27TH CONG....3D SESS.

no special objection to fight under the banner of the Captain, since he was going into private life. The position of the President now is such, that the Democracy dare not treat with neglect or contempt his overtures. They dare not refuse him audience. They must respond when he cries, Who bids?

The welcome of Daniel Webster and John C. Spencer to the ranks of Democracy, by the gentleman from New York, is no new idea in that party. It has before been thought of by them, and acted upon before; and all this parade before the country by gentlemen, that they cannot receive them, nor the Administration with them, is but a feint, to operate upon certain quarters and certain men, when, eventually, acting under the constraining will of the people, as pretended, they will be received into full fellowship, at least by one portion of the immaculate "one and indivisible" Democracy.

I propose reading a resolution adopted at a large meeting of Democrats in the State of Kentucky, at which, the "Madisonian" says, the most influential Democrats of the State attended, and that they are men not surpassed for influence in that party in the Union. Mr. M. read the following:

"Resolved, That Daniel Webster and John C. Spencer, the brightest luminaries of the Whig sky, have, in their transit to Democracy, formed a halo of glory around its principles."

[Laughter, and cries of "Read that again."]

After this, let not my friends think that this Administration is without bidders, when it is put up for sale. The gentleman [Mr. CUSHING] knew all these facts, and knew, however damaged it was to the country, yet, for party purposes, it was highly valuable to the Democracy. Mr. Tyler, by his patronage, is omnipotent with that party. He has done what no other man, either in or out of the party, could do. He has not only carried his own strength into the ranks of the Democracy, but he has carried with him, and installed into his command, Daniel Webster and John C. Spencer as his lieutenants; and the Democracy are rallying around them, while they "formed a halo of glory around its principles." The Democracy will always bid at such a sale. What higher evidence can be wanting of the disposition to bid, irrespective of conditions, than this? And what better evidence of an alliance, offensive as well as defensive, than that which makes old enemies "one and indivisible" political associates? We shall see hereafter if there is not still stronger evidence of alliance-one founded on a bid, and that bid a bargain.

But it may be asked if Mr. Tyler himself is, without difficulty, surrounded by so many new associates and friends? It appears not; from indications, it seems that there are false teachers in the household; that the bidders are themselves treacherous; and, while they bargain for their loyalty, they are seeking to rob patronage of its power, and to sacrifice its dispenser to their selfishness. Treason seems to reign in the camp, and friendship is made the screen behind which perfidy perpetrates its deeds.

I hold in my hand a letter said to have been written from the White House. It appeared in the New York "Union," the accredited organ in that city of the President, and would not have appeared there, urging such grave charges, uttering such melancholy complaints, and speaking such desponding language, if there was no foundation for all, and a great many more causes of dissatisfaction than those detailed. Speaking of the President, it says:

"The President is like a man who is walking over a straight road, and ever and anon some kind friend advises him to turn to the right or the left, or to go up that hill, or down that lane, intending to do him the favor, if they can get him out of the straight and honest path he has chosen, to strip him of his coat, waistcoat, and breeches."

[Roars of laughter.]

Mr. M. continued. He hoped the gentleman from New York was not one of the number who were trying to get the President's breeches. [Continued laughter.] What a melancholy picture does this tale unfold! How fearfully true is the treachery which it discloses ! That the highest officer within the gift of a free people is subject to such associations; that he cannot trust himself to the counsel they may present; and that, under the flattering but deceitful profession of friendship, counsellors around him advise to a policy not to subserve the public good,

The Bankrupt Law-Mr. Meriwether.

but which, if adopted, selects their own selfish purposes as the only object to be attained, robs him of all ability to be useful, and makes him the degraded tool of their ambition! The language of this complaint is figurative, but the fact it discloses is real. Surely the President must feel that he reclines on thorns, when surrounded by a faction which has been collected through the patronage of power, and which will betray him as interest may dictate. These are melancholy facts, to go down to posterity as evidence of the prostitution of the present day. Well might the gentleman, [Mr. CUSHING, knowing all these things-the professions of friendship made, and the perfidy which was ready to betray confidence reposed-put up the Administration at auction; well might he seek to bring out before the public eye those who were its friends, that those who had sworn their loyalty in the recesses at the White House should register their vows before the world-that the true friends might be distinguished, and the robbers of coats and breeches expelled. But how could it be otherwise than that, when treachery had once tainted its victim, the victim should perfect the treachery?

The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. WELLER] had said on yesterday that the President had been greatly annoyed and assailed by the Whigs who wanted office; that their "voracious maws" not being satisfied, they had turned in wrath against him. Upon the subject of office, perhaps that gentleman would have done as well to have been silent. If reports be true, should that gentleman be not now most perfectly satisfied, he might incur the charge of having the insatiable appetite of a cormorant. But it seems that the thirst for office happens not to be confined to the Whigs alone. No doubt that there was a great rush on their part as soon as they had been installed in power. Many honest and honorable men had been hurled from office, for no other reason than that they had an opinion of their own. They came forward quickly to have the stigma wiped from their characterswhich official tyranny had stamped upon them. But it is a fact, which is disgraceful to both parties, that too many of their members desire office for the gains which it brings to them. But the Democrats seem to have much rapacity for office too, and have proved a source of great vexation at the White House. The same letter to which I before referred has this remark:

"I am glad to find that your Tyler cliques in New York are becoming more orderly and governable. I thought at one time, from their continued rush to the Capitol, that a new party, under the name of 'Want-to-get-into-the-custom-house Party,' would carry all before them; for there was no want of applicants for collectors, postmasters, marshals, navy agents, district attorneys, &c.; and, if the applicants themselves were to be credited, those high functionaries were but sorry fellows at best. Although none has succeeded, or is likely to succeed, yet ever and anon a poor 'faint and way worn traveller' finds his way down here with his pockets full of letters of recommendation from the malcontents, representing you all to be without the capacity or the inclination to do the least service to the President, and these denunciations generally end by the complainant's asking for an office."

Then, it seems, continued Mr. M., that the President is beleaguered by office hunters from the Democracy; and, when he places them in power around him, they fail not to consult all the artifices of their address to seduce him from an honest, straightforward path, into private ways and by-paths, where they may practise upon him their arts of petit larce. ny, robbing him even of the slight habiliments which now serve to hide his nakedness. But what does this letter of complaint show? That there must be between the President and his followers a quid pro quo for every favor asked, and every service rendered. Office is asked with the understanding that the "ability and capacity to serve the President," not the country, can be afforded; and office is granted, with the understanding that that "ability and capacity" are made effective in serving the President. What is this but a bargain-a contract -an agreement to do a particular thing-between parties capable and willing to contract, and actually contracting, and the performance under that contract of some service, which strips the transaction in law of that want of consideration which would render the agreement a nudum pactum?

And what was that bargain to which the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. WISE] alluded, which he so bitterly denounced the other day as carrying on

H. of Reps.

its face a "damning suspicion?" The public never said that it amounted to more than an agreement for office for each of the parties. And what is the fact disclosed by this White House letter? That office is conferred upon those only who have the "ability and capacity" to serve the President; and those who receive offices must employ that "ability and capacity" in his service.

This is the scene enacting behind the curtain at the White House; and forthwith the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. CUSHING,] the accredited friend and counsellor of the President, comes upon this floor, in a debate upon the repeal of the bankrupt law, uninduced by anything before said, repeats what it seems had before been heard elsewhere in rehearsals, that the Administration must have friends, and that it possessed the means of rewarding them, and punishing foes. He tells us that the Whigs have been dashed to pieces against the President's "fixed fact." This was punishment. He tells the Democrats that they will "not profit by experience," and that they are dashing wildly against that same "fixed fact." This we all understand to mean the veto of the subtreasury bill, whenever readopted. He had spoken of the "buddings of discontent" in the Democratic party; that a prominent man would draw off one wing, and another man would draw off another wing of that party; that, in the next presidential election, there were those connected with the present Administration who intended soon to have a word to say; and that no one would make anything by indulging in a "fierce warfare against the Presi dent;" that he held the veto power-something more omnipotent than mere patronage. Now, Engglish these sentiments; and what do they mean? That the patronage of the Executive will be thrown into the support of that candidate and his friends, and the veto power used for their advantage, whose friends and associates, possessing the "ability and capacity," would render him (the President) the most effective service, and would not rob him of his coat, waistcoat, and breeches. Is there no intimation of a willingness to bargain for power in all this? No expectation of reward created for services rendered or to be rendered? No temptation to excite rivalry in devotion to the President? And what was the effect of this annunciation of purpose on the part of the President? The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. KENNEDY] Said that he would not bid: to have avowed such an intention would have been to expose and defeat his purpose; but he told the gentleman [Mr. CUSHING] that he, a Democrat, would not encounter the rod of punishment-the veto! The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. WELLER said that it was the high duty of every Democrat to support every act of the Administration as far as he could; and the gentleman from New York, [Mr. BOWNE,] discarding all barriers, exhorts his associ ates to take Mr. Tyler, his administration-Webster and Spencer however deeply dyed in political sins-to take one and all, now and at once, without atonement, conditions, reservations, or stipulationsto take them freely, cheerfully, graciously; and to become with them, at once, "one and indivisible." What call you all this? Is there no response here to the question, Where shall I find my friends? No cringing before the lash? No reaching after the reward? No manifestation of fear that the "fixed fact" was dangerous; that those connected with the Administration, who intended soon to have a word to say in the next presidential election, might not speak that word unfavorably; that certain "discon tents" might not profit by that word; and no evidence of a belief that prudence dictated at once that all fears should be quelled, that a "fierce war. fare against the President" was not to be expected from a certain quarter? Does not all this squint most awfully at the fact, that the terms of sale, as stated, are ready to be embraced? Do not the bids fully cover the offer? And is there nothing like a bargain, an agreement, an undertaking, mutually to do and perform certain acts, for a mutual con. sideration?

But the gentleman, no doubt, did look further, and to other terms than those he expressed, when he put this Administration up at auction. Possibly he had other objects in view; and I will ask the gentleman if he did expect that at this sale any bids would be put in by the Whig party?

[Mr. CUSHING (Mr. M. yielding the floor) said the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. MERIWETHIR] had repeated the remark several times made in this House, and to which he had sought an opportunity to reply. The gentleman desired Mr. C. to inform

128

him when he (Mr. C.) had put up the Administration, if he expected the Whig party to bid? Mr. C. called on the gentleman, and on every member of this House, to put his finger on any part of his speech that authorized this imputation. [Laughter ] He denied that there was any foundation whatever for it; and he asked the gentleman from Georgia to select from that speech a single sentence, if he could, which justified that imputation, which the gentleman himself would declare to the House to be unjust in principle, or untrue in fact?]

Mr. MERIWETHER resumed: The gentleman from Massachusetts was trying to play a Yankee trick upon him-answering his question by asking him another. The answer had in nowise been given to the interrogatory. Waiving, however, his right to insist upon an answer, the gentleman asks me to point to a single sentence of his remarks that would justify such an imputation. Mr. M. would point the gentleman to his whole speech for evidence to sustain the construction he and others had placed upon it. It was no objection to the fact, that one single sentence did not contain the proposition of sale; the whole speech was compounded of several propositions, each resting upon, and connecting with, the other. If this (Mr. C.'s) rule of interpretation were to apply, we might, for the same reason, reject some of the most important truths of the Bible. Mr. M. could understand nothing else from the gentleman's remarks than the imputation which had been made. But I will intimate to the gentleman what I have before said to the House were the terms of his propositions, and leave him to contradict the facts as I state them: that he spoke of a "fixed fact" in the Federal Government; of the President as that "fact;" that the Whig party had been dashed against it; that experience did not serve to teach the Democratic party, and they were going to repeat the same experiment; that "fact" was the veto power in the hands of the President; that in the Democratic ranks there were discontent and division in reference to the succession; that some persons connected with the Administration intended soon to have a word to say in the next Presidential election; and that the interest of no party would be advanced by a fierce attack upon the President, and he deemed it material to be frank upon that point now. Now, with these propositions, what other could follow, but that the Administration would elect in the use of its friendship, (which means the patronage of the Government and the exercise of the veto power,) to bestow the one, and to use or withhold the other, as would subserve the interest of party friends? And who would be its friends, but those who sustained its measures, and were not "too furious" in their opposition to the President? And why talk of being frank in your statements, if nothing was meant by it-no agreement to be understood? Could language be plainer, or logic more clear, than that which deduces this crowning proposition from such premises?

And the bare statement of these propositions had not failed of its effect. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. KENNEDY] had promptly responded to them, disclaiming any intention to bid: (and to have acknowledged it would have been too barefaced,) but assured the gentleman that the Democracy would not encounter the "fixed fact" in their legislation at the incoming Congress; which was to say, "declare your will, and we will execute it." But, as the gentleman now says he did not intend to sell, I suppose the sale is postponed for the present. [Laughter.]

[Mr. CUSHING (Mr. M. again yielding the floor for explanation) said that the gentleman had put to him a question which was based on the assumption that he (Mr. C.) had done a particular thing in this House. Mr. C. had replied, by contradicting the assumption and challenging proof, exhibiting demonstration on that point; and the gentleman said that he had practised the Yankee mode of answering a question by asking another. It was not so; Mr. C. had answered emphatically and fully, cov ering the whole ground; and he now begged leave to ask the gentleman a question: Would the gentleman be good enough to put his finger on a single sentence of that speech which, either as a Whig or Democrat, the gentleman would aver to be unjust in principle or untrue in fact? If he would, Mr. C. would pledge himself to show, by exhibition of the authority of some of the highest and best men that had lived in the United States since the Revolution, that propositions of the same tenor had before been made.]

Mr. M. resumed. He had referred the gentle

The Bankrupt Law-Mr. Meriwether.

man to his whole speech; he seemed unwilling to scan it; he referred him to it again; and when he shall have read it throughout, calmly and dispassionately, he would find more in it than he seems willing to admit now is there, and more than he ought ever to have put there. Even the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Wisɛ,] from the manner in which he had undertaken the other day to explain away the gentleman's speech, had evinced an unuttered conviction, that the construction placed upon the speech was not altogether foreign to its legitimate meaning. The gentleman says that he will show, upon the authority of the highest and best men of the country, that similar propositions have before been made. Mr. M. did not doubt this. Frequent charges had been made of similar combinations, and public sentiment had condemned them. Does their recurrenee justify them? or does the knowledge of their existence by the "highest and best men" of the country give them a passport to our approval? or does the existence of like propositions negative the fact that those now being debated ever had an existence? He calls upon me to condemn any sentence of his speech as "unjust in principle or untrue in fact." His isolated positions, his individual propositions, may stand. The gentleman sees the drift of my remarks too well not to understand my attack to be upon his speech as a whole. I may or may not dissent from his propositions individually; that is not the issue I make. But depend them one upon another; connect them together, as he has connected them; deduce from them, as he has deduced the consequence, the right of the President to wield the patronage of his office and the veto power for the building up or pulling down of parties, irrespective of the public welfare, and of throwing the influence and power of that patronage and of the velo, as freaks of friendship or hatred may come over him, to perpetuate or destroy political friends or opponents, and I denounce the whole jointly, and each singly, in view of such connexion; and I point to each and every of them as untrue in fact, and grossly unjust in principle to the people, and destructive of every semblance of political right.

But, Mr. Speaker, I have not yet learned whether, at this auction, when it shall take place, it will be expected that the Whigs should bid or not? When I was interrupted, I was about entering upon the subject of Democratic difficulties. The gentleman [Mr. CUSHING] had spoken of discontents already existing; of the intention of some connected with the Administration to have a word to say in the next election. Mr. M. said that, doubtless, these divisions had been fully canvassed at the other end of the avenue. The letter from the White House, before referred to, alludes to this matter; and this allusion, and the identity of sentiment expressed by the gentleman with the letter, while they show that what he has said was not the result of momentary excitement, but premeditated and spoken almost by authority, confirm to us that these dissensions in the Democratic ranks are the subject of speculation and calculation by the wireworkers at the President's. Here is the reference:

"Talking of the Presidency, I never saw Mr. Calhoun look so well and so full of hope and expectation. The Legislatures of South Carolina and Alabama have nominated him, and other States will follow. He is excessively uneasy and fretful about going into a national convention, for fear that Mr. Van Buren, being more dexterous with the cups and balls, will cheat him out of a nomination; and in this respect he has grounds of apprehension. Mr. Van Buren in a convention is like a little fierce bull in an amphitheatre, and is sure to gore and toss all the horses and riders who may come into the ring against him."

Here are some strong intimations of approaching difficulty; and while it comes up completely to the views as expressed by the gentleman, [Mr. CUSHING,] let us see if the concluding views do not cover the whole ground assumed by him. The letter continues:

"There is absolutely nothing doing here, we may say, in the political world, and I am glad of it; because when the politicians lie on their oars, the country gains by it. Everything, of course, is in an unsettled state. If a storm is brewing between the Whigs, the Calhoun men, and the Van Buren men, the Administration have only to remain tranquil until the hurricane blows over, and then take advantage of the times. If the people could only unhorse the leaders, no man would be so strong as

H. of Reps.

John Tyler, because he is evidently gaining strength among the great body of the people."

Can any one (continued Mr. M.) look at all these facts, and shut his eyes to the conviction thatthe gentleman's speech was not made without concert with others without premeditation of design--without object? and, if not without object, what other than to identify the Administration, for profit or loss, for better or worse, with some one of the contending factions of the "one and indivisible Democratic party?"

The fact of division in that party is left unquestioned. That Mr. Tyler has effected that division, and to a great extent, is undeniable. The only remaining question was, which portion of that party desired most to convert his influence to its use?

The Northern wing of the Democracy had stepped forth boldly, bid freely, and anxiously sought to close the sale; but the Southern wing had not, as yet, been heard from publicly. Rumor had blessed them with a greater share of executive favor, but yet they have not signified their intention to bid or not. I should like to hear from that division of the party before the debate closes,

There is a great deal submitted to (said Mr. M.) in this hall, from parliamentary courtesy. There never was freer use made of this liberty than during this debate. When it first began, a casual visiter would have supposed that the war waging by the Democrats was aimed solely at the Whig party. While the fact of an open rupture was first developing itself, the effort to direct the quarre against the Whigs was most desperate; and soundly were we whipped over the shoulders for the benefit of our opponents. Well, he did not know that he had much objection to this course. Mr. M. was opposed to making family jars public spectacles. He was willing to take the castigation, if, in so doing, he could hide the wounds which family feuds had made. He would have been very willing to have covered up the divisions which existed in the ranks of his opponents; but this seemed now to be a hopeless matter, and they had themselves become careless and indifferent as to their exposure. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. KENNEDY] had tried very diligently to cover up all their difficulties; he thrust most desperately at us; said some hard things; appealed to old prejudices; spoke of our unworthiness, and the vast superiority of his own friends. But all this would not do; there was no response; and in the bitterness of grief, in a moment of almost frenzied sorrow, he bade us to stand aloof, and let their family quarrel alone. Mr. M. said he should abide the admonition, and leave the family to its tumults. The "cohesive principle," which had hitherto bound them together, seemed too weak to preserve the Union.

Mr. M. could not help thinking, when he heard such violent declamation from the other side, how unsubstantial it was, and how very deceptive it was to those who believed or thought there would be a serious contest by the opposition in the next Presidential election. The people abroad expected a warm and animated contest; but the resistance which would be presented seemed more like a shadow than a substance. The Democracy were united while the whole party warred against the Whigs; but now, when the selection is to be made who shall wear the robes, confusion and discord have scattered them abroad, and divided and broken their front. The heterogeneous mass has many candidates for the honor-some whose claims are growing very stale, and must now be canvassed or never; they present many aspirants to the people, but they will not be permitted to elect all, and they are too weak to elect any one. Division is among them, and is premonitory of defeat; if they are not counting it, why do they not rally and present their candidate? If they can make a selection, why not meet at once and harmonize? But do they not fear a failure, and consequently a certain overthrow, by attempting a reconciliation, and not possessing the power to accomplish it? Is there to be a convention? It is said that there may be a fair convention of the party; if so, when and where is it to be held? The party doubtless have little hope of any united action, and, consequently, no hope of success in 1844.

Although he was no prophet, he would predict, without the hazard of having that prediction condemned by the reality, that, should the Democratic party present but one candidate for the next Presidency and Vice Presidency, that candidate for President would be Daniel Webster; and that candidate for the Vice Presidency would be John C. Spencer

27 M. CONG.... 3D SESS.

And it was right that this should be so; for they are the first men who ever placed a "halo of glory" around the "principles" of that party. The principle of gratitude demands it.

Mr. M. said, as it had occurred to him that the repeal of the bankrupt law was at this time before them, he would make one or two remarks on that subject before he concluded. Heshould vote against the repeal, for two reasons. It had been said that, in the course of the operations of the law, many creditors had been made bankrupts by the discharge of their debtors. This was a proposition that Mr. M. could not well understand; the note or obligation of an insolvent would go no further to pay a debt, as assets, than that of a bankrupt; and he did not understand how a creditor under the bankrupt law, getting a part of his debt, was worse off than he was under the insolvent laws of the States, where he got nothing. It might be, however, that a creditor had so arranged, through favor, relationship, reward, or the hope of it, or by a fraudulent agreement with the debtor, to get his own claim satisfied, and to cover up the rest of his property for his future benefit, and to oust the weaker and smaller creditors altogether; and that the bankrupt law, coming in to defeat such fraudulent combinations, had placed all upon an equality, whereby this creditor was made to share with others the insolvency of the debtor, and his losses thereby had proved disastrous to him. Be this as it may, however, let the law be right or wrong in its origin, since it has made victims by its operation, the highest, noblest, most enduring obligation of the Government is to give to these victims its benefits, since they have unwittingly shared its injuries.

There was another reason why Mr. M. would not now vote for the repeal. Many men are now struggling to escape their embarrassments; and so long as the hope is held out that, should their efforts fail, still they may find relief under the just and wise provisions of this law, they will struggle on. But, agitate the repeal; give them nothing to hope for but the mercy of creditors; and they fly at once to the courts for relief, cease from all further efforts, and sink into despondency at once. Nothing paralyzes more the energies of man than the cheerless and annoying frowns of rapacious creditors. If you would render him useful to society, valuable to his friends, and even available to those creditors, you must open before him the bright field of hope; soothe the pangs of bitter sorrow and mortification; stimulate his energies by encouragement; and do not conduct so towards him that he must feel at every moment the uplifted axe is about to descend upon him. It is the fear of this fatal axe which is now driving many into premature bankruptcy, and filling the courts with applications. Between bankruptcy and the continued deinand of the Shylock's last pound of flesh, human nature is more than itself if it selects the heartless demand. It is the encouragement which this law holds out, that has nerved the energies of many an enterprising man, which has dissipated the dark cloud that overhung many a debtor, and opened to him a bright sunshine. It is this law which has stimulated enterprise, and, by well-directed efforts, has paid fully many debts which, without it, would have been discharged by insol. vency; and, guided by the star of its bright hope, many an unfortunate debtor will yet fully indemnify his creditors, and reserve to himself the means of comfortable subsistence in old age. Then, why should we rshly repeal it, and wither so many fond hopes, now budding into usefulness for society?

It is said that the law is unconstitutional. On that point Mr. M. would say but a word. It is said that it impairs the obligation of contracts, and hence is unconstitutional. He believed no such thing. Every contract has been made, subject to the power of Congress to pass a uniform system of bankruptcy. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land; that declares and defines the power; and whenever a contract has been made, it was in view of that "supreme law"-as much so as if a law had been spread on your statute-book. If a contract had been made antecedent to the adoption of the Constitution, then this law would be unconstitutional in its application to that contract. But such contracts alone could plead an exception; all others must submit to it. But it is said that we must confine our act to the meaning of a "bankrupt law" as understood at the time of the adoption of the Constitution; and we are carried to England, to her bankrupt act then existing, for a definition of the term. Well, what do we find when we look to that fountain of

The Oregon Bill-Mr. McRoberts.

learning? Why, nothing more than that England had declared that her subjects, being unable to pay their debts, might surrender their effects and be discharged; and she limited this right to a favored few, whom she called traders. Now, said Mr. M., what is the principle? Why, that a surrender of assets entitles to a discharge. The individuals to whom the privilege applies is a question of expediency, and not of principle. According to the assumption made, no law could be a bankrupt act, unless the whole English law, with its forms, penalties, rights, punishments, and machinery, were adopted by our own legislation. The argument carries its own refutation along with it; for no one would seriously contend that we had no discretion left as to the forms we might employ. Exercise that discretion for a moment, and the potent assumption is defeated. Mr. M. said that if evil had grown out of the law, all admitted good might come of it hereafter. Why, then, when you are about to reap its benefits, would you repeal it?

SPEECH OF MR. S. McROBERTS,

OF ILLINOIS.

In Senate, December 30, 1842, and January 9, 1843.-On the title of the United States to the Territory of Oregon, and in favor of the bill for its occupation and settlement.

The bill to authorize the adoption of measures for the occupation and settlement of the Territory of Oregon, and for extending certain portions of the laws over the same," having been taken up, as in Committee of the Whole, the motion pending was to strike out the preamble to the bill, which is in these words: "Whereas the title of the United States to the Territory of Oregon is certain, and will not be abandoned"

Mr. McROBERTS addressed the Senate as follows

I shall vote, Mr. President, against the motion to strike out the preamble to this bill. There is no great vitality in a preamble to any law; but the one before us expresses so clearly the rights of the people of the United States, that I prefer it should stand as it is. But whether the preamble be retained in the bill or not, it is my purpose to-day to show that our title to the Oregon Territory is certain, and to present those reasons which I hope may, to some extent at least, induce our countrymen never to abandon it. The citizens of my own State take a deep interest in this question; they have memorialized Congress repeatedly, for years past, to adopt efficient means for the settlement and occupation of the Oregon. The same spirit has long animated the entire population of the West. Nor is it confined to that great division of the Republic, but other States-I believe from all of them on this side of the Alleghanies, at some time or other, have petitions been received, urging this measure upon the attention and consideration of Congress. So far, therefore, as the public voice is concerned-a voice which is indispensable in all great undertakings-we shall never be stronger than at present. We have the great element of national strength and power upon our side. These things all point to the conclusion, that now is the time.

Sir, there are other considerations-great and paramount considerations-connected with, and dependent upon, a determined and speedy action upon this bill. Have you counted the cost necessarily attendant upon delay? Have you weighed well the effect of procrastination? It is with States, as it is with individuals,-long continued neglect of your own rights when others are in their enjoyment, solely because of such neglect, may ultimately prove fatal to those rights. We live in a stirring age; the wants of the human race increase with the augmentation of its numbers, and such wants, when vacant territory is concerned, seldom ask many questions. Of one thing, sir, you may rest assured: if you refuse to take the necessary steps, and afford the neces sary protection, to cause the Oregon to be populated by your citizens, other nations will populate it for you. Already great numbers have gone there, who owe allegiance to other nations. They have asked no questions, and we have interposed no obstacle. The unsurpassed salubrity of the climate, and the fertile soil of the Oregon, its contiguity to the ocean,

Senate.

and the facility to commerce with other portions of the globe, its fisheries, and furs, and its minerals, are temptations too inviting to be overlooked. These are the temptations which Nature offers to emigrants: to pass this bill is but to follow her dictates. To pass it now, will secure the advantages to your own citizens, which, if neglected, will fall into other hands.

That the questions connected with the Oregon should have remained for forty years unsettled, is, I think, very much to be regretted. The mere fact of the delay has operated to retard individual exertion in the settlement and improvement of the country. But this has not been the fault of any Presi dent of the United States, or of the Government; for it has been urged on Congress from that quarter on various occasions and in various forms. Repeated efforts have been made to bring the questions with Great Britain in relation to the Oregon to an amicable adjustment, though hitherto without success. No other Government but that of Great Britain would have desired such delays. In 1815, at the treaty of Ghent, an admirable opportunity presented itself to settle the question of boundary; but it was not acted upon. In 1818, our minister at London' was specially instructed to press the final settlement of the question of boundary. It was so pressed, but nothing definite could be obtained. Our minister proposed that the 49th parallel of latitude (which was the then established boundary) west to the Lake of the Woods, should be extended across the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific ocean, and should be the permanent boundary; the north to belong to Great Britain, and the south to the United States. This the British Government refused. In 1826, the United States proposed a renewal of the discussion as to boundary. Mr. Gallatin and Mr Rush, our ministers, were instructed to propose (and accordingly made the proposition) that the 49th parallel of latitude, which was the boundary between the British possessions and the United States, west from the Lake of the Woods to the Rocky Mountains, should be the permanent boundary, and be extended across the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific ocean. This proposition, and by which the then adminis tration proposed to surrender all claim of the United States between the 49th and 54th parallel of lattitude, was refused by Great Britain. Her ministers, not content with five degrees of latitude on the Pacific ocean, which had been offered them, proposed that the 49th parallel of latitude should be extended across the Rocky Mountains till it intersected the northern source of the Columbia river, and then proceed down the main channel to the sea. This, being wholly inadmissible, was rejected; and the minister of the United States (Mr. Gallatin) informed the British Government that this Government was absolved from its offer to abide by the 49th parallel of latitude, and would thereafter insist upon the whole territory to which it had just claim. Great Britain, however, acted in the spirit of her accustomed policy; and one part of that policy is, that when its Government has in point of fact no strict right in a claim once set up, to effect delayto procrastinate-to put off its adjustment; well knowing that weak pretensions have always been strengthened by that policy. We must cut the Gordian knot, and take possession; or Great Britain will accomplish all she desires, overrun the country with her people, and then with more plausibility urge her claim, upon the ground that she is bound to afford them protection. The convention which was made in 1818, and renewed in 1827, securing to her a joint occupancy with us, has been made by her subservient to this very result. Are we to have no end to these delays? Why is it that a distinguished nobleman of England, (Lord Ashburton,) who was sent to this country as a special minister, and, as was said, to settle, if possible, all disputes between the two countries, should have had no instructions from the British ministry upon this subject! When the British Government had the right clearly on its side, there is not an instance on record where it sought for delay. Now, I am perfectly willing to allow that it is always proper to proceed deliberately; to see that we have the right on our side, when we are obliged to go into such matters. But what I do contend for is, that our right and

27TH CONG......3D SESS.

title to the territory claimed by us (take from latitude 42 to 49 degrees north, for example) have been long since so clearly ascertained, that we should not have admitted any pretence for delay in its recognition. Such would have been the course of Great Britain herself, had she the right and title we pos

sess.

I propose to state briefly the grounds of our title, to show that it has been long since rendered plain and indubitable. I will try and present the subject in such a manner that those who run may not only read, but comprehend also. A cherished principle upon which our people have always acted, is first to investigate, and be certain that they are right; because, if either individuals or nations must quarrel, it is one of the cardinal laws of being, that

"Thrice is he armed who hath his quarrel just."

Let us commence with the title which we derived 'from Spain; because it is to be remembered that, whatever of right Spain had to the Northwest coast, either by discovery, occupancy, or purchase, has been transferred to us in the most enlarged and ample manner.

1st. From 1532 to 1540, several expeditions were fitted out under Spanish authority, and explored California and the coast to a considerable distance north of it. The commanders were Mazuela, Grijalva, Becera, and Ulloa. Their object was discovery, and to find what did not exist-a water communication through to the Atlantic.

In 1540, Coronado, by orders from the viceroy, made an important expedition by land in the interior north of New Mexico; and in 1543, Bartolome Ferrelo discovered Cape Blanco in 43 degrees north latitude.

2d. It is established beyond all question, that in a voyage of discovery under the authority of Spain, in the year 1592, Juan De Fuca discovered and traversed the straits which bear his name. The straits enter the land at 48 degrees north latitude, and extend east 100 miles, and thence northwest 250 miles, into the Pacific again, in latitude 51 degrees; that he remained twenty days in the straits, landed frequently, and traded with the natives. It further appears that this voyage and discovery was made known to England by letters from Michael Lok, the English consul at Aleppo, to Lord Treasurer Cecil, and Sir Walter Raleigh. Spain, therefore, first discovered the country, and traversed it as far north as 61 degrees north latitude, 251 years since, and 184 years before the celebrated voyage of Captain Cook.

3d. In 1602 and subsequent years, further and more extensive surveys were made of the coast by Corvan and Vizcaino, under the Spanish Government, extending north of its former possessions; and on the 16th of January 1603, Aguiler discovered the beautiful river Umqua, which is within our boundary, in latitude 44 degrees north.

4th. Complete and authentic evidence exists that in August, 1774, Perez and Martinez, under Spanish authority, first discovered the Sound of Nootka between latitude 49 and 50 degrees north. called it San Lorenzo. (Humboldt, p. 331.)

They

5th. That equally conclusive evidence exists that Heceta, Ayala, and Quadra, Spanish officers and navigators, discovered the bay at or near the river Columbia.

6th. That in these two years 1774 and 1775, the Northwest coast was explored by Perez and Martinez, Spanish navigators, as high as the 58th degree of north latitude.

7th. That in pursuance of orders from the viceroy of Mexico, then under the Government of Spain, Martinez, with two armed vessels, took possession of Nootka on the 6th of May 1789; and it is affirmed in Greenhow's compilation, upon full examination, thit, "before the arrival of the Spanish commander Martinez at Nootka, in May 1789, no settlement, factory, or commercial or military establishment whatever, had been founded, or even attempted; and no jursdiction had been exercised by the subjects or authoriies of any civilized nation in any part of America bordering upon the Pacific, between Port San Framisco and Prince William's Sound." The first being in latitude 37 degrees north, and the second in latitude 60 degrees.

Such are he prominent points showing the rights

The Oregon Bill-Mr. McRobe ts.

of Spain to the Northwest coast, founded upon discovery and occupancy. Now, the United States have become the successors of Spain, and every right she had, according to the law of nations belongs to us. By the treaty of February 10, 1763, between Great Britain, France, and Spain, England was confirmed in her possession to the French provinces on the St. Lawrence, and she relinquished all claim to territory beyond the Mississippi. Spain acquired Louisiana from France the 3d of November, 1762, and held it until October 1, 1800; she then retroceded it to France-"the same in extent as it now is in the hands of Spain, as it was when France formerly possessed it, and as it should be according to the treaties subsequently made between Spain and other nations." Such is the language of the treaty.

On the 30th of April, 1803, the First Consul of France (Bonaparte) ceded Louisiana to the United States, in the language of the deed itself, "with all its rights and appurtenances, as fully and in the same manner as it had been acquired from Spain" in 1800.

Whatever extent Louisiana possessed under either France or Spain, became the territory of the United States. The discovery by La Salle of the river St. Louis (now Mississippi) gave to France, according to the law of nations, the whole territory watered by it, or its tributary streams, not previously occupied by any other power. This extended Louisiana to the Rocky Mountains on the west, and up the main channel to its source.

By the treaty of February 22, 1819, commonly called the Florida treaty, the boundary between the possessions of the United States and Spain was established at latitude 42 degrees north, extending from the head-waters of the Arkansas, west, to the Pacific ocean. And the third article of the treaty declares that "his Catholic Majesty cedes to the said United States all his rights, claims, and pretensions to any territories east and north of the said line; and for himself, his heirs and successors, renounces all claim to the said territories forever." This is the treaty that perfects our rights; and by this sweeping clause invests the United States with every right, interest, or claim, which the Spanish monarchy possessed upon the shores of the Pacific. What her discoveries were, extending through a period of two hundred and fifty years, I have already shown.

So much for our title to the Oregon, derived by treaty, through France and Spain. Let us now trace our own title, as founded upon discovery and occupancy by citizens and soldiers under the flag of the United States.

The valuable commerce in furs and skins upon the shores of the Pacific induced enterprising merchants, shortly after the Revolution, to engage in that trade.

On the 30th September, 1787, Captains Robert Gray and John Kendrick sailed from Boston in the ships Washington and Columbia, for the Northwest coast. The Washington arrived at Nootka on the 17th of September, 1788, and the Columbia the latter part of that month; at which place both vessels spent the winter. The next year Captain Gray discovered the strait of Fuca, and passed up it fifty miles; and from information derived from the natives, he had no doubt it communicated with the Pacific north of Nootka, at a place he had the year before called Pintard's Sound. The furs collected by Gray and Kendrick they sold in Canton. Gray returned to the United States, and Kendrick remained upon the coast. Gray shortly after again sailed for the Northwest coast, and on the 7th of May, 1792, he discovered a safe harbor in latitude 47 degrees north, and which, in honor of one of the owners of the ship, he called Bulfinch's harbor. On the 11th of May, 1792, he discovered the mouth of the Columbia, which he describes as being a broad and rapid river, the water of which was so perfectly fresh that the casks of the ship were filled within ten miles of the Pacific. He ascended the river twenty miles; he landed and examined the country, and remained there trading with the great number of natives that crowded round his ship in their canoes, until the 20th of the month, when he sailed out into the Pacific. He bestowed the name of his ship-the Columbiaupon the noble river, and called the promontory on

Senate.

the north Cape Hancock, and that on the south Cape Adams.

Such is the account given by Captain Gray himself of his discovery of the Columbia. The material facts are recorded at length in the log-book of his ship, a copy of which has been furnished by Mr. Charles Bulfinch under oath.

The discovery of this great river of the West constitutes an important era in the history of the country. It opened a new channel of communication from the ocean to the Rocky Mountains, and extended, by means of its tributaries, to almost every part of one of the most fertile regions upon the globe. It contributed to secure to the country, under whose flag the discovery was made, a title to the river, and the magnificent territory which is watered by it.

Since the Oregon Territory has begun to be understood and to be justly appreciated, the British Government, through its ministers, have indulged in doubts-nay, in denial-as to Mr. Gray's prior discovery of the Columbia. In order that there shall be no misunderstanding, I will give the words of the British plenipotentiaries in their communication in 1826, to Mr. Gallatin, our minister.

They say that "Great Britain can show that, in 1788, (that is, four years before Gray entered the mouth of the Columbia river,) Mr. Mears, a lieutenant in the royal navy, who had. been sent by the East India Company on a trading expedition to the Northwest coast of America, had already minutely explored that coast from the 49th to the 45th degree of north latitude; had taken formal possession of the straits of De Fuca in the name of his sovereign; had purchased land, trafficked, and formed treaties with the natives; and had actually entered the bay of the Columbia, to the northern headland, which he gave the name of Cape Disappointment." Dixon, Scott, Duncan, Strange, and other private British traders, had also visited these shores and countries several years before Gray; but the single example of Mears suffices to quash Gray's claim to prior discovery. To the other navigators above mentioned, therefore, it is unnecessary to refer more particularly."

Let us proceed to examine the pretensions of the British Government, as set forth in the extraordina-' ry passage here quoted. That Mr. Mears should have minutely explored that coast-"minutely explored" are the words-and yet not have discovered a river which is seven miles wide at the mouth, would seem to be too great a tax upon the credulity of any one. That he should have entered the bay south of Cape Disappointment in 1788, and thereby furnished his Government any claim to the Columbia, would be equally incredible, when it is positive

proved that Heceta, a Spanish navigator, entered the same opening in 1775, and actually named the same Entrada de Heceta, and which is so represented on the Spanish maps. That Mr. Mears should have taken formal possession of the Strait of De Fuca, and that such act should be relied upon as conferring any right, is equally wonderful-especially when it is remembered that the said straits had been discovered and navigated from one end to the other under Spanish authority, and therefore rightfully belonged to Spain for a period, at that time, of one hundred and ninety-six years. Captain Berkeley, under Austrian colors, entered the Strait of De Fuca in the summer of 1787, one year before Mears was there. Why did not he claim it? Berkeley, finding it in the latitude, and answering the description which De Fuca had given of it, and which appeared upon all the old maps, immediately bestowed upon it the name of its discoverer, and called it the Strait of Juan De Fuca. Captain Gray, of the United States, landed at Nootka, (which is on the island formed by this strait,) the 17th of September, 1788; Captain Kendrick joined him during the same month; they built houses, traded with the natives, and spent the winter there. Gray sailed up this same strait fifty miles. The reason that Berkeley and Gray made no claim to the discovery of the Strait of Fuca is, because they knew what the whole maritime world knew-that the merit belonged to another; and that the strait would forever bear the name of its rightful discoverer.

What discoveries were made by Dixon, Scott

27TH CONG.... 3D SESS.

Duncan, Strange, and other British traders, we are not told; and for a very good reason. Indeed, they seem to be named only to fill up the back ground of the picture, as the sentence concludes by saying that the single example of Mears suffices to quash-yes, quash is the word-Gray's claim to the prior discovery of the Columbia river.

Now, it so happens that I have beforeme a piece of evidence upon this subject, that cannot fail to be interesting to the Senate and the country. It is testimony written at the time, with all the frankness of a gallant sailor-and that sailor, too, an officer of Great Britain. I read it here, to show how the assumed facts and conjured up arguments of a British minister to sustain a bad cause, and made out forty years after the date of the transaction, are annihilated by the naked statement of a sailor, and he their own officer.

I read from the second volume of the voyage of discovery of Captain George Vancouver to the north Pacific ocean in 1791-'92-'93-'94.

Vancouver was in latitude 47° 37', and says at page 41:

"At four o'clock a sail was discovered to the westward, standing in shore. This was a very great novelty, not having seen any vessel but our own consort during the last eight months. She soon hoisted American colors, and fired a gun to leeward. At six we spoke her. She proved to be the ship Columbia, commanded by Mr. Robert Gray, belonging to Boston. Having little doubt of his being the same person who had formerly commanded the sloop Washington, I desired he would bring to, and sent Mr. Puget and Mr. Menzies on board to acquire such information as might be serviceable in our future operations.

"On the return of the boat, we found our conjectures had not been ill-grounded; that this was the same gentleman who had commanded the sloop Washington at the time we were informed. She had made a very singular voyage behind Nootka. It was not a little remarkable, that, on our approach to this inland sea, (Strait of De Fuca,) we should fall in with the identical person who, it had been stated, had sailed through it. His relation differed, however, very materially from that published in England. He assured the officers that he had penetrated only fifty miles into the strait in question.

"He (Captain Gray) likewise informed them of his having been off the mouth of a river, in latitude 46° 10′, where the outset or reflux was so strong as to prevent his entering for nine days."

Page 58: "The river Mr. Gray mentioned should, from the latitude he assigned to it, have existence in the bay south of Cape Disappointment. This we passed on the forenoon of the 27th; and, as I then observed, if any inlet or river should be found, it must be a very intricate one, and inaccessible to vessels of our burden. Mr. Gray said he had been several days attempting to enter it. I was thoroughly convinced, as were also most persons of observation on board, that we could not possibly have passed any safe navigable opening, harbor, or place of security for shipping, on this coast, from Cape Mendocino to the promontory of Classat:"-that is, from 40° to 47° 30′ north latitude, and extending a great distance both north and south of the Columbia.

In the month of October following, when the worthy Captain Vancouver returned to Nootka, and saw Mr. Quadra, the Spanish commander, he changed his opinion upon the point that there was no such river as the Columbia, or no harbor on the coast for shipping. The 13th of October, at page 388 vol. 2d, he uses this language:

"The present re-established serenity (of weather) encouraged me to hope I might be enabled, in our route to the southward, to re-examine the coast, and particularly a river and a harbor discovered by Mr. Gray, in the ship Columbia, between the 46th and 47th degrees of latitude, of which Señor Quadra had favored me with a sketch. For this purpose our course was directed along shore to the eastward, which would afford an opportunity of examining the Spanish survey between Nootka and De Fuca's straits."

This last passage contains three highly important admissions:

The Oregon Bill-Mr. McRoberts.

1st. That Mr. Gray had discovered the river Columbia.

2d. That he had discovered a harbor (meaning Gray's harbor) north of the river; and that both these discoveries had been made upon a coast where he (Vancouver) had declared, in April before, that no river, no harbor, or opening, existed.

3d. That the Spaniards had previously made a survey of the coast from Nootka Sound to De Fuca's straits.

Accordingly, on the 16th of October, at page 393, we have the following order of Captain Vancouver:

"I directed Mr. Whidley, taking one of the Discovery's boats, should proceed in the Dedalus to examine Gray's harbor, said to be situated in latitude 46° 53'; whilst the Chatham and Discovery explored the river Mr. Gray had discovered in the latitude 46° 10′."

Page 395: "In the afternoon, when having nearly reached Cape Disappointment, which forms the north point of entrance into Columbia river, (so named by Mr. Gray,) I directed the Chatham to lead into it."

Sir, (said Mr. McR.,) was ever proof of the existence of any fact more conclusive than that here exhibited that Captain Gray was the first discoverer of the great river of the West? This old volume which I have found in the library contains the regular journal of daily entries, made by Captain Vancouver from April to October, 1792. The information furnished to him by Captain Gray, of the strait of Fuca, of Gray's harbor, and of the Columbia river, is repeatedly mentioned. Captain Vancouver objected, in April, that there was any such river or bay. When he returned in October, and learned the particulars from Quadra, and received from him a diagram of both, he directs the bay to be examined by Whidley, and orders the other vessel to lead into the Columbia. He examines them, and admits that Gray was the discoverer. In the face of proof like this, is it not amazing that the British ministers in 1826 should declare to Mr. Gallatin that the discoveries of Mears suffice to "quash" Gray's claim to prior discovery?

The connected testimony of their own witness, entered in his daily journal, and detailed in all the simplicity of truth, is, of itself, sufficient to quash a thousand such claims as those of Mears. It does not only destroy all pretensions on the part of Mears, but it annihilates the arguments of the ministry in sustaining it. As long as that noble stream shall bear the rich commerce that is destined to float upon its bosom from the mountains to the sea, so long will this evidence hold up to the living world the name and character of its undoubted discoverer.

There is another branch of this subject to be considered, and which completes the view of our title to the country by discovery. Mr. Jefferson nominated on the 11th January, 1803, Messrs. Livingston and Monroe to the Senate as ministers to negotiate for the purchase of Louisiana. On the 18th of that month, he recommended an appropriation for an expedition to the Pacific ocean. The 30th of April, 1803, the Louisiana treaty was signed; and on the 14th of May, 1804, Captains Lewis and Clarke entered the Missouri river on their western expedition. Of the importance of that expeditionof the privations and hardships which were endured in its performance-of the unrivalled intrepidity, courage, and talent, displayed by its commanders and the whole party, it is not now my purpose to speak. These things are known, and fill up one of the most interesting and thrilling pages in our history. The expedition traversed the Missouri to its sources among the Stony Mountains, crossed them in latitude 47 degrees north, found the head waters of the Columbia, constructed canoes, and passed down the river; and on the 15th of November, 1805, landed at Cape Hancock, upon the Pacific ocean. Lewis and Clarke and their party passed the winter at an encampment erected by them south of the Columbia, near its mouth. They traded, hunted, and fished with the Indians, and on the 13th of March, 1806, started for the United States. They followed the Columbia in their canoes to its falls, and thence travelled by land to the mountains. One party, under Captain Lewis, crossed the mountains directly east to the falls of the Missouri; while

Senate.

the other party, under Captain Clarke, crossed south, to the sources of the Yellow Stone, and passed down it to its mouth, where the parties were re-united, and on the 23d of September, 1806, arrived at St. Louis. This was the first instance in which the Oregon Territory and the Columbia river, from its source to its mouth, had ever been traversed by civilized man. The whole country on the route, for more than three thousand miles, was sublime wilderness. Lewis and Clarke were not men about whom posterity can err. They are of the number of those whose acts stand in high relief before the world, and whose courage, self-command, and indomitable perseverance awakened new impulses in the age in which God had placed them upon earth.

The trip was undertaken by the Government for the avowed purpose of discovery; it was intended to accomplish an exploration of the Oregon Territory from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific ocean. It was intended to found a claim to that territory in virtue of such discovery, and in furtherance of our existing rights from the discovery of the mouth of the Columbia by Captain Gray. The notoriety of the expedition of Lewis and Clarke, and the publication of their journal, were notice to the world of our purposes, and of the success of the expedition.

Our enterprising citizens have traversed portions of the country on both sides of the Rocky Moun tains often since, and as far south as the Mexican settlements. Emanuel Lisa, Hunt, Henry, and others of Missouri, could be named; and General Thomas James, of my own State. These noble men, though engaged in individual pursuits, explored our remote possessions, and from their intrepidity and talents made the name and character of their country respected in the remotest regions of the West. Their names are known among all the tribes, and by their exertions and sacrifices the rights of our country are engraved upon the mountains.

In furtherance of the rights of the United States to Oregon, founded upon prior discovery, there was an occupancy of the country under our flag of great notoriety, and a subsequent act of the British Government recognising our rights founded upon that occupancy. I refer to the establishment of Astoria, near the mouth of the Columbia. In 1810 the party left the United States, with the necessary material and men; part sailed from New York, and part crossed the country by land, and all met at the mouth of the Columbia in the spring of 1811. Astoria was established, houses and other buildings erected, gardens enclosed and cultivated, a vessel built and launched, and trading-posts located in the interior as high as the mouth of the Okanagan, which is four hundred miles up the Columbia. The party engaged in hunting and trapping, and carried on an extensive and lucrative trade with the natives. Their furs and skins they shipped to Canton. The proceeds were sent to the United States in silks, teas, and other products of the East India markets.

The establishment at Astoria-though it encountered some reverses, and especially in the murder by the Indians of the crew of the ship Tonquin (ir which bloody affair, one of the crew, rather than suffe himself to be murdered by their hands, blew up the vessel, after the enemy had overpowered them,)-the establishment, I say, notwithstanding its reverses, bad fair to be highly prosperous. It had the entire com mand of the fur trade through the whole extent d the valley of the Columbia. It was the first permsnent establishment ever made there. Arrangement at St. Petersburg had been made by it, for the excl. sive trade with the Russian settlements in the noth Pacific. There was not one British subject in ne territory. The news of the war of 1812 was carted from Canada, by one of the Northwest Company, in 1813, and communicated to the inhabitants of Astoria. He was also the bearer of intelligence that a naval force was on its way from England.o take possession of the mouth of the Columbia. The same ntelligence was received from other quaters. A fraudulent sale was then made of the fur and other property, to a party of the British Northwest Company; and shortly after an English ship owar entered the Columbia river, and took possessia of the fort