The bill prepared by the secretary provided, (1.) A country to be procured west of the Mississippi, and beyond the states and territories, for their future and permanent residence; the right to the soil and protection against the intrusion of white settlers to be guarantied to them. (2.) Their removal by individuals, or by portions of tribes, if the whole tribes were unwilling to remove. (3.) Establishing and maintaining a territorial government by the United States for their protection and civilization. (4.) If circumstances should ultimately justify it, the extinction of tribes and their amalgamation into one mass, and a distribution of property among the individuals, instead of its being held in common by a tribe. (5.) The condition of those that remain to be left unaltered.

No definitive action, however, was had upon this bill; nor was any proposition for the removal of the Indian tribes adopted during the administration of Mr. Adams.

CHAPTER XXVIII.

RUSSIAN

AND BRITISH CLAIMS ON THE PACIFIC COAST. -OCCUPATION OF

COLUMBIA RIVER. -PUBLISHING THE LAWS.

PORTIONS of the coast on the Pacific ocean, north of the 42d degree of north latitude, were claimed by the United States, Russia and Great Britain. But prior to the treaty of the 5th of April, 1824, between the United States and Russia, the territorial boundaries of neither of the claimants had been established.

By a resolution of the house of representatives, February 16, 1822, the president was requested “to communicate to the house, whether any foreign government had claimed any part of the territory of the United States on the coast of the Pacific ocean, north of the 42d degree of latitude, and whether any regulations had been made by any foreign powers affecting the trade on that coast," &c. In compliance with this resolution, the president, on the 15th of April, communicated the correspond. ence between our government and the governments of Russia and Great Britain.

Pierre de Poletica, Russian minister at Washington, on the 11th of February, 1822, had transmitted to Mr. Adams, secretary of state, a printed copy of a regulation adopted by the Russian American company, and sanctioned by the emperor. This regulation interdicted the approach of all vessels except Russian, within one hundred Italian miles of the shore of any territory claimed by that government, and assumed a right to the territory as far south as the 51st degree of north latitude. This territorial claim, as well as the right to exclude our vessels from the shore beyond the ordinary distance to which territorial jurisdiction extends, our government was unwilling to concede.

Mr. Adams, in reply, said it had been expected that the boundary would have been arranged by treaty. And he asked explanations of the grounds of such claim and regulations, upon principles generally recog. nized by the laws and usages of nations.

It was answered, that Russia based her territorial claims upon discoveries ; the first of which was dated back to the time of the emperor, Peter I. Captain Behring made his first voyage of discovery in 1728. In his second expedition, 1741, discoveries were made as far south as the 49th degree of north latitude; and establishments were soon after formed by Russians along the coast. In 1799, the emperor, Paul I, granted to the Russian American company their first charter, which gave them the exclusive possession of the coast from the 55th degree to Behring's strait, and permitted them to extend their discoveries south, and to form establishments, provided they did not encroach upon territory occupied by other powers.

The treaty by which Spain ceded the Floridas, and certain territory west of the Mississippi, gave to the United States all that belonged to Spain north of the 42d degree, but did not define the northern boundary.

From the foregoing facts it appeared, that the rights of Russia specified in the regulations of the Russian American company, rested on the three bases required by the general law and usage of nations: (1.) The first discovery. (2.) First occupation. (3.) Peaceable and undisputed possession for more than fifty years. As Spain never had a title to territory beyond the line assigned for the limits of the Russian possessions, and as the United States had no other title than that acquired by the treaty of the 22d of February, 1819, above mentioned, the establishment of this line could not interfere with the just claims of the United States. The 51st degree had been selected, as being the mean point between the Russian establishment at New Archangel, under the 57th degree, and the American colony at the mouth of the Columbia river, under the 46th degree.

The prohibition of foreign vessels for so great a distance, was but a nieasure of prevention, and was directed against foreign adventurers who were not content with exercising an illicit trade on the coast, injurious to the rights of the Russian American company, but furnished arms and ammunition to the natives, exciting them likewise to resistance and revolt against the authorities in the Russian possessions. A majority of

these adventurers had been American citizens. Possessing territory also on the Asiatic side of the Pacific from the strait to the 45th degree of north latitude, Russia might exercise the rights of sovereignty over the whole sea, north of the 51st degree !

Mr. Adams dissented from the principle upon which Russia had extended her claim to the 5 Ist degree, viz., that it was equidistant from New Archangel and the mouth of the Columbia river. Since the limits prescribed by the emperor Paul to the Russian American company were fixed at the 55th degree, no settlement had been made justifiying any claim to territory south of that point. New Archangel, it was said, too, was not situated on the continent, but was a small settlement upon a small island, in latitude 57. With regard to the prohibition upon foreign vessels, Mr. A. said the vessels of the United States, had, during our existence as an independent nation, freely navigated those seas, and the right to navigate them was a part of that independence. Respecting the absurd suggestion that Russia might have made a close sea of the Pacific because she claims territory on both shores, he thought it sufficient to say, that the distance from shore to shore in latitude 51, was 4,000 miles ! Nor could the United States admit the justice of the reason assigned for the prohibition. The right of our citizens to trade with the aboriginal natives beyond the territorial jurisdiction of other nations, even in arms and munitions of war, was as clear and indisputable as that of navigating the seas. And if any well founded charge had ever been made against our citizens for a violation of that right, it would have received the most pointed attention of the government.

The Russian minister, in reply, adduced new arguments to establish the claims of his government to the 51st degree. The great extent of the ocean did not invalidate the right to make it a close sea. The imperial government, however, had never taken advantage of that right. As to the right claimed for our citizens of trading with the natives without the limits of Russian jurisdiction, his government did not think of limiting it; but if it should be extended beyond the 51st degree, it would meet with difficulties for which the American owners must accuse their own imprudence !

The negotiation, at the request of the imperial government, was subsequently transferred to St. Petersburgh, where a treaty was concluded the 5th of April, 1824, by our minister, Henry Middleton, and Count Nesselrode. By this treaty, the boundary line was established at 54 degrees 40 minutes north latitude. The citizens of the United States were not to resort to any point where there was a Russian establishment without permission of the governor or commander: and the subjects of Russia were under similar restrictions as to American establishments.

a

a

a

And for the term of ten years, the vessels of both parties were to have free admission into the interior seas, gulfs, harbors, and creeks upon the coast, for the purposes of fishing and trading with the natives.

Mr. Monroe, in his annual message to congress, December 7, 1824, recommended the establishment of a military post at or near the mouth of the Columbia river, to protect our increased and increasing fisheries on the Pacific. A bill for this purpose was accordingly introduced into the house, with an additional provision, directing the president to open a port of entry in the territory, and empowering him to appoint a governor, judges and other officers for the territory. These provisions were, however, struck out of the bill. The establishment of a territorial government was considered premature; and the opening of a port of entry, and the consequent demand of duties from British traders, would interfere with the treaty with Great Britain, by which a free and open trade was guarantied to both powers for a certain term of years. This gave rise to a discussion, in congress, of the claims of Great Britain on the north-west coast.

It was held that Great Britain had no just claim to any part of the territory. Spanish navigators had first discovered the coast as far as the 58th degree of north latitude. The claim of Spain, founded on first discovery, became ours by the treaty of the 22d of April, 1819. We had claimed the country before the war of 1812, as had also Russia and England. But their titles were mere pretenses. Our government had sent out Lewis and Clark to explore the country; and soon after, our fur traders took possession near the mouth of the Columbia or Oregon river, and in 1810 built there the little town called Astoria. After the commencement of the war, the British traders, aided by the Indians, drove our traders from the country, and held it until the treaty of Ghent, when, according to the stipulation of that treaty, it was restored. Possession was taken by Mr. Prevost, agent of the United States, who also took possession of the British post near the bay; the English settlers, however, protesting against our right to take it.

Immediately after the departure of Mr. Prevost, the British flag was again hoisted, and the country occupied as British territory. This occurred a few days before the treaty of London was signed, Oct. 20, 1818. By the provisions of that treaty, the territory claimed by either party, within its waters, was to be free and open, for ten years, to the vessels, citizens and subjects of the two powers; but the treaty was not to be construed to the prejudice of the claim of either party.

The establishment of a military post to occupy the country, was urged as necessary to enable us to preserve our claim.. At the end of ten years, Great Britain might insist on the parties being put back to their

former condition; and although holding by wrong, yet being in actual possession, when the treaty was concluded, she might represent our rights during the joint occupancy as a mere lease; and neglecting to reöccupy the country, we should lose an important advantage in hereafter treating to reclaim it. Great commercial advantages, too, it was believed, would be gained by the occupation of the country. It would enable us to command the trade of China, and other parts of eastern Asia, and the north Pacific. A military post at the mouth of the Columbia river, with trading houses in the territory, would command the fur trade; and the fur trade and traders would command the Indians, and be the surest means of preserving peace with them.

Fears had been expressed that our confederacy might become too widely extended. Although the federative system was well adapted for the government of an extensive nation, there were limits which it would not be safe to pass. Our system might properly include all who had a mutual interest in being united. To carry it farther, would weaken the bond of union, and endanger the confederacy. But what might be the fate of the federation if extended beyond the Stony Mountains, or what might be the condition of the people of Oregon centuries hence, was not a matter of immediate concern. Posterity would know how to take care of itself, and to provide for its own dangers.

To induce the settlement of the Oregon territory, a section had been inserted in the bill, granting land to the settlers. This section was struck out, and the bill, (Dec. 23,) passed the house, 113 to 57. In the senate, the bill was taken up for consideration on the 25th of February, 1825, and, without a discussion of its merits, laid on the table. until the next day, when the consideration was resumed. It was supported by Mr. Barbour, in a short speech, which was followed by one of greater length from Mr. Dickerson.

Upon the question of the title of the United States to the territory proposed to be settled, the speakers did not essentially differ. Mr. Barbour said, the very full exposition of our claim given by the American plenipotentiary to the court of St. James, (Mr. Rush,) left but little for him to add on this point. By a comparison of that state paper with the counter statement of the representative of that court, the claim of Great Britain, as to the territory on the Oregon, was without foundation. He believed we had in the spirit of friendship and forbearance, made a sacrifice to Russia of five degrees of our just claim, and in the same spirit had been willing to make an equal sacrifice to Great Britain; and he hoped she would close with the terms proposed. The United States could yield no farther: consequently, our claim must be held as unquestionable many degrees to the north of the proposed settlement.