Int. 16.—“State whether the dispute about this matter was the cause of the dissolution of the firm of Smith, Jackson & Sublet, to which you refer in your cross-examination.” (Objected to as above.)
Ans.—“I do not know; that was the report among mountain men.”
With these specimens of testimony on both sides, I will venture a general statement drawn from the whole facts developed.
About the time, or perhaps one year before, the notice that the joint occupancy of the country west of the Rocky Mountains was given by the American government to that of the British, the Hudson’s Bay Company, as such, had made extensive preparations and arrangements to hold the country west of the Rocky Mountains. This arrangement embraced a full and complete organization of the Indian tribes under the various traders and factors at the various forts in the country.
The probability of a Mexican war with the United States, and such influences as could be brought to bear upon commissioners, or the treaty-making power of the American government, would enable them to secure this object. In this they failed. The Mexican war was successfully and honorably closed. The Hudson’s Bay Company’s claims are respected, or at least mentioned as in existence, in the treaty of 1846, that the 49th parallel should be the boundary of the two national dominions.
On the strength of their supposed possessory right, they remain quietly in their old forts and French pig-pens, take a full inventory of their old Indian salmon-houses, and watch the progress of American improvement upon this coast, till 1863, when the American people are in the midst of a death struggle for its civil existence. They then for the third time “water” this monstrosity under the name of “‘The International Financial Society, limited,’ are prepared to receive subscriptions for the issue at par of capital stock in the Hudson’s Bay Company, incorporated by royal charter, 1670,” fixing the nominal stock of the Hudson’s Bay Company at £2,000,000; and taking from this amount £1,930,000, they offer it for sale under this new title in shares of £20 each, claiming as belonging to them [i. e., the Hudson’s Bay Company] 1,400,000 square miles, or upward of 896,000,000 acres of land, and, after paying all expenses, an income of £81,000 in ten years, up to the 31st of May—over four per cent. on the £2,000,000. This vast humbug is held up for the English public to invest in,—a colonization scheme to enrich the favored shareholders of that old English aristocratic humbug chartered by Charles II. in 1670.
In the whole history of that company there has never been any investigation of its internal policy so thorough as in the present proceedings. In fact, this is the first time they have ventured to allow a legal investigation into their system of trade and their rights of property. They have grown to such enormous proportions, and controlled so vast a country, that the government and treasury of the United States has become, in their estimation, a mere appendage to facilitate their Indian trade and financial speculations. From our recent purchases of Russian territory, it becomes an important question to every American citizen, and especially our statesmen, to make himself familiar with so vast an influence under the British flag, and extending along so great an extent of our northern frontier. Should they establish, by their own interested and ignorant testimony, their present claims, there will be no end to their unreasonable demands, for they have dotted the whole continent with their trading-posts. They claim all that is supposed to be of any value to savage and civilized man. The English nation without its Hudson’s Bay Company’s old traps and hunting-parties would have no claim west of the Rocky Mountains, yet, for the sake of these, it has almost ventured a third war with our American people in sending from its shores, instead of land pirates, under the bars and stars, the red flag of the Hudson’s Bay Company. The two flags should be folded together and laid up in the British Museum, as a lasting monument of British injustice.
I apprehend, from a careful review of all this testimony of the forty-one witnesses who were on the part of the Hudson’s Bay Company, and the forty-two on the part of the United States, that the whole policy of the company has been thoroughly developed; yet, at the same time, without a long personal acquaintance with their manner of doing business, it would be difficult to comprehend the full import of the testimony given, though I apprehend the commissioners will have no very difficult task to understand the humbuggery of the whole claim, as developed by the testimony of the clerks in London and the investigation at head-quarters. As to the amount of award, I would not risk one dollar to obtain a share in all they get from our government. On the contrary, a claim should be made against them for damages and trespass upon the American citizens, as also the lives of such as they have caused to be murdered by their influence over the Indians.
The telegraph has informed us that the commissioners have awarded to the Hudson’s Bay Company, $450,000, and to the Puget Sound concern, $200,000. We have no change to make in our opinion of the commissioners previously expressed, as they must have known, from the testimony developed in the Puget Sound concern, that that part of the claim was a fictitious one, and instituted to distract the public and divide the pretensions to so large an amount in two parts. That the commissioners should allow it can only be understood upon the principle that the Hudson’s Bay Company were entitled to that amount as an item of costs in prosecuting their case.
No man at all familiar with the history of this coast, and of the Hudson’s Bay Company, can conscientiously approve of that award. Our forefathers, in 1776, said “millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute,” which we consider this award to be,—for the benefit of English duplicity and double-dealing, in the false representations they made at the making of the treaty, and the perjury of their witnesses.