Still stronger is the language of the message of December, 1844, when the notification of another conference is accompanied by the words: "The establishment of military forts along the route at suitable points upon the extended line of land travel would enable our citizens to emigrate in comparative safety to the fertile regions below the Falls of the Columbia, and make the provision of the existing convention for joint occupation of the territory more available than hitherto, to the latter. * * * Legislative enactment should also be made which should spread the aegis over him of our laws, so as to afford protection to his person and property, when he shall have reached his distant home. In the latter respect the British Government has been much more careful of the interests of such of her people as are to be found in that country, than the United States. Whatever may be the result of the pending negotiations, such measures are necessary. It will afford me the greatest pleasure to witness a happy and favorable termination to the existing negotiations upon terms compatible with the public honor, and the best efforts of the government will continue to be directed to this end."[1]
But other influences were at work to bring about these changes. Then, as now, the scent of politicians for issues to place in their platforms for winning votes, were keen. And here was a question well fitted to their purpose. The southern wing of the democratic party was anxious to annex Texas in the interests of slavery, and an annexation of Oregon to satisfy the northern wing was a shrewd move to gain votes and place James K. Polk in the presidential chair.[2] It was a bold stroke, and might easily bring on war with England. But now
