, 1858-09-24


The provisions of this statute are mainly
as follows:
Be it declared and enacted by authority
Of this present Parliament That all mo-
nopolies and all commissions, grants, lieen.
ses, charters and letters patent heretofore
made and granted or hereafter to be made
and granted, to any person or persons,
bodies polite or corporate whatsoever, or
for the sole buying, selling, making, work
ing or using of anything within this realm,
&C., are altogether contrary to the laws Of
this realm, and, &C., are and shall be ut
terly void and of no effect, &C.
Sec 3. And be it further enacted, That
all person and persons, bodies polite and
corporate whatsoever, which now are, or
hereafter shall be, shall stand and be dis
abled and incapable to have, use, exercise
or put in use, any monopoly or any such
commission, grant, license, charter, letters
patent, proclamation, &c, or any liberty,
power or faculty, grounded or pretended to
be grounded upon them or any Of them.
This statute has never been repealed or
annulled. 1t stand as part of the com
mon law Of England, and there can be no
question that it renders totally void and In
operative the license for exclusive trade
granted to the Hudson Bay Company.
This question would have been undoubtedly
determined by the courts Of law II indi-
viduals had been found powerful enough to
contend with this wealthy company.
Chief Justice Draper, Of Canada, in his
evidence before the Committee Of Parlia-
ment, says with regard to the exclu-
sive license to trade (perhaps with the pre-
judice which lawyers have In favor Of thslr
particular viewS), l never could understand
how 1t could be contended for in q court Of
law for an instant The exclusive license
TO trade appears to me to be diametrically
contrary to the statute Of James Firstn
(Referring doubtedly to the statute before
quoted, although he does not cite it. The
only question, l think, which conld arise
upon it, speaking always individually,
would be whether or not that statute ap-
piled TO a colony, or was confined to . mo-
nopoly within the mother country. As
sumiBg that it was confined to q monopoly
within the mother country, IL stilI, I think,
would be open to o very fair argument that
it did apply to this company, because their
charter makes the seat Of their govern
ment in England"
He further says, in answer to a question
from Lord John Russell-"I understand
you TO give q decided opinion as to the
monopoly Of trade ~ Upon that point /
have never entertained a doubts
The simple question presented to The Do
partment Of State, in view Of the facts
above presented, Is this :-Win the ror-
ernment Of the United States suffer the
natural rights Of its citizens 70 labor and
trade TO be controlled and restrained By .
company Of merchants, the legal existence
Of whose rights Is hardly recognized By the
British government. and only 50 far upheld,
as they are, from considerations Of pollti-
cal expediency, but not Of laW1
/ beg leave to submit TO the Department.
Of State that this is question Of no tril
fling importance to the Pacific States ard
Territories Of the United States. One
quarter part Of the laboriag element Of The
State Of California and the Territories Of
Oregon and Washington win be diverted
to these new regions. The product Of gold
in California and the agricultural produce
Of Oregon and Washington Territories viii
be materially diminished II the present
restrictions are allowed, the gold Of the
new regions, after paying enormous profits
TO the British monopolists, will pass through
their hands to England without benefttlnR
our own country or people. The countries
Of California, Oregon and Washington,
although furnishing all the supplies for the
new gold region, will bo impoverished By
the abstraction Of their own laborsrs Whils
the profits from the sale Of supplies pro-
Iducod 10 these American territories win Be-
absorbed by foreign monopolists.
The government Of the United States
must determine whether tits consistent with
its own self respect and It's duty 10 ils citi.
zenS, tha. this state Of things should con
tinue.
In behalf Of the citizens Of Washington
Territory, whom l Immediately represent.
and further in behalf Of the citizens Of our
whole Pacific coast, / would request thai
the government Of the United States should
interposO with the British authorities for
the removal Of the restrictions above -
fSrred to. And further request that this
government demand the repayment Of eli
sums collected BY the Governor Of Vancou-
Ver's Island for licenses to dig gold, and
that it make reclamation for the value Of
all vessels and cargoes con6scated In con
sequence Of the proclamations Of Gov.
Douglas. before referred to.
In conclusion, l would say that have
no hesitation in expressing my opinion upon
the legal questions involved 10 this paper,
as have been aided 10 their investigation
by the professional advice Of my friend,
John L. Hayes, Esq, counsellor At law Of
this city, to whom am happy TO oxprasg
my obligations
have the honor 70 Be,
Very respectfully, &c,
ISAAC l. STEVENS,
Delegate in Congress from w. 7.