{{c|CHAPTER IX
1792—1846
PAPER TITLES OP SPAIN, FRANCE AND ENGLAND GRAY'S DISCOVERY OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER — THE PURCHASE OP LOUISIANA THE DOCTRINE OP CONTIGUOUS SETTLEMENT — THE LEWIS AND CLARK EXPLORATION — THE PURCHASE OF THE SPANISH TITLE THE CAMPAIGN OF "FIFTY-FOUR FORTY OR FIGHT"—THE
TREACHERY OF PRESIDENT POLK—OREGON SAVED BY THE AMERICAN SETTLERS.
The vast region west of the Rocky mountains fronting on the Pacific ocean
from the northern boundary of California up to Alaska became known to the
world under the name of "Oregon," about the year 1770. And the lirst tangi-
ble acts to obtain title to this vast territory date back to the voyages of Spanish
explorers in 1774; followed by the English navigator, Cook, in 1776, the year
the American colonists declared themselves independent of Great Britain. Six-
teen years after the Englishmen filed a discoveiy claim to the country. Captain
Robert Gray, the American trader, discovered the Columbia river, which prac-
tically drains the whole region and laid the foundation for the claim of the United
States.
Here then are the claims of the three nations — Spain. England and the United States — mere paper titles, founded on the trifling incidents of landing on the sea coast of a vast country of then unknown extent. Neither of these parties had contributed anything whatever to the value of the country, or to any ex- tent worth mentioning, made known to the world its resources, population or boundaries. The law or custom, upon which any shadow of title to the country could be founded by either of these parties, was nothing more than the comity of courtesy conceded among the maritime nations of the world down to that period ; a right, comity, or courtesy which was always ignored and repudiated by the strongest, whenever it was their interest to do so.
The Indians were the original possessors of the country, and held their title from occupancy for unknown thousands of years. But all three of these so- called civilized nations united to deny and overthrow the title of the native barbarian. To deny the title of the Indian, because he was ignorant, super- stitious and a barbarian or savage, was to found rights on educational oppor- tunities rather than upon the foundation set forth by the American Declaration of Independence. To deny the rights of the Indian, and then concede his hu- manity by offering him the teachings of the Bible, was an inconsistency too absurd for argument. And so the moralist and publicists were forced to take grounds with the defenders of African slavery and boldly proclaim the doctrine that neither the red man nor the black man had any rights which the whitr man was bound to respect.
