“While it is apparent from the letters of Dr. Whitman at the missionary house, that, in visiting the Eastern States in 1842-3, he had certain missionary objects in view, it is no less clear that he would not have come at that time, and probably he would not have come at all [which we know to be the case], had it not been for his desire to save the disputed territory to the United States. It was not simply an American question, however,—it was at the same time a Protestant question. He was fully alive to the efforts which the Roman Catholics were making to gain the mastery on the Pacific coast, and he was firmly persuaded that they were working in the interest of the Hudson’s Bay Company, with a view to this very end. The danger from this quarter had made a profound impression upon his mind. Under date of April 1, 1847, he said: ‘In the autumn of 1842-3, I pointed out to our mission the arrangements of the Papists to settle in our vicinity, and that it only required that those arrangements should be completed to close our operations.’”
To the statement of Dr. Whitman as here quoted from his letter to the Board, we can bear positive testimony. He did point out to his associates all the dangers to which they were exposed.
“Dr. Whitman evidently regarded his visit to Washington, and his success in conducting the immigrants of 1843 [eight hundred and seventy-five souls] across the Rocky and Blue mountains, as settling the destiny of Oregon. In the letter just referred to, he said, ‘It may be easily seen what would have become of American interests in this country, had the immigration of 1843 been as disastrous as were the immigrations of 1845 and 1846.’ [In both those years the route which he had selected was abandoned for another.] In confirmation of this opinion, we find a writer in the Colonial Magazine using this language:—
“‘By a strange and unpardonable oversight of the local officers, missionaries from the United States were allowed to take religious charge of the population; and these artful men lost no time in introducing such a number of their countrymen as reduced the influence of the British settlers to complete insignificance.’”
“‘By a strange and unpardonable oversight of the local officers, missionaries from the United States were allowed to take religious charge of the population; and these artful men lost no time in introducing such a number of their countrymen as reduced the influence of the British settlers to complete insignificance.’”
The above quotation from the Colonial Magazine is but a repetition of evidence already given from other English testimony, relative to their determination to hold the country. We also have the expectation of Chief-Factor A. McDonald, as expressed in 1842 to Rev. C. Eells: “He also gave it as his opinion that if England should obtain the desired portion of Oregon, it would be made over to the Hudson’s Bay Company.” He thought that fifty years from that time, the Hudson’s Bay Company’s descendants would be the only occupants of the country. Dr. Whitman, in expressing an opinion upon the same subject, thought that fifty years from that time they would not be found.
In the closing remarks of the article from which we have quoted the above, there is a strange mixture of truth and ignorance. The writer says: “It is not too much to say, perhaps, that Dr. and Mrs. Whitman lost their lives in consequence of the success of the endeavors already described. The immigrants of 1847 carried diseases into the Indian country, which proved very fatal to the aborigines. Some became suspicious of him; some were exasperated; and a few affirmed that he was poisoning them with his medicines, to get them out of the way. It is believed by many, moreover, that the Roman Catholics were in a measure responsible as directly or indirectly, for the catastrophe of Wailatpu. But it is inexpedient to discuss this question at the present time.”
It is evident from this last quotation, that Sir James Douglas’s letter for the information of the Board of Missions produced its desired effect; and it is only from the recent statements respecting that transaction, that the Board have allowed the subject to come before them; they have asked and received from the most cautious missionary they have ever sent to the country, a statement of the facts in the case. He has complied with their request, and the result is a repetition of the slander of the murdered dead. We are unwilling to believe that the Rev. Mr. Treat, D. D., in this closing paragraph, intended to give the impression that he believed the statement; yet we can not understand his object in reporting the statement made to blast the character of a good man, and to shield his murderers from the punishment due to their crime; leaving the impression upon the mind, that it was the Indian superstitions alone that were the cause of the massacre. Those who have read the foregoing pages will not be deceived as to those causes. Mr. Treat should have given us the benefit of his authority for that statement, as we are assured by the Indians themselves that there is not one of them that ever believed those reports till they were affirmed by the priests, and even then they doubted. We have been several times among the Indians of that tribe; and were present at the first consultation held with them by Indian Agent R. R. Thompson in 1853, and took particular pains to inquire as to their belief in that matter. I could not find one, even among the Roman Catholic Indians, that would say he believed that Dr. Whitman did as he is represented by the priests and the company to have done. The Indians invariably told me that the priests, Finlay, Stanfield, Joe Lewis, or Mr. McBean said so, but they believed Dr. Whitman was their friend, and their hearts had wept and cried because they had consented to his being killed.
It was to develop the facts and influences operating in our early history that we commenced to write. It does not matter to us whence a statement comes or by whom it is made, if it does not correspond with the facts in the case, we intend to give what we conceive and firmly believe to be the truth; letting such as are ignorant of the facts, or have been deceived by commercial, religious, or sectarian statements, judge as to the correctness or truth of our conclusions.
A great crime has been committed in our land;—a poor, ignorant, and harmless and comparatively innocent people, have been charged with committing it through “superstitious prejudices,” which, if the very men who make the charge are to be believed, fixes the crimes upon their own heads, for they tell us that they were unharmed amid the scenes of blood and murder, while gathering up the remains of the first missionary victims and consigning them to a common grave. Their messengers pass and repass all through the country, and mingle freely, and “rejoice” that the ignorant murderers will come to them for advice, which is cheerfully given, and a pledge made to assist them to avoid its consequences; while the commercial party in this great crime is handing over to the murderers munitions for defense, and to continue the slaughter of American settlers, the Jesuitical party is confirming the doubtful mind of the Indians in the justness of the crime they have committed. Such were the parties seeking to control our destiny from 1834 to 1849, and such as we have quoted are the sentiments of men high in giving direction to truth and righteousness in a great nation in 1866-7.
We feel, and admit, that our task has been most difficult and arduous,—to seek out and bring to light the truth in relation to events so momentous, and consequences so important to the interests of this western part of our continent. It would be far more gratifying to us to dwell upon the pleasing and happy influences and incidents that float upon the surface of society; but these are commonplace and the natural growth of circumstances, such as the most careless could scarcely fail to observe.