[120] Lord Elgin went on to say: "At the same time I think it is to be regretted that a jurisdiction so extensive and peculiar, exercised by British subjects at such a distance and so far beyond the control of public opinion, should be so entirely removed from the surveillance of Her Majesty's Government. The evil arising from this state of things is forcibly illustrated in the present instance by the difficulty which I experience in obtaining materials for a full and satisfactory report on the charges which your Lordship referred to me. It were very desirable, if abuses do exist, that Government possessed the means of probing them to the bottom; and on the other hand it seems to be hard on the Company, if the imputations cast upon it be unfounded, that Government, which undertakes the investigation, should not have the power of acquitting it on testimony more unexceptionable than any which is at present procurable. It has been stated to me that your Lordship has it in contemplation to establish a military officer at some point within the territories of the Company, and that the Company is disposed to afford every facility for carrying out this arrangement. I trust that this report may prove to be well founded."
[121] The treaty having provided for a joint commission, Mr. A. S. Johnston and the Hon. (afterwards Sir) John Rose were appointed to act for America and Great Britain, respectively. These commissioners, on the 10th of September, 1869, issued an award from Washington, directing the payment of $450,000 by the United States to the Hudson's Bay Company, and $200,000 to the Puget's Sound Company. There was, as usual, considerable delay in making this payment. On the 11th of July, 1870, $325,000 was appropriated by Congress for this purpose, and a like sum by another appropriation in the following year.
[122] "I am glad to tell you that since I received your letter of Saturday last, the Hudson's Bay Company has replied to my communication; and has promised to grant land to a Company formed under such auspices as those with whom I placed them in communication. The question now is, what breadth of land they will give, for of course they propose to include the whole length of the line through their territory. A copy of the reply shall be sent to Mr. Baring, and I hope you and he will be able to bring this concession to some practical issue.
"I was quite aware of the willingness of the Company to sell their whole rights for some such sum as £1,500,000. I ascertained the fact two months ago and alluded to it in the House of Lords in my reply to a motion by Lord Donoughmore. I cannot, however, view the proposal in so favourable a light as you do. There would be no immediate or direct return to show for this large outlay, for of course the trade monopoly must cease, and the sale of the land would for some time bring in little or nothing—certainly not enough to pay for the government of the country.
"I do not think Canada can, or if she can, ought to take any large share in such a payment. Some of her politicians would no doubt support the proposal with views of their own—but it would be a serious, and for some time unrenumerative addition to their very embarassing debt. I certainly should not like to sell any portion of the territory to the United States—exchange (if the territory were once acquired) would be a different thing—but that would not help towards the liquidation of the purchase money."—Letter of the Duke of Newcastle, 14th August, 1862.
[123] "To my mind the worst feature in the new Company is that of allowing a foreigner (American) to hold office. He owes allegiance to the United States, and his position gives him knowledge which no American should possess. 'Blood is thicker than water,' says the proverb: 'No man can serve two masters.' As to the idea that being in the fur-trade his experience and influence will benefit the new Company, will any furrier believe that? If the Company will sell all the furs, I would never rest satisfied while an American was in the management.'"—William McNaughten, the Company's agent at New York.
[124] The eighty-five shares belonging to the wintering partners, in 1863, were held as follows:
| 15 chief factors | 30 | shares |
| 37 chief traders | 37 | " |
| 10 retired chief factors | 13 | " |
| 10 retired chief traders | 5 | " |
| 85 | shares. |
[125] "Its continued attacks upon the Company," wrote Governor Dallas, "find a greedy ear with the public at large, both in the settlement and in Canada."
[126] "With regard to the Hudson's Bay matter," wrote Cartier to Watkin, under date of 15th of February, 1868, "not the least doubt that the speech of 'John A.,' was very uncalled for and injudicious. He had no business to make such a speech, and I told him so at the time—that he ought not to have made it. However, you must not attach too much importance to that speech. I myself, and several of my colleagues, and John A. himself, have no intention to commit any spoliation; and for myself in particular, I can say to you that I will never consent to be a party to a measure or anything intended to be an act of spoliation of the Hudson's Bay's rights and privileges."