The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1846-03-27
POLITICAL.
F. X T r 4 c T S
F. \ T K 4 { 5
From The speech Of Mr.. Erdn's' q Name
on TIE OREGON QUESTION.

On TIE OREGON QUESTION.
We derive our title to the country on
the northwest coast of North America
(which gentlemen of late have chosen 10
call "Oregon'0 from three distinct sour
ces. First, from discovery and this mas
txo hrauches-liIs, a discovery OF the Co.
nmbia river, from The sea, by Capt. Gray,
in 1892 and, second, from us head.wa'
tets, by Lewis aud Clarke, in 1903. Sc
condly, by the ceSsion OF LOUISIANA oy
France in 1904. On the ground OF q 16a
covery, we can claim ..i 60 country drained
river CSIqfg6rra branches. This does no, 60
Up even to 40 degrees, SO that on that
ground we can claim only as high as 10 on
the coast, and perhaps up to 81 degrees IN
the interior, If any branch reaches 10 that
latitude. By the ces,lon OF Louisiana We
get only up to 10 degrees-not an inch be
yond. Tie third source Of our title, and
that which covers all the others, (and
which is said not to be inconsistent with
Them is grant by Spain in the Florida
treaty. This grant gives US all she claim
ed on tie northwest coast, aud excludes
Great Britain al once.
There are grave questions which affect
each Of these grounds Of title, aud ques'
lions which must be fully discussed before
we are prepared 10 pronounce our title to
be clear and unquesilonable. There are
very different degrees Of validity IN these
cIams-lhat derived from the LOUISIANA
treaty is by far the strongest.
As to the discovery OF the Columbia,
those who plead on our side say that Cap.
tain Gray was the first American citizen
who ever entered the river, and believe
that such is the fact have no doubt Of
il. And, in connexion with tins fact, our
advocates Law down the doctrine Of public
law to be that the discoyerer Of a river IN
on unknown country il entitled to the river
and all the valley drained by IT'S waters.
That is the general principle bu, thcn,
under this general principle, there may b"
particular circumstances which draw the
title under doubt. And first, thus whole
north west coast was discovered b, fore
Captain Gray entered the rlyeF. The par.
tcuIar spot on the coast where II empIlc'
into the Pacific had been seen aud visited
and named on the maps before that. On'
Of the capes Of The l,tlo bay INTO which
the river dlsembogues had been seen anl
named Cape disappointment, and the BAY
itself called Deception Bay. Thc ques
ton then arises, when a whole coast ha'
been discovered, and the discovering ma
ton is consequently entitled to the country
when the mouth Of a particular river OF
that coast has been seen-whethcr the cit
izen who shall first actually enter the rive
makes such discovery as entities his IA
) ton to the whole country drained by tn,
river This comes in conflict atth tn
other principle, that the discoyerer Of
coast Is entitled TO the whole country
Now the river Columbia itself was seer
though not entered, in 1913, by the Spar
: ISL navigator lleceta, who was coasIIng 1
: tina, quarter. lie saw the river, he name
= the capes, and so confident was he Of h
+ discovery thai he laid down the Tivor q
L the Spanish maps and called it the rive
ST. Rogue. But the existence Of the rive
was known even before that. There az
, maps 10 existence seventy five years oldt
than the voyage Of lleceta, where the rive
IS laid down and called the River OF tn
. West. Indeed, there seems TO DO an ind
T cation that the river had been entered
that time, for the geographer who cot
|, structed the map marked on it how hIg
u the tide ran up the stream and though
= may be denied that the Rlyerof the We
is the river Columbia, yet, both III leng'
II and position, the river as laid down on II
J. Spanish maps corresponds with It Yer
i nearly. 1t IS sald to have been dlscoyefC
IN 1903 by AguiIa. Here, then, IS u,
the general question, whether the disco
d erer Of river in an undiscovered coun,r
u is entitled to It's whole valley, but whelh,
- in country actually discovered man WI
&c enters a river previously known does her
by obtain for his country title TO its va
e ley? That IS a question which has Il
n yet been discussed, aud | should like to 81
C the grounds that would be taken upon
ID 1t has been put TO Nv by our British q
n ponents that Gray was private advent
n rer, that he communicated 10 his Cover
e merit nothing Of his discovery, nor elaine
IS any thing for himself on account of IL;
3. fact, it remained long unknown that he h;
is even been there, All he did was to sol,
Is the doubt whether the river could be c.
1t tered, aud put an end to the dispute whet
e. or there was river there or not. b
a. Gray having communicated nothing 10 Il
p American Government, and the Cover
i. mcnt having set up no claim from his dI
covery, then came up the question how E
he we derived any tile from the fact Of h
N having entered the riverl This is que
Or ton which stands in the way Of our clair
" as resting on general principles. The Br
Ish say 1t constitutes an exception whlt
takes this case out Of the general princIpl
q But then, it is said, that we have a rig
50 TO the river on the ground Of the dscove
sc of Lewis and Clarke. But here the que
ton arises, Were Lewis and Clarke Sc
!; into that country TO make discoveries
g Did they 90 there to take possession of 4
country Did they, as has been allege
q 20 down the river in order to carry out Il
;, treaty of Louisiana, aud take possession
n the Columbia valley under that treat,