[1] "The great maritime powers of Europe," said Chief Justice Marshall, "discovered and visited different parts of this Continent at nearly the same time. The object was too immense for any of them to grasp the whole; and the claimants were too powerful to submit to the exclusive or unreasonable pretensions of any single potentate. To avoid bloody conflicts, which might terminate disastrously to all, it was necessary for the nations of Europe to establish some principle which all would acknowledge and which would decide their respective rights as between themselves. This principle, suggested by the actual state of things, was, 'that discovery gave title to the Government by whose subjects or by whose authority it was made, against all other European governments, which title might be consummated by possession.'"

[2] "Prince Rupert, we hear, is of no mind to press his Plantation claims until this Dutch warre is over. A Jamaica pattent is spoke of."—Pleasant Passages, 1665.

[3] As early as 1605, Quebec had been established, and had become an important settlement; before 1630, the Beaver and several other companies had been organized, at Quebec, for carrying on the fur-trade in the West, near and around the Great Lakes and in the North-West Territory; that the enterprise and trading operations of these French Companies, and of the French colonists generally, extended over vast regions of the northern and the north-western portions of the continent; that they entered into treaties with the Indian tribes and nations, and carried on a lucrative and extensive fur-trade with the natives. In the prosecution of their trade and other enterprises these adventurers evinced great energy, courage and perseverance. They had, according to subsequent French writers, extended their hunting and trading operations to the Athabasca country. It was alleged that some portions of the Athabasca country had before 1640 been visited and traded in, and to some extent occupied by the French traders in Canada and their Beaver Company. From 1640 to 1670 these discoveries and trading settlements had considerably increased in number and importance.

[4] In 1663 the charter of the Compagnie des Cents AssocÉs, granted by Richelieu in 1627, was ceded to the Crown. In 1665 the new Association "La Compagnie des Indes Occidentals" received its charter.

[5] "Several noblemen and other public-spirited Englishmen, not unmindful of the discovery and right of the Crown of England to those parts in America, designed at their own charge to adventure the establishing of a regular and constant trade in Hudson's Bay, and to settle forts and factories, whereby to invite the Indian nations (who live like savages, many hundred leagues up the country), down to their factories, for a constant and yearly intercourse of trade, which was never attempted by such settlements, and to reside in that inhospitable country, before the aforesaid English adventurers undertook the same."—Company's Memorial, 1699.

[6] Each writer seems to have followed his own fancy in spelling our hero's name, I find Groiseliez, Grozeliers, Groseliers, Groiziliers, Grosillers, Groiseleiz, and Groseillers. Charlevoix spells it Groseilliers. Dr. Dionne, following Radisson's Chouard, writes Chouart. But as Dr. Brymner justly observes "he is as little known by that name as Voltaire by his real name of Arouet, he being always spoken of by the name of des Groseilliers, changed in one affidavit into 'Gooseberry.'" The name literally translated is, of course, Gooseberry-bushes.

[7] For example, the adjoining colony of Connecticut had appealed to them for help in their laudable enterprise of despoiling the Dutch of their possessions. Raids upon the territory and trading-posts controlled by the Dutch were a constantly recurring feature in the history of those times, and nearly the whole of the zeal and substance remaining to the English colonists in Connecticut and Virginia, after their periodical strifes with the Indians, were devoted to forcing the unhappy Hollanders to acknowledge the sovereignty of King Charles of England.

[8] "We have another great officer," records "Pleasant Passages" in another budget of news from Paris, "Prince Ruperte, Master of the Horse."

[9] The proportions of this inland sea are such as to give it a prominent place among the geographical features of the world. One thousand three hundred miles in length, by six hundred miles in breadth, it extends over twelve degrees of latitude, and covers an area not less than half a million square miles. Of the five basins into which Canada is divided, that of Hudson's Bay is immeasurably the largest, the extent of country draining into it being estimated at three million square miles. To swell the mighty volume of its waters there come rivers which take their rise in the Rocky Mountains on the west, and the Labrador wilderness on the east; while southward its river roots stretch far down below the forty-ninth parallel, reaching even to the same lake source whence flows a stream into the Gulf of Mexico. A passing breath of wind may determine whether the ultimate destiny of the rain drop falling into the little lake be the bosom of the Mexican Gulf or the chilly grasp of the Arctic ice-floe.

[10] Known afterwards as Nemiscau by the French.

[11] See Appendix.

[12] The second Duke, Charles' old friend, General George Monk, known to all the leaders of English history as the brave restorer of the King, afterwards created Duke of Albemarle, died in the year the charter was granted.

[13] Lord Ashley, the ancestor of the present Earl of Shaftsbury, and one of the ruling spirits of the reign of Charles II., will also be remembered as the Achitophel of Dryden.

Arlington, another of the Honourable Adventurers, was also a member of the celebrated Cabal.

[14] Kristineaux, Crees.

[15] Jean Bourdon was of the Province of Quebec; he was well known to the Jesuits and trusted by them. He subsequently accompanied Father Jacques on an embassy to Governor Dongan, the Governor of the Province of New York.

In Shea's Charlevoix, Vol. III, pp. 39, 40, it is stated that PÈre Dablon attempted to penetrate to the northern ocean by ascending the Saguenay. Early in June, two months after they set out, they found themselves at the head of the Nekauba river, 300 miles from Lake St. John. Warned of the approach of the Iroquois, they dared not proceed farther. In the New York Historical Documents (p. 97) there is an account of Dablon from the time of his arrival in Canada in 1655. He was immediately sent missionary to Onondaga, where he continued with a brief interval until 1658. In 1661 he set out overland for Hudson's Bay, but succeeded only in reaching the head waters of the Nekauba, 300 miles from Lac St. Jean.

[16] The beaver, amphibious and intelligent, had for centuries a considerable place in commerce: and also a celebrity of its own as the familiar synonym for the common covering of a man's head, and here the animal becomes historic. By royal proclamation in 1638, Charles I., of England, prohibited the use of any material in the manufacture of hats "except beaver stuff or beaver wool." This proclamation was the death-warrant of beavers innumerable, sacrificed to the demands of the trade.

[17] Also known to-day as the Stone Indians.

[18] The material for the two last chapters has been derived chiefly from a pamphlet entitled "French Villainy in Hudson's Bay"; Radisson's own narrative, and the "Journal" of Gillam, the elder, supplied to Dongan. Radisson's narrative, divided into two parts, is written in a clear, legible character, and evinces that its author was a person of some education. The first part is in English, and was long the property of Samuel Pepys. Some years after Pepys' death, the manuscript was purchased for a trifle by Rawlinson, the bibliophile. The second part, recounting the voyages to Hudson's Bay in 1682-84, is half in French and half in English; it is now in the Bodleian library.

[19] As an example of the absurd legends current some years later, and perpetuated, I am sorry to say, to a later day, it would be hard to match this, from La Potherie:

"He (Preston) promised to Godey, one of his domestics, to create him perpetual secretary of the Embassy, providing he engaged Radisson in his party. Godey, the better to succeed, promised Radisson his daughter in marriage, whom he (Radisson) espoused." (La Potherie, Vol. I, p. 145.) Godey was aide-de-camp to Preston; he may have had a daughter, but Radisson certainly did not espouse her, inasmuch as he was already married to Sir John Kirke's daughter, who was still living.

[20] This is M. de la Barre's quaint fashion of spelling Dongan.

[21] Our Frenchmen have seen quite recently from Port Nelson some Indians who were known to have traded several years ago at Montreal. The posts at the head of the Bay Abbitibi and Nemisco can be reached through the woods and seas; our Frenchmen are acquainted with the road. But in regard to the posts occupied by the English in the River Bourbon or Port Nelson it is impossible to hold any posts below them and convey merchandise thither except by sea. Some pretend that it is feasible to go thence overland; but the river to reach that quarter remains yet to be discovered, and when discovered could only admit the conveyance of a few men and not of any merchandise. In regard to Hudson's Bay, should the King not think proper for enforcing the reasons his Majesty has for opposing the usurpation of the English on his lands, by the just titles proving his Majesty's possession long before the English had any knowledge of the country, nothing is to be done but to find means to support the Company of the said Bay, formed in Canada, by the privilege his Majesty has been pleased this year to grant to all his subjects of New France; and to furnish them for some years with a few vessels of 120 tons, well armed and equipped. I hope with this aid our Canadians will support this business, which will otherwise perish of itself; whilst the English merchants, more powerful than our Canadians, will with good ships continue their trade, whereby they will enrich themselves at the expense of the Colony and the King's revenue.—Despatch of Denonville, 12th November, 1685.

[22] Iberville declares that he split his head into fragments.

[23] It has been truly observed that the protracted and bloody contest between the French and English for the possession of the Bay was the result of a desire of the Governor to have access to those waters, and the resolve of the latter to defeat this purpose. "The truth is," says Mr. Lindsay, "the fur trade was only profitable when carried on by water." At Quebec or Three Rivers forty beaver skins made a canoe load. A single canoe load of northern furs was worth six of the southern.

[24] Charlevoix.

[25] Although by this action the French Court directly participated in and lent its support to the hostilities against the English, yet to all intents and purposes the war was between two commercial corporations.

The ruling spirits of the Northern Company were not unaware of the importance and power of the enemy they had to deal with. In a pamphlet published in France in 1692 there is amusing testimony to the consideration in which the London Company was held by the French.

"It is composed," says this authority, "of opulent merchants and noblemen of the first quality; and it is known that the King himself is part proprietor, having succeeded to that emolument with the other belongings to King James II. So great are its profits that each member is worth at least £5,000 English sterling above what he was before he embarked in the fur traffic. There can be no secrecy about its intention, which is to subvert and subjugate the whole northern Country to its sway."

[26] The expedition which thus wrested away from the French all the forts at the bottom of the Bay was in charge of Captain Grimington, an experienced naval officer, who had seen service in the late wars.

I have not been able to ascertain Grimington's fate, but in the Company's minute-book, under date of 19th of May, 1714, I find the following entry:—

"Mrs. Ann Grimington, widow of Captain Michael Grimington, deceased, having delivered in her petition to the Company, the same was read, and considering her poverty and the faithful services her husband performed for the Company, the Committee agreed to allow the said Mrs. Grimington twelve shillings per month for her subsistence, which the secretary is ordered to pay her every first Monday in the month, to commence the first Monday in June next. Interim, the secretary is ordered to pay her twenty shillings as charity, which is afterwards to be taken out of the poor-box." This is sufficiently strong evidence of the state into which the Company had fallen.

[27] To illustrate the divergence of authorities in such matters, I may mention that while JÉrÉmie, who took part in this expedition, calls the two ships the Poli and Charente, in which he is followed by AbbÉ Ferland. Father Marest, the aumonier of the crew, refers to the second ship as the Salamandre. His relation is entitled "Le Voyage du Poli et Salamandre." In the letter of Frontenac to the French minister (November 5, 1694) it is stated that Serigny commanded the Salamandre. La Potherie observes that the ships sent out in 1694 were the Poli and Salamandre. Furthermore, he declares, they sailed the 8th of August; Frontenac states the 9th, and JÉrÉmie the 10th (Jour de St. Laurent). La Potherie and JÉrÉmie agree on the date of their arrival, September 24th, although Ferland says it was the 20th.

[28] JÉrÉmie gives us a detailed description of the fort in his "Relation." He says it was composed of four bastions, which formed a square of thirty feet, with a large stone house above and below. In one of these bastions was the storeroom for furs and merchandise, another served for provisions; a third was used by the garrison. All were built of wood. In a line with the first palisade there were two other bastions, in one of which lodged the officers, the other serving as a kitchen and forge. Between these two bastions was a crescent-shaped earthworks sheltering eight cannon, firing eight-pound balls, and defending the side of the fort towards the river. At the foot of this earthworks was a platform, fortified by six pieces of large cannon. There was no butt-range looking out upon the wood, which was a weak point; all the cannon and swivel-guns were on the bastions. In all, the armament consisted of thirty-two cannon and fourteen swivel-guns outside the fort and fifty-three inside; on the whole, calculated to make a stalwart defence.

[29] Kelsey was the earliest English explorer in the North-West. Mention of his achievements will be found in the course of Chapter XV.

[30] Allen sent home to his superiors a copy of the capitulation proposals of the French Commandant. This document is not without interest. It is headed:—

CAPITULATION OF FORT YORK, 1696.

Articles of capitulation between William Allen, Commandant-in-Chief at Hays, or St. Therese River, and Sieur G. de la Forest, Commandant at Fort York or Bourbon, August 31, 1696.

I consent to give up to you my fort on the following conditions:—

1. That I and all my men, French as well as Indians, and my English servant, shall have our lives and liberty granted to us, and that no wrong or violence shall be exercised upon us or whatever belongs to us.

2. We shall march out of the fort without arms, to the beat of the drum, match lighted, ball in mouth, flags unfurled, and carry with us the two cannon which we brought from France.

3. We shall be transported altogether, in our own vessel, to Plaisance, a French Port in New Newfoundland. We do not wish to give up the fort till we have embarked, and we shall keep the French flag over the fort till we march out.

4. If we meet with our vessels there shall be a truce between us, and it shall be permitted to transport us with whatever belongs to us.

5. We shall take with us all the beaver skins and other merchandise obtained in trade this year, which shall be embarked with us upon our vessels.

6. All my men shall embark their clothes and whatever belongs to them without being subject to visitation, or robbed of anything.

7. In case of sickness during the voyage, you shall furnish us with all the remedies and medicines which we may require.

8. The two Frenchmen, who ought to return with the Indians, shall be received in the fort on their return, where they shall be treated the same as the English, and sent to Europe during the same year, or they shall be furnished with everything necessary to take them to Rochelle.

We shall have the full exercise of our religion, and the Jesuit priest, our missionary, shall publicly perform the functions of his ministry.

[31] A young Irishman, Edmund Fitz-Maurice, of Kerry, who had embraced the Church, and had served with James's army at the Battle of the Boyne, accompanied the expedition in the character of chaplain. He is alluded to by the French chronicler of the affair as "Fiche-Maurice de Kieri de la Maison du Milord Kieri en Irlande."

[32] The fourth, the fire-ship Owner's Love, was never more heard of. It is supposed that, separated from the others, she ran into the ice and was sunk, with all on board.

[33] Thus was concluded what was, in the opinion of the best authorities, French and English, one of the fiercest and bloodiest battles of the war.

"Toute la Marine de Rochefort croient que ce combat a ete un des plus rudes de cette Guerre," says La Potherie.

[34] "Ils avoient de tres habile cannoniers," JÉrÉmie, an eye-witness, was forced to confess.

[35] "Ainsi le dernier poste," Garneau exclaims, "que les English avaient dans le baie d'Hudson tombÉ en notre pouvoir, et la France resta seule maitresse de cette region." (Tome II., p. 137.)

But Garneau overlooked the three forts in James' Bay retaken by the English in 1693; one of which, Fort Anne or Chechouan, he mistook for Fort Nelson. At any rate Fort Albany or Chechouan remained in possession of the Company from 1693; and they never lost it.

It was unsuccessfully attacked by Menthel in 1709.

[36] So strongly has the Treaty of Ryswick been interpreted in favour of France, that some historians merely state the fact that by it she retained all Hudson's Bay, and the places of which she was in possession at the beginning of the war. The commissioners having never met to try the question of right, things remained in statu quo. Now, whatever the commissioners might have done, had they ever passed judgment on the cause the Treaty provided they should try, they could not have given Fort Albany to the British, for it was one of the places taken by the French during the preceding peace, and retaken by the British during the war, and, therefore, adjudged in direct terms of the Treaty itself to belong to France. Thus, then, it will be seen, declared the opponents of the Company, that the only possession held by the Hudson's Bay Company during the sixteen years that intervened between the Treaty of Ryswick and the Treaty of Utrecht was one to which they had no right, and which the obligations of the Treaty required should be given up to France.—Report of Ontario Boundary Commission.

[37] "Six or seven times over," the Company say in their reply.

[38] After the battle of Port Nelson, Iberville had returned to France leaving Martigny in command of the Fort. His subsequent career may be read elsewhere; the Bay was no longer to be the theatre of his exploits. He perished in 1707 at Havana.

[39] At Albany they were surrounded by the French on every side, a circumstance which greatly sapped their commerce. Yet, even at this period, the importation of beaver and other peltries from the single fort remaining to them was above thirty thousand annually.

[40] By the Treaty of Ryswick, Great Britain and France were respectively to deliver up to each other generally whatever possessions either held before the outbreak of the war, and it was specially provided that this should be applicable to the places in Hudson's Bay taken by the French during the peace which preceded the war, which, though retaken by the British during the war, were to be given up to the French. Commissioners were to be appointed in pursuance of the Treaty to determine the rights and pretensions which either nation had to the places in Hudson's Bay. But these commissioners never met. The commissioners must, however, have been bound by the text of the Treaty wherever it was explicit. They might, said the Company's opponents, have decided that France had a right to the whole, but they could not have decided that Great Britain had a right to the whole. They would have been compelled to make over to France all the places she took during the peace which preceded the war, for in that the Treaty left them no discretion. The following are the words of the Treaty:—"But the possession of those places which were taken by the French, during the peace that preceded this present war, and were retaken by the English during the war, shall be left to the French by virtue of the foregoing article." Thus the Treaty of Ryswick recognized and confirmed the right of France to certain places in Hudson's Bay distinctly and definitely, but it recognized no right at all on the part of Great Britain; it merely provided a tribunal to try whether she had any or not.

[41] "Therefore, we shall proceed to inform your Lordships of the present melancholy prospects of our trade and settlement in Hudson's Bay, and that none of his Majesty's plantations are left in such a deplorable state as those of this Company, for by their great losses by the French, both in times of peace as well as during the late war, together with the hardships they lie under by the late Treaty of Ryswick, they may be said to be the only mourners by the peace. They cannot but inform your Lordships that the only settlement that the Company now have left in Hudson's Bay (of seven they formerly possessed) is Albany Fort, vulgarly called Checheawan, in the bottom of the said Bay, where they are surrounded by the French on every side, viz., by their settlements on the lakes and rivers from Canada to the northwards, towards Hudson's Bay, as also from Port Nelson (Old York Fort) to the southward; but beside this, the Company have, by the return of their ship this year, received certain intelligence that the French have made another settlement at a place called New Severn, 'twixt Port Nelson and Albany Fort, whereby they have hindered the Indians from coming to trade at the Company's factory, at the bottom of the Bay, so that the Company this year have not received above one-fifth part of the returns they usually had from thence, insomuch that the same doth not answer the expense of their expedition."

[42] The Company being by these and other misfortunes reduced to such a low and miserable condition, that, without his Majesty's favour and assistance, they are in no ways able to keep that little remainder they are yet possessed of in Hudson's Bay, but may justly fear in a short time to be deprived of all their trade in those parts which is solely negotiated by the manufacturers of this kingdom. Upon the whole matter, the Company humbly conceive, they can be no ways safe from the insults and encroachments of the French, so long as they are suffered to remain possessed of any place in Hudson's Bay, and that in order to dislodge them from thence (which the Company are no ways able to do) a force of three men-of-war, one bomb-vessel, and two hundred and fifty soldiers besides the ships' company will be necessary, whereby that vast tract of land which is of so great concern, not only to this Company in particular, but likewise to the whole nation in general, may not be utterly lost to this kingdom.

[43] The Duke of York's (James II.) share, however, was retained by his heirs up to 1746.

[44] Captain John Merry is desired to speak with Captain Moody, who has a nephew in the Orkneys, to write to him to provide fifteen or sixteen young men, about twenty years old, to be entertained by the Company, to serve them for four years in Hudson's Bay, at the rate of £6 per annum, the wages formerly given by the Company.—From the Company's Order Book, 29th February, 1710.

[45] "This country," it was remarked in 1710, "is composed of persons of various character and different inclinations. One and the other ought to be managed, and can contribute to render it flourishing."

[46] I find the following in the minute books, under date of 24th March, 1714. "It was resolved that the Committee when they meet Friday come Senuit, do agree to wait on the Lord Bishop of London, in order to return him the thanks of this Company for the care that has been taken of them by the Treaty of Ryswick."

[47]

The Lords of Trade to the Earl of Dartmouth.

To the Right Honourable the Earl of Dartmouth.

My Lord,—In obedience to Her Majesty's commands, signified to us, we have considered the enclosed petition from the Hudson's Bay Company to Her Majesty, and are humbly of opinion that the said Company have a good right and just title to the whole Bay and Streights of Hudson.

Since the receipt of which petition, the said Company have delivered us a memorial, relating to the settlement of boundaries between them and the French of Canada, a copy whereof is enclosed, and upon which we take leave to offer, that as it will be for the advantage of the said Company that their boundaries be settled, it will also be necessary that the boundaries between Her Majesty's colonies on the continent of America and the said French of Canada be likewise agreed and settled; wherefore we humbly offer these matters may be recommended to Her Majesty's Plenipotentiaries at Utrecht.

We are,
My Lord,
Your Lordship's most obedient, and most humble servants,

Winchelsea,
Ph. Meadows,
Chas. Turner,
Geo. Baillie,
Arth. Moore,
Fra. Gwyn.

Whitehall, February 19th, 1711-12.

[48]

The Company's Petition to Queen Anne for Act of Cession.

To the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty:—

The humble petition of the Governor and Company of Adventurers of England trading into Hudson's Bay, sheweth:

That your petitioners, being informed that the Act of Cession is come over, whereby (among other matters thereby concerted) the French King obliges himself to restore to your Majesty (or to whom your Majesty shall appoint to take possession thereof) the Bay and Streights of Hudson, as also all forts and edifices whatsoever, entire and demolished, together with guns, shot, powder and other warlike provisions (as mentioned in the 10th article of the present treaty of peace), within six months after the ratification thereof, or sooner, if possible it may be done.

Your petitioners do most humbly pray your Majesty will be graciously pleased to direct the said Act of Cession may be transmitted to your petitioners, as also your Majesty's commission to Captain James Knight and Mr. Henry Kelsey, gentleman, to authorize them, or either of them, to take possession of the premises above mentioned, and to constitute Captain James Knight to be Governor of the fortress called Fort Nelson, and all other forts and edifices, lands, seas, rivers and places aforesaid; and the better to enable your petitioners to recover the same, they humbly pray your Majesty to give orders that they may have a small man-of-war to depart with their ships, by the 12th of June next ensuing, which ship may in all probability return in the month of October.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray.

By order of the Company.

per Wm. Potter, Secretary.

[49] "My Lords and Gentlemen,—The Queen has commanded me to transmit to you the enclosed petition of the Hudson's Bay Company, that you may consider of it and report your opinion what orders may properly be given upon the several particulars mentioned. In the meantime I am to acquaint you that the places and countries therein named, belonging of right to British subjects, Her Majesty did not think fit to receive any Act of Cession from the French King, and has therefore insisted only upon an order from that Court for delivering possession to such persons as should be authorized by Her Majesty to take it; by this means the title of the Company is acknowledged, and they will come into the immediate enjoyment of their property without further trouble."

[50] In 1714 the Hudson's Bay Company sent a memorandum to the Lords Commissioners of Trade and Plantations, accompanied by a map in which they claimed that the eastern boundary should be a line running from Grimington's Island through Lake Miscosinke or Mistassinnie, and from the said lake by a line run south-westward into 49 degrees north latitude, as by the red line may more particularly appear, and that that latitude be the limit; that the French do not come to the north of it, nor the English to the south of it.

[51]

Mr. Bladen to Mr. Delefaye.

Paris, November 11th, 1719, N.S.

On Wednesday last, my Lord Stair and I delivered to the Marechal d'Estrees the demand of the Hudson's Bay Company, with respect to their limits, and by comparing the enclosed, which is a copy of that demand, with the instruction upon his head, you will perceive the same has been fully complied with.

So soon as I shall have the French Commissary's answer to our demand, I shall likewise take care to transmit you a copy of it, to be laid before their Excellencys the Lord Justices.

[52]

Paris, May the 4th, N.S., 1720.

Mr. Pulteney to Mr. Secretary Craggs.

My Lord Stair has spoke to the Regent, who said immediately that the conferences shall be renewed whenever we please; His Excellency then desired His Royal Highness would appoint a day, which he promised to do. This is what the Regent has promised my Lord Stair once every week, for four or five months past, without any effect, and his Excellency does not expect any more from the promise now, though possibly a conference may be appointed for form sake. I have been here near six months, and have seen only one conference, which was appointed by my Lord Stanhope's desire. I think there had been two conferences before I came; at the first of them the commissions were read, and at the second my Lord Stair and Mr. Bladen gave in a memorial about the limits of the Hudson's Bay Company, to which no answer has been made. I must own that I never could expect much success from this commission, since the French interests and ours are so directly opposite, and our respective pretensions interfere so much with each on the several points we were to treat about; but that the French have not been willing to entertain us now and then with a conference, and try how far we might be disposed to comply with a conference, and try how far we might be disposed with any of the views they had in desiring the commission, cannot, I should think be accounted for, but by supposing they knew we came prepared to reject all their demands, and to make very considerable ones for ourselves.... I shall expect your further direction as to my stay or return; I cannot help owning I heartily wish for the latter, but I shall always submit to what His Majesty likes best, and shall only desire in this case that I may have a supply from the treasury, since I have not had the good fortune to be concerned in either of the Misiseppis.

[53] "Matonabbee," says Hearne, "had eight wives, and they were all called Martens."

[54] All this ceremony has a significance of its own. Interpreted, it said: "Whilst the sun shall visit the different parts of the world and make day and night; peace, firm friendship and brotherly love shall be established between the English and the Indians, and the same on the latter's part. By twirling the pipe over the head, it was further intended to imply that all persons of the two nations, whosoever they were, shall be included in the friendship and brotherhood, then concluded or renewed."

[55] This fort has been thought to have been in the neighbourhood of Selkirk, Manitoba. But Verandrye would not have abandoned such an advantageous position as that which the meeting of the two rivers afforded at the modern Winnipeg.

[56] On the site of Fort Jonquiere, a century later, Captain Brisebois, of the Mounted Police, founded a post bearing his name. This post has given way to-day to the well-built and thriving town of Calgary.

[57] In one of his letters, dated 21st of January, 1737, Middleton held that the Company thought it their interest rather to prevent than forward new discoveries in that part of the world. "For that reason they won't suffer any of our journals to be made public," he adds. Than which certainly no observation could be truer.

[58]

A List of Vessels Fitted Out by the Hudson's Bay Company
on Discovery of a North-West Passage.

1719—Albany Frigate, Capt. George Barlow, sailed from England on or about 5th June. Never returned. Discovery, Capt. David Vaughan, sailed from England on or about 5th June. Never returned.

1719—Prosperous, Capt Henry Kelsey, sailed from York Fort, June 19th. Returned 10th August following. Success, John Hancock, master, sailed from Prince of Wales' Fort, July 2nd. Returned 10th August.

1721—Prosperous, Capt. Henry Kelsey, sailed from York Fort, June 26th. Returned 2nd Sept. Success, James Napper, master, sailed from York Fort, June 26th. Lost 30th of same month.

1721—Whalebone, John Scroggs, master, sailed from Gravesend, 31st May; wintered at Prince of Wales' Fort.

1722—Sailed from thence 21st June. Returned July 25th following.

1737—The Churchill, James Napper, master, sailed from Prince of Wales' Fort, July 7th. Died 8th August; and the vessel returned the 18th. The Musquash, Robert Crow, master, sailed from Prince of Wales' Fort, July 7th. Returned 22nd August.

[59] "On looking through the correspondence at the Admiralty, it is impossible not to be struck with the straightforward manliness, candour and honesty of purpose exemplified by Captain Middleton throughout this trying business. It was a cruel attack."—Sir John Barrow.

[60] The name of John Stanion certainly appears in the list of proprietors of Hudson's Bay stock, published in 1749, but it is followed by the significant term deceased.

[61] Henry Ellis.

[62] The number of the Adventurers was, before the enquiry of 1749, a mystery. By many it was charged that they were not above a dozen or fifteen.

[63] Dobbs's "Hudson's Bay," a hysterical work, which was throughout an attack on Captain Christopher Middleton.

[64] 1720

[65] On June 28th, 1749, at a Company's meeting, an account was made of the cost of defending the Company's charter, upon the motion made in the House of Commons. It amounted in the whole to only £755 5s. 10d., exclusive of Sharpe, the Company solicitor's services.

[66] In refusing to advise the granting of a charter to the Company's enemies, the Attorney-General, Sir Dudley Ryder, and the Solicitor-General, Sir William Murray—afterwards Lord Mansfield—drew up a lengthy and important paper, reviewing the charges against the Company. Their conclusion was that either the charges were "not sufficiently supported in point of fact, or were in great measure accounted for from the nature and circumstances of the case." They deemed the charter valid for all practical purposes.

[67] "The Company being apprehensive that Mr. Secretary Pitts' indisposition should deprive them of an opportunity of conferring with him in due time, with respect to the Company's claim on the French nation for depredations in times of peace before the Treaty of Utrecht, resolved that a petition should be drawn up to his Majesty, humbly representing such losses and damages, reciting the tenth and eleventh article of the said treaty, and praying that his Majesty will give his plenipotentiaries at the approaching congress for a treaty of peace, such directions as will suffice for justice being done to the Company by compensation for such losses. Also that the boundaries of Hudson's Bay may be settled."—Minute Book, May 20th, 1761.

[68] France ceded to England "Canada with all its dependencies," reserving only such part of what had been known as Canada as lay west of the Mississippi. The watershed between the Missouri and the Mississippi rivers had been the boundary between Canada and Louisiana when both were owned by France, and by the treaty of 1763 the River Mississippi was agreed to as the future boundary between the English and French possessions in that quarter; the language of the treaty being, "that the confines between [France and England] in that part of the world shall be fixed irrevocably by a line drawn along the middle of the River Mississippi from its source [etc.], to the sea." Very soon after this treaty, viz., on 7th October, 1763, the Province of Quebec was erected by Royal Proclamation, but the Province as then constituted took in very little of what was afterwards Upper Canada and what is now Ontario; the most north-westerly point was Lake Nipissing; the whole of the territory adjacent to the great lakes was excluded. In 1774 the boundaries of Quebec were enlarged by the Quebec Act. That Act recited that "by the arrangements made by the said Royal Proclamation a very large extent of territory, within which were several colonies and settlements of subjects of France, who claimed to remain therein under the faith of the said treaty, was left without any provision being made for the administration of civil government therein." The Act, therefore, provided that "all the territories, islands and countries in North America belonging to the Crown of Great Britain, bounded on the south by a line" therein described, "from the Bay of Chaleurs to the River Ohio, and along the bank of the said river, westward, to the banks of the Mississippi, and northward to the southern boundary of the territory granted to the Merchants-Adventurers of England trading into Hudson's Bay," etc., "be, and they are hereby, during His Majesty's pleasure, annexed to and made part and parcel of the Province of Quebec as created and established by the said Royal Proclamation of the 7th October, 1763."

[69] It is not a little singular that neither Middleton, Ellis, Christopher, Johnston nor Garbet, all of which explorers had visited Marble Island prior to 1767, and some of them often, ever discovered this harbour. The actual discoverer was Joseph Stephens, commanding the Success, a small vessel employed in the whale fishery. Two years later Stephens was given the command of the Charlotte, a fine brig of 100 tons, his mate then being Samuel Hearne, the explorer.

[70] "I have seen," wrote Governor Hearne, "the remains of those houses several times; they are on the west side of the harbour, and in all probability will be discernible for many years to come."

[71] From the good opinion we entertain of you, and Mr. Norton's recommendation, we have agreed to raise your wages to £130 per annum for two years, and have placed you in our council at Prince of Wales' Fort; and we should have been ready to advance you to the command of the Charlotte, according to your request, if a matter of more immediate consequence had not intervened.

Mr. Norton has proposed an inland journey, far to the north of Churchill, to promote an extension of our trade, as well as for the discovery of a north-west passage, copper mines, etc.; and as an undertaking of this nature requires the attention of a person capable of taking an observation for determining the longitude and latitude and also distances, and the course of rivers and their depths, we have fixed upon you (especially as it is represented to us to be your own inclination) to conduct this journey with proper assistants.

We therefore hope you will second our expectations in readily performing this service, and upon your return we shall willingly make you any acknowledgment suitable to your trouble therein.

We highly approve of your going in the Speedwell to assist in the whale-fishery last year, and heartily wish you health and success in the present expedition.

We remain your loving friends,

Bibye Lake, Deputy Governor.
John Anthony Merle.
Robert Merry.
Samuel Wegg.
James Winter Lake.
Herman Berens.
Joseph Sparrel.
James FitzGerald.

[72] "No man," says Hearne, "either English or Indian, ever found a bit of copper in that country to the south of the seventy-first degree of latitude, unless it had been accidentally dropped by some of the far northern Indians on their way to the Company's factory."

[73] "This leader," says Hearne, "when a youth, resided several years at the above Fort and was not only a perfect master of the Southern Indian language, but by being frequently with the Company's servants had acquired several words of English and was one of the men who brought the latest accounts of the Coppermine River. It was on his information, added to that of one I-dot-le-ezry (who is since dead), that this expedition was set on foot."

[74] "I cannot sufficiently regret," wrote Hearne in 1796, "the loss of a considerable vocabulary of the northern Indian language, containing sixteen folio pages, which was lent to the late Mr. Hutchins, then corresponding secretary to the Company, to copy for Captain Duncan, when he went on discoveries to Hudson's Bay in the year 1790. But Mr. Hutchins dying soon after, the vocabulary was taken away with the rest of his effects and cannot now be recovered, and memory, at this time, will by no means serve to replace it."

[75] The Company had previously written thus to its servant, Mr. Samuel Hearne:—

Sir,—Your letter of the 28th August last, gave us the agreeable pleasure to hear of your safe return to our factory. Your journal and the two charts you sent sufficiently convinces us of your very judicious remarks.

We have, naturally, considered your great assiduity in the various accidents which occurred in your several journeys. We hereby return you our grateful thanks, and to manifest our obligation we have consented to allow you a gratuity of £200 for those services.

[76] "Mr. Dalrymple, in one of his pamphlets relating to Hudson's Bay, has been so very particular in his observations on my journey, as to remark that I have not explained the construction of the quadrant which I had the misfortune to break in my second journey to the North. It was a Hadley quadrant, with a bubble attached to it for a horizon, and made by Daniel Scatlif, of Wapping."—Hearne.

[77] The Eastern traders were always known by this title, as though hailing from Boston, in contradistinction to the "King George men."

[78] Upon the new post was bestowed the name of Cumberland House.

[79] The following were the prices paid by the Company about 1780, at its inland posts:—

The principal profits accrued from the sale of knives, beads, flint, steels, awls and other small articles. Tobacco fetched one beaver skin per foot of "Spencer's Twist," and rum "not very strong," two beaver skins per bottle.

[80] "What folly," asks one of the Company's servants, "could be more egregious than to erect a fort of such extent, strength and expense and only allow thirty-nine men to defend it?"

[81] An account of Hearne's journey was found in MS. among the papers of the Governor, and La PÉrouse declares in his memoirs that Hearne was very pressing that it should be returned to him as his private property. "The goodness of La PÉrouse's heart induced him to yield to this urgent solicitation, and he returned the MS. to him on the express condition, however, that he should print and publish it immediately on his arrival in England." "Notwithstanding this," observes Mr. Fitzgerald, "Hearne's travels did not appear until 1795, i.e., twenty-three years after they were performed." This gentleman, so distinguished in his zeal to prove a case against the Company, evidently overlooks the circumstance of the gist of travels having been issued in pamphlet form in 1773 and again in 1778-80. The volume of 1795 was merely an application—the product of Hearne's leisure upon retirement.

[82] White Man's Lake.

[83] Of David Thompson we get a portrait from Mr. H.H. Bancroft. He was, he says, "of an entirely different order of man from the orthodox fur-trader. Tall and fine looking, with sandy complexion, with large features, deep-set studious eyes, high forehead and broad shoulders, the intellectual was set upon the physical. His deeds have never been trumpeted as have those of some of the others; but in the westward explorations of the North-West Company, no man performed more valuable service or estimated his achievements more modestly. Unhappily his last days were not as pleasant as fell to the lot of some of the worn out members of the Company. He retired, almost blind, to Lachine House, once the headquarters of the Company, where he was met with in 1831 in a very decrepit condition."

[84] See map, page 246.

[85] To exhibit anew the exaggeration common to the acquisition of new possessions, I may observe that Shelekoff reported that he had subjected to the crown of Russia, "fifty thousand men in the Island of Kodiak alone." But Lisiansky, who took a prominent part in the Russian Company, remarks, in 1805, that "the population of the island, when compared with its size, is very small." After the "minutest research" at that time he found it amounted to only four thousand souls.

[86] Canadian archives.

[87] The tables enclosed in the dispatch show, first, the names and numbers of the posts occupied in the Indian country (exclusive of the King's posts), the number of partners, clerks and men employed, the latitude and longitude of each post being also given. The grand total shows that there were 117 posts, 20 partners, 161 clerks and interpreters, 877 common men, in all of a permanent staff 1,058 men, thus divided: Ninety-five in the territory of the United States from the south side of Lake Superior to the division of the waters falling into the Mississippi on the one side and Hudson's Bay on the other; seventy-six on the waters falling into the St. Lawrence from the Kaministiquia, and also from the St. Maurice; six hundred and thirty on the waters falling into Hudson's Bay, and two hundred and fifty-seven on the waters falling into the North Sea by the Mackenzie River. Besides these there were eighty or one hundred Canadians and Iroquois hunters, not servants, ranging free over the country and about five hundred and forty men employed in canoes on the Ottawa River. The average duties paid annually on landing in Britain amounted to upwards of £22,000 sterling and the price paid for the furs exported from Quebec in 1801, at the London sales, was £371,139 11s. 4d.

[88] Canadian Archives.

[89] It has been noted that several partners of the North-West concern were upon the grand jury which found the bill of indictment, and out of four judges who sat upon the bench, two were nearly related to individuals of that association.

[90] Already, in April, 1802, Lord Selkirk had addressed a letter and memorial to Lord Pelham, the Home Secretary, detailing the practicability of promoting emigration to Rupert's Land. "To a colony in these territories," he concluded, "the channel of trade must be the river of Port Nelson."

[91] In the course of a letter reporting on the disputes between the Hudson's Bay Company and the North-Westers, Commissioner Coltman attributed the disasters in the territories to the Company having held in abeyance its right to jurisdiction and that this neglect was the reason for passing the act of 1803. This letter is in the Canadian Archives, v. Report 1892.

[92] "I have," writes Sir Alexander Mackenzie from London, 13th April, 1812, "finally settled with that Lord (Selkirk). After having prepared a bill to carry him before the Lord Chancellor, it was proposed to my solicitor by the solicitor of his Lordship that one-third of the stock that was purchased on joint account before I went to America, amounting to £47,000, and the balance of cash in his Lordship's hands, belonging to me, should be given up to me; of this I accepted, though I might have obliged his Lordship to make over to me one-third of the whole purchase made by him in this stock, which at one time I was determined to do, having been encouraged thereto by the house of Suffolk Lane and countenanced by that of Mark Lane. But these houses thought it prudent to desist from any further purchases."

Mackenzie says that by a verbal understanding with Mr. McGillivray, his purchase of the Hudson's Bay stock belonged to the North-West Company, and that, if Mr. McGillivray himself had been there, a sum of £30,000 might have been invested in that stock, "all of which Lord Selkirk purchased, and if he persists in his present scheme, it will be the dearest he yet made.

"He will put the North-West Company to a greater expense than you seem to apprehend, and had the Company sacrificed £20,000 which might have secured a preponderance in the stock of Hudson's Bay Co., it would have been money well spent."

[93] The district thus granted was called Assiniboia, a name undoubtedly derived from the Assiniboine tribe and river, yet alleged by some at the time to be taken from two Gaelic words "osni" and "boia"—the house of Ossian.

[94] "None of the young men," says McDonnell, "made any progress in learning the Gaelic or Irish language on the voyage. I had some drills of the people with arms, but the weather was generally boisterous, and there were few days when a person could stand steady on deck. There never was a more awkward squad—not a man, or even officer, of the party knew how to put a gun to his eye or had ever fired a shot."

[95] Governor McDonnell's observations are not always to be relied upon. For instance, he says in one report, "I am surprised the Company never directed a survey to be made of the coast on each side of Hudson's Straits. From the appearance of the country there must be many harbours and inlets for vessels to go in case of an accident from ice, want of water, etc. We were often, ourselves, much in doubt for the accomplishment of our voyage, and had we been under the necessity of putting back, must have suffered for want of water. Two of the ships, without any additional expense, might execute this survey on the voyage out, with only the detention of a few days, one taking the north and the other the south shore." Such a survey had been made as early as 1728. Mention has already been made of Captain Coats, who, in 1739, prepared a chart of the Straits and Bay. To some of the older captains in the service, the Straits were as well-known as the harbour of Stromness.

[96] The precise spot was well chosen by Selkirk, had his object been only the confusion and discomfiture of the North-Westers. It was the great depot of the latter for the preparation of pemmican. Were the region to become colonized it would slowly but surely cut off the buffalo, from which pemmican was made, and eventually force the North-Westers to import from Canada, at ruinous expense, the chief part of the provisions requisite for their trading expeditions.

[97] In honour of William McGillivray, principal partner of the concern.

[98] "It will never do," wrote Governor McDonnell to his chief, "to take the colonists from among the Company's servants. The Orkneymen are so averse to labour that they prefer the Company's service to agriculture, and all being engaged in the name of the Company they object to serve in the colony, thinking it a separate concern."

[99] There is preserved a letter from the leader of the Bois-BrulÉs, written to one of the partners. It bears date of 13th of March, 1816, and runs as follows:—

My Dear Sir: I received your generous and kind letter of last fall by the last canoe. I should certainly be an ungrateful being should I not return you my sincerest thanks. Although a very bad hand at writing letters I trust to your generosity. I am yet safe and sound, thank God! For I believe it is more than Colin Robertson, or any of his suit dare to offer the least insult to any of the Bois-BrulÉs, although Robertson made use of some expressions which I hope he shall swallow in the spring; he shall see that it is neither fifteen, thirty nor fifty of your best horsemen can make the Bois-BrulÉs bow to him. Our people of Fort des Prairies and English River are all to be here in the spring. It is hoped we shall come off with flying colours, and never to see any of them again in the colonizing way in Red River; in fact the traders shall pack off with themselves, also, for having disobeyed our orders last spring, according to our arrangements. We are all to remain at the Forks to pass the summer, for fear they should play us the same trick as last summer, of coming back; but they shall receive a warm reception. I am loath to enter into any particulars, as I am well assured that you will receive more satisfactory information (than I have had) from your other correspondents; therefore I shall not pretend to give you any, at the same time begging you will excuse my short letter, I shall conclude, wishing you health and happiness.

I shall ever remain,
Your most obedient humble servant,
Cuthbert Grant.

J.D. Cameron, Esq.

[100] This messenger, Lagimoniere by name, was waylaid and robbed by the North-Westers. He had previously made a hazardous winter journey of upwards of 2,000 miles for the purpose of bringing to Montreal intelligence of the re-establishment of the Red River Colony. He was now attacked near Fond du Lac by some native hunters employed by the North-West Company, who beat him in a shocking manner, besides plundering him of his despatches, his canoe and all his effects. The order to intercept him was issued on the 2nd of June by Norman McLeod from Fort William; and the Indians who performed the service were credited in the books of the partnership with the sum of $100. Several of Lord Selkirk's letters were afterwards discovered at Fort William.

[101] Semple is said, on the authority of an eye-witness, Donald Murray, yet living in 1891 (when a monument was erected to commemorate the Red River tragedy), to have disapproved of Robertson's management during his absence. This veteran was fond of relating that when Robertson started for York Factory in a boat, taking Duncan Cameron a prisoner, he insultingly hoisted a pemmican sack instead of the British flag.

[102] The route taken by the Bois-BrulÉs was along the edge of the swamps, about two miles out on the prairie from Fort Douglas, and from that point gradually drawing nearer to the main highway, which is now the northern continuation of Winnipeg's Main street, until it effected a junction at a spot known as Seven Oaks. The name was derived from the circumstance of seven good sized oak trees growing there, about one hundred yards south of a small rivulet, now known as Inkster's Creek.

[103] Their being painted and disguised, forms a very material fact, because it shows a premeditation to commit hostilities. It was not the custom of the Indians or Bois-BrulÉs to paint themselves, except on warlike occasions. Seeing this party of horsemen were proceeding towards the settlement, Semple directed about twenty men to follow him in the direction they had taken to ascertain what was their object. These took arms with them, but no ammunition. That Semple and his party went out with no hostile intention is evident from there being but twenty who went, whereas a much greater number who could have gone and were desirous of going, were left behind.

[104] After the tragedy many of the settlers are said to have been of the opinion that the first shot was fired by Lieut. Holt, whose gun went off by accident, thus precipitating the conflict.

[105] While the affair was sufficiently horrible, there was yet room for exaggeration in the tales of the survivors. "On my arrival at the fort," declared Pritchard, "what a scene of distress presented itself! The widows, children and relations of the slain, in the horrors of despair, were lamenting the dead and trembling for the safety of the survivors." It is to be noted that only one actual settler was killed, and I cannot discover that the others had any white women-folk amongst them.

[106] Benjamin Frobisher was a native of York, England.

[107] At the trials at York in October, 1818, Sherwood, the North-West Company's counsel, continually demanded to know why Semple was called governor. "Why," he exclaimed, with ludicrous energy, "why should this gentleman be continually dignified by the appellation of governor? The indictment charged that Robert Semple was killed and murdered; it said nothing about his being a governor. If he was a governor, then he was also an emperor. Yes, gentlemen," shrieked the counsel, working himself up to fever heat, "I repeat, an emperor—a bashaw in that land of milk and honey, where nothing, not even a blade of corn, will ripen. Who made him governor? Did the King? Did the Prince Regent? No; this pretended authority was an illegal assumption of power, arrogating to itself prerogatives such as are not exercised even by the King of England. I demand that Robert Semple be called Robert Semple—but as he was not a governor let us not be ——"

"Come, come," cried Chief Justice Powell, "do let this trial go on! It is no matter whether he was or was not a governor, or what he was called, or called himself, he is not to be murdered, though he was not a governor."

[108] "Ses postes," says Senator Masson, "avient ÉtÉ pillÉs et devastÉs; ses exportatiors considerablement sÉdintes." On the other hand, he adds, these losses were partly compensated for by the high prices secured in England for their furs.

[109] Wentzel.

[110] In March, 1821, Wentzel, one of the North-West partners, wrote: "The Hudson's Bay Company have apparently relaxed in the extravagance of their measures; last autumn they came in the [Athabasca] Department with fifteen canoes only, containing each about fifteen pieces. Mr. Simpson, a gentleman from England last spring, superintends their business. His being a strange, and reputedly gentlemanly, man, will not create much alarm, nor do I presume him formidable as an Indian trader."

[111] May 30th, 1838.

[112] "Such is the spirit and avidity exhibited by the Council," wrote one of the Company's factors, in 1823, "that it is believed these discoveries will be extended as far as the Russian settlements on the Pacific Ocean."

[113] On motion of Mr. Congressman Floyd, a committee was appointed in December, 1820, "to enquire into the situation of the settlements upon the Pacific Ocean, and the expediency of occupying the Columbia River."

[114] See Appendix for copy of this Treaty.

[115] The Russian Company was incorporated under the patronage of the Crown with a capital of two hundred and sixty thousand pounds sterling. It had a large commerce with Northern China which did not deal with Canton; and it was in the northern part of the empire that the consumption of furs was greatest. Canton was merely the entrepÔt where furs were received for distribution throughout China.

[116] From Joseph Berens, Esq., the Governor of the Hudson's Bay Company and the gentlemen of the Committee, I received all kinds of assistance and information, communicated in the most friendly manner previous to my leaving England; and I had the gratification of perusing the orders to their agents and servants in North America, containing the fullest directions to promote by every means the progress of the expedition.—Sir John Franklin.

[117] "The extraordinary expedition with which this despatch was transmitted by the Hudson's Bay Company," says Back, "is worthy of being recorded."

[118] Indeed it cannot be doubted that Great Britain was wholly influenced by the position of the Company. It has been said that she did not anticipate any permanent possession of the country. "The British have certainly no other immediate object," wrote Mr. Gallatin, the American commissioner, to Henry Clay, "than that of protecting the Company in its fur-trade."

[119] Sir Edward Walkin tells how, when he was for a short time, in 1865 and 1866, shareholders' auditor of the Company, he cancelled many of these notes which had become defaced, mainly owing to the fingering of Indians and others, who had left behind on the thick yellow paper, coatings of pemmican.

[120] Lord Elgin went on to say: "At the same time I think it is to be regretted that a jurisdiction so extensive and peculiar, exercised by British subjects at such a distance and so far beyond the control of public opinion, should be so entirely removed from the surveillance of Her Majesty's Government. The evil arising from this state of things is forcibly illustrated in the present instance by the difficulty which I experience in obtaining materials for a full and satisfactory report on the charges which your Lordship referred to me. It were very desirable, if abuses do exist, that Government possessed the means of probing them to the bottom; and on the other hand it seems to be hard on the Company, if the imputations cast upon it be unfounded, that Government, which undertakes the investigation, should not have the power of acquitting it on testimony more unexceptionable than any which is at present procurable. It has been stated to me that your Lordship has it in contemplation to establish a military officer at some point within the territories of the Company, and that the Company is disposed to afford every facility for carrying out this arrangement. I trust that this report may prove to be well founded."

[121] The treaty having provided for a joint commission, Mr. A.S. Johnston and the Hon. (afterwards Sir) John Rose were appointed to act for America and Great Britain, respectively. These commissioners, on the 10th of September, 1869, issued an award from Washington, directing the payment of $450,000 by the United States to the Hudson's Bay Company, and $200,000 to the Puget's Sound Company. There was, as usual, considerable delay in making this payment. On the 11th of July, 1870, $325,000 was appropriated by Congress for this purpose, and a like sum by another appropriation in the following year.

[122] "I am glad to tell you that since I received your letter of Saturday last, the Hudson's Bay Company has replied to my communication; and has promised to grant land to a Company formed under such auspices as those with whom I placed them in communication. The question now is, what breadth of land they will give, for of course they propose to include the whole length of the line through their territory. A copy of the reply shall be sent to Mr. Baring, and I hope you and he will be able to bring this concession to some practical issue.

"I was quite aware of the willingness of the Company to sell their whole rights for some such sum as £1,500,000. I ascertained the fact two months ago and alluded to it in the House of Lords in my reply to a motion by Lord Donoughmore. I cannot, however, view the proposal in so favourable a light as you do. There would be no immediate or direct return to show for this large outlay, for of course the trade monopoly must cease, and the sale of the land would for some time bring in little or nothing—certainly not enough to pay for the government of the country.

"I do not think Canada can, or if she can, ought to take any large share in such a payment. Some of her politicians would no doubt support the proposal with views of their own—but it would be a serious, and for some time unrenumerative addition to their very embarassing debt. I certainly should not like to sell any portion of the territory to the United States—exchange (if the territory were once acquired) would be a different thing—but that would not help towards the liquidation of the purchase money."—Letter of the Duke of Newcastle, 14th August, 1862.

[123] "To my mind the worst feature in the new Company is that of allowing a foreigner (American) to hold office. He owes allegiance to the United States, and his position gives him knowledge which no American should possess. 'Blood is thicker than water,' says the proverb: 'No man can serve two masters.' As to the idea that being in the fur-trade his experience and influence will benefit the new Company, will any furrier believe that? If the Company will sell all the furs, I would never rest satisfied while an American was in the management.'"—William McNaughten, the Company's agent at New York.

[124] The eighty-five shares belonging to the wintering partners, in 1863, were held as follows:

[125] "Its continued attacks upon the Company," wrote Governor Dallas, "find a greedy ear with the public at large, both in the settlement and in Canada."

[126] "With regard to the Hudson's Bay matter," wrote Cartier to Watkin, under date of 15th of February, 1868, "not the least doubt that the speech of 'John A.,' was very uncalled for and injudicious. He had no business to make such a speech, and I told him so at the time—that he ought not to have made it. However, you must not attach too much importance to that speech. I myself, and several of my colleagues, and John A. himself, have no intention to commit any spoliation; and for myself in particular, I can say to you that I will never consent to be a party to a measure or anything intended to be an act of spoliation of the Hudson's Bay's rights and privileges."

[127] "The present state of government in the Red River settlement is attributable alike to the habitual attempt encouraged, perhaps very naturally, in England and in Canada, to discredit the tradition and question the title of the Hudson's Bay Company, and to the false economy which has stripped the Governor of a military force, with which, in the last resort, to support the decisions of the legal tribunals. No other organized government of white men in the world, since William Penn, has endeavoured to rule any population, still less a promiscuous people composed of whites, half-breeds, Indians and borderers, without a soldiery of some sort, and the inevitable result of the experiment has, in this case, been an unpunished case of prison-breaking, not sympathized in, it is true, by the majority of the settlers, but still tending to bring law and government into contempt, and greatly to discourage the governing body held responsible for keeping order in the territory."—Governor Dallas.

[128] "It is an undoubted fact," remarks General Sir William Butler, "that warning had been given to the Dominion Government of the state of feeling amongst the half-breeds, and the phrase, 'they are only eaters of pemmican,' so cutting to the MÉtis, was thus first originated by a distinguished Canadian politician."

[129] The distinguished philanthropist, the present Lord Strathcona and Mount Royal, High Commissioner for Canada in London and Governor of the Hudson's Bay Company.

[130] T.C. Mendenhall, in Atlantic Monthly for April, 1896.