# Oregon Historical Quarterly/Volume 13/How British and American Subjects Unite in a Common Government for Oregon Territory in 1844

HOW BRITISH AND AMERICAN SUBJECTS UNITE IN A COMMON GOVERNMENT FOR OREGON TERRITORY IN 1844*
By Robert C. Clark, Ph.D.
It is not the purpose of this paper to state with any detail the already so well-told story of the organization of a Pro- visional Government in Oregon. The main features of that narrative have been too long a matter of record and based upon too complete evidence to need repetition at my hands. Such of its details are as given elsewhere will, so far as is consistent with clearness, be omitted here. This paper is, therefore, an attempt to supplement and correct existing accounts. It is now possible to perform such a task by the discovery of new materials in the form of letters written by officials of the Hudson's Bay Company 1 and by a more thorough use of the well known sources. To make needed additions to the existing accounts of the movement on the part of the settlers of the Willamette Valley to establish a government in the years 1841-1843; to explain the influences opposing this enterprise; to give more definitely the sources of the first constitution; and lastly, to tell how a union of all the people of Oregon territory south of the Columbia river, British and Ameri- cans, was brought about in 1844, these in brief are the aims of this paper.
While the Oregon country was occupied jointly by British and American citizens with equal right from the agreement of 1818 to the treaty of 1846 that established the northern boundary of the United States west of the Rocky Mountains, neither Great Britain nor the United States extended any governmental authority over the territory. The former in- trusted to the Hudson's Bay Company the power to keep order and administer justice for her subjects, the latter left her citizens entirely to their own resources. The officials of the Hudson's Bay Company, located at Vancouver on north bank of the Columbia, had the authority of magistrates and could
Paper read before Pacific Branch American History Association, April 6, 1912. Copies of these have been kindly loaned to the author by Professor Schafer. ​How BRITISH AND AMERICAN SUBJECTS UNITE 141 arrest and confine their own employes for any minor offense. For the more serious crimes the accused had to be sent to Canada for trial. The authority of the Company, moreover, was recognized by its retired servants, Canadian citizens and others who had taken up their residence in the Willamette valley or elsewhere in Oregon territory. 2 Citizens of the United States left to their own resources had elected officers to admin- ister justice, for themselves as early as 1838. 3 And in very serious cases improvised juries had administered on the spot a very acceptable justice.* Thus it will be seen that the Ore- gon country really had from an early period as much govern- ing authority as was needful for the conditions of the time. In these years there were no serious quarrels between persons recognizing a conflicting allegiance. Such conflicts were, how- ever, an ever increasing danger to the peace of the community as the number of Americans was swelled by yearly immigra- tions. But the French-Canadians were so peaceful, industrious, and inoffensive, the Americans for the most part so law-abid- ing, that it was possible to postpone for some years the organi- zation of a government that might embrace the whole com- munity. Such a movement began early in 1841 after the coming in 1839 and 1840 of a few adventurous men from the middle western states. This small immigration furnished two or three men of good education and some legislative expe- rience who seem to have given the impulse and furnished in part the leadership for such an enterprise. Now at the outset of this effort to organize a government there were not more than 140 white men settled in the region south of the Columbia river, made up almost equally of citizens of Great Britain and the United States. The former consisted for the most part of French-Canadians and half-breeds, with 2 McLoughlin letter of March 20, 1843; F. C. Amer. 401; Wilkffs' Narrative, IV., 330. 3 Oregon Settlers' Petition of 1840; 2$th Congress 3d. Sess. H. Reports, 101; Gray's History of Oregon, p. 194, speaks of "self-constituted tribunals." For two years before 1840 persons had been chosen as "judges and magistrates." Hines' Oregon History, p. 417. 4 Samuel Parker, Journal of an Exploring Tour in 1835, p. 181. ​142 ROBERT CARLTON CLARK their Indian wives. 5 The latter, of those attached to the Methodist and other missionary enterprises, ministers and lay- men; and independent and unattached American element, mountain men, ex-trappers with native wives, and a few men who had gradually filtered over the mountains from various of the western states (some had come via California.) In addi- tion there were a few of various nationalities upon whom sat lightly any especial allegiance. These people were scattered along the prairies bordering on the Willamette river and its tributaries. Such a community was naturally fitted for a com- mon government since communication by means of the water courses was fairly easy and certain bonds of common interest had arisen. The immediate need of more efficient legal machinery was seriously felt when one of the better-to-do residents of the valley died leaving a valuable estate and no heirs to take pos- session of it. Out of this situation developed a movement to create an organization with sufficient authority to deal with such matters. This movement was not a complete success, but as a result of it the community secured a full corps of officers, with the exception of an executive head. These were chosen in February, 1841, at a gathering described as a "full meeting of the inhabitants of Willamette Valley" 6 and the supreme judge was instructed to act according to laws of the State of New York until a code of its own be adopted by the com- munity. A legislative committee, appointed at this time to draft a constitution and laws, failed to report to a subsequent meeting in June and so the settlement failed to secure a fully organized and constitutional government. It is to be noted, however, that as a result of this movement a definite body of officials were given authority to administer justice for the community. Though their power and tenure of office were not placed upon a constitutional basis, yet they had an authority emanating directly from the people. The instruction to follow 5 Lord Durham's description of the contemporary French in Canada seems a good characterization of those in Oregon. "They are mild and kindly, frugal, industrious, and honest, very sociable, cheerful and hospitable, and distinguished for a courtesy and real politeness." Report of Earl of Durham, 1838, p. 17. 6 Grover, Oregon Archives, p. 5. ​How BRITISH AND AMERICAN SUBJECTS UNITE 143 the laws of New York gave a measure of guidance to their judicial officers. 7 The people now had a machinery for making arrests, punishing offenders, and settling disputes more elabo- rate and more efficient than possessed before. The officers elected at this February meeting held office for more than two years. Another public meeting in May, 1843, authorized them to continue in office until July 5 of that year. A foreign visitor writing at the time testifies that the Willamette settlement is "ready to take cognizance under a code of its own formation of such cases of outrage as may occur." 8 From the facts here given it will be seen that the Willamette community had taken in 1841 a long step towards establishing an organized govern- ment. At the outset of this movement of 1841 all the people of the valley seemed to have joined in it. The journals of the public meetings speak of them as full meetings of all the inhabitants. Americans, French-Canadians, Englishmen were chosen im- partially for the offices created. The French Catholic priest, F. N. Blanchet, was named first on the legislative committee. A policy of conciliation and comprehension was evidently fol- lowed. The June meeting even went so far as to refer the question of the expediency of forming a government to the Chief Factor of the Hudson's Bay Company. Apparently a spirit of harmony and good will prevailed at this period. But such unanimity of opinion and feeling did not long endure. There were some men who did not deem a govern- ment necessary.9 Captain Wilkes, of the United States Explor- ing Expedition, visiting the Willamette settlement at this time, advised against such a movement. Furthermore, the Hudson's Bay Company was opposed to it. Its officers feared a conflict with the young and belligerent community. The company had assisted in bringing into the country the priests who admin- 7 Dr. Babcock, supreme judge, was a native of New York. This is probably the reason for such instruction. James A. O'Neil, who came to Oregon in 1834, was a native of New York, had studied law to some extent in his native state, and had a copy of the New York statutes. This statement is made on information given many years ago by the late Medorem Crawford, also of New York State. Information given by Mr. George H. Himes. 8 Letter of Sir George Simpson, 1841. Am. Hist. Rev., XIV., p. 81. 9 Wilkes' Narrative, IV., p. 330. ​144 ROBERT CARLTON CLARK istered to the French-Canadians and expected them to use their influence to further its interests. 10 The Canadians were for the most part retired servants of the Company and obedient to its instructions. Now under the direction of their spiritual advisers the French withdrew their support from the move- ment to form a government. Writing in November, 1841, one of the managers of the company could boast, "This last sum- mer the Willamette community made strong effort to form a constitution for themselves, but the Company's influence over the Canadian settlers in a large measure defeated that object." 11 Though one of the Catholic clergy had been selected as head of the constitutional committee, a little pressure from the officials of the company secured his resignation. Thus the active hostility of the Hudson's Bay Company, the indifference of many of the Americans and opposition of others, the refusal of the Canadians to join the movement caused a failure to secure a constitution at this time. Besides many were satisfied with having secured a body of officials able to deal with such exigencies as might arise in the immediate, future, and the very coming together for common action in a matter of public interest had shown the colony able to deal with affairs of consequence as they might come up. 12 By the arrival in the fall of 1842 of some 140 Americans led by Dr. Elijah White, recently appointed by the government of the United States a sub-agent for the Oregon Indians, a new impetus was given to the agitation for a government. In Sep- tember of 1842 a public meeting was held to receive the cre- dentials of Dr. White. 13 As far as the formal minutes of the meeting show it came together merely to express the sentiments of the community on appointment of Dr. White. Hines says that White made claims to larger powers than those of an Indian agent, equivalent to those of governor, but no definite conclu- sion was reached on this point. '* Though the formal minutes 10 Letter of Sir George Simpson, Am. Hist. Rev., XIV., p. 81. 1 i Ibid. 12 Hines' Oregon History, p. 420. 13 White, Ten Years in Oregon, p. 168. 14 Oregon Hist., p. 421. White calls this the "largest and happiest public meeting ever convened in this infant colony." ​How BRITISH AND AMERICAN SUBJECTS UNITE 145 of this meeting show only an expression of approval of the recognition given the needs of the community by the United States in the appointment of an Indian agent, there is other evidence that the claim of Dr. White to an authority over the territory equivalent to that of a governor aroused again a discussion of the question of organizing a provisional govern- ment. At least Dr. White's activity seems to have given anxiety to the officials of the Hudson's Bay Company who char- acterized him as "active, forward and very presumptuous" and held him responsible along with some of those con- nected with the missions for further meetings of the peo- ple held with "a view to the election of a governor." 1 ? But whatever efforts of this nature may have been made in 1842 were again defeated by the Canadians who "outvoted" the Americans. 16 Further incentive for urging on the formation of a pro- visional government grew out of the grievances against the Hudson's Bay Company held by some of the Americans, espe- ically those connected with the Methodist Mission. McLough- lin, chief factor at Vancouver ? laid claim to land at the Falls of the Willamette that was coveted by the Methodists. Some of these as early as 1841 had formed a milling company and seized upon a site on an island in the river at the Falls, on the ground that McLoughlin had taken possession of on behalf of the Company in 1829. 1 ? The missionaries had also erected build- ings on the east bank of the river, a further encroachment on the McLoughlin claim. In 1842 McLoughlin had the claim surveyed and laid out into lots for a town named Oregon City. He had also set up a rival mill and the American company were fearful of its competition. The conduct of the Company in its dealing with the colony and of McLoughlin in insisting upon the priority of his claim at the Falls were made subjects of complaint and grievance in a petition to Congress drawn up in a meeting of the Americans held early in 1843. They urged 1 5 Letter of Sir George Simpson written from Red River Settlement, June 21, 1843, F. O. Amer., 401. 1 6 Ibid. 17 Simpson Letters, Am. Hist. Rev., XIV., 80. ​146 ROBERT CARLTON CLARK as a reason for the speedy extension to them of the jurisdiction of the United States the need of "laws that will be respected and obeyed" in order to put an end to the monopolistic control exercised over the colony by the Hudson's Bay Company. This petition bore the signatures of a large, number of the Ameri- cans in the colony, 65 names in all. 18 Now while there might be some hope of protection from Congress and perhaps the McLoughlin claim might ultimately be disallowed by that body, a more speedy way of securing "law that will be respected and obeyed" was at hand. The same men who had put their names to the petition to Congress now revived the project for organizing a government for the settlement. (Twenty of the signers of the Petition of 1843 voted for organization of a government in May of that year.) They saw a means of checkmating the Hudson's Bay Company in the formulation of a skillfully devised land law that would deprive McLoughlin of his land claim. To advance this object meetings of the settlers were called early in 1843. To disguise their true purpose and to persuade the Canadians to join them these meetings were called to con- sider measures for protection against wild animals. Out of them came the appointment of a committee to issue a call for a public assembly to "consider the propriety of taking measures for the civil and military protection of the colony." 1 9 Some of the French-Canadians had attended these so-called "Wolf Meetings," but were not yet ready to join the movement to establish a government. 20 McLoughlin was kept well in- formed of what was going on in the Willamette country and the Canadians were still well under his control. He, as well as the higher officials of the Hudson's Bay Company, were by this time beginning to realize that though the movement might be postponed so long as their retired servants were able to out- vote the Americans, the latter were now "numerous enough to carry their point." 21 The Canadians seem to have begun to 1 8 Holman, McLoughlin, p, 198, for Petition of Citizens of Oregon, 1843. 19 Graver, Oregon Archives. 20. The second meeting was at the home of J. Gervais, Grover, Oregon Archives, p. 9. Letter of McLoughlin, March 20, 1843, F. O. Amer. 401. 21 Letter of Sir George Simpson, June 21, 1843, * 0, Amer. 401. ​How BRITISH AND AMERICAN SUBJECTS UNITE 147 yield to the persuasion of their neighbors and McLoughlin writes as if he, too, realized that it was to their advantage to join the Americans. In a letter of March 20, 1843, he says, "Tho some of the Canadians were present at the meeting of March 17 (the second of the Wolf Meetings) still, though in no way inclined to join in the measure to erect a temporary gov- ernment, yet they must admit the strength of the argument used by the Americans that they must,, now that people are coming here from different countries, adopt some plan to keep peace in the country, and that while they, the Canadians, are bound, those who come from the states are amenable to no authority. " 22 Perhaps if the enterprise had been less partisan and not so manifestly the outcome of dislike of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany, the Canadians would have been persuaded to join it. But McLoughlin had received information of the petition against the company directed to the Congress of the United States. 23 Besides in the minds of the officers of that organization there was a real danger that the success of the movement might lead to "serious difficulties, for if these people enter on the exercise of self government they will unquestionably attempt to assume authority over all the inhabitants of the district, British as well as foreign/' 2 * So pursuing the same policy as before they endeavored to defeat the undertaking by the use of the Cana- dians. At a meeting of the inhabitants of the Willamette settle- ments on May 2, 1843 ? the Canadians attended in full force and all but defeated a motion recommending the establishment of a provisional government. 25 Upon the passing of this motion by the small majority of two the dissenters withdrew. 26 The fear of the Hudson's Bay Company officers that the Ameri- cans would be numerous enough to carry their object had been realized. 22 F. O. Amer. 401. 23 Letter of Simpson, June 21, 1843, cited above tells of a letter written to McLoughlin by an American lawyer, Hastings, of a "close meeting" at Falls of Willamette for purpose of petitioning Congress. 24 Ibid. 25 The journal of the meeting shows that the motion was at first declared lost. A division is said to have given a majority in favor of organizing. Gray, Hist, of Oregon, p. 279. a6 Journal of meeting of May 2, 1843, in Oregon Archives. ​148 ROBERT CARLTON CLARK This May assembly, undiscouraged by the desertion of al- most half their number, proceeded to elect a full corps of officers for the colony, excepting a governor. A legislative committee given authority to draft a constitution and laws, having com- pleted its work in the six days of session allowed, presented it to a meeting of the people held July 5. This meeting adopted the Organic Articles and Laws which thus became Oregon's first written constitution. The legislative committee of nine that made this contribu- tion to state constitution making were not lawyers. There were as yet no lawyers in the colony. Its chairman, Robert Moore, had been a member of the Missouri legislature. The leading spirit of the committee seems to have been Robert Shortess, a native of Ohio, formerly a school teacher, and of good education. He had been the principal mover in calling the meeting earlier in the year that had drawn up the petition to Congress complaining of the conduct of the Hudson's Bay Company, and now did most of the work of formulating the Organic Articles and Laws that were to give the colony an organized government. There happened to be in the settle- ment a copy of the statute laws of the Territory of Iowa enacted in 1838-39, and containing the Declaration of Inde- pendence, the Constitution of the United States, the Ordinance of Congress for the government of the Territory Northwest of the, River Ohio, 1787, an Act to divide the Territory of Wiscon- sin and to establish the territorial government of Iowa, and lastly the Statute Laws of Iowa arranged in alphabetical order beginning with "abatement" and ending with "worshipping congregations." With so much constitutional and legal material available, and such as had proved useful for the last and more infant of the territories of the United States, the work of the committee became largely a matter of compilation and adaptation. The Organic Articles as finally adopted are there- fore scarcely more than a rehash, with necessary changes in phraseology, of the Ordinance of 1787 and the Organic Law ​How BRITISH AND AMERICAN SUBJECTS UNITE 149 of Iowa, together with some parts of the Iowa code. 2 ? Land and militia laws suitable to local conditions, together with a provision for districting the territory, were added. The two novel features of the constitution were the vesting of the executive power in three persons and the provision for secur- ing funds to support the government by voluntary subscription. The land law seems to show the animus and purpose of the whole movement. While it makes provision for registering land claims with the recorder of the territory and thus ful- filled one of the chief objects of those desiring a constitution, by furnishing a means of avoiding conflicts in land claims and laying the basis for a more secure title, in its fourth clause it prohibited the holding of a claim of 640 acres "upon city or town lots, extensive water privileges or other situations neces- sary for the transaction of mercantile or manufacturing opera- tions." Then in order to shut out the Hudson's Bay Company and yet recognize the rights of the Methodist mission a proviso was added that "nothing in these laws shall be construed as to affect any claim of a religious character made prior to this time." The constitution of 1843 fell far short of providing an or- derly and stable government. Its makers showed great timid- ity and hesitation, and failed completely to provide the proper sanctions for such a government. It manifestly included within the bounds of its powers only those who had participated in its formation or voluntarily submitted to its terms. Perhaps a majority of the settlers did not recognize the government set up by it. The provision for supporting the government by the circulation of subscription papers shows that there was no intention on the part of the makers of this constitution to coerce any one. They even hesitated to fix a northern boundary to the territory because they did not wish to claim a definite jurisdiction over the Hudson's Bay Company officials and prop- 27 Careful comparison of the Organic Articles with these sources shows how phrases were picked out here and there and woven together to describe the various authorities set up. Section i of the Articles is almost identical with the articles of compact closing the Ordinance of 1787. Articles 4, 5, 6, 7, in section 2, are adapted from sections 7, 2, 4, and 9, respectively, of the Iowa Organic Law. The other articles are taken from the code of Iowa. The Statute Laws of Iowa, Reprint of 1839 edition. ​150 ROBERT CARLTON CLARK erty. 28 For all practical purposes, then, the settlers of the Wil- lamette were little bettered by adopting this constitution in 1843. There, was as yet little need of a better organized gov- ernment than that furnished by election of officers in 1841. The government was entirely American. The British and Cana- dians considered it a purely "American compact," protested against it, 29 and on withdrawing from the meeting in May, 1843, "delivered to the Americans a declaration of their reasons for remaining separate." 30 Nor did the Hudson's Bay Com- pany in any way recognize the authority of the provisional gov- ernment. With these important elements completely beyond its jurisdiction and control the, most important need of a govern- ment, an organization obeyed by all inhabitants, reconciling all conflicting interests, empowered to settle without resort to arms but through peaceful judicial procedure all conflicts that might arise, such an organization was not secured. This government, too distinctly partisan in character, could not be permanent. Until the arrival at the Willamette in the fall of 1843 of some 800 prospective settlers the question of governmental status seems not to have troubled the colony. For a time it seemed doubtful if the new arrivals, so greatly outnumbering those settlers already in the territory, would acknowledge a government of so questionable origin as that of July, 1843. Some of them favored the establishment of an independent state on the ground "that if the country becomes a territory of the United States it will be so remote from the seat of gov- ernment that it will be, very difficult for them to get the laws made that they require." 31 While the majority were, opposed to independence they doubted the success of a movement that failed to take in all the inhabitants, British as well as Ameri- can. The Canadians, too, impressed by so large an addition to the American element, now realized that it would be no longer "possible to maintain peace and order" without a gov- 28 Oregon territory was made to include all the region south of the northern boundary of the United States. As this boundary west of Rocky Mountains had not yet been determined the language is no doubt intentionally vague. 29 Warre and Vavasour documents, Quart. Oreg. Hist. Society, X., 51. 30 McLoughlin letter to Captain Gordon, September 15, 1845, F. O. Amer., 459. 31 McLoughlin letter July 4, 1844; Accompaniment to Mitchell's Map of Texas, Oregon and Calif., 17; Burnett letter in Niles Register, LXV1II., 393. ​How BRITISH AND AMERICAN SUBJECTS UNITE 151 ernment.3 2 Besides the Americans now called upon their French neighbors to join them in forming a government for all.33 New arrivals and old settlers combined in this effort to secure a union with the Canadians. 34 At last a meeting called apparently for the purpose of hearing the wishes of the Cana- dians and to harmonize such differences of opinion as had arisen was held in March, 1844. To this assembly the Cana- dian residents of the Willamette Valley presented an address, drawn up by one of their priests Me. Langlois3S in which they set forth their objections to the existing government and suggested what seemed to them a better plan of organization. The evidence that such a meeting was held for the special purpose of conciliating the Canadians and considering a plan of union is as follows : 1. The salutation of the address reads, "We, the Canadian citizen residents of the Wallamat, ma- turely considering the object for which the people are gathered in the present meeting, present the unanimous expression of our desire for union." 2. The signatures of president, two vice presidents, two secretaries, three Americans, one (Joseph Gervais) certainly, another probably (Francis Renay) French- men, indicate a meeting of some kind, made up of both Ameri- cans and Canadians, though so many officers may show a permanent organization. These signatures are found at the bottom of the French copy of the address. 3. McLoughlin in a letter of September, 1845, says that the address was handed in in March to a meeting then assembled. 4. There is an indorsement in a different handwriting from that of the ad- dress on back of the English copy, "Address of the Canadians to the Meeting at Champa " (illegible). Inasmuch as it has been the practice to date, this address as drawn up in 1842 and presented some time in 1843, it seems desirable to give the reasons for fixing its date as 1844. 32 Letters of McLoughlin, F. O. Amer., 440, 459 33 Ibid. 34 Signatures of officers at bottom of Canadian Address, Oregon Archives, Provisional, i. 35 McLoughlin states positively that it was drawn up and presented by him. It has always been incorrectly attributed to F. N. Blanchet. Lanj?lois arrived at the Willamette Falls, September 16, 1842. He later became superintendent of St. Joseph's College founded at Oregon City by Blanchet. De Smet's Oregon Missions in Early Western Travels, 29: 135. ​152 ROBERT CARLTON CLARK There are in existence three known contemporary copies of this address of the Canadian citizens. Two of these, one writ- ten in French, the other apparently an English translation, have been preserved in the, office of the Secretary of State at Salem and are apparently the original copies presented to the meeting mentioned above. The third, an English translation sent by John McLoughlin, Chief Factor of the Hudson's Bay Company at Vancouver to the home office, is to be found in the foreign office of the British Government. 36 No one of these three copies is dated. The two English copies are not duplicates nor are they good translations of the French. The English translation found at Salem was printed, with errors of tran- scription, in Grover's Oregon Archives, in 1853. The French original seems to have been overlooked or at least is unnoticed in any existing account of the Provisional Government. All of these accounts alike place the document in 1842 and 1843 as noted above. Apparently the only reason for so dating it has been because the copyist who made the copy for the printed Oregon Archives in 1853 took the indorsement to be found on the back of the English translation and made it read "Address of the Canadian Citizens of Oregon to the Meeting at Champoeg, March 4, 1843." No note is made of the fact that the indorsement is written in a hand different from that of the document itself and that the name of the place of meet- ing is of doubtful reading. Accepting the heading as given and finding no record of a meeting for the purpose indicated by the address on March 4, all writers on early Oregon his- tory have concluded that the address was made to the meeting at Champoeg, May 2, 1843. They have further been encour- aged in this error by the misleading English translation and by the statement of W. H. Gray, one of the members of the legislative committee of 1843, who says37 that the address was handed in to a sub-committee of three, of which he was a member, by the clerk of the legislative committee, examined and handed back to him. Gray, how- 36 A copy has been loaned me by Professor Schafer who has also called to my attention the existence of the French original. 37 History of Oregon, 273. ​How BRITISH AND AMERICAN SUBJECTS UNITE 153 ever, was writing some 25 years after the event with the printed address before him. His identification of this document as the one that was handed in to his committee cannot be accepted as positive. There is evidence as already given that the Cana- dians handed in at the time of their withdrawal from the May meeting in 1843 a protest and declaration of a character differ- ent from this address. The first gave reasons for remaining separate, the, second expresses a desire for union. The first may be the document that Gray had in mind. However this may be, that the address of the Canadians was delivered in 1844 seems susceptible of the most positive proof. 1. McLoughlin inclosing a copy of the address [the Hudson's Bay copy mentioned above] in a letter of July 4, 1844, writes that "the American citizens called on the Canadians to join them and organize a government for themselves, and though the Canadians refused last year, they consented this year, but first gave in the 'address'." This shows that though in 1843 the Canadians were unwilling, in 1844 they had changed their minds and that the address was presented after they had de- termined on joining the union. 2. In another letter of March 20, 1845, McLoughlin says, "From the great additional number of immigrants who came in 1843 the Canadians considered it necessary to have an organization to pass laws and on strength of the address handed in in March to the meeting then assem- bled" voted at the election in May, 1844. This shows that it was not until after the great increase in the numbers of Ameri- cans by the immigration of 1843 that the Canadians became convinced of the necessity of a government. These new-comers did not reach the Willamette until late in November of that year. This fixes March, 1844, as the date. 3. There is also the further evidence of the names appended to the French version of the address. The signatures run from the bottom of the last page towards the top, filling the blank margin. They are quite evidently genuine as a comparison with other signatures of the same men has shown. S. Smiths 8 signs as 38 Awkwardly written, but Mr. George H. Himes is positive that it is the signature of Sidney Smith. ​154 ROBERT CARLTON CLARK president; J. Gervez [signs with his mark, usually written Gervais] as vice president; Francis Renay, apparently as a second vice president; and Charles E. Pickett and S. M. Holderness as secretaries. Now the two last came to Oregon with the immigration of 1843. 39 An examination of the internal evidence furnished by the document itself is quite as convincing as that already given that it belongs to the year 1844. 1. In the first and second clauses of the address the Canadians say that they "desire laws and regulations for the protection of persons and property and will not resist the measures of this nature passed last year by a part of the people, although not approving of all the regula- tions then made. Let the magistrates finish their year." Now in the opinion of those accepting 1842 as the date of the ad- dress these clauses have reference to the effort made in 1841 to form a government. Yet there were no definite laws or regulations adopted then, no officers elected for any prescribed term, and whatever action then taken had been that of the whole people, Canadians as well as Americans, and not of "part of the people" as described in the address. These statements of the address seem to apply exactly to situation created by the movement of 1843. Laws and regulations had then been adopted by a part of the people and officers elected for a year. Moreover at the date of the address the Canadians are ready to form a union with the other settlers. In 1843 they were op- posed to forming a government, attempted to outvote the Americans and withdrew from the May meeting when defeated. This certainly fixes the date at some time subsequent to the meeting of July 5, 1843, at which the government was finally established. 2. The address shows a knowledge of the, arti- cles and laws adopted at that meeting. It is largely a criticism of the American plan of union and such a criticism as would have been made after having studied its organic act. Since the work of the legislative committee that drew this up was not completed until the latter part of June, 1843, such knowl- ZgNesmith list of 1843 Immigrants, Trans. Oreg. Pioneer Assoc., 1879. ​How BRITISH AND AMERICAN SUBJECTS UNITE 155 edge of it as shown in the address could hardly have been obtained prior to that time. The address could not have been written in 1843 because the reference to action taken "last year" would have no meaning. No constitution and laws were issued in 1842. Those writers who have found internal evidence for 1842 or 1843 as the date of the address have depended on its 5th clause as given in the printed English translation. This clause is there made to read, "we are opposed to the regulations an- ticipated." This seems to imply foreknowledge on the part of the Canadians as to the. kind of constitution and laws the Americans intended to adopt in 1843, and thus makes intelligible the objections found in the address. The Canadians really said something entirely different as shown by an examination of the same clause of the French original. "We oppose any regula- tions too much in advance of our state of society" is what they really said. It seems entirely possible that the indorsement on the back of the English copy which has heretofore led the unwary his- torian astray may be correct in everything but the year. If it was made by some one at a later period the mistake would be easy to understand, or even if written at the time by some one of the secretaries (the ink is the same as that of the sig- natures on French document) it would have been easy for the slip to be made. With the evidence thus conclusive that the address was composed in 1844, with other independent evi- dence that of the McLoughlin letter of March 20, 1845, that it was presented at a meeting in March, it seems quite prob- able that this meeting was held on March 4, the day of the month given in the indorsement. The Canadians stood out in this address for a union that would incorporate all the various elements of the community. The plan of government adopted in 1843 was as they express it "too individual," meaning too distinctly American. Until the boundary of the territory has been definitely fixed by treaty between Great Britain and the United States they insist that the country must be open alike to citizens of every na​156 ROBERT CARLTON CLARK ionality,* and any government that shall be formed should be respectful of the rights of all the inhabitants.* 1 They criticise the American plan of government as providing too many offices "filled with too many useless titles for our state of poverty," as they express it. "In a new country, the more men employed and paid by the public, the fewer remain for industry." So in their plan of organization they would have a single council, its members elected from different dis- tricts, perform all the necessary governing functions. A mag- istrate from whose decisions appeals may be taken to the cen- tral council, would be elected for each district to act as a jus- tice of the peace. Further they would secure the right of the individual citizen to be heard in affairs of general public in- terest in the meetings of the council when assembled to discuss and regulate the needs of the colony.* 2 At the outset in a new colony they would have as few laws as possible "as the more laws there are the more opportunity for trickery for those who make the law a profession." They would also guard against technicalities in the law that "would substitute cunning for trickery." They would have such laws as may be adopted require of the community as little expense as possible. Especially should they not be made burdensome to new comers. For this reason taxes should be light as pos- sible; the land law should not provide unnecessarily trouble- some requirements as to fixing exact boundaries to a claim and registering it.*3 A militia law would not be necessary because a militia is not needed and when created would be an object of suspicion to the natives and besides a hindrance to the necessary work of the community. The Canadians also made request in this address for some measure of local autonomy for themselves. They fear being completely submerged by the Americans and seek some guar- antee that their customs will be respected and that they may 40 Clauses n and 12. "Whether subjects of England, France, Ireland or California." 41 Clause n. "Free to every individual to establish himself here without distinction of origin and without right to make him pay for becoming a citizen. 42 Clause 1 6. Curiously omitted from the English versions. 43 "We are opposed to any registrations whatever." (Clauses 4 and 9). ​How BRITISH AND AMERICAN SUBJECTS UNITE 157 be free to make such regulations as are suited to their own needs. Such in brief is the purport of this curious document. Unfortunately we are without a record of this March meet- ing of 1844 to which this address of the Canadians was pre- sented. Minutes of other public meeting of the time have been preserved in our archives, but for some reason this one is men- tioned by no contemporary American writer, and only casually alluded to by the Hudson's Bay official correspondence. But from what followed the meeting it seems that some under- standing must have been reached in it. Possibly the Americans suggested that the new legislature soon to be elected would be able to repeal the obnoxious laws and consider the suggestions given as to modifications in the existing form of government. The letters of the Hudson's Bay Company officials written at the time imply some kind of definite compact or agreement be- tween Canadians and Americans. 44 In their address the Cana- dians had professed a willingness to obey the laws adopted in 1843 and to recognize the government then set up and now, apparently, satisfied with assurances given them they agreed to associate themselves with the organization already formed and to signify such union by participating in the election of officers in the coming May. At this annual election they voted for the first time and helped to elect a new executive committee, a legislative committee, and the other prescribed officers. 45 The new executive and legislative committees showed very great consideration for the sentiments of the Canadian and British settlers, 46 and a desire for harmony and compromise. At the suggestion of the executive the legislative committee passed several laws that indicate such a spirit. Following the suggestion of the Canadian address the land law was repealed and a new one enacted that abandoned the requirement for 44 British and Yankees have joined in forming a sort of provisional govern- ment," writes the commander of the British ship of war, Modeste, who visited Oregon in July, 1844. F. O. Amer., 440. "The Canadians and other retired servants of the Company became parties to these measures (those passed by legislative assembly of 1844.) "Letter of Sir George Simpson. 45 McLoughlin Letter March 20, 1845. 46 One of the executive committee. Dr. Bailey, characterized by McLoughlin as a "cockney," was an Irishman by birth. Gray speaks of him as having come to the meeting in 1841 with the Canadians pledged to elect him for governor. Hist, of Oregon, p. 275. ​158 ROBERT CARLTON CLARK registration of land claims. The clause 4 of the old act that was intended to deprive McLoughlin of his claim at the Falls of the Willamette is dropped.*? By another measure the north- ern boundary of the territory over which the provisional gov- ernment claimed jurisdiction was fixed at the Columbia River.* 8 This shows an unwillingness to encroach upon the Hudson's Bay Company. Provision was also made and agreed to by the Canadians, for supporting the government by taxation and de- priving those who refused to contribute of any right to vote or to receive protection from the government. The form of the executive was also changed and provision made to elect a governor at the next annual election. So important were the changes made in the Organic Laws and Articles of 1843 by the legislative committee of 1844 that something like, a new constitution was then made. It was under these new articles of compact and agreement that the Canadians and British sub- jects south of the Columbia joined with the Americans in constituting a government. From the new facts herein first presented showing how the Canadians were led finally to join with the Americans in form- ing a temporary government for the Oregon territory it is now clear that the movement of 1843, participated in by only a "part of the people" must not be considered as anything more than one of several steps in the direction of setting up a constitutional government. The first of these steps had been taken in 1838 when the American element elected magistrates for themselves ; the second in 1841 by the selection of a larger body of officers ; the third in 1843 with the placing of the government on a more definite constitutional basis. But until 1844 the British and Canadian citizens held aloof and were only brought into the union in that year under the circumstances described. By this fourth step a government embracing all the inhabitants and 47 General and Special Laws of Oregon, 1843-1849, 77. It is worth while noticing that the Methodist mission had been disbanded and its land and property distributed to its individual members so that there was no reason to retain the proviso of clause 4. 48 General Laws, 74. In the next session, Dec., 1844, changed again to 54 40', but in taking the census the sheriff was not required to go beyond the Columbia. Ibid, 72. ​comprising all the territory south of the Columbia River was established. Not until the next year and by means of a special agreement with the Hudson's Bay Company and by forming a third constitution was the region north of the Columbia and its residents brought into the bounds of the infant state. But this is a story by itself and not to be related here.