A History of Oregon, 1792-1849. Gray William Henry

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ student of the history of the settlement of our Pacific coast will be able to understand the influences its early settlers had to contend with, and the English colonist may learn the secret of their failure to build up a wealthy and prosperous colony in any part of their vast dominion on the North American continent.

      CHAPTER X

      Case of The Hudson’s Bay Company v. The United States. – Examination of Mr. McTavish. – Number of witnesses. – Their ignorance. – Amount claimed. – Original stock. – Value of land in Oregon. – Estimate of Hudson’s Bay Company’s property. – Remarks of author.

      I have carefully reviewed all the testimony in the above case, on both sides, up to May 1, 1867. On April 12, the counsel on the part of the United States having already spent twenty-five days in cross-examining Chief-Factor McTavish, so as to get at the real expenditures of the Hudson’s Bay Company, and arrive at a just conclusion as to the amount due them, – Mr. McTavish having frequently referred to accounts and statements which he averred could be found on the various books of the company, – gave notice to the counsel of the company in the following language: —

      “The counsel for the United States require of Mr. McTavish, who, as appears from his evidence, is a chief factor of the Hudson’s Bay Company, and its agent in the prosecution of this claim, to produce here for examination by the United States or their counsel, all accounts, account-books, and letter-books of said company, together with the regulations under which their books were kept, and the various forms of contracts with servants of the company, all of which books, rules, and forms contain evidence pertinent to the issue in this case, as appears from the cross-examination of Mr. McTavish, and suspends the further cross-examination of this witness until he shall produce such books, accounts, rules, and forms.”

      On the 1st of May Mr. McTavish’s examination was resumed.

      Int. 952.– “Will you please produce here for examination by the United States or their counsel, all accounts, account-books, and letter-books of the Hudson’s Bay Company which were kept at the various posts of that company south of the 49th parallel of north latitude during their occupation by the company, together with the regulations under which their books were kept, and the regular forms of contracts with the company’s servants?”

      Ans.– “I can not say whether I will produce them or not.”

      (The above question was objected to as incompetent, and as asking the witness, not as to what he knows of the subject, but as to what his future course of action will be, over which, as witness, he can have no control.)

      During the examination of Mr. McTavish it was evident that he was the main prosecuting witness, and considerably interested in the results of the claim, or suit.

      It would doubtless be interesting to most of our readers to see a review of the testimony, or at least a summary of the evidence presented on both sides in this case. There are now printed about one thousand pages of documents and depositions. That relating particularly to the Hudson’s Bay Company comprises about two-thirds of the whole amount. The balance relates more particularly to the Puget Sound Agricultural Company’s claim. This claim, the company have not been able, by any testimony yet presented, to separate from that of the Hudson’s Bay Company; so that there is no prospect of their receiving one dollar on that account. There have been examined on the part of the Puget Sound Company, to prove its separate existence from the Hudson’s Bay Company, thirty witnesses; on the part of the United States, twenty-one. On the part of the Hudson’s Bay Company’s claim as separate from the Puget Sound Company, nineteen witnesses; on the part of the United States, thirty. On both sides not far from forty-five witnesses have been called upon the stand to testify in this important case. The company in London have been requested to furnish evidence of the separate organization or independent existence of the two companies; and with all this evidence produced, nothing definite or certain is shown, except that the concern was gotten up to deceive the English people and rob the American government, and to counteract and oppose the American settlement of this country.

      As a looker-on and an observer of events in this country, I must confess my astonishment at the ignorance, perverseness, and stupidity of men whom I have ever heretofore regarded as honorable and truthful.

      From the testimony before me of the twenty odd English witnesses, it really appears as though they felt that all they had to do was to ask their pay, and our government would give it to them; or, in other words, they, as Englishmen and British subjects, are prepared to compel the payment of any sum they demand.

      There are many interesting developments brought out in this case relative to the early history of this country, which renders the depositions in the case, though voluminous and tedious in the main, yet interesting to the close and careful student of our history.

      If time and opportunity is given, I will review this whole testimony as a part of the history of this country, and, in so doing, will endeavor to correct an erroneous impression that will result from the testimony as now before us.

      The amount claimed in this case is four million nine hundred and ninety thousand thirty-six dollars and sixty-seven cents, or, nine hundred and eighty-five thousand three hundred and fifty pounds sterling, in gold coin.

      I now have before me, including the Hudson’s Bay Company’s memorial, eleven hundred and twenty-six pages of printed documents and depositions relating to this case. I also have what may properly be termed British testimony, bearing directly upon this case, which is entitled to its full weight in a proper and just decision as to the amount of compensation this Hudson’s Bay Company is entitled to receive from our government.

      I do not propose to review all the one thousand four hundred and nineteen pages of statements and depositions in detail; that would be too tedious, though I might be able to make it interesting to the general reader, as it develops the whole history of that portion of our continent that has for one hundred and ninety-seven years been under the exclusive jurisdiction of a monopoly that effectually closed it to all outside influences up to the year A. D. 1834.

      According to our British testimony, it was originally £10,500. In 1690, in consequence of the enormous profits upon this small capital, it was increased threefold, making it £31,500. In 1720 it was declared to be £94,500. In this year the stock was (as is termed) watered. The then proprietors each subscribed £100, and received £300 of stock, calling the whole nominal stock £378,000, while the actual subscription was but £94,500, and only £3,150 was paid. The stock was ordered to reckon at £103,500, while the actual total amount paid was but £13,650.

      In 1821, there was another “watering” of the stock, and a call of £100 per share on the proprietors, which raised their capital to £200,000. The Northwest Fur Company joined the Hudson’s Bay Company in this year, and the joint stock was declared to be £400,000.

      We are ready to admit, in fact, the testimony in the case goes to prove, that the French Northwest Company brought into the concern an equal amount of capital with that of the Hudson’s Bay Company. This would give the present Hudson’s Bay Company a real capital of £27,300, a nominal capital of £400,000.

      By reference to the memorial of the company, we find they claim, on the 8th of April, 1867, of our government: —

      For the right to trade, of which the settlement of the country and removal of Indians to reservations has deprived them, £200,000.

      For the right of the free navigation of the Columbia River, £300,000.

      For their forts, farms, posts, and establishments, with the buildings and improvements, £285,350, making, in all, £785,350, or $3,822,036.67, or £385,350 more than the whole amount of nominal stock which they СКАЧАТЬ