The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-08-21
THE CHARTER OF THE HUDSON BAY
COMPANY

We published, with great pleasure, in last eve
ning's Union, the speech of Colonel Benton in ex-
ecutiye session, upon the ratification Of the Oregon
convention. We were DESTROYS especially of present.
ing his arguments in opposition to the perpetual
navigation Of the Columbia river, which, some Of
the wing presses contend enures to the Hudson
Bay Company, and to the British subjects who trade
with them. In connection with these remarks which
fell from the lips Of the senator from Missouri, as
well as those which were skeched by our own pen,
we now beg leave to annex the following editorial
article from the last Westminster (Maryland) Dem
| ocrat:
THE NAVIGATION or THE CoLUMsIA.-Much
has been said of late respecting the navigation of
the Columbia river whether il has been granted TO
the Hudson Bay Company in perpetuiiy, or only
for term Of years. The treaty gives the right 10
The company generally, without any words of linn
ltaton and It has been ascerained that their char
ter is perpetual. This would seem to settle the
question: but the fact is that the charter granted
originally to the Hudson Bay Company by Charles
III, in 1911 confined to the territory east Of the
Rocky mountains; whereas the only privilege con-
coded To the company west Of the Rocky noun
tains, was crown grant for exclusive trade with
the Indians in that territory for oftwenty
years, which expires in 1859 The right to nav-
gate the Columbia expires with that grant; and the
only question is, whether the right could be- rc-
newed by an extension Of the grant by the British
government To be sure, the navigation of that
river is limited to a single company, and a few
years will render 1t barren right in great meas
ure; yet we were well convinced that the Pres
dent would not yield the free navigation of the river
| to any British subjects for an indefinite period
unless, indeed, overruled by the advice Of the SEN
ate, TO which he agreed to submit-that we could
| not believe that question was overlooked. We are
Glad find that The Of
that the right expired in 1859, and that the British
government was appraised thereof, previous to its
final ratification Of the treaty. To prove this we
| offer the following extract Of letter from Mr..
Buchanan to our minister in London, dated June
| Is, 1876;
"G have learned from the best sources that the
Senate gave this advice under the conviction that
by the true construction of the second article of the
projet, the right Of the Hudson Bay Company to
navigate the Columbia would expire with the term-
nation Of their present license TO trade with the In
dams, &c, on the northwest coast of America, on
the 30th May, 1859. In conversation with Mr.
Pakenham to-day, communicated this fact to him,
and requested him TO state 1t in his despatch to Lord
Aberdeen.
"'The treaty will be signed and sent to the Sem
ate on Monday next; and 1t is more than probable
that they will, in some form or other, place upon
their record their understanding Of its true consruc-
ton in this particular.
al am, &c, -.
"'JAMES BUCHANAN.
"'LeUrs McLASE, esq, &c. &c. &c."
Mr.. Benton has stated in the course Of his speech
new position, to which we cannot subscribe toi-
dem verbs. As it is a new question, we beg
leave to republish his views we'll to lay before
our readers the views which present themselves on
the other side:
By the terms of this article the privilege of navi-
tba II,le n. o. -
to the British subjects trading with them and they
are to be subject to the laws and regulations which
apply to our own citizens. Now, there happens to
be two Hudson Bay Companies, and those who do
not attend to that little fact may fall into great error
The first company has perpetual charter, from
Charles the Second, to trade with the Indians all
the waters emptying into the Bay of Hudson. This
company has no rights, under that charter, beyond
the Rocky mountains. The second company is of
recent date, and is formed of the Hudson Bay and
the old Northwest Company united, and exist UNI
der license OF twenty-one years, granted by the
crown, under an act of Parliament. 1t bears the
name of Hudson Bay Company; but it is 80 entirely
distinct from the chartered company of King Charles,
that 1t can carry trade on the waters of Hud-
sons bay, as the old Hudson Bay Company can
carry on none on the waters of the Pacific ocean.
This licensed company was first created in 1921,
and continued by new license for second
term of twenty-one years in the year 1S42. 1t
is, therefore, now in the fourth year of its pres
| ent existence, and has seventeen years to live.
1t is of this second, or licensed company, that
the treaty speaks and, of course, all the privi-
eges granted by the treaty refer to it. The treaty
stpulaes for this company, as it is, under its pres
ent license not as it may, or may not be, under
a new license. 1t stipuates for company whose
existence is to terminate in 1863; and, Of course
that is the limit in point of duration, of this priv
iege of navigation, which is becoming so large an
object In the eyes of some gentlemen Certainly it
ot ha aIp IN ha Al,
the perpetual navigation offered in 1896, and the
Sovereignty of the right bank of the river de-
handed by the British since so many years
The year 1863 the limitation of the navi-
CATION now granted; and those who do not yield to
the reading ofthe treaty, as it now stands, will only
have to wait till 1862 when time will bring an argu-
ment which no one can misunderstood"
As these remarks were calculated to attract some
attention, we have made inquiries into the subject the
result of which will be found in the following state
ment, showing, we think, that there is but one
Hudson Bay Company. The statement made in
the speech, arises probably, from the circumstance
that certain privileges in the country west of the
Rocky mountains, were temporarily granted to this
body by the British government.
The Hudson Bay Company was formed under a
charter from King Charles the Second Of England,
granted in May, 1910, to "he governor and company
Of adpenures Of England trading into Hudson's bay"
and endowing them with perpetual possession trade,
and almost sovereignty Of all the countries drained
by streams falling into Hudson's bay; which coun
tries, with the exception of small portion Of the
valley of the Red river of Lake Winnipeg, included
in the United States, by the convention Of lSls that
company still holds, on the same terms, no alteration
having been made in its charter After the cesson Of
Canada to England by France, in 1862 many private
associations were formed there for carrying the fur
trade in the countries claimed as Canada; and some
Of those associations in defiance of the char ter Of
the Hudson Bay Company, advanced their posts
through the territories Of the latter, to such
tent, as almost to drive the legitimate owners from
them. Among these private associations, the princi-
pal was the Northwest Company, Of Montreal, COM
posed of the MacTavishes, MacGillivrays, Fra
zers and other enterprsng persons, mostly Of Scotch
descent; which, in time, extinguished or absorbed
~ =. 4 4.