Volume 1 of this important set was noted in the Quarterly for April,

1913, page 131. As noted there, the readers in the Pacific Northwest are awaiting with interest the subsequent volumes containing the record of John Quincy Adams in the diplomacy of Old Oregon.

* * * * *

DECISIONS, JULY, 1912, TO JULY, 1913. By United States Geographic Board. (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1913. Pp. 54.)

There are here given 365 decisions on geographic names. Of this total a surprising number of decisions (107) are devoted to geographic features of the State of Washington. Of these there are 56 in Whatcom County in the vicinity of Mount Baker and 49 are found in the Mount Rainier National Park. The remaining two are Mount Spokane and Portage Bay, the latter a part of Lake Union, Seattle.

* * * * *

EARLY AMERICAN MOUNTAINEERS. By Allen H. Bent. (Reprint from Appalachia, Vol. XIII, No. 1. Pp. 45 to 67.)

Western mountains come in for a fair share of attention in this interesting little monograph. There are a number of portraits, among which may be seen those of David Douglass, the famous early botanist who wrought in the Pacific Northwest, and General Hazard Stevens, who made the first ascent of Mount Rainier with P. B. Van Trump.

* * * * *

MYTHS AND LEGENDS OF THE GREAT PLAINS. Selected and edited by Katharine Berry Judson. (Chicago, A. C. McClurg & Co. 1913. Pp. 205. $1.50 net.)

This is the fourth volume in the series of Myths and Legends edited by Miss Judson. Earlier volumes covering Alaska, The Pacific Northwest, and California and the Old Southwest have been noted in previous issues of this magazine.

* * * * *

ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF PEACE. By Henry Cabot Lodge. (New York, The Macmillan Company, 1913. Pp. 136. $1.25 net.)

This timely book should find a welcome in the State of Washington, where committees are already at work to celebrate the centennial of peace by the erection of an arch or some other form of imposing monument where the Pacific Highway passes from the United States into Canada.

* * * * *

JAMES HARLAN. By Johnson Brigham. (Iowa City, The State Historical Society of Iowa, 1913. Pp. 398.)

This latest volume in the very creditable Iowa Biographical Series (edited by Benj. F. Shambaugh) is the well told story of one of Iowa's best known sons. James Harlan was a typical Westerner, a man of rugged sincerity, an orator and debater of no mean ability, an independent and self-reliant leader of a pioneer people. The years of his political career were entangled with the anti-slavery agitation, the Civil War, and the confused and trying periods of Reconstruction. He was not perhaps a statesman of first rank, but Iowa does well in setting forth the work of her sons in the very excellent series of which this volume forms a creditable addition. On the whole, the volume does not measure up to the standard for fairness set by some of the earlier volumes. On too many controverted points the opinion of the "Burlington Hawk-Eye" and "the Iowa State Register" are quoted as if their judgment was final. A good many states would reflect credit on themselves by encouraging a similar excellent biographical series.

* * * * *

THE LIFE OF ROBERT TOOMBS. By Ulrich Bonnell Phillips, Ph. D., Professor of American History in the University of Michigan. (New York, The Macmillan Co. 1913. Pp. 281. $2.00.)

This volume from the pen of one of the ablest students of American history gives in available form an interesting and instructive account of one of the leading "fire-eaters" of the ante-bellum period. Professor Phillips treats Toombs as an exponent of the social and industrial history of his period and section and therefore emphasizes these factors rather than those that are purely biographical. In very large measure he allows Toombs to speak for himself through his speeches and letters.

* * * * *

AN ECONOMIC INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. By Charles A. Beard, Associate Professor of Politics, Columbia University. (New York, The Macmillan Company, 1913. Pp. VII, 330. $2.25 net.)

Professor Beard in this work is concerned with the "forces which condition" a great movement in politics, viz., the making of our national constitution. Rapidly sketching the economic interests in 1787, the movement for the constitution and the property-safeguards in the election of delegates, he leads up to the most direct contribution in the book, viz., a study of the personal and financial interests of the framers of that document. Biographical sketches of the members are given from this new angle. The basis being a careful study of the extant records of the Treasury Department at Washington now used for the first time in this connection. Emphasis is laid upon the economic interests represented in "personality in public securities," "personality invested in lands for speculation," "personality in the form of money loaned at interest," "personality in mercantile, manufacturing, and shipping lines" and "personality in slaves." The remaining chapters treat of the political doctrines of the "framers" and the process of ratification. Professor Beard states frankly that his study is fragmentary, but he has unquestionably made available to students a body of facts that must be taken into account by anyone desiring to understand the making of our constitution.

Other Books Received

AMERICAN ANTIQUARIAN SOCIETY. Proceedings, New Series, Volume 23, Part I. (Worcester, Society, 1913. Pp. 169.)

AMERICAN JEWISH HISTORICAL SOCIETY. Publications, Number 21. (N. Y. Society, 1913. Pp. 304.)

AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION. Annual Report, 1911. Volume 1. (Washington, Govt. 1913. Pp. 842.)

AMERICAN SCENIC AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION SOCIETY. Eighteenth Annual Report, 1913. (Albany, Lyon, 1913. Pp. 832.)

ILLINOIS STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY. Transactions for the year 1911. (Springfield, State Historical Library, 1913. Pp. 151.)

KANSAS STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY. Biennial Report, 1910-1912. (Topeka, 1913. Pp. 193.)

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. Classification, Class E-F, America. (Wash., Govt. 1913. Pp. 298. 40 cents.)

ONTARIO HISTORICAL SOCIETY. Annual Report, 1913. (Toronto, Society, 1913. Pp. 78.)

ONTARIO HISTORICAL SOCIETY. Papers and Records, Volume 11. (Toronto. Society, 1913. Pp. 81.)

Entire number devoted to a study of "Place Names in Georgian Bay and North Channel," by James White.

RHODE ISLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY. Proceedings, 1911-1913. (Providence, Society, 1913. Pp. 92.)

RHODE ISLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY. The Seal, the Arms and the Flag of Rhode Island, by Howard M. Chapin. (Providence, Society, 1913. Pp. 16.)

SEATTLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. In Memoriam--John Harte McGraw. (Seattle, Chamber of Commerce, 1911. Pp. 84.)

THEABAUD, AUGUSTUS J. Three Quarters of a Century (1807 to 1882); a retrospect written from documents and memory. (N. Y. United States Catholic Historical Society, 1913. Pp. 204.)

VIRGINIA STATE LIBRARY. Ninth Annual Report, 1911-1913. (Richmond, State Printer, 1913. Pp. 49+335.)

Appendix contains a list of the Revolutionary soldiers of Virginia.

WASHINGTON BANKERS ASSOCIATION. Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Convention, 1913. (Tacoma, Association, 1913. Pp. 198.)

WASHINGTON STATE FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS. Seventeenth Annual Report, 1913-1914. (Printed at Sunnyside, Wash. 1913. Pp. 114.)

WASHINGTON STATE HIGH SCHOOL DIRECTORY, 1913-14. (Olympia, Lamborn, 1913. Pp. 126.)

WISCONSIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY. Collections, Volume 20. Edited by Reuben Gold Thwaites. (Madison, Society, 1911. Pp. 497.)

Devoted to a history of the fur-trade in Wisconsin.

NEWS DEPARTMENT

Death of Reuben Gold Thwaites

History interests of the Pacific Northwest, as well as those of other parts of the United States, have sustained a severe loss in the sudden death of Reuben Gold Thwaites on October 22. As Secretary of the Wisconsin State Historical Society he worked out an international reputation as editor and author of extensive works in the field of history. His will be a most difficult place to fill.

Professor Turner's Visit to the Coast

Professor Frederick J. Turner, formerly of the University of Wisconsin, but now of the Harvard faculty, will be in the Pacific Northwest next summer, dividing his time between the Universities of Oregon and Washington. He will deliver the commencement address at the University of Washington in June.

Professor Golder Goes to Russia

Professor Frank A. Golder of the Washington State College will leave for St. Petersburg on January 24, where he will catalogue the materials in the Russian archives relating to America. This work is being done for the Carnegie Institution, Department of Historical Research. Professor Golder is one of the few American historians who is perfectly at home with the Russian language. His selection for this work is complimentary to the Pacific Northwest.

Death of Mrs. Isaac I. Stevens

Even the older pioneers of Washington were surprised to read on November 6, 1913, that the widow of the first Territorial Governor, Isaac I. Stevens, had just died. Since her husband's heroic death at the Battle of Chantilly, September 1, 1862, she had been living at her home, 8 Bowdoin Avenue, Boston. Her son, General Hazard Stevens, who was with her to the last, writes that, though his mother had passed the ninetieth milestone of an eventful life, she retained her cordial interest in the children of men and just quietly went to sleep.

Pacific Coast Branch of the American Historical Association

The Eleventh Annual meeting of the Pacific Coast Branch of the American Historical Association met at Los Angeles, November 28-29, as guests of the University of Southern California. Prof. Frank J. Klingberg, of the University of Southern California, opened the programme with a paper on "The Anti-Slavery Movement in England," in which he traced the history of the movement which led to freedom, but was unaccompanied by any such upheaval as characterized our anti-slavery movement. In the second paper, "The Movement of Population in Feudal and Modern Japan," Prof. Y. Ichihashi, of Stanford University, examined the growth and decline of Japanese population in the light of the well known principles of Malthus. Prof. Ichihashi illustrated his statistical tables by means of charts and concluded that movements of population were far more intimately connected with economic development than with the natural checks discussed by Malthus. The concluding paper of the afternoon session was read by Prof. Robt. G. Cleland of Occident College. In discussing "The Relation of Slavery to the Early Sentiment for the Acquisition of California" he pointed out that the agitation of the slavery question in connection with California came after the acquisition and not before, and he made it clear to all that there is abundant need to study Western history from the sources in order to escape the bias of the more general historians who see the whole field in terms of the slavery struggle.

The annual dinner was held at Christopher's and was presided over by that "Prince of Toastmasters," Prof. H. Morse Stephens. President J. M. Guinn delivered the President's Address, which was a study of the old municipal archives of Los Angeles. The dry humor and keen wit of the Nestor of California historians found an admirable field in commenting on these quaint Mexican archives. Greetings were then heard from various representatives in attendance "from Seattle to San Diego." No one who knows Morse Stephens will need be told the dinner was in every way a complete success.

Saturday morning's session was given over to a wide range of discussion. Dean Bliss, of the San Diego Normal School, set forth the contents and value of "The Hayes Collection in the Bancroft Library." Prof. F. H. White, of Pomona College, summarized the history of "The Development of the National Land Administration," confining himself largely to the technique of administration. Professor Herbert E. Bolton gave the results of his study in sources by tracing some of the Spanish explorers in the West. At the business session which followed the officers for the coming year were elected, as follows: President, Edmond S. Meany, of the University of Washington; Vice-President, E. B. Krehbiel, of Stanford University; Secretary-Treasurer, William A. Morris, of the University of California. To membership on the Executive Council the following were chosen: Edith Jordan, Los Angeles Polytechnic High School; Robert G. Cleland, Occident College; Dean Bliss, San Diego Normal; and Edward McMahon, University of Washington.

A complimentary luncheon given by the University of Southern California initiated the members still further into the boundless hospitality of that institution, and then the final session was held in cooperation with the Southern California Social Science Association. Owing to the absence of Professor Schafer of Oregon, Professor Bolton gave an excellent talk on the value of local history, which compensated in large measure for the absence of Professor Schafer. Miss Jane Harnett, of Long Branch, led the discussion and laid emphasis upon many of the points touched upon by Professor Bolton. The second paper, "An Introduction to the Social Sciences," by Professor Emory S. Bogardus, of the University of Southern California, was a discussion of a course designed for students in the junior colleges and was reinforced by Professor Bogardus' experience in giving the course. Professor Edward McMahon, of the University of Washington, followed with a plea for emphasis on "The Social Sciences in the High Schools." He contended that the instruction now given is inadequate to meet the demands of citizenship placed upon our citizens. Miss Anna Stewart, discussing both papers dealing with the social sciences, told very interestingly of the valuable work now being done in the Los Angeles High School with classes in social problems, and demonstrated the necessity of serious consideration of these questions by students who are passing out of the high school to deal with them as citizens.

The meeting at Los Angeles was in every respect a complete success and the large attendance and hospitality of the people made all the delegates exceedingly anxious for an invitation to come again.

Marking an Old Historic Site

Led by W. H. Gilstrap, under the auspices of the Washington State Historical Society, a number of pioneers assembled at Tacoma recently and repaired to the site on the prairie near that city where a monument was unveiled. It marks the end of the long journey of that famous party of pioneers who in 1853 were the first to reach Puget Sound by crossing the Cascade Range. Only a few of the original party survive, but it is believed that every one of the survivors were assembled for the interesting ceremony.

NORTHWESTERN HISTORY SYLLABUS

[The aim of this department is to furnish outlines that will aid those who wish to study the subject systematically. It is expected that its greatest use will be as a guide for members of women's clubs, literary societies, and classes in colleges or high schools. It will be a form of university extension without the theses and examinations necessary for the earning of credits toward a degree.]

VIII. Provisional Government of Oregon

1. Early Settlers.

a. Fur hunters. b. Seekers for homes and lands. c. The Oregon trail.

2. Petitions to Congress.

a. Seeking recognition and protection of government. b. In nature of early census.

3. Death of Ewing Young, Feb. 15, 1841.

a. Possessing property but no heirs. b. Action proposed at the funeral. c. Committee to form some sort of government. d. Property probated. e. Temporary government abandoned.

4. Wolf Meetings.

a. Seeking united action. b. Multnomah Circulating library. c. Lyceum for debates. d. Bounty for destruction of dangerous animals. e. Proposal to secure protection for families. f. Committee to frame temporary government. g. Plan adopted by meeting in Champoeg field. h. Legislative committee appointed. i. Executive committee of three instead of governor.

5. Reorganization.

a. Influence of immigration of 1843. b. Primitive State House. c. Earliest laws enacted. d. Legislative committee becomes a legislature. e. Executive committee changed to governorship. f. George Abernethy chosen governor, 1845. g. Oath of office reveals "joint occupancy."

6. Results.

a. Laws of Iowa Territory adopted. b. Prohibition. c. Failure of postoffice. d. Dwelling. e. Currency, "Beaver Money" in gold. f. Dominion up to 54-40 north latitude. g. Federal organization of Oregon Territory, 1848-1849.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The above outline covers one of the most interesting portions of Northwestern history. It reveals the natural aptitude of Americans for self-government and shows a natural evolution of a state from settlements of pioneers in a wilderness. The literature on the subject is growing rapidly. The items following are among those most readily accessible to those wishing to pursue the study:

BANCROFT, HUBERT HOWE. Works of. Vol. XXIX, chapters XII, XIV, XVI, XVIII, XIX, XXII, XXVI. Here is found the story of the provisional government told at considerable length.

CLARK, ROBERT CARLTON. How British and American Subjects Unite in a Common Government for Oregon Territory in 1844. In the Quarterly of the Oregon Historical Society, Vol. XIII, Number 2.

GROVER, LAFAYETTE. The Oregon Archives. This is a rare book, published in 1853. It contains the early laws of the provisional government and other source materials of prime importance.

HOLMAN, FREDERICK V. Dr. John McLoughlin, the Father of Oregon. While this is intended as a biography of the grand old Doctor, it is a book of much helpfulness to students of this period. At the end of the volume there are nineteen documents illustrative of the text.

JOHNSON, SIDONA V. A Short History of Oregon, Chapters XVIII to XXIII. The title of the book is well chosen, but many may find there the facts needed.

MEANY, EDMOND S. History of the State of Washington. Chapter XVI deals in part with the provisional government while Washington was yet a part of Oregon.

SCHAFER, JOSEPH. History of the Pacific Northwest. In this interesting and useful book, Chapter XIII is entitled "The First American Government on the Pacific."

WOODWARD, WALTER C. Political Parties in Oregon, 1843-1868. This book was published by the J. K. Gill Company of Portland. Oregon, in 1913. It is the newest, as well as the most extensive, work in this particular field. Those who are collecting books on the Northwest should not overlook this one. Anyone studying in the field of the above syllabus will find the book helpful.

REPRINT DEPARTMENT

George Wilkes: History of Oregon, Geographical, Geological and Political. (New York, Colyer, 1845.)

* * * * *

[The reprint of this rare work was begun in the first number of the Washington Historical Quarterly and has been continued in portions of varying lengths. The installment in this issue concludes the reprinted book.--_Editor._]

* * * * *

But can such charters be considered an acknowledged part of the law of nations? Were they any thing more, in fact, than a cession to the grantee or grantees of whatever rights the grantor might suppose himself to possess, to the exclusion of other subjects of the same sovereign?--charters binding and restraining those only who were within the jurisdiction of the grantor, and of no force or validity against the subjects of other states, until recognized by treaty, and thereby becoming a part of international law.

Had the United States, thought proper to issue, in 1790, by virtue of their national authority, a charter granting to Mr. Gray the whole extent of the country watered, directly or indirectly, by the River Columbia,[84] such a charter, would, no doubt, have been valid in Mr. Gray's favor, as against all other citizens of the United States. But can it be supposed that it would have been acquiesced in by either of the powers, Great Britain and Spain, which, in that same year, were preparing to contest by arms the possession of the very country which would have been the subject of such a grant?

If the right of sovereignty over the territory in question accrues to the United States by Mr. Gray's discovery, how happens it that they never protested against the violence done to that right by the two powers, who, by the convention of 1790, regulated their respective rights in and over a district so belonging, as it is now asserted, to the United States?

This claim of the United States to the territory drained by the Columbia and its tributary streams, on the ground of one of their citizens having been the first to discover the entrance of that river, has been here so far entered into, not because it is considered to be necessarily entitled to notice, since the whole country watered by the Columbia falls within the provisions of the convention of 1790, but because the doctrine above alluded to has been put forward so broadly, and with such confidence, by the United States, that Great Britain considered it equally due to herself and to other powers to enter her protest against it.

The United States further pretend that their claim to the country in question is strengthened and confirmed by the discovery of the sources of the Columbia, and by the exploration of its course to the sea by Lewis and Clark, in 1805-6.

In reply to this allegation, Great Britain affirms, and can distinctly prove, that, if not before, at least in the same and subsequent years, her North-Western Trading Company had, by means of their agent, Mr. Thomson, already established their posts among the Flathead and Kootanie tribes, on the headwaters of the northern or main branch of the Columbia, and were gradually extending them down the principal stream of that river; thus giving to Great Britain, in this particular, again, as in the discovery of the mouth of the river, a _title to parity_ at least, if not priority, of discovery, as opposed to the United States. It was from those posts, that, having heard of the American establishment forming in 1811, at the mouth of the river, Mr. Thomson hastened thither, descending the river, to ascertain the nature of that establishment.[85]

Some stress having been laid by the United States on the restitution to them of Fort George by the British, after the termination of the last war, which restitution they represent as conveying a virtual acknowledgment by Great Britain of the title of the United States to the country in which that post was situated--it is desirable to state, somewhat in detail, the circumstances attending that restitution.

In the year 1815, a demand for the restoration of Fort George was first made to Great Britain, by the American government, on the plea that the first article of the treaty of Ghent stipulated the restitution to the United States of all posts and places whatsoever taken from them by the British during the war, in which description, Fort George, (Astoria,) was included.

For some time the British government demurred to comply with the demand of the United States, because they entertained doubts how far it could be sustained by the construction of the treaty.

In the first place, the trading post called Fort Astoria (or Fort George,) was not a national possession; in the second place, it was not a military post; and, thirdly, it was never captured from the Americans by the British.

It was, in fact, conveyed in regular commercial transfer, and accompanied by a bill of sale, for a sum of money, to the British company, who purchased it, by the American company, who sold it of _their own free will_.

It is true that a British sloop of war had, about that time, been sent to take possession of that post, but she arrived subsequently to the transaction above mentioned, between the two companies, and found the British company _already in legal occupation of their self acquired property_.

In consequence, however, of that ship having been sent out with hostile views, although those views were not carried into effect,[86] and in order that not even a shadow of a reflection might be cast upon the good faith of the British government, the latter determined to give the most liberal extension to the terms of the treaty of Ghent, and, in 1818, the purchase which the British company had made in 1813 was restored to the United States.

Particular care, however, was taken, on this occasion, to prevent any misapprehension as to the extent of the concession made by Great Britain.

Viscount Castlereagh, in directing the British minister at Washington to intimate the intention of the British government to Mr. Adams, then secretary of state, uses these expressions, in a despatch dated 4th February, 1818:--

"You will observe, that, whilst this government is not disposed to contest with the American government the point of possession as it stood in the Columbia River at the moment of the rupture, _they are not prepared to admit the validity of the title of the government of the United States to this settlement_.

"In signifying, therefore, to Mr. Adams the full acquiescence of your government in the reoccupation of _the limited position_ which the United States held in that river at the breaking out of the war, _you will at the same time assert, in suitable terms, the claim_ of Great Britain to that territory, upon which the American settlement must be considered as an encroachment."

This instruction was executed verbally by the person to whom it was addressed.

The following is a transcript of the act by which the fort was delivered up, by the British, into the hand of Mr. Prevost, the American agent:--

"In obedience to the command of H. R. H. the prince regent, _signified in a despatch from the right honorable the Earl Bathurst_, addressed to the partners or agents of the North-West Company, bearing date the 27th of January, 1818, and in obedience to a subsequent order, dated the 26th July, from W. H. Sheriff, Esq., captain of H. M. ship Andromache, We, the undersigned, do, in conformity to the first article of the treaty of Ghent, restore to the government of the United States, through its agent, J. P. Prevost, Esq., the settlement of Fort George, on the Columbia river.

"Given under our hands, in triplicate, at Fort George, (Columbia River,) this 6th day of October, 1818.

"F. HICKEY, _Captain H. M. ship Blossom_. "J. KEITH, _of the N. W. Co_."

The following is the despatch from Earl Bathurst to the partners of the North-West Company, referred to in the above act of cession:--

DOWNING-STREET, _27th January, 1818_.

"Intelligence having been received that the United States sloop of war Ontario has been sent by the American government to establish a settlement on the Columbia river, which was held by that state, on the breaking out of the last war. I am to acquaint you, that it is the prince regent's pleasure, (_without, however, admitting the right of that government to the possession in question_) that, in pursuance of the first article of the treaty of Ghent, due facility should be given to the reoccupation of the said settlement by the officers of the United States; and I am to desire that you would contribute as much as lies in your power to the execution of his royal highness's command.

"I have, &c. &c. BATHURST.

"_To the Partners or Agents of the North-West Company, residing on the Columbia river._"

The above documents put the case of the restoration of Fort Astoria in too clear a light to require further observation.

The case, then of Great Britain, in respect to the country west of the Rocky Mountains, is shortly this:--

Admitting that the United States have acquired all the rights which Spain possessed, up to the treaty of Florida, either in virtue of discovery, or, as is pretended, in right Louisiana, Great Britain maintains that the nature and extent of those rights, as well as of the rights of Great Britain, are fixed and defined by the convention of Nootka; that these rights are equal for both parties; and that, in succeeding to the rights of Spain, under that convention, the United States must also have succeeded to the obligations which it imposed.

Admitting, further, the discovery of Mr. Gray, to the extent already stated, Great Britain, taking the whole line of the coast in question, with its straits, harbors and bays, has stronger claims, on the ground of prior discovery, attended with acts of occupancy and settlement, than the United States.

Whether, therefore, the United States rest their claims upon the title of Spain, or upon that of prior discovery, or upon both, Great Britain is entitled to place her claims at least upon a parity with those of the United States.

It is a fact, admitted by the United States, that, with the exception of the Columbia river, there is no river which opens far into the _interior_, on the whole western coast of the Pacific Ocean.

In the _interior_ of the territory in question, the subjects of Great Britain have had, for many years, numerous settlements and trading posts--several of these posts on the tributary streams of the Columbia, several upon the Columbia itself, some to the northward, and others to the southward, of that river; and they navigate the Columbia as the sole channel for the conveyance of their produce to the British stations nearest the sea, and for the shipment of it from thence to Great Britain. It is also by the Columbia and its tributary streams that these posts and settlements receive their annual supplies from Great Britain.[87]

In the whole of the territory in question, the citizens of the United States have not a single settlement or trading post. They do not use that river, either for the purpose of transmitting or receiving any produce of their own, to or from other parts of the world.

In this state of the relative rights of the two countries, and of the relative exercise of those rights, the United States claim the exclusive possession of both banks of the Columbia, and, consequently, that of the river itself; offering, it is true, to concede to British subjects a conditional participation in that navigation, but subject, in any case, to the exclusive jurisdiction and sovereignty of the United States.

Great Britain, on her part, offers to make the river the boundary; each country retaining the bank of the river contiguous to its own territories, and the navigation of it remaining forever free, and upon a footing of perfect equality to both nations.

To carry into effect this proposal, on our part, Great Britain would have to give up posts and settlements south of the Columbia. On the part of the United States, there could be no reciprocal withdrawing from actual occupation, as there is not, and never has been, a single American citizen settled north of the Columbia.

The United States decline to accede to this proposal, even when Great Britain has added to it the further offer of a most excellent harbor, and an extensive tract of country on the Straits of De Fuca--a sacrifice tendered in the spirit of accommodation, and for the sake of a final adjustment of all differences, but which, having been made in this spirit, is not to be considered as in any degree recognizing a claim on the part of the United States, or as at all impairing the existing right of Great Britain over the post and territory in question.

Such being the result of the recent negotiation, it only remains for Great Britain to maintain and uphold the qualified rights which she now possesses over the whole of the territory in question. These rights are recorded and defined in the convention of Nootka. They embrace the right to navigate the waters of those countries, the right to settle in and over any part of them, and the right freely to trade with the inhabitants and occupiers of the same.

These rights have been peaceably exercised ever since the date of that convention; that is, for a period of near forty years. Under that convention, valuable British interests have grown up in those countries. It is fully admitted that the United States possess the same rights, although they have been exercised by them only in a single instance, and have not, since the year 1813, been exercised at all. But beyond these rights they possess none.

To the interests and establishments which British industry and enterprise have created, Great Britain owes protection. That protection will be given, both as regards settlement and freedom of trade and navigation, with every attention not to infringe the coördinate rights of the United States; it being the earnest desire of the British government, so long as the joint occupancy continues, to regulate its own obligations by the same rule which governs the obligations of any other occupying party.

Fully sensible, at the same time, of the desirableness of a more definite settlement, as between Great Britain and the United States, the British government will be ready, at any time, to terminate the present state of joint occupancy by an agreement of delimitation; but such arrangement only can be admitted as shall not derogate from the rights of Great Britain, as acknowledged by treaty, nor prejudice the advantages which British subjects, under the same sanction, now enjoy in that part of the world.

(No. 7.)

_Convention between the United States and Great Britain, signed at London, October 20th, 1818._

ARTICLE 2.--It is agreed that a line drawn from the most northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods, along the 49th parallel of north latitude, or, if the said point shall not be in the 49th parallel of north latitude, then that a line drawn from the said point due north or south, as the case may be, until the said line shall intersect the said parallel of north latitude, and from the point of such intersection due west along and, with the said parallel, shall be the line of demarkation between the territories of the United States and those of his Britannic majesty; and that the said line shall form the northern boundary of the said territories of the United States, and the southern boundary of the territories of his Britannic Majesty, from the Lake of the Woods to the Stony Mountains.

ART. 3.--It is agreed that any country that may be claimed by either party on the northwest coast of America, westward of the Stony Mountains, shall, together with its harbors, bays, and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same, be free and open for the term of ten years from the date of the signature of the present convention, to the vessels, citizens, and subjects, of the two powers; it being well understood that this agreement is not to be construed to the prejudice of any claim which either of the two high contracting parties may have to any part of the said country, nor shall it be taken to affect the claims of any other power or state to any part of the said country; the only object of the high contracting parties, in that respect, being to prevent disputes and differences among themselves.

(No. 8.)

_The Florida Treaty, signed at Washington, February 22nd, 1819_....

ARTICLE 3.--The boundary line between the two countries west of the Mississippi shall begin on the Gulf of Mexico, at the mouth of the River Sabine, in the sea, continuing north, along the western bank of that river, to the 32d degree of latitude; thence, by a line due north, to the degree of latitude where it strikes the Rio Roxo of Natchitoches, or Red River; then, following the course of the Rio Roxo westward, to the degree of longitude 100 west from London and 23 from Washington; then crossing the said Red River, and running thence, by a line due north, to the River Arkansas; thence following the course of the southern bank of the Arkansas, to its source in latitude 42 north; and thence, by that parallel of latitude, to the South Sea; the whole being as laid down in Melish's map of the United States, published at Philadelphia, improved to the 1st of January, 1818. But, if the source of the Arkansas River shall be found to fall north or south of latitude 42, then the line shall run from the said source due south or north, as the case may be, till it meets the said parallel of latitude 42, and thence, along the said parallel, to the South Sea; all the islands in the Sabine, and the said Red and Arkansas Rivers, throughout the course thus described, to belong to the United States; but the use of the waters and the navigation of the Sabine to the sea, and of the said Rivers Roxo and Arkansas, throughout the extent of the said boundary, on their respective banks, shall be common to the respective inhabitants of both nations.

The two high contracting parties agree to cede and renounce all their rights, claims, and pretensions, to the territories described by said line; that is to say, the United States hereby cede to his Catholic Majesty, and renounce forever, all their rights, claims, and pretensions, to the territories lying west and south of the above-described line; and, in like manner, his Catholic Majesty cedes to the said United States all his rights, claims, and pretensions, to any territories east and north of the said line; and for himself, his heirs, and successors, renounces all claim to the said territories forever.

(No. 9)

_Convention between the United States and Great Britain, signed at London, August 6th, 1827._

ARTICLE 1. All the provisions of the third article of the convention concluded between the United States of America and his majesty the king of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, on the 20th of October, 1818, shall be, and they are hereby, further indefinitely extended and continued in force, in the same manner as if all the provisions of the said article were herein specifically recited.

ART. 2. It shall be competent, however, to either of the contracting parties, in case either should think fit, at any time after the 20th of October, 1828, on giving due notice of twelve months to the other contracting party, to annul and abrogate this convention; and it shall, in such case, be accordingly entirely annulled and abrogated, after the expiration of the said term of notice.

ART. 3. Nothing contained in this convention, or in the third article of the convention of the 20th October, 1818, hereby continued in force, shall be constructed to impair, or in any manner affect, the claims which either of the contracting parties may have to any part of the country westward of the Stony or Rocky Mountains.

(No. 10.)

_The Instructions of the Merchant Proprietors, to John Meares_:

"* * * * Should you, in the course of your voyage, meet with any Russian, _English_, or Spanish vessels, you will treat them with civility and friendship, and allow them, if authorized, to examine your papers, which will show the object of your voyage. But you must, at the same time, guard against surprise. Should they attempt to seize you, or even carry you out of your way, you will prevent it by every means in your power, and repel force by force. You will on your arrival in the first port, protest before a proper officer against such illegal procedure; and ascertain as nearly as you can the value of your vessel and cargo, sending such protest, with a full account of the transaction, to us at China. Should you in such conflict have the superiority, you will then take possession of the vessel that attacked you, as also her cargo, and bring both, with the officers and crew to China, that they may be condemned as legal prizes and their crews punished as pirates. Wishing you a prosperous voyage, etc.

(Signed) "THE MERCHANT PROPRIETORS."

FOOTNOTES:

[84] These Englishmen are crazy--the Columbia was not discovered by Captain Gray till 1792. If the above is intended as an illustration only, the instance is as weak as the previous arguments are inconclusive.

[85] We have seen that Mr. Thomson came a year too late.

[86] Those views were carried into effect. The place was regularly taken possession of in the king's name on the 1st December, 1813, and the British flag was run up with all the formalities of conquest, in place of the American standard.

[87] Here is an assertion that Great Britain has been accruing title, through the operations of her Hudson's Bay Company, ever since the treaty of 1818. This gives an additional significance to her grant of the civil and criminal jurisdiction of the territory, to that incorporation. It will be well for our readers here to recollect the declaration of our Government made in 1823, that thenceforth no portion of the American Continents were to be considered as subjects for European Colonization.

The Washington Historical Quarterly

Board of Editors

CLARENCE B. BAGLEY, Seattle. J. N. BOWMAN, Seattle. T. C. ELLIOTT, Walla Walla. FRANK A. GOLDER, Pullman. CEYLON S. KINGSTON, Cheney. W. D. LYMAN, Walla Walla. EDWARD MCMAHON, Seattle. THOMAS W. PROSCH, Seattle. OLIVER H. RICHARDSON, Seattle. O. B. SPERLIN, Tacoma. E. O. S. SCHOLEFIELD, Victoria, B. C. ALLEN WEIR, Olympia.

Managing Editor

EDMOND S. MEANY

Business Manager

CHARLES W. SMITH

VOL. V NO. 2 APRIL, 1914

_ISSUED QUARTERLY_

Contents

T. C. ELLIOTT Journal of John Work, June-October, 1825 83 ANNA SLOAN WALKER History of the Liquor Laws of the State of Washington 116 RALPH R. KNAPP Divorce in Washington 121 DOCUMENTS--A New Vancouver Journal 129 BOOK REVIEWS 138 NEWS DEPARTMENT 152 NORTHWESTERN HISTORY SYLLABUS 156 HISTORY TEACHERS' SECTION 158

THE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY

UNIVERSITY STATION

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON

Entered at the post office at Seattle as second-class mail matter.

The Washington University State Historical Society

* * * * *

Officers and Board of Trustees:

CLARENCE B. BAGLEY, President JUDGE JOHN P. HOYT, Vice-President JUDGE ROGER S. GREENE, Treasurer PROFESSOR EDMOND S. MEANY, Secretary JUDGE CORNELIUS H. HANFORD JUDGE THOMAS BURKE SAMUEL HILL

PRINTING DEPARTMENT UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

_Vol. V., No. 2 April, 1914_

The Washington Historical Quarterly

JOURNAL OF JOHN WORK, JUNE-OCTOBER, 1825

(Introduction and annotations by T. C. Elliott.)

Readers of the Washington Historical Quarterly have already become acquainted with Mr. John Work, an officer of the Hudson's Bay Company, through his previous journal--with introductory note--published in