namely, that they hoisted the British flag. Mr. Buchanan states, that Thompson's discovery "has no merits whatever. Bin journey was undertaken on behalf of the North-west Company, for the mere purpose of anticipating the United States in the occupation of the mouth of the Columbia; a temtmy to which no nation, unless it may have been Spain, could with any show of justice dispute their right."
First—For "the United States" in this passage the correct reading should be, "the British partners of Mr. Astor, who under the protection of the British Minister established themselves on the Columbia river, and had there hoisted the British flag." Second—With regard to the superior Spanish title, so much relied on, how had the Spanish Government itself dealt with it? In the relation of the expedition of Galiano and Valdes, published by the order of the King of Spain at Madrid in 1802, is this passage—" The true glory which the English navigator (Drake) may claim for hunselt; is the having discovered the portion of coast comprehended between theparallels of 43° and 48°; to which, consequently, the denomination of New Albion ought to be limited, without in- terfering with the discoveries of preceding navigators." The Spanish Government thus officially admitted in 1802, that it had no title to the coast in dispute by reason of original discovery. And yet a title thus disclaimed by Spain—and most correctly disclaimed, as Dr. Twiss has shown—is the title set up by the Government of the United States. i It s utterly incomprehensible that, with any gravity, a Spanish title should wider any circumstances be alleged. It is said to have been acquired in 1819: and yet the United States offered to partition the country with Great Britain in 1818, and claimed the territory and establishment at Astoria as national property in 1814!
Your remark, that it is possible Captain Baker, in the Jenny of Bristol, entered the Columbia river before Gray, makes it very desirable that inquiry should be made for his log-book; though it into be feared it may be now lost. It is cer- tainly doubtful whether Baker or Gray first entered the Columbia river- though you have most correctly observed, that after the discovery. of the coast by Drake, the entering the river has no political importance, "and is a mere geographical merit."
Permit me to express my entire concurrence in your praise of the very meri- torious and able work of Dr. Travers Twiss on the Oregon question. T. F.
The facts respecting Astoria are of great weight in a moral view; but as political evidence, we fear they are formally barred by Lord Castlereagh's having consented to consider Astoria as an American post, and restoring it as such after the peace. In like manner, we have no moral or scienti- fic doubt that Drake reached latitude 480: the internal evidence of the de- scriptions, the proofs to be drawn from the extent of the country bearing the name of New Albion, and the general opinion upon the point, are con- clusive without the elaborate and curious arguments of Dr. Twiss. But we attached less weight than, in a critical point of view, we should have done to Drake, because we wished to confine our statement to what was of the nature of unquestionable evidence. Nor is he really needed: striking out apochryphal or unpublished and therefore unproclaimed voyages, the high- est latitude reached by any Spanish navigator previous to Cook was 43°. Cook and Vancouver may be said to have discovered, as they certainly sur- veyed, the whole coast of Oregon.
We suppose the Customs books at Bristol, if in existence for 1790-1800, would show the owners of the " mall schooner" Jenny: her log-book is another matter. Nor, except as meeting the assertions of unscrupulous and advantage-seeking diplomatists, (for arguments they cannot be called,) is it of the slightest importance. The true title does not rest upon disco- very: but, whether the title be discovery, occupation, possession, or use, or all combined, the British right to all that she demands is to our conviction clear and indefeasible; whilst the American title to any part of Oregon is of a slender character, resting upon a treaty where Spain could only give what she had—a common right of occupation, of which right America, by a peculiarity of her constitution, cannot avail herself, as Mr. Falconer showed in his Discovery of the Mississippi. The more the subject is sifted, the more clearly we believe will this be seen: and should the American Government refuse our next offer, they may possibly find that they have outstood their market,—unless, indeed, weakness or insouciance should sa- crifice our rights and interests.
It may be added, that we use "Oregon territory" as a popular term; but the country North of the boundary we last week suggested as the present British boundary, is no more Oregon than France is Spain. The valley of Columbia or Oregon river (as the Indians name it) is separated as dis- tinctly from the valley of the Frazer and Thompson rivers by the Cascade range as the Pyrenees separate Spain from France. This limitation of Oregon to the country drained by the Oregan river should be steadily kept in view.
Previous page
