Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1872-01-06
TIE MISSION CLAIM.

The delay in the settlement of the Cath.
Ollie Mission Claim a, Vancouver, is again
engaging considerable attention. We pub
lish q communication from a resident Of
Vancouver to the Portland Herald, with
the design Of throwing some light upon
the merits Of the question. "Our Dele.
gate can make such excuses as he pleascs
to account for the delay, but he cannot re.
strain the belief that he is in great mca-
sure responsible for it. As the election APP
proachcs, he very naturally becomes anx.
ious about the effects Of his negligence, and
attempts to shirk the responsibility, or
fasten it upon others shoulders
In a late number of the Vancouver R,yisicr,
noticet following words addressed by MIR.
Garhelde to the citizens of this town:
'.There was no hope of a settlement Of the
Mission Claim, while the military occupied
part of the land in dispute"
1t is not to be supposed tina: Mr.. Garfielic.
who lately returned from Washington, has
made use Of this assertion inconsiderately, or
without knowing the determination o: the Adj
minis,ration concerning the case.
Now, Mr.. Editor, is not this a very strange
determination? Why is it that, because the
military occupies part of the iandin dispute,
there can be no settlement of the claim is not
this most unheard Of way of dispensing jus.
,ice? Whether the title of the Mission be
valid or null, is it not the duty of the Admin
istration to decide it at once? BY refusing to
take action in the case, under the plea of oc-
| cupancy by the military, is not the Admins
tration failing to fulfill one of its most inculn
bent duties - that of causing the laws of
Congress to be promptly aud faithfully exc
cutcd, and the more so, when, as in the pres
cnt instance, SO much is at stake, not only
for the parties more intimately interested in
the matter, but for the whole community at
large? If the title of the Mission to the claim
be valid, as the report of the late DR.. Henry
seems to prove without the least particle of
doubt why dcfraud the Mission of its Just
right to it? IT, on the contrary, the title to the
Mission be null, why not so declare it at once,
and TINS pat an end to this unsettled state of
aifs;rs? The only conclusion one can reason
ably arrive at is, that the protractcd delay on
the part of the Government to come to final
decision, indicates but too plainly its implicit
acknowledgment Of the validity Of the Mission
title to the disputed claim.
have said enough, presume, to prove that
the plea of military occupancy is no sufficient
reason for postponing the settlement of this
vexed question, and that in allowing sLcl, pal
try reason as this to impede its action the
Government was far from acting in accordance
with its much boosted libcrality and justice :;
yet cannot refrain from making IL few addi-
tional observations to show that in the present
case the Government does not only exhibit a
want of liberality aud justice, but the most
glaring Partially.
1t is a well-known fact that the Catholic
Church asks no privilege over the other rcli-
gous denominations. All she asks is equal
treatment equal justice, and the Constitution
| of the United States grants her that right. Is
| she, then, treated accordingly? Let the i'm
partial reader decide for himself from the fol-
| lowing fact: There have been on this coast
| two cases of Mission claims quite similar,
! founded on two acts Of Congress, and both
occupied by the military-one at the Dallcs in
| Oregon and the other at Vancouver. W. T.
| The former was claimed by the Missionary So
| cie,y of the Methodist Episcopal Church. In
| 1860 the Government acknowledged its title,
and paid the claimants $50, 900 for the release
| of the land within the limits Of the military
reserve, and all claims for damages. This was
| nothing but right and just. Now how fares it
with the Catholic Mission Claim occupied by
the military since ls43? Until now the Gov
ernment has persisted in refusing not only to
acknowledge the validity of the title, but also
to declare its nulliy if considered null, for the
reason, as Mr.. Garficlde tells us, that the
q military occupies the land" or the no less
lame pretext adduced by an ex-Secretary, that
the " Government has expended large sums of
money on the spot" which in plain English
must mean that the title Of the Mission will be
disregarded and the land occupied indefinitely
without either indemnity or compensation. II
this is not partially, then words have lost
their ordinary meaning.
Secretary of the Interior now in Office will I'M
dcrstand better than some of his predecessors
in what equal justice really consists, and be
more inclined to render it promptly and tear
lessly, without regard to any party considera-
| tions, whether religious or political, showing,
thereby, that the Government uses no longer
two weights and two measures concerning mis-
sion claims entirely identical.