whose names of objects they adopted, and make not the slightest allusion to Mr. Gray: nay, we cannot make out that anything more of Gray was known to them, or indeed to any one else, than was told in Vancouver's voyage. To the total silence of Mr. Jefferson and Captains Lewis and Clarke as to Gray's name and discovery, we have to add a curious fact. Gray gave to the north cape of the Columbian estuary, named by Meares Disappointment,' the name of Cape Hancock,' and to the southern point that of 'Adams,' and he probably so marked them on the sketch which Quadra gave to Vancouver. Vancouver on his chart very properly preserved the name of Cape Disappointment,' which Meares had given before Gray saw it; but he, with equal propriety, preserved the name that Gray had first given to the other, Point Adams.' Now, when Lewis and Clarke come to talk of these capes, we hear nothing of Cape Hancock ;' and of the other they say

"The point called Cap Rond by La Peyrouse, and Point Adams, by Vancouver-Ib. 400—

clearly ignorant that Adams' was the name given by the American citizen in honour of the American President, and only repeated on his authority by the British officer.

This expedition of Captains Lewis and Clarke wintered from the 9th of December, 1805, to the 23rd of March, 1806, in a few wooden huts erected by them on the left or south side of the river, and thence returned, step by step as they had come, back into the Missouri country.

Very easy it would be to show that this expedition had none of the characteristics that could confer sovereignty and dominion on the nation which ordered it. The officers were not authorised to do any act of possession; they did nothing of the kind. A paper which they left with the natives, to be shown to any ship that might arrive (ib. 492), negatives any such intention; and the going back step by step as they had come - not even being tempted to pursue the great Columbia, even to its junction with the branch which they named en l'air after Captain Clarke-proves that having found a passage between the eastern and western waters they had done their duty, and were satisfied. But we need not insist on these details, because it does so happen that they did not even touch upon any part of the territory which England claims-except that portion of the Lower Columbia which Broughton had already surveyed, and which England has proposed as the common boundary. So that again, if these gentlemen had been authorised to take possession of all they saw, and had done so, they would have not touched our original claim to the whole right bank, and still less Mr. Dargan's proposition; for

so far from reaching 49°, the most northern point reached by the travellers was 46° 48'. In their zeal, however, for the exclusive pretension, the cabinet of Washington has fallen into some misstatements of several essential facts of this expedition, which Dr. Twiss has exposed, and which it is necessary that we should shortly advert to. To make our observations the more intelligible, we subjoin a fac-simile of that portion of their map which relates to this part of their journey. The size of the rivers and the size of the letters used in designating the rivers are faithfully copied, and deserve attention.

As early as the negotiation of 1824 Mr. Rush stated that'the Columbia river extended by the river Mulnomah to as low as 42°, and by Clarke's river as high as 51°, if not beyond.'-—ap. Twiss, 336. The imperfect geographical knowledge of that period would be some excuse for a party who was not claiming under a pretension

of

46

of scientific exploration, but, in truth, Mr. Rush was mistaken no less than two degrees to the southward and about as much to the northward. But the following misstatements are much more serious, and, as far as we can see, without any excuse.

Mr. Calhoun says that the expedition, having

'reached the Koos kooshee in lat. 43° 34', descended that to the principal northern branch, which they called Lewis. They followed that [the Lewis] to its junction with the great northern branch, which they called Clarke; thence descended to the mouth of the river, where they landed and encamped on the north side of Cape Disappointment.'-ap. Twiss, 337. This statement Mr. Buchanan subsequently repeats, adding'That Messrs. Lewis and Clarke, under a commission from their Government, first explored the waters of this river almost from its headsprings to the Pacific, passing the winter of 1805-6 on its northern shore, near the ocean.'-1b. 336.

Now we are obliged to say that every point of both these statements is contrary to the facts stated by the American officers themselves; as will be best seen by comparing the statements with the sketch: by which our readers will see

1st. That they came on the Kooskooskee not in 43° 34', but in about 46° 34'.

2nd. That the Lewis is a southern and not a principal northern branch.

3rd. That they did not explore the waters of the Columbia from almost their head springs to the sea; they explored only a minor stream, the Kooskooskee; they explored a small portion of the Lewis, and no part whatsoever of the Clarke.

4th. That they did not follow the Lewis to its junction with the great northern branch called Clarke;'-that they never were within two degrees of the junction with the Clarke;-that they never saw and knew nothing whatsoever about the Clarke, except that somewhere in the mountains, while making towards the Kooskooskee, they crossed a river to which they gave the name of Clarke.' This stream they did not know to be an affluent of the Columbia, but it was so represented in their map from the reports of the natives.

5th. Mr. Calhoun says that they encamped on the north side of the river, and wintered!' Mr. Buchanan also says they wintered on the north shore.' Mr. Greenhow repeats and improves on the errors of both by saying the expedition 'descended the Lewis into the northern branch called the Clarke, and wintered on the northern bank,'-the wintering place is beyond this sketch, but by reference to another sketch (p. 594) it will be seen that all this is utterly untrue. When the exploring party descended the river they did indeed bivouac or encamp on the north side for a

few

few dreary and miserable nights, which they passed in great distress and danger while looking about for a proper place for wintering; but they crossed over as soon as they could to the south side, and there they built log-houses, and wintered from the 9th December to the 23rd March. When we recollect that these statements were made in answer to a proposition from England to divide the territory by the main stream of the Columbia, she taking the north and the United States the south bank, it will be easily seen why the imaginary exploration of the Clarke and the ideal wintering encampment on the north bank are made so prominent.

We cannot suspect Messrs. Calhoun or Buchanan of having intentionally made these misstatements, which we incline rather to attribute to the misguiding of Mr. Greenhow, who seems to be a very unscrupulous, as he certainly is a very inaccurate, adviser. Such misstatements, however, were not worth making; first, because they are so easy of detection; and secondly, because, even if true, they are of little value; for-we repeat it— such an expedition could never, in any case, constitute a possessory title; and if it did, it so happens that it never touched any portion of the territory that England claims, except in that portion of the lower Columbia where the English proposition admits the river to be common to both.

Here we must shortly notice the earlier explorations of our own countrymen :

In 1793 Mackenzie discovered and passed down a considerable portion of Frazer's River, and was the first white man who explored this region. How then can the United States with any consistency deny the British claim to the region drained by the Frazer?'-North American Review, p. 242.

As to the Columbia, Mr. Greenhow admits

the first white person who navigated the northern branch of the Columbia, or traversed any part of the country drained by it, was Mr. David Thomson, Surveyor and Astronomer of the British North-west Company, and his followers, in the spring of 1811.'-(Hist., p. 297.)

This, under an apparent candour, is, after Mr. Greenhow's usual style, an essential misrepresentation of the facts. Mr. Thomson was indeed the first white who ever navigated the Northern Columbia, but he did so long prior to 1811. As early as October, 1800, Mr. Thomson-who is still living in Montreal-with six Canadians and four or five Indians, crossed the Rocky Mountains in latitude 51° N., and descended one of the great northern branches of the Columbia River, which he called M'Gillivray's River. He descended this river for a good distance, when he was driven back by a band of a powerful tribe of Indians, and compelled to re-cross the Rocky Mountains.

In 1807 Mr. Thomson again crossed the Rocky Mountains, and established, not far from the source of the Columbia, a fortified trading post, and there passed two winters: the summer season he was employed in exploring the country.

In 1809 he established a trading post on the Flathead or Clarke's River, between latitudes 47° and 48° N., and wintered there. During these three years (1807-1810) several trading posts were established on different parts of the Columbia River, its branches, and lakes.

In 1810 Mr. Thomson wintered on the Columbia River, near the foot of the Rocky Mountains, about 100 miles from its source, and spent the ensuing summer in exploring the country; and for six successive years employed himself in exploring and surveying the main Columbia River and all its great branches, and settling the position of these places by numerous astronomical observations. All this was prior to the settlement of Astoria, of which we shall have to speak presently; but here we pause to repeat the observation made by the North American reviewer as to the Frazer River, that if the expedition of Lewis and Clarke conferred any right to the territories drained by the southern tributaries they descended, the British have the same claim to the territory drained by the main river, which Mr. Thomson was confessedly the first to explore.

So far, we think, we have, step by step, refuted the multifarious claims of the United States; one other only remains, that of actual occupation and possession, and the acknowledgment by England of that title, as arising out of the case of Astoria. Now this we shall show to be utterly valueless as for any purpose of this argument, and that it can only have been produced to increase the complication and confusion in which the American statesmen have endeavoured to embarrass the case.

The success of the fur trade carried on by the British NorthWest Company in the interior, and by numerous traders both British and American, seaward, induced Mr. John Jacob Astor, a German naturalized in New York, to attempt a trading establishment at the mouth of the Columbia, and he accordingly, in 1810, formed an association for that purpose, under the title of the Pacific Fur Company. Mr. Astor was a wealthy and enterprising merchant; he supplied all the funds, and associated himself with parties who were the practical agents of the whole operation. Three of the partners were native Americans—the six others were Scotchmen, who, however, had so little intention of resigning their national character, that before signing the articles of agreement, they obtained from Mr. Jackson, then the British minister at Washington, an assurance, that in case of war between the two countries they