It will be remembered that this demand is simply on account of the settlement of Oregon by the Americans. A part of the posts for which this demand is made are still in their undisputed possession, and a large portion of the claim is set up in consequence of the loss of the profits of the fur trade, of that portion of their business as conducted in territory that originally belonged to the United States, and was actually given up to them by the treaty of December 24, 1814.
The reader will bear in mind, that in the review or discussion of this Hudson’s Bay Company’s claim on our government, we only refer to that part of their trade, and the rights or privileges they were permitted to enjoy, jointly with Americans, in what is now absolutely American territory. Over two-thirds of their capital has always been employed in territory that the American has not been permitted to enter, much less to trade and form a settlement of any kind.
The witnesses on the part of the Hudson’s Bay Company have been forty-one in number. Of this number fifteen are directly interested in the results of the award. Fourteen were brought to the country by, and remained in the service of the company till they left the country; and were all British, though some of them have become naturalized American citizens. Twelve are American citizens, and are supposed to have no particular interest in the results of the case; in fact, their statements are all of a general and very indefinite character. Having come to the country since 1850, they know but little or nothing about the Hudson’s Bay Company, its rights, policy, or interests there. Not one of them appears, from the testimony given, to understand the justness of the company’s claim, or the injustice there would be in allowing any part of it. Their testimony appears to be given under the impression that because the treaty stipulated that the possessory rights of the company were acknowledged and to be respected, that therefore full payment must be paid the company for the right of trade, and the prospective profits in trade, and the increased value of assessable property for an indefinite period in the future. As, for example, a witness is asked:—
“What is the present value per acre of the company’s claims at Cowlitz and Nasqualla, for farming and grazing purposes?”
Ans.—“Supposing both claims to belong to the same person or company, having a clear and undisputed title, and perfectly exempt from molestation in the transaction of business, I think the Cowlitz claim worth to-day thirty dollars an acre, and the Nasqualla claim five dollars an acre, for farming and grazing purposes.”
The fifteen interested witnesses all testify to about the same thing, asserting positively as to the real value of the company’s supposed rights. One of the chief factors, in answer to the interrogatory, “State the value of the post at Vancouver, as well in 1846 as since, until the year 1863; give the value of the lands and of the buildings separately; and state also what was the value of the post in relation to the other posts, and as a center of trade,” said:—
“It being the general depot for the trade of the company west of the Rocky Mountains, in 1846 the establishment at Vancouver, with its out-buildings, was in thorough order, having been lately rebuilt; taking into account this post” (a notorious fact that but two new buildings were about the establishment and in decent repair), “together with the various improvements at the mill, on the mill plain, on the lower plain, and at Sauvies Island, I should estimate its value then to the company at from five to six hundred thousand dollars.”
The value of the land used by the company, at Fort Vancouver, in 1846, say containing a frontage of twenty-five miles on the Columbia, by ten miles in depth, in all two hundred and fifty square miles, or about 160,000 acres, I should calculate as being worth then, on an average, from $2.50 to $3 an acre (at $2.50 would give us $400,000); this, with the improvements, say $500,000, gives us, at this witness’s lowest estimate, $900,000 for the company’s possessory rights.
This witness goes into an argument stating surrounding and probable events, and concludes in these words: “I am clearly of opinion that had the company entire control to deal with it as their own, without any question as to their title, from the year 1846 and up to 1858, when I left there, taking the fort as a center point, the land above and below it, to the extent of three square miles, or 1,920 acres, with frontage on the Columbia River, could have been easily disposed of for $250 per acre ($480,000). The remainder of the land claim of the company at Vancouver is more or less valuable, according to its locality; thus, I consider the land on the lower plain, having frontage on the river for a distance of five miles, or 3,200 acres, as worth $100 per acre ($320,000). Below that, again, to the Cathlapootl, a distance of probably ten miles, with a depth of two miles, or 12,800 acres, is worth $25 an acre ($320,000). Going above the fort plain, and so on to the commencement of the claim, two miles above the saw-mill on the Columbia River, say a distance of six or seven miles and back three miles, or about 13,500 acres, should be worth from $10 to $15 per acre” ($135,000, at $10, his lowest estimate). “The remainder of the claim is worth from $1.50 to $3 per acre.” It being 128,580 acres, at $1.50 per acre, $192,580. This would make for the Vancouver property, as claimed, and several witnesses have sworn the value to amount, as per summary of a chief factor’s testimony—
| For | the fort, buildings, farm and mill improvements | $500,000 | ||||
| „ | 1,920 | acres | of land about the fort at $250 | per | acre | 480,000 |
| „ | 3,200 | „ | below the fort, at $100 | „ | „ | 320,000 |
| „ | 12,800 | „ | on lower plain, at $25 | „ | „ | 320,000 |
| „ | 13,500 | „ | above the saw-mill, at $10 | „ | „ | 135,000 |
| „ | 128,580 | „ | balance of claim, at $1.50 | „ | „ | 192,580 |
([Note])