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

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ that while Mr. Greenhow was writing the above high commendation of the conduct and policy of the Hudson’s Bay Company, in relation to their treatment of Indians and missionaries under their absolute control, that that company were driving from their posts at Moose Factory and Vancouver, their own Wesleyan and Episcopal missionaries, and doing all they could to prevent the settlement or civilization of the Indians, or allowing any missionary intercourse with them, except by foreign Roman Jesuits, and were actually combining the Indians in Oregon to destroy and defeat civil and Christian efforts among the Indians and American settlements then being established in the country. Page 390, Mr. Greenhow further says: “The course pursued by the Hudson’s Bay Company, with regard to American citizens in the territory west of the Rocky Mountains, was equally unexceptionable and politic. The missionaries and immigrants from the United States, or from whatever country they might come, were received at the establishments of the company with the utmost kindness, and were aided in the prosecution of their respective objects, so far and so long as those objects were not commercial; but no sooner did any person, unconnected with the company, attempt to hunt, or trap, or trade with the Indians, than all the force of the body was turned against him.”

      The statement in the last part of the foregoing paragraph can be attested by more than one hundred American hunters and traders, who have felt the full force of that company’s influence against them; as also by missionaries and settlers on first arriving in the country. But Mr. Greenhow says: “There is no evidence or reason to believe that violent measures were ever employed, either directly or indirectly, for this purpose; nor would such means have been needed while the company enjoyed advantages over all competitors, such as are afforded by its wealth, its organization, and the skill and knowledge of the country, and of the natives, possessed by its agents.” This is simply an assertion of Mr. Greenhow, which our future pages will correct in the mind of any who have received it as truth. It is unnecessary to pursue Mr. Greenhow’s history of the Hudson’s Bay Company respecting their treatment of American or English missionaries or American settlers; the statements we have quoted show fully his want of a correct knowledge of the practices of that company in dealing with savage and civilized men. We only claim for ourselves close observation and deeply interested participation in all that relates to Oregon since 1832, having been permitted to be present at the forming of its early civil settlement and political history. This work of Mr. Greenhow’s appears to be peculiarly political as well as strongly national, and in the passages we have quoted, with many other similar ones, he seems to us to have written to catch the patronage of this foreign English corporation, which, according to his own showing, has been an incubus upon the English, and, so far as possible, the Americans also. While he shows his utter ignorance of their internal policy and history, his researches in the history of the early discoveries on this western coast are ample And most useful as vindicating our American claim to the country. But as to its settlement and civilization, or its early moral or political history, as he says of Mr. Samuel Parker, “in all of which he is evidently a stranger.”

      Our reasons for giving the extracts from Mr. Greenhow’s work are —

      1st. That the reader may the better understand what follows as our own.

      2d. To avoid a future collision or controversy respecting statements that may be quoted from him to contradict or controvert our own, respecting the policy and practices of the Hudson’s Bay Company, which, Mr. Greenhow says, page 391, “did no more than they were entitled to do. If the Americans neglected or were unable to avail themselves of the benefits secured to both nations by the convention, the fault or the misfortune was their own, and they had no right to complain.” If this is true, as against the American, what right has the Hudson’s Bay Company to complain and ask pay for what had been rendered worthless to them by the American settlement of the country?

      “The hospitable treatment extended to them [American citizens] by the agents of the Hudson’s Bay Company was doubtless approved by the directors of that body; and all who know Messrs. McLaughlin and Douglas, the principal managers of the affairs of that body on the Columbia, unite in testifying that the humanity and generosity of those gentlemen have been always carried as far as their duties would permit. That their conduct does not, however, meet with universal approbation among the servants of the company in that quarter, sufficient evidence may be cited to prove.” He quotes John Dunn’s book, chap. 12.

      Mr. Greenhow wrote his history with the light then existing, i. e., in 1844. About that time Dr. McLaughlin was called to an account by the directors of the Hudson’s Bay Company, in London. He explained to them his position, and the condition of the Americans, who came to this country both naked and hungry, and that, as a man of common humanity, he could do no less than he did. The directors insisted upon the enforcement of their stringent rule, which was, to starve and drive every American from the country. He then told them: “If such is your order, gentlemen, I will serve you no longer.” As to Mr. Douglas, we have no such noble sentiment to record in his behalf; he belonged to that English party called by Mr. Greenhow “Patriots.” He says: “There were two parties among the British in Oregon, the Patriots and the Liberals, who, while they agreed in holding all Americans in utter detestation, as knaves and ruffians, yet differed as to the propriety of the course pursued with regard to them by the company. The Patriots maintained, that kindness showed to the people of the United States was thrown away, and would be badly requited; that it was merely nurturing a race of men, who would soon rise from their weak and humble position, as grateful acknowledgers of favors, to the bold attitude of questioners of the authority of Great Britain, and her right, even to Vancouver itself; that if any attempts were made for the conversion of the natives to Christianity, and to the adoption of more humanized institutions (which they limited to British institutions), a solid and permanent foundation should be laid; and for that purpose, if missionaries were to be introduced, they should come within the direct control of the dominant power, that is, the British power, and should be the countrymen of those who actually occupied Oregon, etc. The Liberals, while admitting all that was said on the other side, of the character of the Americans, nevertheless charitably opined that those people should not be excluded, as they possessed some claim, ‘feeble, but yet existing,’ to the country, and until ‘these were quashed or confirmed, it would be unjust and impolite’ to prevent them from all possession; that these missionaries, though bad, were better than none; and that good would grow out of evil in the end, for the Americans, by their intercourse with the British, would become more humanized, tolerant, and honest.”

      As most of the above sentiment relative to the two English parties in the country appears to be quoted by Mr. Greenhow from some author, it would be interesting to know who he is; still, the fact is all that is essential to know, and we have reason to believe and know that the sentiments expressed were entertained by the controlling authority of the company in London and in Oregon; and that Messrs. Douglas and Ogden, and the Roman priests under their patronage, acted fully up to them as Roman and British Jesuits, there is no question; and under such circumstances, it is not surprising that the immigration from the United States in 1843, ’44, and ’45, should increase that feeling of hostility and hatred of the American settlement and civilization in the country.

      We do not propose at present to speak of the action of the American Congress relative to Oregon, but, as will be seen, to connect and bring into our own history such allusions of Mr. Greenhow as serve to illustrate and prove the several propositions we have stated respecting the early history of its settlement, and also to prepare the reader to understand in a manner the combined influences that were ready to contest any claim or effort any American company or citizen might make for the future occupation of the country.

      It will be seen that no company of settlers or traders could have succeeded, having arrived in advance of the American missionaries. They were unquestionably the only nucleus around which a permanent settlement could have been formed, eleven different American fur companies having commenced and failed, as will be shown; and although Mr. Greenhow seems to regard and treat the American missionary effort with contempt, yet impartial history will place them in the foreground, and award to them an honorable place in counteracting foreign influences СКАЧАТЬ