Chapter LVI
Comments on Vicar-General Brouillet's arguments against the Whitman massacre being the act of Catholics.--Joe Stanfield: Brouillet's story in his favor.--Murders on the second day.--Deposition of Daniel Young.--More murders.
Vicar-General Brouillet, in his narrative of "Protestantism in Oregon," says: "I could admit that Joseph Lewis, Joseph Stanfield, and Nicholas Finlay, who may have been seen plundering" (as proved on the trial of Stanfield), "were Catholics, without injuring in the least the cause of Catholicism; because, as in good reasoning" (Roman Catholic, of course), "it is never allowed to conclude from one particularity to another particularity, nor to a generality; in like manner, from the guilt of three Catholics it can not be reasonably concluded that other Catholics are guilty, nor, a fortiori, that all Catholics are guilty and Catholicism favorable to the guilt."
No man, set of men, or sect, not interested in the result of a measure or a crime, will ever use an argument like the one we have quoted from this priest. Dr. Whitman and those about his station had been slaughtered in the most brutal and cowardly manner, by a band of Indians that this priest, his bishop, and associates, backed by the consent and influence of the Hudson's Bay Company, had brought about through the direct influence of these three men: all of whom knew, and consulted with the Indians as to the commission of the crime. And we have the strongest reason to believe that this priest and his party were, by their conversation, instructions, and direct teachings, adding their influence and approval to that horrid transaction. Besides, when the crime is committed, we find this same band of fur traders and priests protecting, shielding, advising and assisting the murderers to the utmost of their power and influence, both in the country and in their foreign correspondence. If such facts do not implicate a party, we ask what will? The very book from which we are quoting, containing 108 pages, has not a single sentence condemning the course or crime of these men, but every page contains some statement condemning Spalding, Whitman, or some American supposed to belong to, or in favor of, the American settlements or missions.
But let us return to further particulars of this Whitman massacre. We have gathered up the statements and facts on both sides of this question, and with our own knowledge, previous to and since its occurrence, we write with assurance, if not with the best judgment in selecting the facts and evidence to place the truth before the public.
We were in the midst of describing that horrible scene of savage blood and carnage, when we stopped for a moment to inquire after the character of three of the prominent actors, in fact, the leaders in the tragedy.
Brouillet tells us (on page 89 of his narrative, page 56 of Ross Browne) in extenuation of the guilt of Stanfield, that "the following circumstance, if true, speaks very highly in his favor, and shows that if he has at any time forgotten the good principles he had received in his infancy, once, at least, those principles prompted him to an heroic action. It was on the morning of the day that followed the massacre. There were several Indians scattered in the neighborhood of the mission buildings, but especially a crowd of Indian women was standing near the door of the house in which all the white women and children were living. Stanfield, being then at a short distance from the house, Tilokaikt, the chief of the place, came up and asked him if he had something in the house. 'Yes,' said Stanfield, 'I have all my things there.' 'Take them away,' said the Indian to him. 'Why should I take them away? they are well there.' 'Take them off,' he insisted, a second time. 'But I have not only my things there; I have also my wife and children.' 'Yes,' replied Tilokaikt, who appeared a little surprised, 'you have a wife and children in the house! Will you take them off?' 'No,' replied Stanfield, 'I will not take them away, and I will go and stay myself in the house. I see that you have bad designs; you intend to kill the women and children; well, you will kill me with them. Are you not ashamed? Are you not satisfied with what you have done? Do you want still to kill poor innocent creatures that have never done you any harm?' 'I am ashamed,' replied Tilokaikt, after a moment's hesitation. 'It is true, those women and children do not deserve death; they did not harm us; they shall not die.' And, turning to the Indian women who were standing near the door of the house waiting with a visible impatience for the order to enter and slaughter the people inside, he ordered them to go off. The Indian women then became enraged, and, showing them the knives that they took from beneath their blankets, they insulted him in many different ways, calling him a coward, a woman who would consent to be governed by a Frenchman; and they retired, apparently in great anger for not having been allowed to imbrue their hands in the blood of new victims. The above circumstance was related at Fort Wallawalla to Mr. Ogden, by Stanfield himself, under great emotion, and in presence of the widows, none of whom contradicted him. An action of that nature, if it took place, would be, of itself, sufficient to redeem a great many faults."
We do not wish to question any good act this Frenchman may have done; but the guilt of knowing that crime was to be committed, and that the Americans were to be killed around him like the ox he had brought to the slaughter, which he knew was to be the signal for its commencement; and the manner he and his two associates conducted themselves on the ground; the influence he had to stop the massacre at any time, and his robbing the widows and orphans in the midst of the slaughter;--these make up a complication of crime that none but the vilest will attempt to excuse.
On the 30th of November, Mr. Kimball and Mr. Young, a young man from the saw-mill, were killed. Mr. Kimball, in attempting to go from his concealment in the chamber for water for himself and the sick children, was shot by a young Indian, who claimed his eldest daughter for a wife as his lawful pay for killing her father.
We will now give an original deposition which explains the killing of Mr. Young, and also of two other young men, who escaped the first and second, and became victims of the third more brutal slaughter.
Deposition of Mr. Daniel Young relative to the Wailatpu Massacre.
QUESTION.--When, and in what manner, did you learn of the massacre?
ANSWER.--I was residing with my father's family at Dr. Whitman's saw-mill, about twenty miles from Wailatpu, where we had gone for the winter. My brother, a young man about twenty-four years of age, and about two years older than myself, had gone down to the station, the Tuesday before, with a load of lumber, and for provisions, and was expecting to return about the last of the week. Joseph Smith and family were also living at the saw-mill, except his oldest daughter, who was at the station. His family was out of flour and meat, and ours was now out of meat. On Saturday evening, he proposed to me to go down the next day for provisions. I did not wish to go down; told him if he wanted provisions he could go. He said if he had a horse he would go. We offered him a horse. He still urged me to go, as there was no one, he said, to stay with his family. I went down on horseback on the Sabbath, being the next Sabbath after the massacre. I did not go to the place till about an hour after dark, and learned nothing of the massacre till after I had got into the house. In the room where I expected to find my brother, I found them eating supper, with several Indians in the room. At the table was Mrs. Hays, and Joseph Stanfield, and Mrs. Hall, with the remnant of her family. About a couple of minutes after I went in, Joseph Stanfield left the table and went out of the house (this was some time previous to the rest leaving the table), and was gone for about three hours, I knew not where; but after he returned, he said he had started to go to Nicholas Finlay's, a half-breed's lodge, but had got lost. Nicholas had come in about half an hour before Stanfield returned. In the mean time I had learned from the Indian Beardy, through Eliza Spalding (his interpreter), of the massacre. This was in short sentences and much confused. Beardy said, however, that the Doctor was his friend, and he did not know of it until a good many had been killed, and he was sorry for what had taken place; he said the Indians said the Doctor was poisoning them, and that was the reason they did it, but he (Beardy) did not believe it. That he was there to protect the women and children, and no more should be killed. During the evening I also learned of the number that had been killed, and of those who had escaped from the place; but it was not known what had become of them.
I was informed by Stanfield that my brother had met an Indian who had told him to go back and stay for a week, but another Indian told him he could safely go on for provisions, and that he would go with him. He went on to within half a mile of the mission. The Indians were said to have gone thus far with him. Stanfield said he there found him dead, shot through the head near one eye, and there he buried him. Stanfield said also that evening that the Doctor was poisoning the Indians, which had caused the massacre; that Joe Lewis had heard from an adjoining room one night the Doctor and Mrs. Whitman talking of poisoning them, and that the Doctor had said it was best to destroy them by degrees, but that Mrs. Whitman said it was best to do it at once, and they would be rid of them, and have all their land and horses as their own; and that he (Joe Lewis) had told the Indians this before the massacre.
Stanfield also asked me if I had heard of his being married. I told him I had heard from my brother that he was going to take Mrs. Hays for a wife. He said: "We are married, but have not yet slept together." I said: "Yes, I understand, you pretend to be married." He said: "We are married; that is enough." I thought it strange why he was saved unless he was a Catholic, and during the evening took an occasion, when I thought he would not suspect my object, to ask Stanfield whether he was a Catholic? He said, "I pass for one."
I slept with Stanfield that night; did not retire till late. Next morning, Crockett Bewley, a young man about twenty-one or twenty-two, I should think, who was sick at the time of the first massacre, and whose clothes had been stolen (by Stanfield), came into the room wrapped in a blanket or a quilt. Bewley seemed to speak of the Doctor's poisoning the Indians as something commonly reported among them as the cause of the massacre, but said he did not believe any thing of it, but he believed Joe Lewis was one of the leaders, and the Catholic priests were the cause of it. Stanfield replied, "You need not believe any such thing, and you had better not let the Indians hear you say that," and spoke in a voice as though he was somewhat angry. Soon after this, Bewley left the room; Stanfield turned to me and said: "He had better be careful how he talks; if the Indians get hold of it the Catholics may hear of it." As soon as I could do it without being suspected, I sought an opportunity to caution Bewley about the danger I thought he was running in speaking thus in the presence of Stanfield, and asked him if he did not know of Stanfield being a Catholic? He said he did not. I told him he might have known it from the fact of most French being Catholics. He replied he did not know of the French being Catholics more than any other people. I told him to be cautious hereafter how he spoke, and he said he would.
Soon after the conversation with Bewley, I told Stanfield I must return home; he said I must not, the Indian chiefs would be there after a while and would tell me what I must do; said he did not think I could get off till the next day.
We now commenced making a coffin for one of the Sager children that had died the night before. Soon after, the chief Tilokaikt came. He told me I could not go back till the next day, that he would then send two Indians back with me. I told Stanfield, in the chief's presence, that I had told my folks I should be back on Monday if I came at all. Stanfield told me in reply, that the chief says, "Then you may go;" Stanfield also said, "The chief says tell them all to come down and bring every thing down that is up there; we want them to come down and take care of the families and tend the mill. Tell them, 'Don't undertake to run away; if you do, you will be sure to be killed;' not be afraid, for they shall not be hurt."
The chief had now done talking. Stanfield now told me to caution them, our people, at the saw-mill, as to what they should say; if they said any thing on the subject, "say that the Doctor was a bad man, and was poisoning the Indians." He had also before that told me the same. I got a piece of meat and asked for some salt; but he said there was none about the house; afterward I found this was not the case. I then returned home, and informed our people as to what had taken place, and my father's first reply was, "The Catholics are at the bottom of it." Mr. Smith admitted it, but said, immediately, we must all become Catholics for our safety, and before we left the saw-mill, and afterward, he said he believed the Doctor was poisoning, and believed it from what Joe Stanfield had told him before about the Doctor's misusing the half-breeds and children at his mission. The next day, Tuesday, we went down to the mission, and arrived after dark; found the young men, Bewley and Amos Sales, who were sick at the time of the first massacre, were both killed, and their bodies were lying outside of the door near the house where they lay during the night, and Stanfield said he could not bury them until he got the permission of the Indians. The next day we helped to bury them.
Here I would say that the two Indians the chief wished to send with me, as he said, to see us safe down, as Stanfield interpreted to me at the time, were the chief's sons, and he wished me to wait because Edward, Tilokaikt's son, had gone to the Umatilla to the great chief, to see what to do with the two young men who were sick. This, Stanfield told me, was the business which Edward Tilokaikt had gone for, and he would not get back so as to go with me that day. Three Indians, however, arrived within an hour after I got to the saw-mill, viz., Clark Tilokaikt, Stikas and one whose name I never knew, and came down a part of the way with us next day. I learned from Mrs. Canfield and her daughter, that this same Edward Tilokaikt, after he returned from the Umatilla, gave the first blow with his whip, and broke and run out of doors, when other Indians finished the slaughter of the sick men. While at the station, Joseph Smith threatened me with the Indians if I did not obey him. I felt our condition as bad and very dangerous from the Indians, and feared that Smith would join them. He sometimes talked of going on to the Umatilla to live with them. His daughter was taken by the chief's sons (first Clark, and in the second place, Edward) for a wife. I told Mr. Smith, were I a father, I would never suffer that, so long as I had power to use an arm; his reply was, "You don't know what you would do; I would not dare to say a word if they should take my own wife." I continued to regard our situation as exceedingly dangerous till we got out of the country.
After we had arrived at Wallawalla, I said, in the presence of Mr. McBean, that I supposed there were present some of the Indians who had killed my brother, and if I knew them I would kill them yet. Mr. McBean said, "Take care what you say, the very walls have ears." He was very anxious to get us safe to the Wallamet.
Q.--Would you suppose one who was acquainted at that place liable to get lost in going that evening to Finlay's lodge?
A.--I would not. It was in sight and a plain path to it, and was not more than twenty-five yards off.
Q.--When did you learn from your brother that Stanfield was going to take Mrs. Hays as a wife?
A.--Some two or more weeks before the massacre, something was said as to Mr. Hoffman taking Mrs. Hays. My brother says, "No, I heard Joe Stanfield say that he was going to take her as a wife."
Q.--Did your brother appear to believe that this was about to take place?
A.--He did, and my brother talked about it,--made us believe it was going to take place.
Q.--What opportunity had your brother to know about this, more than yourself?
A.--He boarded at the station, and was some of the time teaming from the saw-mill, and Mrs. Hays cooked for him and several others of the Doctor's hands, among whom was Stanfield.
Q.--Why did you think Stanfield was a Catholic, as a reason for his being saved?
A.--Because I heard Dr. Whitman say at the mill, that the Catholics were evidently trying to set the Indians upon him, but he thought he could keep it down for another year, when he would be safe. I supposed he expected safety from the government being extended over the country.
Q.--How did Stanfield seem to know that the chief would be there after a while, and would tell you what you might do as to going back to the saw-mill?
A.--I did not know.
Q.--Why did you tell your people that you would be back on Monday, if at all?
A.--Because we were in an Indian country, and I remembered what I had heard the Doctor say at the Umatilla, and my brother had not returned as expected.
Q.--Had you any means of knowing what "great chief," at the Umatilla, Tilokaikt spoke of, where his son Edward had gone to learn what to do with the sick young men?
A.--I had not.
Q.--Did you know at that time that the bishop was said to be at Umatilla?
A.--Yes.
Q.--Did you form in your own mind, at that time, any opinion as to whom Edward had gone to consult?
A.--I thought the term "great chief" might have been put in to deceive me, as Stanfield had told me, the evening before, that the Catholics were going to establish a mission right away at that place, and that they would protect the women and children, and I thought it might be the Catholics he was consulting, or it might be some great Indian chief. This talk of establishing a station there continued for more than a week after we got down to the station. After I found Bewley and Sales were killed, I seemed to forget much until even after I had got down, and even to the plains, when the facts again came more clearly to my recollection, and I spoke of them freely to my parents and to others.
(Signed,) DANIEL YOUNG.
Sworn and subscribed to, before me, this 20th day of January, A.D. 1849, in Tualatin Plains, Oregon Territory.
G. W. COFFINBURY, Justice of the Peace.
Chapter LVII
How the country was saved to the United States.--Article from the New York Evening Post.--Ingratitude of the American Board.--Deposition of Elam Young.--Young girls taken for Indian wives.--Statement of Miss Lorinda Bewley.--Sager, Bewley, and Sales killed.
In taking up our morning Oregonian of November 16, 1866, our eye lit upon the following article from the New York Evening Post, which we feel assured the reader will not regret to find upon these pages, and which will explain the desperate efforts made to secure this country to the United States by Dr. Whitman, the details of whose death we are now giving from the depositions of parties upon the ground, who were eye-witnesses and fellow-sufferers at the fall of that good and noble man whose labors and sacrifices his countrymen are at this late day only beginning to appreciate. We ask in astonishment: Has the American Board at last opened its ears, and allowed a statement of that noble martyr's efforts to save Oregon to his country to be made upon its record? It has! it has! and here it is:--
"We presume it is not generally known to our citizens on the Pacific coast, nor to many people in the Atlantic States, how near we came to losing, through executive incompetence, our just title to the whole immense region lying west of the Rocky Mountains. Neither has due honor been accorded to the brave and patriotic man through whose herculean exertions this great loss and sacrifice was prevented.
"The facts were briefly and freshly brought out during the recent meeting at Pittsburg of the 'American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions,' in the course of an elaborate paper read by Mr. Treat, one of the secretaries of the Board, on the 'Incidental Results of Missions.'
"In the year 1836 the American Board undertook to establish a mission among the Indians beyond the Rocky Mountains. Two missionaries, Rev. Mr. Spalding and Dr. Whitman, with their wives,--the first white women who had ever made that perilous journey,--passed over the mountains with incredible toil, to reach Oregon, the field of their labor. After remaining there for a few years, Dr. Whitman began to understand the object of the misrepresentations of the Hudson's Bay Company. He saw, contrary to the reiterated public statements of that company--
"1. That the land was rich in minerals.
"2. That emigrants could cross the Rocky Mountains in wagons, a feat which they had constantly asserted to be impossible.
"3. That the Hudson's Bay Company was planning to secure the sole occupancy of the whole of that country, by obtaining a surrender of the American title into the hands of the British government.
"Seeing these things, but not knowing how very near the British scheme was to its accomplishment, Dr. Whitman resolved, at every hazard, to prevent its consummation. He undertook, in 1842, to make a journey on horseback to Washington, to lay the whole matter clearly before our government by personal representations. Being a man of great physical strength and an iron constitution, he accomplished the long and perilous journey, and reached Washington in safety. The remainder of the story we will relate in the language of the Boston Congregationalist: Reaching Washington, he sought an interview with President Tyler and Daniel Webster, then Secretary of State, and unfolded to them distinctly what was going on. Here he learned that a treaty was almost ready to be signed, in which all this northwestern territory was to be given up to England, and we were to have in compensation greater facilities in catching fish. Dr. Whitman labored to convince Mr. Webster that he was the victim of false representations with regard to the character of the region, and told him that he intended to return to Oregon with a train of emigrants. Mr. Webster, looking him full in the eye, asked him if he would pledge himself to conduct a train of emigrants there in wagons. He promised that he would. Then, said Mr. Webster, this treaty shall be suppressed. Dr. Whitman, in coming on, had fixed upon certain rallying-points where emigrants might assemble to accompany him on his return. He found nearly one thousand ready for the journey. After long travel, they reached Fort Hall, a British military station, and the commandant undertook to frighten the emigrants by telling them that it was not possible for them to go through with wagons; but Dr. Whitman reassured them, and led them through to the Columbia, and the days of the supremacy of the Hudson's Bay Company over Oregon were numbered."
Twenty-four years after that noble, devoted, faithful servant and missionary of theirs had received a cold reproof, after enduring one of the severest and most trying journeys of several thousand miles, his Board at home, and unreasonably cautious associates in Oregon have consented to acknowledge that they owe to him a debt of respect for doing, without their consent or approval at the time, a noble, patriotic, and unselfish act for his country.
And how shall we regard the cold indifference they have manifested to the present day, in regard to the infamous manner in which his life, and the lives of his wife and countrymen were taken, and the continued slanders heaped upon their names? Have they asked for, or even attempted an explanation, or a refutation of those slanders? Their half-century volume speaks a language not to be mistaken. Mr. Spalding, his first and most zealous associate, attempted to bring the facts before the world, but the caution of those who would whitewash his (Dr. Whitman's) sepulcher induced Mr. Spalding to give up in despair,--a poor broken-down wreck, caused by the frightful ending of his fellow-associates, and of his own missionary labors.
Is this severe, kind reader, upon the Board and a portion of Dr. Whitman's associates? We intend to tell the truth if it is, as we are endeavoring to get the truth, the whole truth, and as few mistakes as possible in these pages. Therefore we will copy another deposition relative to this massacre.
Deposition of Mr. Elam Young.
I met Dr. Whitman on the Umatilla, about the 1st of October, 1847. He engaged me to build a mill for him at his mission. As the lumber was not handy at the station, I moved up to the saw-mill to do a part of the work there.
Some time in November, my son James, who was teaming for the Doctor, went from the saw-mill with a load of lumber for the mission station, and was to return with provisions for us. This was on Tuesday after the murder. Shortly after he had gone away, Mr. Smith, who was also at the saw-mill, appeared to be very uneasy; stated repeatedly that he was sure something had happened to him; said he had a constant foreboding of some evil; stated that Dr. Whitman was abusing the children at the mission, as he had understood by Stanfield; frequently spoke against Dr. Whitman. The next Sunday, beginning to feel uneasy, I sent my second son Daniel down to the station, who returned on Monday and brought the news of the massacre. It instantly struck my mind that the Catholic priests had been the cause of the whole of it. This conviction was caused by repeated conversations with Dr. Whitman, together with my knowledge of the principles of the Jesuits. Mr. Smith observed at the same time that we must all be Jesuits for the time being. Soon after Daniel returned, three Indians came up and told us we must go down to the station, which we accordingly did the next day. When we got there it was after night; we found that Crockett Bewley and Amos Sales had both been killed that day. The women told us that they had told the Indians, before we came down, that we were English, and we must not contradict it. The Indians soon began to question whether I was English. I told them I was of English parents, but born in the United States.
A few days after we got there two young women were taken as wives for the Indians, which I opposed, and was threatened by Mr. Smith, who was very anxious that it should take place, and that other little girls should be given up for wives. Was employed while there in making coffins and grinding for the Indians.
While there, Miss Bewley was taken off to the Umatilla. Tried to comfort her as much as I could, believing she would be safer there at the Catholic station than where we were. First ten days we were constantly told that the Catholics were coming there to establish a mission. Heard that Mr. Ogden had come up to Wallawalla to rescue us from the Indians. Went to grinding and preparing provisions for our journey. Smith and Stanfield, who appeared to be very friendly with each other, had the management of the teams and loading, took the best teams and lightest loads, gave us the poorest teams and heaviest loads. On the way to Wallawalla they drove off and left us. The hindmost teams had to double in the bad places. Reached the fort perhaps half an hour after Smith and Stanfield had; met Smith at the gate, who says: "Well, you have got along?" "Yes." "It is well you did, for the Indians found out that you were not an Englishman, and were determined to have your scalp." I asked him, "How do you know this?" to which he made no reply. Went into the fort and met Mr. McBean and the priest; supposed they would all rejoice at our escape, but their manner was very cold and distant. But Mr. Ogden greeted us cordially. The next day the Indians came into the fort in considerable numbers, and their actions were suspicious, and Mr. McBean seemed to interest himself very much in our behalf, and told us to be very quiet and to keep in our own rooms, and be careful what we said, as the very walls had ears. [If this does not show the sneaking dog, what does? Ogden is apparently all friendship, and McBean is all caution to the captives.]
We arrived on Monday, and Mr. Spalding on Saturday after, and the next day all took boat for the lower country.
Q.--Did your son give you any caution as to what to say when you reached the station.
A.--He said Stanfield said we must say the Doctor poisoned the Indians.
Q.--What did you learn about Mr. Rogers as having made a confession.
A.--Stanfield said that Mr. Rogers had made a confession that the Doctor had poisoned the Indians. I replied, "Who knows this?" He said Mrs. Hays and Mrs. Hall heard it. I afterward asked Mrs. Hays if she did hear it. She replied, "We must say so now." I afterward, at the station, told Stanfield he had better not mention that to Americans, for there was not one from Maine to Georgia that would believe it. He replied, "We must say so." I told him I never would.
Q.--What conversation with the Doctor led you to believe the Catholics were at the bottom of the whole of it?
A.--That some years before (1841) he had had difficulty with the Indians, and he had found out satisfactorily where it came from, by charging the Indians of having been made jealous of a certain man. I do not recollect the name, but I think he said he was from Canada, and the Indians acknowledged it. [The difficulty here spoken of was about the horses given as a present to Rev. Jason Lee, on his way to Wallamet. The Indians had been told by the company's interpreter, old Toupin, that he had as good as stolen their horses, as he made them no presents in return, and they were encouraged to make that a cause of difficulty with Dr. Whitman.] At that time they had knocked off his hat, etc., but other Indians would obey him and pick it up, and so long as they would obey, he was satisfied of his safety; but this had long since passed off. [The writer was present, and saw the whole performance here alluded to, the particulars of which are given elsewhere]. And they were never in a better state until of late, when a body of priests and Jesuits had come in, and were constantly saying in their ears that this sickness came on them by the Americans; that the Americans were a very bad people, that the Good Being had sent on them as a punishment.
Q.--Why did Mr. Smith appear anxious to have the young women given to the Indians?
A.--I do not know, unless to appease them, and get their affection.
Q.--Did the Doctor appear to wish to remain, against the wish of a majority of the Indians?
A.--I heard him say repeatedly, if the Indians wished him to leave he would, but a large majority said he must not, and he thought the times would soon change. I understood him to expect a change from the extension of government.
Q.--Did your son Daniel say any thing, before you moved from the saw-mill, of having cautioned C. Bewley for speaking unadvisedly before Joe Stanfield?
A.--Yes, he gave that; that amounts to the same as he has given in his statement.
Q.--Did you have any fears, while at the station, that Mr. Smith was liable, had the circumstances become more dangerous, to act with the Indians?
A.--Certainly I did.
Q.--Did you get any reason why Bewley and Sales were killed?
A.--Though I did not get it directly from them, the Indian account was, the great chief at the Umatilla said their disease would spread; but I believe it was because Bewley had spoken before Stanfield unadvisedly.
(Signed,) ELAM YOUNG.
Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 20th day of January, 1849.
G. W. COFFINBURY, Justice of the Peace.
What shall we say of these depositions, and the facts asserted under the solemnity of an oath, the witnesses still living, with many others confirming the one fact, that Roman priests and Hudson's Bay men, English and Frenchmen, were all safe and unharmed in an Indian--and that American--territory, while American citizens were cut down by savage hands without mercy? Can we regard the conduct of such men in any other light than as enemies in peace? Without the aid of religious bigotry and the appeal to God as sending judgments upon them, not one of those simple-minded natives would ever have lifted a hand to shed the blood of their teachers or of American citizens. We see how faithful and persevering Joe Lewis, Finlay, and Stanfield were in their part, while the bishop and his priests, and Sir James Douglas, at Vancouver, were watching at a distance to misrepresent the conduct of the dead, and excuse and justify their own instruments, as in Mr. Douglas's letters to Governor Abernethy and the Sandwich Islands; and Vicar-General Brouillet's narrative, with more recent proceedings, which are given in another chapter.
We intended to give in this connection the account of this tragedy as given by Vicar-General Brouillet, but it accords so nearly with that given by Sir James Douglas in his Sandwich Islands letter to Mr. Castle, that the impression is irresistibly forced upon the mind that the whole account is prepared by one and the same person; hence we will not encumber our pages with more than a liberal amount of extracts, sufficient to show the full knowledge of the bishop and his priests of what was expected to take place at the Whitman station, and the brutal and inhuman part they took in forcing Miss Bewley into the arms of Five Crows, after that Indian was humane enough to permit her to return to the house of those, that Mr. Young, and all others who were ignorant of their vileness, might naturally suppose would be a place of safety from such treatment. She that was Miss Bewley is now dead, but she has left on record the statement of her wrongs. We give it a permanent place in our history, not to persecute or slander the Jesuit fraternity (for truth is no slander), but to warn Americans against placing their daughters and sons under any such teachings or influences.
Statement of Miss Lorinda Bewley.
Q.--What time did the massacre commence?
A.--I think half-past one.
Q.--Who fled to the chamber?
A.--Mrs. Hall, Mrs. Hays, Mrs. Whitman, Mr. Kimball, Mr. Rogers,--the three last wounded,--myself, Catharine Sager, thirteen years of age, her sisters Elizabeth, Louisa, and Henrietta, the three half-breed girls,--Miss Bridger, Mary Ann, and Helen,--last four very sick. After we got into the chamber the Indians broke in the windows and doors, filled the house and broke down the stair-door. Mr. Kimball advised to attempt the appearance of defense at the stairway. Mrs. Whitman and Mr. Rogers said, let all prepare for death. I found an old gun, and it was held over the staircase by Mr. Rogers. They appeared cool and deliberate in ordering all to prepare for death, when they were breaking up the house. The appearance of the gun appeared to check the Indians from coming up-stairs. A few words passed between Mr. Rogers and one of the Indians. Mr. Rogers said, "The Indians wish me to come down." Mrs. Whitman objected at first; some words passed between Mrs. Whitman and Mr. Rogers about his going down which I do not recollect; finally Mrs. Whitman took his hand and said, "The Lord bless you; go!" and he went nearly to the bottom of the stairs, but his head was all the time above the stairs; he was not there longer than two or three minutes. A few words passed between them, but I did not understand the language. Mrs. Whitman said, "The Indians say you have guns and want to kill us." Mr. Rogers says, "No, you wish to get us down to kill us." This seemed to be all they talked about. Mr. Rogers says to Mrs. Whitman, "Shall we let them come up?" Mrs. Whitman says, "Let one, Tamsaky, come up." Tamsaky came up and shook hands with us all, and spoke and advised us all to go down and go over to the other house, for the young men would burn the house; he led the way down while the Indians were hallooing wildly in the room below, but when we had got down, the Indians had gone out and were very still. While we were up-stairs the Doctor's face had been cut awfully to pieces, but he was yet breathing. Mrs. Whitman saw him and said she wanted air; they led her to the settee and she lay down. She appeared to think then, that we were going to be spared, and told us to get all the things from the press we needed. I put a blanket I had over her, and got a sheet for myself, and we put a good many clothes from the press on the settee; Mrs. Hall and Mrs. Hays got their arms full also. Mr. Rogers was going to take us over to the other house, and then come back for the sick children. This was Tamsaky's advice, as he said the Indians were going to burn the house. It was now getting dark. Mr. Rogers and Joe Lewis carried out the settee, over the bodies of the Doctor and John Sager, which were dreadfully mangled; they passed through the kitchen, and through the outside door toward the end of the house occupied as the Indian room. Here, to our surprise and terror, the Indians were collected, with their guns ready; the children from the school were huddled in the corner of the building. When the settee had gone about its length from the door, Joe Lewis dropped the end he was holding and the guns were immediately fired. Mr. Rogers had only time to raise his hands and say, "O my God, save me," and fell. I felt my fingers numb till next morning, from a ball that passed so near as to sting them. Mrs. Whitman received two balls when on the settee.
I could not see what was done at the same time on all sides of me. On turning round I saw Francis Sager down bleeding and groaning. The children said an Indian hauled him out from among them and Joe Lewis shot him with a pistol. Mr Rogers fell down by my feet and groaned loud. All three appeared in great agony, and groaned very loud. The Indian women were carrying off things, and the Indians were shouting terribly; the Indians also started and cut Mrs. Whitman's face with their whips and rolled her into the mud. [This treatment of Mrs. Whitman will be explained in the statement of Stikas, as given from Mr. McLane's journal.] At this I attempted to escape to the other house. One of the Indians from Mrs. Whitman caught me,--I had run about two rods,--when I screamed and he shook his tomahawk over my head, and I kept screaming, not knowing that he wanted me to hush; then a great many others came round, and pointed their guns and shook their hatchets. I finally discovered they wanted me to be still, and when I was silent, one of them led me by the hand over to the mansion.
Q.--Was Mr. Rogers wounded when he started into the house?
A.--Yes; shot through the arm and tomahawked in the head.
Q.--Did Mr. Rogers have any interview with the Indians after he got in until the one on the stairs?
A.--No. As soon as he got in the house was locked, and none got in after that till we were all up-stairs, when they broke the doors and windows.
Q.--Did the Indians have an interview with Mr. Rogers after the one on the stairs, up to the time he was shot?
A.--No; the Indians were not in the room, except Tamsaky and Joe Lewis, and we were all very still and Mr. Rogers was all the time in my sight, except as I stepped to the bed for the sheet, and I was very quick.
Q.--Did you hear it reported that Mr. Rogers said he overheard Dr. and Mrs. Whitman and Mr. Spalding talking at night about poisoning the Indians?
A.--No; but after being taken to Umatilla, one of the two Frenchmen said that the Indians' talk was that an Indian who understood English overheard such conversation.
Q.--Did you consider Mr. Rogers and Mrs. Whitman were meeting their fate like devoted Christians?
A.--Yes.
Q.--When did the priest arrive?
A.--Wednesday, while the bodies were being prepared for the grave. The bodies were collected into the house on Tuesday evening.
Q.--Did the Indians bury a vial or bottle of the Doctor's medicine?
A.--They said they did. Joe Stanfield made the box to bury it in, and the Indians said they buried it.
Q.--Why did they bury it?
A.--They said the priests said it was poison. Stanfield and Nicholas were their interpreters to us.
Q.--How did they obtain this vial?
A.--The Indians said the priests found it among the Doctor's medicines, and showed it to them, and told them if it broke it would poison the whole nation.
Q.--Was there much stir among the Indians about this bottle?
A.--Yes, a great deal.
Q.--Why did the Indians kill your brother?
A.--Edward Tilokaikt returned from the Umatilla, and told us (after they had killed him) the great chief told them their disease would spread.
Q.--Did your brother make any effort to escape?
A.--He told me the night before he was killed that he was preparing to make an effort to escape. I told him he must not, he was not able to walk. He said he had that day agreed with Stanfield to get him a horse, and assist him away. I said, "What will become of me?" He said, "I know you have been greatly abused, and all I care for my life is to get away, and make an effort to save you; but I may be killed before to-morrow at this time, but, if it is the Lord's will, I am prepared to die." This was Monday, a week from the first massacre. About three o'clock the next day my brother and Mr. Sales were killed, and I have always thought that Joe Stanfield betrayed them.
Q.--Did the Indians threaten you all, and treat you with cruelty from the first?
A.--They did.
Q.--Did they on Tuesday assemble and threaten your lives?
A.--Yes, and frequently threatened our lives afterward. (See statement of Stanfield by Brouillet, in a previous chapter, confirming the fact of his unbounded influence over the Indians.)
Q.--When were the young women first dragged out and brutally treated?
A.--Saturday night after the first massacre, and continually after that.
Q.--When were you taken to the Umatilla?
(Miss Bewley will answer this question after we have given Vicar-General Brouillet an opportunity to state his part in this tragedy.)
Chapter LVIII
Vicar-General Brouillet's statement.--Statement of Istacus.--The priest finds the poison.--Statement of William Geiger, Jr.--Conduct of Mr. McBean.--Influence of the Jesuit missions.
We left Vicar-General Brouillet and Bishop Blanchet and his priests on their way to their station on the Umatilla, where they arrived on November 27. On the 28th, Brouillet says, page 47: "The next day being Sunday, we were visited by Dr. Whitman, who remained but a few minutes at the house, and appeared to be much agitated. Being invited to dine, he refused, saying that he feared it would be too late, as he had twenty-five miles to go, and wished to reach home before night. On parting, he entreated me not to fail to visit him when I would pass by his mission, which I very cordially promised to do.
"On Monday, 29th, Mr. Spalding took supper with us, and appeared quite gay. During the conversation, he happened to say that the Doctor was unquiet; that the Indians were displeased with him on account of the sickness, and that even he had been informed that the Murderer (an Indian) intended to kill him; but he seemed not to believe this, and suspected as little as we did what was taking place at the mission of the Doctor."
The reader will note and remember the statement which follows: Brouillet says, on the 48th page of his narrative, the 36th of J. Ross Browne's report:--
"Before leaving Fort Wallawalla, it had been decided that, after visiting the sick people of my own mission on the Umatilla, I should visit those of Tilokaikt's camp, for the purpose of baptizing the infants and such dying adults as might desire this favor; and the Doctor and Mr. Spalding having informed me that there were still many sick persons at their mission, I was confirmed in this resolution, and made preparations to go as soon as possible.
"After having finished baptizing the infants and adults of my mission, I left on Tuesday, the 30th of November, late in the afternoon, for Tilokaikt's camp, where I arrived between seven and eight o'clock in the evening. It is impossible to conceive my surprise and consternation when, upon my arrival, I learned that the Indians the day before had massacred the Doctor and his wife, with the greater part of the Americans at the mission. I passed the night without scarcely closing my eyes. Early the next morning I baptized three sick children, two of whom died soon after, and then hastened to the scene of death, to offer to the widows and orphans all the assistance in my power. I found five or six women and over thirty children in a situation deplorable beyond description. Some had just lost their husbands, and others their fathers, whom they had seen massacred before their eyes, and were expecting every moment to share the same fate. The sight of those persons caused me to shed tears, which, however, I was obliged to conceal, for I was the greater part of the day in the presence of the murderers, and closely watched by them; and if I had shown too marked an interest in behalf of the sufferers, it would only have endangered their lives and mine; these, therefore, entreated me to be upon my guard."
The women that lived through that terrible scene inform us that this priest was as familiar and friendly with the Indians as though nothing serious had occurred. We have seen and conversed freely with four of those unfortunate victims, and all affirm the same thing. Their impression was, that there might be others he expected to be killed, and he did not wish to be present when it was done. According to the testimony in the case, Mr. Kimball and James Young were killed while he was at or near the station. Brouillet continues, on the 49th page:--
"After the first few words that could be exchanged under the circumstances, I inquired after the victims, and was told they were yet unburied. Joseph Stanfield, a Frenchman, who was in the employ of Dr. Whitman, and had been spared by the Indians, was engaged in washing the corpses, but being alone, he was unable to bury them. I resolved to go and assist him, so as to render to these unfortunate victims the last service in my power to offer them. What a sight did I then behold! Ten dead bodies lying here and there, covered with blood, and bearing the marks of the most atrocious cruelty,--some pierced with balls, others more or less gashed by the hatchet. Dr. Whitman had received three gashes on the face. Three others had their skulls crushed so that their brains were oozing out.
"I assure you, sir, that, during the time I was occupied in burying the victims of this disaster, I was far from feeling safe, being obliged to go here and there gathering up the dead bodies. In the midst of assassins, whose hands were still stained with blood, and who, by their manners, their countenances, and the arms which they still carried, sufficiently announced that their thirst for blood was yet unsatiated. Assuming as composed a manner as possible, I cast more than one glance aside and behind at the knives, pistols, and guns, in order to assure myself whether there were not some of them directed toward me."
The above extract is from a letter addressed to Colonel Gilliam. The cause of the priest's alarm is explained in a statement found in the journal of Mr. McLane, private secretary to Colonel Gilliam, while in the Cayuse country, taken from the Indians' statement in the winter of 1847-48. He was compelled to find the poison. Brouillet says:--
"The ravages which the sickness had made in their midst, together with the conviction which a half-breed, named Joseph Lewis, had succeeded in fixing upon their minds that Dr. Whitman had poisoned them, were the only motives I could discover which could have prompted them to this act of murder. This half-breed had imagined a conversation between Dr. Whitman, his wife, and Mr. Spalding, in which he made them say that it was necessary to hasten the death of the Indians in order to get possession of their horses and lands. 'If you do not kill the Doctor,' said he, 'you will be dead in the spring.'"
Statement of Istacus, or Stikas.
In the first place, Joe Lewis told the Indians that the Doctor was poisoning. Tamsaky went to Camaspelo and told him he wanted to kill the Doctor, and wished him to help. He replied, pointing to his child, that his child was sick, and that was as much as he could attend to. Tamsaky then went to Tilokaikt, and he said he would have nothing to do with it. But his son and young men wished to do it, and they contended so long that at last he said: "If you are determined to do so, go and kill him." Afterward, the Indians presented a gun two different times to Tamsaky, and told him to go and kill the Doctor. He said he would not kill him.
When the priests came, they got to quarreling; the Catholic priests told them that what the Doctor taught them would take them to the devil, and the Doctor told them what the priests taught them would take them to the devil. After the priests told them that, the Indians said they believed it, for the Doctor did not cure them.
After the Doctor was killed, the priest told the Young Chief that it was true that the Doctor had given them poison; before that, the Doctor had given them medicine and they died. After the massacre, all the Indians went to the priest's house (an Indian lodge near Dr. Whitman's station), and I said that I was going to ask the priest himself whether it was true or not, so that I could hear with my own ears. He (the priest) told them that the priests were sent of God. They did not know how to answer him. The Five Crows told me that the priest told him the Doctor was poisoning them. I then believed it.
They then went and killed the two sick men. I asked the Indians, if he gave us poison, why did the Americans get sick?
[It is evident that this conversation took place at the camp of Tilokaikt, where Mr. Brouillet says he spent the night of the 30th of November.]
Afterward, they went to the Doctor's place, and the priest was there too, and they asked him where the poison was that the Doctor gave them. After searching some time among the medicines, he found a vial with something white in it, and told them, "Here it is." I tell you what I heard.
The priest then told them that Mrs. Whitman had a father in the States that gave poison to the people there, and that he had given this to her, to poison them all; then they all believed. I told them that I did not believe that the Doctor was poisoning them; I said I expected they brought the sickness with them from California, for many of them died coming from that place. Joe Lewis told them to make a box, and Beardy buried the vial in the square box, stating, if they did not, the Americans would get it and poison them all.
The head man of the priests told them all these things, and the priest took all the best books to his house.
* * * * *
The above is a true extract from the journal of Mr. McLane, private secretary to Colonel Gilliam, the same as was read in my hearing to Mungo, the interpreter for Colonel Gilliam, when these statements were made, and he said it was true and correctly written.
(Signed,) L. H. JUDSON.
Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 25th day of November, 1848, Champoeg County, Oregon Territory.
AARON PURDY, Justice of the Peace.
* * * * *
There are three important facts stated by this Indian which are confirmed by other testimony.
First. That the priest was upon the ground, or in at the death.
Second. He was ready to overhaul the Doctor's medicines and hunt out some vial, and tell the Indians, "Here it is,--the medicine the Doctor has been killing you with."
Third. That he told them it was sent to the Doctor by Mrs. Whitman's father, who poisoned people in the States.
This explains the terrible and brutal treatment of Mrs. Whitman's body, even after death.
Brouillet says, "Joseph Lewis had succeeded in fixing upon their minds that Dr. Whitman had poisoned them," but Istacus, one of the first and most truthful Indians we became acquainted with in the country, tells us that the Indians did not believe Joe Lewis till the priest confirmed his statements, and this priest was required to show them the poison.
It would not be strange, if, while he is compelled to hunt over the medicines of Dr. Whitman, to find any that he could call poison, and in exhibiting such evidence to the deluded murderers about him, that he should feel himself in danger, yet his whole conduct belies such a statement, for he well knew the ignorance of those about him as to any medicine he might select and call poison.
This Indian's statement also explains the killing of the two young men, Sales and Bewley, and that as these priests "were sent of God," the disease of these young men would spread; in other words, their testimony would convict the parties implicated.
We find in this same letter to Colonel Gilliam, other statements that are important in the history we are giving. He says: "I knew that the Indians were angry with all Americans, and more enraged against Mr. Spalding than any other." If this was the case, why did they not kill him first? There is certainly some mistake in this statement of Mr. Brouillet, or else the Indians were too hasty, which is probably the case. The Indians were not quite as much "enraged" against Mr. Spalding as his reverence, who claimed to know their feelings so well.
Again, on the 54th page (39th of Ross Browne), in answer to Mr. Spalding's wild, despairing cry, "But where shall I go?" he answers: "I know not; you know the country better than I; all that I know is that the Indians say the order to kill Americans has been sent in all directions."
How did this Rev. Father Brouillet know all this? We have yet to learn that he ever gave a single American, except Mr. Spalding, any information respecting their danger,--which he certainly could have done with perfect safety, by sending any one or all of them a written notice of the "order to kill Americans;" but instead of warning them of their danger, he was present to show to the Indians a vial of Dr. Whitman's medicine and tell them it was the poison.
The long list of statements collected and given to the world as reliable historical data, by this priest, and embodied in an official report by J. Ross Browne, do but show the active part he, with his associate priests and the Hudson's Bay Company, took to destroy the American influence and settlements then in the country.
Says the historian Bancroft: "It is the duty of faithful history to trace events not only to their cause, but to their authors."
We will direct our attention for a short time to the proceedings of Mr. McBean in charge of Fort Wallawalla (or Fort Nez Perces), in council with the Indians. From the statement of Mr. Wm. Geiger, Jr., who was at Dr. Whitman's station during the winter of 1846-7, teaching school, we learn that the Indians showed some dissatisfaction, and were called together by Dr. Whitman, to consult and decide what they would do. The Doctor proposed to them that a majority of the tribe should let him know definitely, and a vote was taken, and but two or three were found to favor his leaving. During this council Mr. Geiger and the Doctor learned that there had been conversation and a council with the Indians at the fort, by Mr. McBean. That he had informed them of the Mexican war between the United States and Mexico, and of the prospect of a war between the United States and England (King George men), and that he was anxious to know which side the Cayuses would take in the event of such a war. This question Mr. McBean kept constantly before the Indians whenever they went to the fort. They would return to the station and say that Mr. McBean had given them more news of the prospect of war between the King George people and Americans, and that he wished to know which side they would take. Tamsaky, Tilokaikt, and one other Indian said they had told Mr. McBean that they would join the King George. Some said they had told him their hearts favored the Americans; others professed to be on the "back-bone," i.e., hesitating. All matters and causes of dissatisfaction between the Doctor's mission and the Indians were amicably settled. The Doctor and Mr. Geiger could not see why Mr. McBean should beset the Indians on that subject, unless it was to bring about what had been before, viz., to make allies of the Indians in case of war.
On account of this dissatisfaction, the Doctor thought of leaving. Mr. Geiger says, "I told them I thought it their duty to remain. I thought the Indians as quiet as communities in general; in old places there were more or less difficulties and excitements."
In the communication signed by Mr. Geiger, he is asked, "What was the cause of discouragement with the Doctor and Mr. Spalding at that time?"
A.--"The influence of the Roman priests, exercised in talking to the Indians, and through the French half-breed, Lehai, Tom Hill, a Delaware Indian, and others."
Q.--"What did the Indians mention was the instruction they received from Roman Catholics?"
A.--"That the Protestants were leading them in wrong roads, i.e., even to hell. If they followed the Suapies (Americans) they would continue to die. If they followed the Catholics, it would be otherwise with them; only now and then one would die of age. That they would get presents,--would become rich in every thing."
We have a statement made by Brouillet as to their influence among the Indians on this coast, found on the 87th page of his narrative, "Protestantism in Oregon" (55th of Ross Browne.) He says:--
"Messrs. Blanchet and Demerse, the first Catholic missionaries that came to Oregon, had passed Wallawalla in 1838, where they had stopped a few days, and had been visited by the Indians. In 1839, Mr. Demerse had spent three weeks in teaching the Indians and baptizing their children. In 1840, he had made there a mission so fruitful that the Protestant missionaries had got alarmed, and feared that all their disciples would abandon them if he continued his missions among them. Father De Smet, after visiting the Flatheads in 1840, had come and established a mission among them in 1841; and from that time down to the arrival of the bishop, the Indians of Wallawalla and of the Upper Columbia had never failed to be visited yearly, either by Mr. Demerse or by some of the Jesuits, and those annual excursions had procured every year new children to the church. Almost every Indian tribe possessed some Catholic member."
We can bear positive testimony as to the effect and influence of those teachings up to 1842 among the Upper Columbia Indians; and it is to illustrate the bearing and result of those teachings, continued for a series of years upon the savage mind, and the influence of a foreign monopoly in connection with such teachers, that we bring these statements before the reader.
The vast influence wielded by this foreign fur and sectarian monopoly was used to secure Oregon for their exclusive occupation. The testimony of Rev. Messrs. Beaver and Barnley, and Sir Edward Belcher, as given by Mr. Fitzgerald, and that of his Reverence Brouillet, as found on the 56th page of his narrative, all affirm the close connection of these two influences. Leaving out of the question the statement of many others, we have that of this priest. He says:--
"Some days after an express reached us from the fort, informing us that our lives were in danger from a portion of the Indians who could not pardon me for having deprived them of their victim; and this was the only reason which prevented me from fulfilling the promise which I had made to the widows and orphans of returning to see them, and obliged me to be contented with sending my interpreter" to the scene of the murder, to bring Miss Bewley to be treated as the evidence in the next chapter will show.
Chapter LIX
Continuation of Miss Bewley's evidence.--The priests refuse her protection.--Forcibly taken from the bishop's house by Five Crows.--Brouillet advises her to remain with her Indian violator.--Indecent question by a priest.--Mr. Brouillet attempts to get a statement from her.--Two questions.--Note from Mrs. Bewley.--Bishop Blanchet's letter to Governor Abernethy.--Comments on the Jesuits' proceedings.--Grand council at the bishop's.--Policy in forcing Miss Bewley to Five Crows' lodge.--Speeches by Camaspelo and Tilokaikt.--Killing of Elijah and the Nez Perce chief commented on.--The true story told.--Dr. White's report.--The grand council again.--Review of Brouillet's narrative.--Who were the real authors of the massacre.
Miss Bewley's Deposition Continued.
Q.--When were you taken to the Umatilla?
A.--Just at night, on Thursday the next week after the first massacre, having shaken with the ague that day; slept out that night in the snow-storm.
Q.--Whose horses came after you?
A.--Eliza Spalding said they belonged to her father; this led us to suppose Mr. Spalding was killed.
Q.--When did you leave Umatilla?
A.--On Monday before the Wednesday on which we all went to Wallawalla.
Q.--When did you reach Wallawalla?
A.--On Wednesday before the Saturday on which Mr. Spalding and company arrived, and we all started the next day for the lower country.
Q.--Where did you spend your time when at the Umatilla?
A.--Most of the time at the house of the bishop; but the Five Crows (Brouillet's Achekaia) most of the nights compelled me to go to his lodge and be subject to him during the night. I obtained the privilege of going to the bishop's house before violation on the Umatilla, and begged and cried to the bishop for protection either at his house, or to be sent to Wallawalla. I told him I would do any work by night and day for him if he would protect me. He said he would do all he could. [The sequel shows that in this promise the bishop meant to implicate and involve the Five Crows, should a war with the American settlement grow out of the massacre.] Although I was taken to the lodge, I escaped violation the first four nights. There were the bishop, three priests, and two Frenchmen at the bishop's house. The first night the Five Crows came, I refused to go, and he went away, apparently mad, and the bishop told me I had better go, as he might do us all an injury, and the bishop sent an Indian with me. He took me to the Five Crows' lodge. The Five Crows showed me the door, and told me I might go back, and take my clothes, which I did.
Three nights after this, the Five Crows came for me again. The bishop finally ordered me to go; my answer was, I had rather die. After this, he still insisted on my going as the best thing I could do. I was then in the bishop's room; the three priests were there. I found I could get no help, and had to go, as he told me, out of his room. The Five Crows seized me by the arm and jerked me away to his lodge.
Q.--How long were you at the Umatilla?
A.--Two weeks, and from Friday till Monday. I would return early in the morning to the bishop's house, and be violently taken away at night. The Bishop provided kindly for me while at his house. On my return one morning one of the young priests asked me, in a good deal of glee, how I liked my companion. I felt that this would break my heart, and cried much during the day. When the two Nez Perces arrived with Mr. Spalding's letter, they held a council in the bishop's room, and the bishop said they were trying to have things settled. He said Mr. Spalding was trying to get the captives delivered up; I do not recollect what day this was, but it was some days before we heard that Mr. Ogden had arrived at Wallawalla. When the tall priest (Brouillet) that was at the Doctor's at the first was going to Wallawalla, after hearing of Mr. Ogden's arrival, he called me out of the door and told me if I went to the lodge any more I must not come back to his house. I asked him what I should do. He said I must insist or beg of the Indian to let me stop at his house; if he would not let me, then I must stay at his lodge. I did not feel well, and toward night I took advantage of this and went to bed, determined I would die there before I would be taken away. The Indian came, and, on my refusing to go, hauled me from my bed and threw my bonnet and shawl at me, and told me to go. I would not, and at a time when his eyes were off I threw them under the table and he could not find them. I sat down, determined not to go, and he pushed me nearly into the fire. The Frenchmen were in the room, and the bishop and priests were passing back and forth to their rooms. When the Indian was smoking, I went to bed again, and when he was through smoking he dragged me from my bed with more violence than the first time. I told the Frenchman to go into the bishop's room and ask him what I should do; he came out and told me that the bishop said it was best for me to go. I told him the tall priest said, if I went I must not come back again to this house; he said the priests dared not keep women about their house, but if the Five Crows sent me back again, why come. I still would not go. The Indian then pulled me away violently without bonnet or shawl. Next morning I came back and was in much anguish and cried much. The bishop asked me if I was in much trouble? I told him I was. He said it was not my fault, that I could not help myself. That I must pray to God and Mary. He asked me if I did not believe in God; I told him I did.
* * * * *
We will not stop to comment on the simple narrative of this young woman. No language of mine will more deeply impress the reader with the debasing character of these "holy fathers, the Catholic priests," that served the Honorable Hudson's Bay Company and mother church so faithfully.
It appears that Miss Bewley arrived at the bishop's on the 10th of December. On the 58th page of Brouillet's narrative (41st of Browne's) we find the following language:--
"On the 11th of December we had the affliction to hear that one of the captives had been carried off from the Doctor's house by the order of Five Crows, and brought to him; and we learned that two others had been violated at the Doctor's house."
How seriously these holy fathers were afflicted, Miss Bewley has told us in language not to be misunderstood. Her statement continues:--
* * * * *
Last summer, when I was teaching school near Mr. Bass, the tall priest, whose name I have learned was Brouillet, called on me, and told me that Mr. Spalding was trying to ruin my character and his, and said that Mr. Spalding had said that I had told him (Mr. S.) that the priests had treated me as bad as the Indians ever had. I told him I had not said so. He said he wanted to ask me some questions, and would send the Doctor, who could speak better English; he wished me to write it; I told him I would rather not do it. When at the Umatilla, the Frenchmen told me that they were making arrangements to locate the priests,--two at Mr. Spalding's as soon as Mr. S. got away, and two at the Dalles, and they were going to the Doctor's next week to build a house. This conversation was before Mr. Ogden arrived at Wallawalla.
Q.--Did Dr. Whitman wish to have Joe Lewis stop at his place?
A.--He let him stop at first only because he said he had no shoes nor clothes and could not go on; but when a good many, on account of sickness, had no drivers, the Doctor furnished Joe with shoes and shirts, and got him to drive a team. He was gone three days, and came back, but the Doctor never liked it. I heard Mrs. Whitman and the Sager boys say that Joe Lewis was making disturbance among the Indians.
Q.--Did you ever hear the Doctor express any fears about the Catholics?
A.--Only once; the Doctor said at the table: "Now I shall have trouble; these priests are coming." Mrs. Whitman asked: "Have the Indians let them have land?" He said: "I think they have." Mrs. Whitman said: "It's a wonder they do not come and kill us." This land was out of sight of the Doctor's as you come this way (west of the station). When the Frenchman was talking, at Umatilla, of going to build a house there, he said it was a prettier station than the Doctor's.
(Signed,) LORINDA BEWLEY.
Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 12th day of December, 1848. G. WALLING, Justice of the Peace, Clackamas County, Oregon Territory.
We have another original statement of Miss Bewley's, as taken by Rev. J. S. Griffin, which we will give as a part properly belonging to the above statement.
OREGON CITY, February 7, 1849.
Questions to Miss Lorinda Bewley, in further examination touching the Wailatpu massacre:--
Q.--Did the Five Crows, when you were taken to his lodge from the bishop's house by an Indian, send you back with your things in apparent anger, or did he appear at that time to pity you?
A.--I thought at the time that I had good evidence, from his manner and behavior to me at the lodge in giving me up, that he was disposed to pity me, and not to abuse me.
Q.--Did you anticipate that evening that he would demand you afterward?
A.--No; I did not think he was disposed to.
Q.--What was this Five Crows' English name?
A.--Hezekiah (Brouillet's Achekaia).
Q.--Did you have evidence that it was necessary for Hezekiah to hold you as a wife to save you from a general abuse by the Indians?
A.--I was overwhelmed with such evidence at Wailatpu, but saw none of it at the Umatilla.
Q.--What was the order of conversation to you when the priest went to Wallawalla, after hearing of Mr. Ogden's arrival?
A.--I besought him to do all he could at the fort to obtain my delivery from bondage, and he said he would. A little after he called me to step out of the door from the rest, and told me if I went with the Indian I must not come back to his house any more, when I burst out crying, and asked him what to do; he said I must insist or beg the Indian to let me remain, or I must remain there. I begged him, as I was alone there, he would do everything in his power to get Mr. Ogden to take me away, whether he could obtain all the prisoners or not.
Q.--Did you know of the priests having baptized any at the time of the burial at Wailatpu?
A.--I did not; but they were baptizing a great many at the Umatilla, principally children; two the same day after I went there, and very frequently afterward. On Christmas day they baptized many.
Q.--Was it understood among the Indians that the families at the mill were English?
A.--Yes, sir; and Mr. Smith was an Englishman.
Q.--Did the report reach the Indians at Wailatpu before you went to Umatilla, that the Indians were told at the Fort Wallawalla that they must not kill any more Americans?
A.--Yes, sir. This seemed to be generally understood.
Q.--Was it made known to you captives what Edward Tilokaikt was gone to the Umatilla for?
A.--It was made known to us, after a council, that Edward was to go to the big chief at the Umatilla and see what was to be done with us, and especially with the young women; and, after his return, he immediately commenced the massacre of the sick young men, and the next morning announced to us that the arrangement had been made for Hezekiah to come and take his choice among the young women, and that Edward and Clark Tilokaikt were then to take the other two. Hezekiah was a chief [the one appointed by Dr. White in 1843], and regarded by us, and I believe by others, as a single man. Edward and Clark were only the sons of a chief. Hezekiah did not come for me himself, but sent a man [Brouillet says, page 56 (Ross Browne, 40), the caution he received from Mr. McBean "obliged me to be content with sending my interpreter"] and a boy for the young woman that was a member of Mrs. Whitman's family. The contract between my mother and Mrs. Whitman was, that I was to continue my studies with Mrs. Whitman, and take part with her in the instruction and care of the children.
Q.--After Mr. Rogers entered the house wounded, and closed the doors, did he have any conversation with Nicholas or the Manson boys?
A.--No. Neither of them came into the house.
LORINDA BEWLEY.
Rev. J. S. Griffin says he is ready to testify to the fact that the above is a true statement, as made by Miss Bewley, and it was his own oversight at the time that her oath was not attached before a justice of the peace.
There was no other person living at the time that could positively state the facts as given by Miss Bewley; others have given their depositions, which confirm her statements, and show them to be the simple, unvarnished truth of the whole scene that passed before her, and her treatment by those "holy fathers, the bishop and his priests."
We are forced to confess, that, after studying and copying these old documents and papers, we dare not trust ourselves to express an opinion, lest the reader should say our feelings have overcome our better judgment. Therefore we will simply ask a question or two, and let each reader answer for himself.
What think you, kind reader, of the Hudson's Bay Company and Roman Catholic Jesuits, and priests and bishop in Oregon in 1847-8?
Did not Dr. Whitman, his wife, and all at his mission suffer, and many of them die, to save Oregon as a part of the great American Republic?
We know that a few of the poor miserably deluded Indians belonging to his mission have suffered an ignominious death by being hung like dogs (a death, of all others, the most odious to them), and for what? Simply because they were deceived by those who knew at the time they were deceiving them; and who have since so managed as to deceive the Christian world, and bring falsehood to cover their participation in the transaction.
We would not have been so particular, nor copied documents so extensively, had we not before us a narrative of 108 pages, written by one of these "holy fathers," Vicar-General Brouillet, purporting to give the causes both remote and immediate of this horrible massacre; giving it the title of "Protestantism in Oregon, account of the murder of Dr. Whitman, and the ungrateful calumnies of H. H. Spalding, Protestant missionary," in which he searches back even before the arrival of Dr. Whitman in the country, and cites Rev. Mr. Parker's first supposed or imaginary statements to the Indians as a cause of the massacre, which we know to be false and unfounded from the six years' early acquaintance we had with those Indians; and also from the personal allusions he makes to transactions with which we were intimately acquainted, and know to be false in fact and inference. These statements of this priest and his associates, McBean and Sir James Douglas, have induced us to extend the particulars of that massacre beyond our original design in giving the history of Oregon. As he claims great credit for himself and associates, Stanfield in particular, in burying the dead, and showing kindness to the widows and orphans, we will give another item to show the character of the thief, liar, and accomplice in that massacre, whom this priest is so ready in his narrative to claim as a saint.
Mrs. Catharine Bewley says: "Dr. Prettyman said to me that Joe Stanfield told him at his own house, when the sheriff had him in custody, that 'the morning of the day when young Bewley was killed, he had gone into the room and had hid every thing in the room back of the bed he was upon.' This, the doctor thought, showed that he was the cause of his being killed."
Under date of Umatilla, December 21, 1847, Father Blanchet, bishop of Wallawalla, writes to Governor Abernethy as follows:--
"As soon as I had been informed what had happened, I instantly told the two chiefs near my house that I hoped the women and children would be spared until they could be sent to the Wallamet. They answered: 'We pity them,--they shall not be harmed; they shall be taken care of, as before.' I have since had the satisfaction to hear that they have been true to their word, and that they have taken care of these poor people."
In Father Brouillet's narrative, page 57 (Ross Browne, page 41), he says: "On the 3d, the bishop called for the Young Chief and his brother Five Crows, in order to express to them how deeply he had been pained by the news of the horrible affair at Wailatpu, and to recommend to their care the widows and orphans, as well as the men who had survived the massacre. They protested to have given no consent to what had happened at Wailatpu, and promised to do all in their power for the survivors.
"On the 10th we received the painful intelligence that two other young men, who, being sick, had been spared by the Indians at the time of the first massacre, had since been torn from their beds and cruelly butchered."
The positive testimony in regard to these two young men is already before the reader. If this bishop and priest do not act and narrate falsely, we ask, What is falsehood?
After giving a description of the grand council held at the Catholic mission house by Tawatowe, Tilokaikt, Achekaia, and Camaspelo, Brouillet says, on page 67: "Before taking leave of the chiefs, the bishop said to them all publicly, as he had also done several times privately, that those who had taken American girls should give them up immediately. And then all entreated Five Crows repeatedly to give up the one whom he had taken, but to no purpose." How does this compare with Miss Bewley's testimony?
We must ask to be excused from at present commenting further upon the notes and extracts from the statements of these several parties. They are before you, reader, not as fiction or imagination; they are transactions connected with the history we are writing. The statements on the part of this bishop and his priests have been published and extensively circulated, and have been believed, and have had far too much influence in encouraging and sustaining them among their deluded victims; besides mystifying, and causing a public sentiment to be generally entertained derogatory to the Protestant and American missionary influence in Oregon.
We have given an account of this bishop and his priests on the first commencement of their missionary efforts among the Cayuse Indians, and have followed them through their labors, and their legitimate results, till we now come to the 16th of December, the day on which they received a wild, incoherent--not to say injudicious and foolish--letter from Rev. Mr. Spalding, which they gave, with a flourish of trumpets and shout of triumph, on their arrival in Wallamet, to be published as evidence of their extensive influence over the Indians, and to destroy the influence of Mr. Spalding as a missionary. In this they have succeeded but too well, and for which we should look closely into their proceedings with the Indians.
Brouillet, on the 58th and 61st pages (41st and 43d of Browne), in speaking of the Nez Perces who brought Mr. Spalding's letter, says:--
"We had reason to be astonished at that confidence of those Indians, as we had had as yet no opportunity of seeing any one of the Nez Perces since our arrival in the country.
"The two Nez Perce chiefs advised the Cayuses to take measures for avoiding a war with Americans. They requested the bishop to write to Governor Abernethy, begging him not to send up an army, but rather to come himself in the spring and make a treaty of peace with the Cayuses, who promised that they would then release the captives of Wailatpu,--promising besides to offer no injury to Americans until they heard the news from Wallamet. The bishop told them that he was glad of their proceeding, and was disposed to assist them to the extent of his power, but that he could not write without knowing the opinion of the Cayuses, and that as soon as he could learn this he would send an express below. He then encouraged them to see all the chiefs about it."
From the above and subsequent statements and transactions, we have no reason to doubt the truth of the bishop's remark, "that he was glad of their proceeding." There can be no question that he did all he could to help the Indians, and to defeat the provisional troops and government, as is proved by the evidence already given, and will be seen as we proceed. He tells the Indians that he could not write, without knowing the opinion of the Cayuses; he must be satisfied that they are all united, and when he has learned that fact, he can write with more assurance and effect to the governor. He extends consolation and encouragement to Camaspelo on the 18th, and two days after convenes the council alluded to.
"Accordingly, on Monday, 20th December, 1847, at the Catholic Mission, the Cayuses assembled in grand council held by Tawatowe (or Young Chief), Tilokaikt, Achekaia (or Five Crows), and Camaspelo, all the great chiefs of the Cayuses, in presence of many other great men (second chiefs) of the nation." This council was held just three months and three days after. Brouillet says that Bishop Blanchet met Dr. Whitman at Wallawalla, and said to him, "All is known. I come to labor for the conversion of Indians, and even of Americans, if they are willing to listen to me." And we say, to crush and drive the Protestant missions from the country, including their heretical settlements.
We wish to give these foreign priests the full benefit of their own statements, as we shall express fully our opinion of them; besides, we presume that not one in a thousand will be able to understand the wonderful workings of Jesuitism among the Indians and the people of our country, without extensive quotations from their books.
The narrative continues: "About ten o'clock in the morning they all entered the mission house. The bishop was present, together with Messrs. Rousseau, Leclaire, and myself [Vicar-General Brouillet, the writer of the narrative we are quoting from]. After a deep silence of some minutes, the bishop explained to them the object of the meeting. He began by expressing to them the pleasure he felt in seeing them thus assembled for the purpose of deliberating on a most important subject,--that of avoiding war, which is always a great evil. He told them that in matters of importance they should always hold a council and consult those who might be best able to give them good advice; that in giving their advice separately, they were liable to be misunderstood, and thereby expose themselves and their people to great misfortunes; that he was persuaded that if the chiefs had deliberated together they would not now have to deplore the horrible massacre of Wailatpu, nor to fear its probable consequences."
The reader can understand how sincere these "holy fathers" were in saying "horrible massacre at Wailatpu," when, instead of calling on Dr. Whitman, as Brouillet says he "cordially promised to do," he went to an Indian lodge, learned of the massacre, and remained all night, writing, the Indians say, this false and infamous account of the transaction, to slander the dead and clear the guilty; and the next morning baptized three of the Indian children before going to the assistance of the widows and orphans.
The bishop told them "that two Nez Perce chiefs had asked him to write to the great chief of Wallamet (Governor Abernethy) to obtain peace, but that he could not do so without the consent of the Cayuses."
It will be remembered that up to the arrival of Dr. White, in 1842, as an official spy upon the proceedings of the Hudson's Bay Company, drawing the pay of a sub-Indian agent, the company had not allowed any effort to combine the Indians; but on the arrival of Dr. White, they at once made use of him, and also of the bishop and his priests, to form just the combinations they wished to make use of, to strike at the settlements at the proper time.
Tawatowe, or Young Chief, was, up to the time of the taking of Fort Nez Perces, considered a head chief; but in consequence of the part he had taken in that affair his power had been broken. His brother, Five Crows, was advanced, and had become the favorite of Dr. Whitman, as well as of Dr. White, and was looked upon as friendly to the mission and the American cause. Miss Bewley's being forced to become his wife was a part of the scheme to involve him in the war then in contemplation, and to bring about a union of the tribe under the very plausible reason given by this "holy father," and was one of the most important measures to implicate that humane and Protestant Indian in the war measures now in discussion before this grand Indian council at the house of the bishop. The bishop says "that the propositions which those chiefs wished to send were these: 1st. That Americans should not come to make war; 2d. That they should send up two or three great men to make a treaty of peace; 3d. That when these great men should arrive, all the captives should be released; 4th. That they would offer no offense to Americans before knowing the news from below.
"The bishop then desired them to speak and to say what they thought of these propositions.
"Camaspelo spoke first. He said he was blind and ignorant, and had despaired of the life and salvation of his nation, but that the words of the bishop had opened his eyes, consoled and encouraged him; that he had confidence, and that he approved the propositions.
"The chief Tilokaikt then rose to say that he was not a great speaker, and that his talk would not be long. He then reviewed the history of the nation since the arrival of the whites (French people or Hudson's Bay Company) in the country down to the present time. He said that before they had been visited by white men the Indians were always at war; that at the place where Fort Wallawalla now stood nothing but blood was continually seen; that they had been taught by the whites that there was a God who forbids men to kill each other." "A jewel of gold in a swine's snout." This is the Indian that assisted in killing Dr. Whitman, and engaged his attention while his companion gave the first blow; and he afterward cut the Doctor's face horribly with a hatchet, while he was yet alive. But let us continue this "holy father's" lesson of peace and morality from the mouth of his converted Indian, for we have every reason to believe he is now fully converted to that faith, and has given us a specimen in the practice of the religion he has just commenced to learn. He says, "that since this time they had always lived in peace, and endeavored to persuade others to do the same. He eulogized Mr. Pambrun; spoke of a Nez Perce chief who had been killed when going to the States; afterward of the son of Yellow Serpent, who had been killed by Americans in California; said that they had forgotten all this. He spoke also of Dr. Whitman and Mr. Spalding, and finished by saying that since they had forgotten all, he hoped that the Americans would also forget what had been recently done; that now they were even."
This priest is careful to make his converted Indian tell a plausible story, as also to eulogize Mr. Pambrun and the Hudson's Bay Company, and to state that two Indians had been killed while in company with, or by Americans.
As to the killing of the Nez Perce chief (so called), we knew much more of it than this priest or his Indian. The Nez Perce was killed in open fight with the Sioux, at Ash Hollow, on the Platte River, after the party had fought three hours, and killed fifteen and wounded eight of the Sioux. He was no connection of this Cayuse tribe, and is only referred to for effect. The bishop makes Tilokaikt tell a falsehood to shield a crime in himself and associates.
The killing of Elijah, the son of Yellow Serpent, is equally false in the statement of the fact, and relation of the circumstances. Dr. White, sub-Indian agent, etc., was never known to tell the truth when a falsehood would suit his plans and purposes better; as is evident in this case, which is given that the reader may judge of its truth. Mr. Brouillet comments upon Dr. White's letter to the Department at Washington, April 4, 1845, as follows: "After speaking of some difficulties that occurred in California between the Cayuses and Wallawallas on one part, and the Spaniards and Americans on the other, on account of some stolen horses that the Cayuses and Wallawallas had taken from hostile Indians by fighting them [this is altogether a mistake, as the horses belonged to the Americans and Spaniards and they had their Indians guarding them, and the party here referred to killed the guard and attempted the life of an American], Mr. White passes on to relate a murder there, committed coolly by an American the fall previous upon the person of Elijah, the son of Yellow Serpent, the chief of the Wallawallas, in the following way: 'The Indians had gone to the fort of Captain Sutter to church, and, after service, Elijah was invited into another apartment, taking with him his uncle, Young Chief, of the Umatilla River, a brave and sensible chief of the age of five and forty.'" This priest, on page 30 (J. Ross Browne, page 28), makes Mr. McKinley say that in the fall of 1844, the Indians, a short time after their return from California, met one day at Fort Wallawalla, seven hundred in number, all armed, and decided to walk down immediately upon the colony of the Wallamet, and that they could be stopped only by the Young Chief, who, by his entreaties, decided them to abandon their undertaking and to go home. We are led to inquire, why did not these Indians, at this time, direct their attention to the American missions in their midst, and take their revenge then, instead of waiting three years, and then, as Brouillet says, making this murder a cause of the massacre? McBean, and Bishop Blanchet and his priests, were not then at the fort, nor among those Indians, to aid them in avenging themselves on the innocent.
But let us finish the account of this horrid transaction on the part of our countrymen, as repeated by Brouillet to excuse the Wailatpu massacre.
He says the Young Chief went into the room with Elijah, and "while there in an unarmed and defenseless condition, they commenced menacing him for things alleged against the River Indians of this upper country, in which none of them had any participation; called them indiscriminately dogs, thieves, etc." The truth is, that this party went from the Cayuse country to California expressly to steal horses and cattle. This same educated Indian boy was the leader of the party in going to the fort. He and the Young Chief were both arrested, and tried by a military court; the chief was acquitted, upon the evidence of the American referred to, as he saved his life, while Elijah was for killing him. Elijah was condemned, and shot, to prevent other similar parties from disturbing the settlements and killing peaceable Indians in California. This is the reason, as Mr. McKinley doubtless told Brouillet, why the Young Chief used his influence to prevent any attempt at retaliation.
The narrative continues: "This American then observed, 'Yesterday you were going to kill me; now you must die,' and drawing a pistol--Elijah, who had been five or six years at the Methodist Mission, and had learned to read, write, and speak English respectably, said deliberately, 'Let me pray a little first;' and kneeling down, at once commenced, and, when invoking the Divine mercy, was shot through the heart or vitals, dead upon the spot. Taking for truth an Indian report [which in this case suited this priest and Dr. White's purposes better than a true statement of the facts would], this horrible affair created considerable excitement [which, he tells us in another place, the Young Chief, who was present, was able to quell], and there is some danger of its disturbing the friendly relations that hitherto existed between us here and all those formidable tribes in the region of Wallawalla and Snake River."
This Indian story or tragedy is useful for three purposes. First, to show Dr. White's disposition to have his importance known to the department at Washington. Second, to show the disposition of this "holy father, the Catholic priest," to quote a case of the kind, to justify the Whitman massacre by the Indians, and deceive his readers and the world as to the real cause of that transaction; thus aiding us in bringing home the guilt of a crime where it belongs. Third, to show how capable he is of misrepresenting and falsifying historical facts, to excuse a foul murder of American citizens. He continues to quote Dr. White as follows:--
"Learning from Dr. Whitman, who resides in their midst, how much they were all excited by reason of the treacherous and violent death of this educated and accomplished young chief, and, perhaps more especially by the loss they had sustained, and then, after suffering so many hardships and encountering so many dangers, losing the whole, I apprehended there might be much difficulty in adjusting it, particularly as they lay much stress upon the restless, disaffected scamps, late from Wallamet to California, loading them with the vile epithets of dogs, thieves, etc., from which they believed or affected to believe that the slanderous reports of our citizens caused all their loss and disasters, and therefore held us responsible. He, Ellis, the Nez Perce chief, assured me that the Cayuses, Wallawallas, Nez Perces, Spokans, Ponderays, and Snakes were all on terms of amity, and that a portion of the aggrieved party were for raising a party of about two thousand warriors of those formidable tribes, and march to California at once,[13] and, nobly revenging themselves on the inhabitants by capture and plunder, enrich themselves upon the spoils; while others, not indisposed to the enterprise, wished first to learn how it would be regarded here, and whether we would remain neutral in the affair. A third party were for holding us responsible, as Elijah was killed by an American, and the Americans incensed the Spaniards."[14]
[Footnote 13] Brouillet, in his haste to bring Dr. White to prove his statements of the causes of the Whitman massacre, has forgotten that he was assured by Mr. McKinley that they intended to go to the Wallamet, instead of California.
[Footnote 14] See the whole of Dr. White's report, chapter 50, page 387 et seq.
The above extract is quoted by Brouillet for so base a purpose, that it seems necessary, in order to correct the errors of Dr. White and this priest, to give it in full. We have given the statement of Mr. McKinley, as quoted by Brouillet, which shows the absurdity of this whole document. If the Young Chief went into the room and saw Elijah shot down in the brutal manner represented by Dr. White, he certainly must have been a very remarkable and forgiving Indian if he used his influence to prevent his tribe from seeking revenge; besides, we find in the subsequent history, that even Elijah's own father did not seek to avenge his death, as stated by this priest on page 30 of this narrative (28th of Ross Browne's report).
He says: "And in the spring of 1847, the Wallawalla chief himself, Yellow Serpent, started with a party of Wallawallas and Cayuses for the purpose of attacking the Americans in California, whom they thought unsuspicious. But having found them on their guard, and too strong to be attacked without danger, he took their part against the Spaniards, offered his services to them, and fought in their ranks."
This, with the statement of Mr. McBean, as will be given in his letter, shows that this very Rev. Father Brouillet knew nothing of the subject he was writing about, and was ready to pick up any statement that might be made, without any regard to its absurdity or plausibility. I query whether there is a living man well acquainted with Dr. White, who will state that he believes he would tell the truth, officially or otherwise, when a falsehood would suit his purposes better; and from a careful study of the statements and writings of this reverend priest, we are forced to the same conclusion.
Rev. Mr. Brouillet has filled four pages and a half of his narrative with the statements of William Craig, in answer to questions asked by Hon. P. H. Burnett, all of which show that Mr. Craig knew nothing of the massacre only as he was told, by two Indians, what some other Indian said that some other Indian had said. We are not surprised that Mr. Burnett gave up the contest with Mr. Spalding, after examining such a witness as Mr. Craig, and finding that he knew so little relative to the subject in question. Suppose Tom Hill and the Indian messenger that brought the news to Mr. Spalding's station told all they heard of the matter, did that make their statements true? Or did the repeating of these Indian statements by Mr. Craig make them true? Rev. Father Brouillet has showed, in these four pages, a weakness we did not expect to find in a man with so many sacred titles to his name. In fact, the greater part of his statements are from persons who make them as coming second-hand from the Indians. He makes Mr. Craig repent from the mouth of the Indian messenger the statement first published in Sir James Douglas's letter to the Sandwich Islands; and then in conclusion says, on page 29:--
"Now I am satisfied that every impartial and unprejudiced person, after reading attentively the above documents, will come with me to the conclusion that the true causes, both remote and immediate, of the whole evil must have been the following: 1st. The promise made by Mr. Parker to the Cayuses and Nez Perces of paying for their lands every year, and the want of fulfillment of that promise."
Which promise Mr. Parker never made, and which the Hudson's Bay Company and these Roman priests made up to cause difficulty with the Indians and American missions and settlements.
"2d. The death of the Nez Perce chief, killed on his way to the United States, when he was in company with Mr. Gray, and in his service." This Mr. Gray knows to be false, both in statement and inference, as already explained.
This priest says: "The conclusion is evident, from the circumstances which preceded that death, and from the proceedings of the Nez Perces against Mr. Spalding and all the people of his establishment on account of it, and likewise from the general habit of the Indians in such cases."
We will here state that we were two years at Mr. Spalding's station, on returning from the States, and saw the whole Nez Perce tribe, and employed them for days and months, and worked with them, and explored their country to select farms for them, and know that the Nez Perces never, on any occasion, made the least disturbance about the station, or in any other place, on account of the death of that Indian; and we know that neither Mr. Spalding nor any of the people at his place were ever confined in their houses for an hour on account of it; and we further know that the statement made by Brouillet, as coming from old Toupin, is false and malicious, and only shows the ignorance and malice of this priest, who has made these false statements, as he has those about the killing of Elijah, to cover his own guilt in the infamous crime charged upon him and his associates.
"3d. The murder committed by an American in California on the person of Elijah, the son of the Wallawalla chief, in 1844." Answered already.
This priest says of Yellow Serpent: "On his way coming back from California he lost many of his people from sickness [to which Istacus alludes in his reasons for not believing that Dr. Whitman was the cause of the Indians dying by poison], so that he and his young men, when arrived at home in the fall, felt more ill-disposed than ever toward the Americans." This priest's fourth reason embraces the tales told by Tom Hill, Joe Lewis, Finlay, old Toupin, and Stanfield, which are all of the same class, and have all been learned from the same reverend teachers, and copied into Sir James Douglas's letter, for the benefit of the American Board, going by way of the Sandwich Islands.
His fifth reason, about the small-pox, as stated by Craig--the Doctor and Gray's poisoning melons--the Doctor being a physician, shows that he is terribly pressed for a plausible reason for the crime he attempts to excuse. His sixth reason--lack of sincerity. Here he quotes Mr. Spalding's letter, written soon after his return home, after being exposed six days and nights to extreme fatigue, hunger, and cold,--his mind racked with anxiety and fear in regard to himself and family, and tortured with thoughts of the scene at Wailatpu; being ignorant of any of the particulars of the massacre, and of the part the bishop and his priests were taking in it, he wrote as to friends whom he thought would feel for his situation. He also quotes a letter he received through P. H. Burnett, signed J. Magone, who says: "I recollect distinctly, however, that he (Mr. Spalding) was not in favor of killing all the Cayuses, for he gave me names of some four or five that he knew to be friendly, and another whom I marked as questionable." (Mr. S. had learned more of the particulars of the massacre.) Does this letter prove that he was in favor of killing all the Indians but the ones mentioned, or does it show his anxiety lest the innocent should perish with the guilty, which led him to give those names to Major Magone, an officer in the provisional army?
We have naturally left that deep, silent grand council of Indians, presided over by his reverence, Bishop Blanchet, and directed our attention to other important facts and statements relative to the subject of this chapter.
We now have the touching appeal of Edward Tilokaikt, with whom the reader has become acquainted in the depositions already given. He is now brought before us in this grand council at the bishop's house (page 66 of Brouillet; page 44 Ross Browne).
"Edward, the son of Tilokaikt, then came forward, bearing in his hand the Catholic Ladder stained with blood; he repeated the words which Dr. Whitman had used when he showed it to them, one or two weeks before he died: 'You see this blood! it is to show you that now, because you have the priests among you, the country is going to be covered with blood! You will have nothing now but blood!' He then related what had passed, gave a touching picture of the afflicted families in seeing borne to the grave a father, a mother, a brother, or a sister; spoke of a single member of a family who had been left to weep alone over all the rest, who had disappeared. He stated how and for what the murder had been committed, entered into the most minute details, avoiding, however, to give any knowledge of the guilty, repeated the words which Joseph Lewis said had passed between Dr. Whitman, his wife, and Mr. Spalding, and finally spoke of the pretended declaration of Mr. Rogers at the moment of his death: 'that Dr. Whitman had been poisoning the Indians.'"
Reader, need I tell you that the language and sentiment above quoted as coming from Edward Tilokaikt, never entered his savage Indian brain; that this speech is the carefully combined and studied production of the author of the narrative we have quoted it from? It is given in connection, repeated and combined with a little variation by every individual who makes a statement favorable to those priests; and in the whole list of statements this priest Brouillet and McBean are the only two that could write or translate the Indian ideas into French or English; so that at the time these Indian speeches were said to have been made, and purport to have been translated by Brouillet, it is plain to be seen that he tells his own story to suit the case in hand; and the letter of Sir James Douglas to the Sandwich Islands shows this priest to be the author of the statements contained therein. These Indian assemblies or councils were held to more closely unite the tribe, and give a coloring of truth to the malicious statements of Joe Lewis and Edward Tilokaikt.
All these false statements were written out and sent to the Sandwich Islands under date, Vancouver, 9th December, 1847, while Brouillet says this Edward Tilokaikt repeated them as a reason for the massacre on the 20th December, 1847, eleven days before they are said to have been repeated by the Indians.
Many important facts can only be reached by carefully studying the language of this priest, in connection with the evidence obtained from the survivors, and their subsequent conduct, and the foreign correspondence of the parties who were seeking the exclusive occupation of our country.
From the statement that follows, it will be seen how careful this Jesuit is to inform us that these propositions come from the Nez Perces.
He says, on page 65: "After having deliberated together, the chiefs concluded by adding something to the propositions of the Nez Perces, insisting principally upon the reasons which they pretended ought to excuse their action, and requested the bishop to send to the governor in their name the following manifesto."
Before copying this important document and the letter which accompanied it to the governor of Oregon, we will place before our readers the "preface" to the book in which we find it, that they may see the full object of the author of that narrative in publishing it:--
NEW YORK, June, 1853.
"The following interesting narrative was prepared by the very Rev. Mr. Brouillet, vicar-general of Wallawalla, at the time of the excitement consequent on the murder of Dr. Whitman by the Indians, and in answer to Mr. Spalding, and other of Dr. Whitman's former associates. Although the immediate occasion has passed away, it is proper, still, to put the facts of the case on record; and these pages, which appeared recently in the columns of the New York Freeman's Journal, will form an interesting and authentic chapter in the history of Protestant missions.
"J. A. MCMASTERS."
We will now turn to the 65th page of this false and malicious narrative, and find a document carefully prepared, as stated by its author, in grand council assembled under the eye of Bishop Blanchet, then bishop of Wallawalla, by the very Rev. Mr. Brouillet, etc. By a cursory glance at this narrative and document, it will be seen that it is prepared as coming from the Indians for the express purpose of blackening the character of Dr. Whitman, his wife, Mr. Spalding, and Mr. Rogers, and of charging them with being the cause of their own murder, and the murder of all who fell at Wailatpu by the hands of their own Indians, the Cayuses. That it embodies all the foul slanders against those missions that have been collected for a series of years, and asserts them to be true, without a single deposition or statement having been made before any court or justice of peace, known to the laws then in the country. These statements, from preface to finis, go upon the presumption that the title and professions of the men whose names are attached are sufficient evidence of the truth of any statements they may make, however unreasonable or false they may be. The documents above referred to are as follows (J. R. Browne, page 45):--
"The principal chiefs of the Cayuses, in council assembled, state: That a young Indian (Joseph Lewis) who understands English, and who slept in Dr. Whitman's room, heard the Doctor, his wife, and Mr. Spalding express their desire of possessing the lands and animals of the Indians; that he stated also that Mr. Spalding said to the Doctor, 'Hurry giving medicines to the Indians, that they may soon die;' that the same Indian told the Cayuses, 'If you do not kill the Doctor soon, you will all be dead before spring;' that they buried six Cayuses on Sunday, November 28, and three the next day; that Mr. Rogers, the schoolmaster, stated to them before he died that the Doctor, his wife, and Mr. Spalding poisoned the Indians; that for several years past they had to deplore the death of their children; and that, according to these reports, they were led to believe that the whites had undertaken to kill them all; and that these were the motives which led them to kill the Americans. The same chiefs ask at present--
"1st. That the Americans may not go to war with the Cayuses.
"2d. That they may forget the lately committed murders, as the Cayuses will forget the murder of the son of the great chief of Wallawalla, committed in California.
"3d. That two or three great men may come up to conclude peace.
"4th. That as soon as these great men have arrived and concluded peace, they may take with them all the women and children.
"5th. They give assurance that they will not harm the Americans before the arrival of these two or three great men.
"6th. They ask that Americans may not travel any more through their country, as their young men might do them harm.
"(Signed,) "TILOKAIKT. "CAMASPELO. "TAWATOWE. "ACHEKAIA.
"PLACE OF TAWATOWE, UMATILLA, December 20, 1847."
"The bishop accompanied this manifesto with a letter addressed to the governor, which concluded in these terms: 'It is sufficient to state that all these speeches went to show, that since they had been instructed by the whites they abhorred war, and that the tragedy of the 29th had occurred from an anxious desire of self-preservation, and that it was the reports made against the Doctor and others which led them to commit this act. They desire to have the past forgotten and to live in peace as before. Your excellency has to judge of the value of the documents which I have been requested to forward to you. Nevertheless, without having the least intention to influence one way or the other, I feel myself obliged to tell you, that by going to war with the Cayuses, you will likely have all the Indians of this country against you. Would it be for the interest of a young colony to expose herself? That you will have to decide with your council.'"
Reader, you now have before you a full statement of the most important facts of the Whitman massacre, and of the part taken in it by "the holy fathers, the Catholic priests," as they were styled by Mr. McBean, of Fort Nez Perces, to Mr. Kimzey and his wife.
The part taken by Mr. McBean, Mr. Ogden, and Sir James Douglas, will be given in another chapter.
The above manifesto is given as having been made on the 20th of December, 1847. On the 23d, three days after, when this very Rev. Mr. Brouillet mounted his horse to go to the fort, he told Miss Bewley that "if she went to Five Crows' lodge any more she must not come back to his house." Miss Bewley says: "The bishop told me I had better go.----The bishop sent an Indian with me; he took me to Five Crows' lodge.----The bishop finally ordered me to go.----I found I could get no help."
These are the solemn affirmations of this intelligent young American lady, who was present at the bishop's house when this manifesto was prepared.
Were this Bishop Blanchet and his priests true and sincere in what they said, and in the advice they say they gave to the Indians?
We have now traced what may be termed the missionary account of this painful tragedy, as given by both parties. Our readers must judge for themselves as to the guilt or innocence of all the parties involved, and also of the application to our subject of the extensive extracts we have given. We will now turn our attention to those whom we conceive to be the prime movers, and, in consequence, the most deeply implicated in this tragedy.
We have had occasion to allude to the intimate connection existing between the Jesuit missions in Oregon and the Hudson's Bay Company. As early as 1836, that company brought a Protestant Episcopal chaplain to Vancouver for political reasons, whom they soon dismissed and attempted to disgrace, as unworthy of belief in any statement he might make. Soon after, in the fall of 1838, two Roman priests arrived at Vancouver and took charge of the religious and literary instructions of the members of the company,--of their children and servants, and, as far as possible, of all the Indians in the country; and while the company professed friendship for the American missionaries, they were active and vigilant to defeat all their efforts to enlighten and civilize the Indians, enlisting sufficient American influence to distract and divide the American people, so as to cover up their main object of securing the country for British Territory. This will be seen by evidence already quoted from our English authors, Mr. Fitzgerald and Sir Edward Belcher, and the refusal of Sir James Douglas to aid the provisional government, or furnish supplies for their troops, and the fact that they did embrace every opportunity to supply the Indians with guns, powder, and balls, and sought to combine the whole Indian power and prejudice against the settlements.
Chapter LX
The Hudson's Bay Company's and the priests' part in the massacre.--McBean's messenger.--Plot divulged to Hinman, Ogden, and Douglas.--Douglas's remark to Hinman.--McBean's letter.--His perversion of facts.--Comments.--Sir James Douglas's letter to Governor Abernethy.--His Sandwich Islands letter.--Its falsehood and absurdity.--Mr. Hinman's letter to Governor Abernethy.--The dates.--Assertion of Robert Newell.--Hudson's Bay Company v. United States.
We learn from Mr. McBean's letter, given below, that his horse guard and interpreter were at Dr. Whitman's mission and saw the dead bodies; and from Indians we learn that they were kept by the Rev. Mr. Brouillet, and took his account of the massacre (which he spent most of the night in preparing) to Mr. McBean. They also reported to him that three parties of Indians were preparing and about to start, to destroy the remaining Protestant missions and American settlements in middle Oregon, including the station at the Dalles; that the women and children were to be held as hostages, or captives for future disposal; that letters and a statement were prepared by Mr. McBean, and instructions given to his messenger that he might inform the Indians on his way down to Vancouver of what had happened, but he must not give any information to any American on the way, or at the Dalles. We learn from the Hon. A. Hinman that this messenger went to him at the Dalles station, and told him that he was sent by Mr. McBean to Vancouver for men, to replace such as had died of sickness at Fort Nez Perces. The messenger took dinner with Mr. Hinman, who went with him to the Indian lodges, where the messenger told the Indians of the massacre. Mr. Hinman procured a canoe and started with him to go to Vancouver. They reached Cape Horn, some thirty miles above that place, and there, while windbound, he informed Mr. Hinman of what had occurred, making a full confession, that "the priests, Mr. McBean, and he were bad in trying to deceive him and have his family and people killed by the Indians;" told of his instructions, and of what was expected to be done with all the Americans in the country, and that he was the bearer of letters to Governor Ogden from Mr. McBean.
We will now go with this express to Vancouver. Says the Hon. A. Hinman, who is still alive, and has made oath to the truth of his statements: "We went first to Mr. Ogden's room and informed him of the massacre. He was shocked, and said: 'Mr. Hinman, you can now see what opposition in religion will do.' We then went to Mr. Douglas's room and informed him, and when Mr. Ogden was pacing the room, he said: 'Mr. Douglas, you see now what opposition in religion does.' After a moment's pause, Mr. Douglas replied, 'There may be other causes.'"
Reader, will you turn back and read over the chapter on the English Hudson's Bay Company's effort to secure Oregon, and see if there has not been a desperate effort made, since Dr. McLaughlin left that company, to overcome his mistakes and his humane policy toward Americans. Look also at the chapter on the English Hudson's Bay Company's policy relative to Rupert's Land and Oregon, and learn fully what Mr. Ogden and Mr. (now Sir James) Douglas meant by these expressions made to Mr. Hinman, who says: "Mr. Douglas turned to me, and wished to know why I was not at home at so perilous a time. I told him I had received no letter from Wallawalla, and did not learn of the massacre till below the Cascades. At this he expressed surprise, and said, 'Mr. McBean ought by all means to have informed you of your danger.'
"After this the express was opened, and Mr. Douglas read, and I listened to the account as given by Mr. McBean, and also of his account of three parties, which, Mr. McBean's letter said, Indian report says are fitting out, one to the saw-mill to kill the Americans at that place, and one to Rev. Mr. Spalding's station to cut off the Americans at that place, and one also to the Dalles to cut off those at that station.
"I said to Mr. Douglas, 'How is it possible that Mr. McBean could have treated me in this way? How is it possible he did not inform me?' Mr. Douglas, after a little pause, said, 'Mr. Hinman, we must consider that the poor man was in circumstances of great perplexity, and might not know what to do.'"
This was not the case, for Mr. McBean did give him positive instructions, as we learn from Mr. Hinman's statement. He says: "After hearing this dreadful account from the Canadian, I asked him why he did not inform me before I left my house. He said Mr. McBean told him to say nothing about it to them at the Dalles!"
Soon after the messenger and Mr. Hinman left the Dalles, the Indians went to the station and informed P. Whitman, the doctor's nephew, that his uncle and aunt, and all the Americans at that place, were killed. This Indian report was not credited; they could not believe that Mr. McBean would send a messenger, as he had done, and not inform them of what had actually taken place.
The reader will remember the deposition of Mr. Kimzey in relation to Mr. McBean's statements about the "holy fathers, the Catholic priests," and the subsequent instructions to him, to let the Indians know he was from the fort.
We will now direct our attention to the mutilated letter of William McBean, as furnished by Sir James Douglas to Governor Abernethy, and published in the Oregon Spectator, December 10, 1849:--
FORT NEZ PERCES, Nov. 30, 1847.
"To the Board of Managers:
"GENTLEMEN,--It is my painful duty to make you acquainted with a horrible massacre which took place yesterday at Wailatpu, about which I was first apprised, early this morning, by an American who had escaped, of the name of Hall, and who reached this place half-naked and covered with blood, as he started at the outset; the information I received was not satisfactory. He, however, assured me that the Doctor and another man were killed, but could not tell us the persons who did it, and how it originated. I immediately determined on sending my interpreter and one man to Dr. Whitman to find out the truth, and, if possible, to rescue Mr. Manson's two sons and any of the survivors. It so happened that, before the interpreter had proceeded half-way, the two boys were met on their way hither, escorted by Nicholas Finlay, it having been previously settled among the Indians that these boys should not be killed [Mr. McBean should have added, as per my instructions]; as also the American women and children [as per Joseph Stanfield's direction, as he had taken Mrs. Hays for a wife, and several Indians were to have the young women at the station for wives]. Tilokaikt is the chief who recommended this measure. I presume that you are well acquainted that fever and dysentery have been raging here and in the vicinity, in consequence of which a great number of Indians have been swept away, but more especially at the Doctor's place, where he had attended upon the Indians. About thirty souls of the Cayuse tribe died, one after another, who evidently believed the Doctor poisoned them, and in which opinion they were, unfortunately, confirmed by one of the Doctor's party. As far as I have been able to learn, this has been the sole cause of the dreadful butchery. In order to satisfy any doubt on that point, it is reported that they requested the Doctor to administer medicine to three of their friends, two of whom were really sick, but the third feigned sickness, and that the three were corpses the next morning. After they were buried, and while the Doctor's men were employed slaughtering an ox, the Indians came one by one to his house, with their arms concealed under their blankets, and, being all assembled, commenced firing on those slaughtering the animal, and in a moment the Doctor's house was surrounded; the Doctor, and a young lad brought up by himself, were shot in the house. His lady, Mr. Rogers, and the children had taken refuge in the garret, but were dragged down and dispatched (excepting the children) outside, where their bodies were left exposed.
"It is reported that it was not their intention to kill Mr. Rogers, in consequence of an avowal to the following effect, which he is said to have made, and which nothing but a desire to save his life could have promoted him to do. He said, 'I was one evening lying down, and overheard the Doctor telling Rev. Mr. Spalding that it was best you should all be poisoned at once, but that the latter told him it was best to continue slowly and cautiously, and between this and spring not a soul would remain, when they would take possession of your lands, cattle, and horses.'
"These are only Indian reports, and no person can believe the Doctor capable of such an action without being as ignorant and brutish as the Indians themselves. One of the murderers, not having been made acquainted with the above understanding, shot Mr. Rogers."
This confession is made, as the reader will notice, and attributed to Mr. Rogers, in order to give the coloring of truth to Joe Lewis's statement. There appears, as will be seen by comparing the statements of Vicar-General Brouillet's Indian council and this of McBean's, a little doubt which to make the author of that story. Sir James Douglas has adopted McBean's statement, as the most plausible, in his report, as it is attributed to one of the Doctor's own party.
The whole thing, as will be seen by the testimony of Miss Bewley, is utterly false, and, as McBean has said, only Indian reports; and, we will add, told to them by Stanfield, Joe Lewis, and Finlay, a Frenchman, an Indian, and a half-breed, all under the influence, and probably in the service, of the Hudson's Bay Company and priests. And McBean, Sir James Douglas, and Brouillet are more brutish than the Indians, in putting such reports in circulation. If they had no confidence in them, why did they repeat them, giving them the color of truth? And why do they pretend to say "his life would have been spared," and it was only a mistake that he was shot? Bewley and Sales were brutally murdered the eighth day after Rogers was, for Bewley's saying he did not believe the stories about poisoning Indians, and that he believed the priests were the cause of it. If the Doctor, and Mr. Spalding, and Mrs. Whitman were the only ones they thought injuring them, why attempt to kill all the Americans at the station? Why make the arrangements as extensive as Vicar-General Brouillet tells Mr. Spalding they were (on page 51 of his narrative, 38 of Ross Browne's report): "I knew that the Indians were angry with all Americans, and more enraged against Mr. Spalding than any other;"--on 54th page: "I know not; you know the country better than I do. All that I know is, that the Indians say the order to kill Americans has been sent in all directions."
Without the history of the Hudson's Bay Company and the Northwest Fur Company before us, we would be quite incapable of comprehending the expressions and statements of this priest to Mr. Spalding. Were we ignorant of that history, and without a knowledge of the statements to which they have made oath in relation to their claims against our government, we could not understand these letters of McBean and Douglas.
We are also in possession of other facts, respecting the treatment of their own countrymen who have unfortunately fallen under their displeasure, which is here repeated upon Dr. Whitman and Mr. Rogers.
We would cut all these communications short, and make a general statement, but we would be charged (as we have already been) with "stringing together statements without facts;" besides, all these Hudson's Bay documents and statements have had a powerful influence to destroy the characters of good men who are dead, and shield the vile conduct of the guilty, who are still living.
So far as McBean was concerned, he obeyed orders as implicitly as Grant of the Hudson's Bay Company did, when he sent forty families, in 1846, into the mountains of California, to perish in the snow with cold and hunger. McBean must assist in blackening the character of Whitman, Rogers, and Spalding, to protect that of the "holy fathers, the Catholic priests."
McBean in his letter further says: "It is well understood that eleven lives were lost and three wounded. It is also rumored that they are to make an attack upon the fort; let them come if they will not listen to reason; though I have only five men at the establishment, I am prepared to give them a warm reception; the gates are closed day and night, and bastions in readiness. In company with Mr. Manson's two sons was sent a young half-breed lad brought up by Dr. Whitman; they are all here, and have got over their fright."
This portion of the letter is supposed, by Mr. Hinman, to have been put in by Mr. Douglas in place of that which related to sending parties to destroy Americans at other places; and to show to the world that they were threatened by the Indians, as well as the Americans. The same as Brouillet is careful to tell us that "he was afraid the Indians would kill him," and that the priests were not safe among them.
"The ringleaders in this horrible butchery are Tilokaikt, his son, Big Belly, Tamsaky, Istacus [a true friend of the Americans, who was only a witness of the murders], Towmoulisk, etc. I understand from the interpreter that they were making one common grave for the dead. The houses were stripped of every thing in the shape of property; but when they came to divide the spoils, they all fell out among themselves, and all agreed to put back the property. I am happy to state the Wallawalla chief had no hand in the whole business."
If this is true, the killing of the Wallawalla chief's son in California could not have been one of the causes of the massacre, as alleged in the narrative of the very Rev. Mr. Brouillet.
"They were all the Doctor's own people,--the Cayuses."
This we should expect, as it would enable those who wished to make their own guilt appear innocence. The Doctor's people alone were to commence killing the Americans. It is asserted by good authority, that a part of Mr. Spalding's, and the Indians at the Dalles, were ready to engage in the same business, from the same advice and orders.
"One American shot another, and took the Indians' part to save his own life."
This statement by McBean is made, as will be seen, to give the impression that there was a quarrel among the Americans, and that they were ready to betray and shoot each other and take the part of the Indians. The reader will recollect that this shooting refers to the Indian Joe Lewis, in killing one of the Sager boys, and is explained particularly by Sir James Douglas in his Sandwich Islands letter, for the information of the American Board of Missions. This fact goes to show that Sir James had received a more particular and carefully prepared account than Mr. McBean had; while the one was a summary, the other was the particulars so arranged as to implicate Dr. Whitman, Mr. Spalding, Mr. Rogers, Mrs. Whitman, and another American, to show that they were not only ready to poison the Indians, but to kill and betray each other to save their own lives; thus showing the intimate connection and complicity of Sir James with the very rev. vicar-general, in giving countenance to this infamous slander, and publishing it to the world over his own signature, and using all his influence to shield and clear the instigators of the crime.
It can not be urged that Sir James received his particular information at some other time, for his letters to Governor Abernethy and the Sandwich Islands were dated, the one to the governor, December 7, 1847, in which he says, "A copy of Mr. McBean's letter herewith will give you all the particulars known to us of this indescribably painful event;" and the one to the Islands, December 9, 1847, in which he gives more particulars.
The impression is irresistibly fixed in the mind, that Mr. Brouillet spent most of the night, on arriving at Wailatpu (before the dead were buried), in Tilokaikt's lodge or camp, arranging and writing those statements and particulars, so that Sir James Douglas could give his approval, and that they would go to the American Board of Missions and the friends of the murdered dead, with the sanction of his name, implicating the dead as having brought about this horrible massacre.
Another reason for this impression is, that in all the public and private correspondence between any of these parties, there is, and always has been, the most intense anxiety shown to prevent the open discussion of that transaction, as will be seen in the next paragraph in McBean's letter, and by the promptness with which Mr. Ogden reported to Bishop Blanchet; Mr. Spalding's injudicious remarks to Major Magone on the trip down the river; the manner of Mr. Spalding's very unwise and imprudent letter to the bishop and his priests, was published and commented upon by them; the promptness of Mr. Douglas to demand an explanation of Colonel Gilliam's supposed statement; the refusal of the Hudson's Bay Company to furnish supplies to the provisional troops; and the fact that the company did supply 1,080 pounds of powder, 1,800 pounds of balls and shot to the priests for the Indians, with three cases containing thirty-six guns, all of which were seized by Lieutenant Rogers at the Dalles, and should have been (but were not) confiscated. We will now ask the attention of the reader to the remainder of this (to the Hudson's Bay Company and Romanists in general) glorious news of the complete victory they had obtained over Protestantism and its missions in Oregon.
Mr. McBean, or Sir James Douglas, we do not know which, says: "Allow me to draw a veil over this dreadful affair which is too painful to dwell upon, and which I have explained conformable to information received and with sympathizing feelings.
"I remain, with much respect, gentlemen, "Your most obedient humble servant,
"WILLIAM McBEAN."
We can scarcely retain the expressions of Whew! Horrible! etc., as we give the balance of this important letter, copied and given to the public of Oregon, under the eye of Sir James Douglas, with the--
"N. B.--I have just learned that the Cayuses are to be here to-morrow to kill Serpent Jaune, the Wallawalla chief.
"W. McB."
"Names of those who were killed: Dr. Whitman, Mrs. Whitman, Mr. Rogers, Hoffman, Sanders, Osborn [not killed], Marsh, John and Francis Sager, Canfield [not killed], and a sailor, besides three that were wounded more or less--Messrs. Hall, Kimball, and another whose name I can not learn.
"W. McBEAN."
Could the reader look at the exact original copy of that letter, and of that as found in the Spectator of December 10, 1847, and hear the expressions of sentiment and feeling among a portion of the people at Oregon City; and listen to some of the private consultations, and hear the opinions there expressed, he would be able to understand the impression that this, with some other letters published at that time, made upon the public mind.
There was in one little council of a number of the then representatives of Oregon, a disposition to let that foul murder pass, without making an effort to avenge those deaths, or punish the Indians. One of that little council exclaimed with an oath, "Gentlemen, we must not allow that murder to pass, without an effort to punish those concerned in it; and for one, I know that Dr. Whitman did not bring it upon himself. Our own existence in this country is involved in the action we take in this matter. It becomes absolutely necessary that we take measures to protect ourselves and punish the murderers."
FORT VANCOUVER, Dec. 7, 1847.
"George Abernethy, Esq.:
"SIR,--Having received intelligence last night (on the 4th), by special express from Wallawalla, of the destruction of the missionary settlement at Wailatpu by the Cayuse Indians of that place, we hasten to communicate the particulars of that dreadful event, one of the most atrocious which darkens the annals of Indian crime.
"Our lamented friend Dr. Whitman, his amiable and accomplished lady, with nine other persons, have fallen victims to the fury of those remorseless savages, who appear to have been instigated to the appalling crime by a horrible suspicion which had taken possession of their superstitious minds, in consequence of the number of deaths from dysentery and measles, that Dr. Whitman was silently working the destruction of their tribe, by administering poisonous drugs under the semblance of salutary medicines.
"With a goodness of heart and benevolence truly his own, Dr. Whitman had been laboring incessantly, since the appearance of the measles and dysentery among his Indian converts, to relieve their sufferings, and such has been the reward of his generous labors.
"A copy of Mr. McBean's letter herewith will give you all the particulars known to us of this indescribably painful event.
"Mr. Ogden, with a strong party, will leave this place as soon as possible for Wallawalla, to endeavor to prevent further evil, and we beg to suggest to you the propriety of taking instant measures for the protection of the Rev. Mr. Spalding, who, for the sake of his family, ought to abandon the Clearwater Mission without delay, and retire to a place of safety, as he can not remain at that isolated station without imminent risk in the present excited and irritated state of the Indian population.
"I have the honor to be, sir, "Your most obedient servant,
"JAMES DOUGLAS."
We now give Sir James Douglas's letter to the Sandwich Islands, as found in the March number of the Friend:--
"FORT VANCOUVER, Dec. 9, 1847.
"S. N. Castle, Esq.:
"SIR,--It is with feelings indescribably painful that I hasten to communicate to you, for the information of the Board of Missions, intelligence of a disastrous event which lately occurred at the mission station of Wailatpu. Our esteemed friend Dr. Whitman, his amiable and accomplished lady, and nine men and youths in the mission employ, were murdered on the 29th ultimo by the Cayuse Indians, with circumstances of the most revolting cruelty. The lives of the women and children, with the exception of the lamented lady already mentioned, were spared. The mission being situated in the Cayuse country, they had a peculiar interest in protecting it from harm, in gratitude for past favors, and for the blessings of religious instruction so assiduously dispensed to them and to their families; yet those very people, the objects of so much solicitude, were alone concerned in effecting the destruction of the establishment founded solely for their benefit.
"The Cayuses are the most treacherous and untractable of all the Indian tribes in this country [contradicted by Mr. Ogden], and had on many former occasions alarmed the inmates of the mission by their tumultuous proceedings and ferocious threats; but, unfortunately, these evidences of a brutal disposition were disregarded by their admirable pastor, and served only to arm him with a firmer resolution to do them good. He hoped that time and instruction would produce a change of mind,--a better state of feeling toward the mission,--and might have lived to see his hopes realized [had not the Hudson's Bay Company and the Roman priests determined otherwise], had not the measles and dysentery, following in the train of emigration from the United States, made fearful ravages this year in the upper country, many Indians having been carried off through the violence of the disease, and others through their own imprudence.
"The Cayuse Indians of Wailatpu being sufferers in the general calamity, were incensed against Dr. Whitman, [by the tales of Joe Lewis, Stanfield, and the very Rev. Mr. Brouillet, who afterward found a vial of white powder and called it poison, and ordered the Indians to bury it, as per evidence in the case] for not exerting his supposed supernatural power in saving their lives. They carried this absurdity beyond that point of folly.
"Their superstitious minds became possessed with the horrible superstition that he was giving poison to the sick instead of wholesome medicine, with the view of working the destruction of the tribe; their former cruelty probably adding strength to their suspicions. Still some of the more reflecting had confidence in Dr. Whitman's integrity, and it was agreed to test the effect of the medicine he had furnished on three of their people, one of whom was said to be in perfect health."
The absurdity of this statement is so palpable, and so perfectly improbable in every respect, that, with all my study of Indian character, I am unable to understand why this statement is repeated by any of the parties concerned in bringing about that massacre. It can only be believed by the most stupid, as it has not the plausibility of truth in it; and Mr. Douglas showed a debasement of mind beyond comprehension in quoting it to his friend. We quote this whole letter, that it may be seen how low Sir James felt himself obliged to descend, to make an absurdity appear reasonable. The idea is started by Brouillet, increased by McBean, and completed by Douglas, who would give such accounts to the public to make others equally false appear probable. He continues:--
"They unfortunately died, and from that moment it was resolved to destroy the mission."
But we have positive testimony that the destruction of that mission, with Mr. Spalding's, was determined upon, and so stated by McBean before an Indian was known to be sick in the tribe or at the station. Mr. Douglas says:--
"It was immediately after burying the remains of these three persons, that they repaired to the mission one after another, with their arms hid under their blankets. The Doctor was at the school with the children, the others were cutting up an ox which they had just killed. When the Indians were numerous enough to effect their object, they fell upon the poor victims, some with guns and others with hatchets, and their blood was soon streaming on all sides.
"Some of the Indians turned their attention toward the Doctor; he received a pistol-shot in the breast from one, and a blow on the head from another. He had still strength enough to reach a sofa, where he threw himself down and expired. Mrs. Whitman was dragged from the garret and mercilessly butchered at the door. Mr. Rogers was shot after his life had been granted to him.
"The women and children were also going to be murdered, when a voice was raised to ask for mercy in favor of those whom they thought innocent, and their lives were spared.
"It is reported that a kind of deposition made by Mr. Rogers incensed the fury of this savage mob. Mr. Rogers was seized, was made to sit down, and then told that his life would be spared if he made a full discovery of Dr. Whitman's supposed treachery. That person then told the Indians that the Doctor intended to poison them; that one night, when Mr. Spalding was at Wailatpu, he heard them say that the Indians ought to be poisoned, in order that the Americans might take possession of their lands; that the Doctor wished to poison them all at once, but Mr. Spalding advised him to do it gradually. Mr. Rogers, after this deposition, was spared, but an Indian, who was not present, having seen him, fired at and killed him.
"An American made a similar deposition, adding that Mrs. Whitman was an accomplice, and she deserved death as well as her husband.
"It appears that he concluded by saying that he would take the side of the Indians, and that he detested the Americans. An Indian then put a pistol into his hand, and said to him, 'If you tell the truth, you must prove it by shooting that young American;' and this wretched apostate from his country fired upon the young man shown to him, and laid him dead at his feet.
"It was upon the evidence of that American that Mrs. Whitman was murdered, or she might have shared in the mercy extended to the other females and children.
"Such are the details, as far as known, of that disastrous event, and the causes which led to it.
"Mr. Rogers' reported deposition, if correct, is unworthy of belief, having been drawn from him by the fear of instant death. The other American, who shed the blood of his own friend, must be a villain of the darkest dye, and ought to suffer for his aggravated crime."
There is no evidence that Sir James Douglas ever exerted the least influence to arrest or punish one of those murderers; on the contrary, there is evidence that the Hudson's Bay Company assisted them and facilitated their escape from justice, and supplied the Indians with arms and ammunition to carry on the war that followed. Particulars of the whole truth, are given in another chapter. This letter of Sir James Douglas continues:--
"On the 7th instant, Mr. Ogden proceeded toward Wallawalla with a strong party of the Hudson's Bay Company's servants, to endeavor to prevent further evil.
"Accompanying, you will receive a copy of a letter which I addressed to Governor Abernethy immediately after the arrival of the melancholy intelligence at this place.
"All that can be collected will be considered important by the friends of Doctor and Mrs. Whitman in the United States, who will be anxious to learn every particular concerning their tragic fate. It will be a satisfaction for them to know that these eminent servants of God were faithful in their lives, though we have to deplore the melancholy circumstances which accompanied their departure from this world of trial.
"I am, sir, your obedient servant,
"JAMES DOUGLAS."
We now have before us the statements of all the parties concerned in the most inhuman and disgraceful tragedy that has darkened the pages of our history. The crime itself was most inhuman and brutal, but, being mixed with religious prejudice and sectarian hate, guided and brought about by foreign commercial influences under the direction of a British monopoly, it demands a national investigation.
That Sir James Douglas knew more of the inception and ultimate designs of that transaction is evident from the prompt and careful manner in which he answered Mr. Ogden's remark, that it was brought about from religious causes; he affirmed that "there might be other causes;" and when he had read the dispatches, he said, "We must consider the poor man was in great perplexity, and might not know what to do." These two expressions of Sir James Douglas to Mr. Ogden and Mr. Hinman are the key that unlocks the whole mystery in this desperate arrangement to hold this whole country for the exclusive benefit of that monopoly.
As to the morality of the transaction, the great sympathy of Sir James and his conclave of bishops and priests, the church assumes all. The baptizing of three Indian children was of more importance to the church than all the suffering widows and orphans at that missionary settlement.
The particular account, as given by Sir James, was of more importance than punishing the murderers, or even casting a suspicion, such as Mr. Ogden, his associate, had done, upon his accomplices in crime.
These two letters show his duplicity, and the unblushing manner in which he gives one statement to Governor Abernethy, for Oregon, and another for the Board of Missions, and how careful he is to state circumstances and false impressions as to the facts he pretends to give with so much sympathy and apparent interest in the fate of the murdered dead.
There are but two other persons who have given us any information of this tragedy, on the part of the priests and the Hudson's Bay Company. One of those was, at the time, in charge of Fort Nez Perces. His account was sent to Sir James,--mutilated, and not as carefully prepared for the people of Oregon as was this one for the great world beyond. The other is prepared by the very Rev. Mr. Brouillet, vicar-general of Wallawalla, and given to the world to form an "interesting and authentic chapter in the history of Protestant missions," and contains all the imaginary circumstantial statements of the massacre, as given over the name of James Douglas, and officially in the report of J. Ross Browne, December 4, 1859.
If these statements had first appeared, as they now do, over the name and by the authority or affirmation of the very Rev. Mr. Brouillet, etc., all the world, as J. Ross Browne did, would have adopted the idea of Mr. Ogden, and said truly this was the result of opposition in religion. But Sir James Douglas proves, by his own statements and letters, and subsequent conduct all through the war that followed, that it was not "opposition in religion alone." It was a predetermined arrangement of the "powerful company, the practical monopoly of the fur trade," which, in 1865, he affirmed this company held over the country in 1846. The profits of that business were not to be lost to his powerful company by any missionary settlement in it.
Are we correct in these conclusions? The statements are given by the parties implicated. Were we to allow our personal feelings and sectarian preferences to influence our conclusions, we would join in the general conclusion of Mr. Ogden; but a full knowledge of the facts forces us to believe the statement of Mr. Douglas as being the most correct; nevertheless, we will not abate one iota of the scathing condemnation justly due to the foreign sectarianism brought into the country to effect the object of that corporation, nor of the scorn and infamy due to the immediate controlling actors--Bishop Blanchet and his priests--under the garb of religion.
We wish to keep as distinctly as possible before the mind the separate part each party has performed in this great drama of which we have been writing. As we have before said, there were four distinct parties or influences in the country, and the Indian formed the fifth. The Hudson's Bay Company and the Roman priests combined and formed one; the missionaries with the settlers formed another; and the Indian was between them. For a time, the American influence was the most prominent,--say in 1843, 1844, and 1845. In 1846, Bishop Blanchet was in Europe, making extensive preparations for missionary operations in Oregon, corresponding in extent with those made by the Rev. Jason Lee in 1839-40.
"On August 19, 1847, Bishop Blanchet arrived in the mouth of the Columbia River, in the Morning Star, Captain Menes, five and a half months from Brest, with five priests, three Jesuits, three lay brothers, two deacons, and seven nuns." In addition to these, we had, overland, eight priests and two nuns that same year. These, with the priests already in the country, gave us twenty-five of the Roman clerical order and fifteen nuns. This was a powerful and extensive effort to recover the lost foreign influence in the country. How well they succeeded is now a matter of history, and will enable the reader to understand the bold and defiant attitude of Mr. Douglas and his efficient co-laborers, Bishop Blanchet and his priests, among the Indians.
The missionary settlement at Wailatpu was the most important point in the whole upper country. The influence and position of those Indians were such, that special efforts were required to commence and carry on the destruction of all American settlements in the country.
We come now to the letter of Hon. A. Hinman, properly belonging to this chapter.
FORT VANCOUVER, December 4, 1847.
Mr. George Abernethy:
DEAR SIR,--A Frenchman, from Wallawalla, arrived at my place on last Saturday, and informed me that he was on his way to Vancouver, and wished me to assist in procuring him a canoe immediately. I was very inquisitive to know if there was any difficulty above. He said four Frenchmen had died recently, and he wished to get others to occupy their places.
I immediately got him a canoe, and concluded to go in company with him, in order to get some medicine for the Indians, as they were dying off with measles and other diseases very fast. I was charged with indifference. They said we were killing in not giving them medicines, and I found if we were not exposing our lives, we were our peace, and consequently I set out for this place. This side of the Cascades I was made acquainted with the horrible massacre that took place at Wailatpu last Monday. Horrid to relate! Dr. and Mrs. Whitman, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Osborn, Mr. Sanders, a school-teacher, the two orphan boys (John and Francis Sager), together with all the men at that place,--eleven in all. Some are living at the saw-mill, which is situated about twenty miles from the Doctor's. A party set out for that place to dispatch them; also a party for Mr. Spalding's, to dispatch them; and they are not satisfied yet, but a party is said to have started for my place, and has, if true, reached them before this time. Oh! had I known it when I was at home. I can neither sleep nor take any rest, on account of my family and those with them, viz., my wife and child, the Doctor's nephew, Dr. Saffron, and Mr. McKinney and wife. If I had ten men I could defend myself with perfect ease, by occupying the meeting-house, which is very roomy and close. You see my situation, as well as Mr. Spalding's. I have perfect confidence in your doing all you can to get a party to come up and spend the winter there, and likewise to go to the rescue of the women and children, and Mr. Spalding, if alive, which I think very doubtful.
Delay not a moment in sending a few men for my protection; a few moments may save our lives.
I expect to leave to-morrow for home, and perhaps the first salutation will be a ball. My family is there, and I must return if it costs my life.
We are in the hands of a merciful God, why should we be alarmed? I will close by saying again, send a small force immediately without the delay of one day. Farewell.
Yours truly, ALANSON HINMAN.
It will be seen that the main facts are given by Mr. Hinman, with the designs of other Indian parties to cut off the Americans at Mr. Spalding's, the saw-mill, and at the Dalles, which Mr. Douglas omits in his letter to Governor Abernethy, but informs him of the Indians' threatened attack upon Fort Nez Perces (Wallawalla).
That part of Mr. Douglas's letter relating to Mr. Rogers' supposed statement to the Indians, the brother (still living) has requested Mr. Douglas to explain; but no explanation has been given. We know, from the depositions given, that Mr. Douglas made the statement without evidence of its truth; and it is evident he is too stubborn or proud to acknowledge or explain his error.
There is one other fact in connection with this transaction that looks dark on the part of Sir James Douglas.
It is shown in the dates of the several letters. Mr. Hinman's is dated December 4; Mr. Douglas's, December 7; that to the Sandwich Islands, December 9. Now, between the 4th and 7th are three days. In a case of so much importance, and professed sympathy,--as expressed in his letter,--how is it, that three, or even two days were allowed to pass without sending a dispatch informing Governor Abernethy of what had happened, and of what was expected to take place? which last he had left out of his letter, and the copy of McBean's; but does inform him of the threatened danger to Fort Nez Perces, as coming from McBean.
Mr. Douglas is prompt to urge the removal of Mr. Spalding, but unreasonably slow to send an express twenty or thirty miles to notify the American settlement of its danger.
We wish to say, once for all, that we are not giving the private history or character of any man or set of men. Their public conduct and proceedings are a part of our history. Mr. Douglas was, at the time we are writing, the acknowledged head of the Hudson's Bay Company, and, as such, acted and controlled the movements of its members. Bishop Blanchet was the acknowledged head of the Roman Church, and, as such, acted with Mr. Douglas; for while not one Roman priest, or a servant of either of these two parties were disturbed or harmed in the least, all Protestant missionaries and American citizens were either killed, or driven from the upper country by order of that company. As Robert Newell asserts, under date of October 25, 1866: "And they could not have remained in the country a week without the consent and aid of that company, nor could any mission, in my opinion, in those days have been established in this (Wallamet) or that (Wallawalla) valley, without the aid and influence of the Hudson's Bay Company, nor could the settlers have remained in the country as they did up to 1848, for the same reasons."
This statement is made by a gentleman who professes to know more of, and has been (without a question) more favored by the Hudson's Bay Company than any other American in the country. If his statement is true, which we have no doubt he believes it to be, then who is responsible for all the murders of American hunters, trappers, missionaries, immigrants, and settlers on their way to our country and in it. But we will not risk our conclusions upon the statement of an individual, who is totally ignorant of the policy of the company he undertakes to defend. We have, in addition, the sworn statement of Sir James Douglas as to the power and influence of his company, one year previous to the cutting off of the missionary settlement at Wailatpu.
He says, under oath: "Their posts were so arranged as to practically enjoy a monopoly in the fur trade, and they possessed an extraordinary influence with the nations west of the Rocky Mountains." (Answer to interrogatory in claim Hudson's Bay Company v. United States.)
That this influence was exerted to destroy that mission there can be no question; and that the same influence has since been exerted to spread, far and wide, statements originated by them and their associates to blast the character of the dead, and destroy the influence of the living in the cause of truth, is equally true.
We find it stated in Brouillet's narrative that the most friendly and cordial relations existed between the Hudson's Bay Company and his mission; so much so, that he is present by special invitation at Mr. Ogden's council for arranging the purchase of the captives. He informs us, on page 69, "Protestantism in Oregon," that Mr. Ogden told them that "the Hudson's Bay Company had never deceived them; that he hoped they would listen to his words; that the company did not meddle with the affairs of the Americans; that there were three parties; the Americans on one side, the Cayuses on the other, and the French people and the priests in the middle; the company was there to trade and the priests to teach them their duties; 'Listen to the priests,' said he, several times; 'listen to the priests; they will teach you how to keep a good life; the priests do not come to make war; they carry no arms,--they carry but their crucifixes,[15] and with them they can not kill.' He insisted particularly, and at several times, upon the distinction necessary to be made between the affairs of the company and those of the Americans."
[Footnote 15] The Oblates, who constantly carry a crucifix on their breasts, were present.
The company's interests must not be interfered with. The professions of sympathy found in Mr. Douglas's letters are all explained, when the facts are fully developed. The complaint of the company, as stated in the memorial presented to the commissioners, April 17, 1865 (Hudson's Bay Company v. United States, page 19), states that "among these circumstances may be specified the aggressive acts and the general conduct of American citizens, and of persons acting under the authority of the United States, commencing shortly after the 15th of June, 1846, and continuing from year to year, by which the rights of the claimants under that treaty were violated and denied, and their property and possessions were, in some instances, usurped and taken from them, and, in others, were necessarily abandoned. This course of conduct was, perhaps, to be expected, from the anomalous position in which the company was placed,--a foreign corporation exercising a quasi sovereignty and exclusive rights over territory transferred to a power whose policy in dealing with such territory was diametrically opposed to that which the company pursued, and from which they derived their profits."
This complaint demands careful consideration at the present time. The statements of Mr. Ogden to the Indians, the memorial of the company, and the testimony it has produced in support of its claims, the statements and correspondence of the Jesuit missionaries, all go to prove the settled policy of the company to maintain its "quasi sovereignty" and exclusive asserted claims to the country at the time of the Wailatpu massacre.
That company, with less than half its then powerful influence and capital, had compelled the more powerful and active French-Canadian Northwest Company, numerically stronger than itself, to yield and accept its terms of a union in 1821.
They had driven from the country all American traders. They had, as they vainly imagined, secured an influence in the provisional American government sufficient to control all danger from that source, while they were ready to let loose the Indians upon the settlers, and prepared to supply them with the means to destroy or drive them from the country.
Chapter LXI
Preliminary events of the Cayuse war.--Message of Governor Abernethy.--Journal of the house.--Resolutions.--Assembling of the people at the call of the governor.--Enlisting of men.--Names of the volunteers.--Names of the officers.--Their flag.--Their departure.--Letter to Sir James Douglas.--His reply.--Commissioners return.--Address to the citizens.--Public meeting.--Report of commissioners to the Legislature.--Messenger sent to Washington.--Memorial to Congress.--Champoeg County tax.--Strength of the settlement called for.--Bishop Blanchet's letter to Governor Abernethy.
Message of Governor Abernethy.
OREGON CITY, December 8, 1847.
GENTLEMEN,--It is my painful duty to lay the inclosed communications before your honorable body. They will give you the particulars of the horrible massacre committed by the Cayuse Indians on the residents at Wailatpu. This is one of the most distressing circumstances that has occurred in our Territory, and one that calls for immediate and prompt action. I am aware that to meet this case funds will be required, and suggest the propriety of applying to the Hudson's Bay Company and the merchants of this place for a loan to carry out whatever plan you may fix upon. I have no doubt but the expense attending this affair will be promptly met by the United States government.
The wives and children of the murdered persons, the Rev. Mr. Spalding and family, and all others who may be in the upper country, should at once be proffered assistance, and an escort to convey them to places of safety. I have the honor to remain, gentlemen,
Your obedient servant,
GEORGE ABERNETHY.
To the Honorable Legislative Assembly, Oregon.
Journal of the House, December 8, 1847
At two o'clock the house met. The sergeant-at-arms announced a special communication from the governor, which was read by the clerk. It consisted of letters from Messrs. Douglas and McBean, of the forts on the Columbia, announcing the horrid murder of Dr. Whitman's family and others, accompanied by a letter from the governor, praying the immediate action of the house in the matter.
Mr. Meek moved the reference of the communications to a committee of the whole house, which was lost. Mr. Nesmith offered the following, which was adopted:--
"Resolved, That the governor be, and is hereby, authorized and required to raise, arm, and equip a company of riflemen, not to exceed fifty men, with their captain and subaltern officers, and dispatch them forthwith to occupy the mission station at the Dalles, on the Columbia River, and hold possession until re-enforcements can arrive at that point, or other means be taken, as the government thinks advisable."
Messrs. Nesmith, Reese, and Crawford were appointed a committee to wait on the governor and inform him of said resolution.
The communications concerning the Indian depredations were referred to a committee consisting of Messrs. Ford, Rector, and White.
The committee appointed to wait on the governor concerning the resolution for raising a company of riflemen, reported that they had discharged their duty, and received, in answer, that the governor will use his utmost endeavors to accomplish the object.
* * * * *
The governor called the people together in the evening, and, after the statements of the object of the meeting, some forcible and earnest remarks from Judge Nesmith and Messrs. Lee, Barlow, and others, the enrollment of the first company of Oregon riflemen commenced.
The following true and noble-hearted men sprang to arms, and, in fifteen hours from the time they had enrolled their names as defenders of Oregon, were on their way to protect their own and their countrymen's lives from Hudson's Bay Company, Jesuitical, and Indian savagism.
We will give the names of this noble little band a place in the history of the country they were so prompt and ready to defend. They are as follows:--
Joseph B. Proctor, J. S. Rinearson, H. A. G. Lee, Thomas Purvis, J. Magone, C. Richardson, J. E. Ross, Isaac Walgamoutts, John G. Gibson, B. B. Rogers, Benjamin Bratton, Samuel K. Barlow, Wm. Berry, John Bolton, George Moore, Henry W. Coe, William Buckman, S. A. Jackson, Jacob Witchey, John Fleming, A. C. Little, A. J. Thomas, George Westby, Edward Robson, Andrew Wise, D. Averson, J. H. McMellen, John C. Danford, W. M. Carpenter, Lucius Marsh, Joel McKee, H. Levalley, J. W. Morgan, O. Tupper, R. S. Tupper, C. H. Devendorf, John Hiner, C. W. Savage, G. H. Bosworth, Jacob Johnson, Stephen Cummings, George Weston.
Forty-two as noble and true men as ever breathed. They were soon organized under a set of energetic and brave young officers, who feared no danger, and were ready to meet in open fight the combined enemies of their country's rights upon the shores of the Pacific or in the mountains or valleys of Oregon. Their officers were:--
Captain, H. A. G. Lee. First Lieutenant, J. Magone. Second Lieutenant, J. E. Ross. Commissary, C. H. Devendorf. Surgeon, W. M. Carpenter, M. D. First Sergeant, J. S. Rinearson. Second Sergeant, W. Savage. Third Sergeant, Wm. Berry. First Corporal, Stephen Cummings. Second Corporal, J. H. McMellen.
* * * * *
"At twelve o'clock on the afternoon of Tuesday, the company assembled at the City Hotel, where they were presented with an appropriate flag, by Judge Nesmith, in behalf of the ladies of Oregon City, with an appropriate address. (No record of that address or of the names of the donors can be found.) Captain Lee, on the part of the company, made an exceedingly happy reply upon receiving the beautiful token of the patriotism of the lovely donors."
In two hours after, the company started, amid the firing of cannon and the cheers of the assembled citizens. It speaks well for our city, that in less than twenty-four hours this detachment was raised and had started for the scene of action.
It is to be regretted that the editor of the Oregon Spectator, at the time these deeply-interesting events were occurring, should fill the only public journal on the coast with accounts of personal piques, and allow the remarks of Judge Nesmith and the reply of Captain Lee to pass with the meager notice we have quoted; that the deeply-stirring events respecting the murder of his countrymen should find so small a place in his editorial. He tells us in this same paper that he means to keep us posted in the war news, but the next paper is filled with a personal war between himself and the directors of the Printing Association, about some political resolutions that did no good or harm to anybody, except to show the party spirit then existing in the country, in which he is foolish enough to engage, and degrade his noble position as a journalist and editor, which compels us to look to other sources for facts relative to the history of those times.
Our little army of braves were accompanied by Governor Abernethy and three commissioners to Vancouver, where they completed their outfit before proceeding to the Dalles.
They arrived at Vancouver on the 10th of December. On the 11th, the commissioners addressed a letter to Mr. Douglas, requesting him to furnish supplies, as follows:--
FORT VANCOUVER, December 11, 1847.
To James Douglas, Esq.:
SIR,--By the inclosed document you will perceive that the undersigned have been charged by the Legislature of our provisional government with the difficult duty of obtaining the means necessary to arm, equip, and support in the field, a force sufficient to obtain full satisfaction of the Cayuse Indians for the late massacre at Wailatpu, and protect the white population of our common country from further aggression.
In pursuance of this object, they have deemed it their duty to make immediate application to the Honorable Hudson's Bay Company for the requisite assistance.
Though clothed with the power to pledge, to the fullest extent, the faith and means of the present government of Oregon, they do not consider this pledge the only security of those who, in this distressing emergency, may extend to the people of this country the means of protection and redress. Without claiming any especial authority from the government of the United States to contract a debt to be liquidated by that power, yet from all precedents of like character in the history of our country, the undersigned feel confident that the United States government will consider the murder of the late Dr. Whitman and lady as a national wrong, and will fully justify the people of Oregon in taking active measures to obtain redress for that outrage, and for their protection from further aggression.
The right of self-defense is tacitly accorded to every body politic in the confederacy to which we claim to belong and in every case similar to our own, within our knowledge, the general government has promptly assumed the payment of all liabilities growing out of the measures taken by the constituted authorities to protect the lives and property of those residing within the limits of their districts.
If the citizens of the States and Territories east of the Rocky Mountains are justified in promptly acting in such emergencies, who are under the immediate protection of the general government, there appears no room to doubt that the lawful acts of the Oregon government will receive a like approval.
Should the temporary character of our government be considered by you sufficient ground to doubt its ability to redeem its pledge, and reasons growing out of its peculiar organization be deemed sufficient to prevent the recognition of its acts by the government of the United States, we feel it our duty, as private individuals, to inquire to what extent and on what terms advances may be had of the Honorable Hudson's Bay Company, to meet the wants of the force the authorities of Oregon deem it their duty to send into the field.
With sentiments of the highest respect, allow us to subscribe ourselves,
Your most obedient servants, JESSE APPLEGATE, } A. L. LOVEJOY, } Commissioners.[16] GEO. L. CURRY, }
[Footnote 16] Mr. Douglas's reply to the above was, in substance, a refusal to advance the means asked for in consequence of the stringent rules laid down for his government by the home company. He, however, upon the security of the governor and two of the commissioners, advanced the amount necessary to fit out the first company of Oregon riflemen, $999.59.--(See report of Loan Commissioners, Oregon Archives, p. 323.)
Captain Lee's company received their outfit as per arrangements through the governor, Mr. Applegate, and Mr. Lovejoy, and proceeded to the Dalles. The commissioners returned to Oregon City, and on the 13th December, 1847, addressed the merchants and citizens of Oregon as follows:--
GENTLEMEN,--You are aware that the undersigned have been charged by the Legislature of our provisional government with the difficult duty of obtaining the means necessary to arm, equip, and support in the field a force sufficient to obtain full satisfaction of the Cayuse Indians, for the late massacre at Wailatpu, and protect the white population of our common country from further aggression. In furtherance of this object, they have deemed it their duty to make immediate application to the merchants and citizens of the country for the requisite assistance.[17]
[Footnote 17] The paragraphs here omitted are the same as those addressed to the Hudson's Bay Company.
* * * * *
Though the Indians of the Columbia have committed a great outrage upon our fellow-citizens passing through their country, and residing among them, and their punishment for these murders may, and ought to be, a prime object with every citizen of Oregon, yet, as that duty more particularly devolves upon the government of the United States, and admits of delay, we do not make this the strongest ground upon which to found our earnest appeal to you for pecuniary assistance. It is a fact well known to every person acquainted with the Indian character, that, by passing silently over their repeated thefts, robberies, and murders of our fellow-citizens, they have been emboldened to the commission of the appalling massacre at Wailatpu. They call us women, destitute of the hearts and courage of men, and if we allow this wholesale murder to pass by as former aggressions, who can tell how long either life or property will be secure in any part of this country, or what moment the Wallamet will be the scene of blood and carnage?
The officers of our provisional government have nobly performed their duty. None can doubt the readiness of the patriotic sons of the West to offer their personal service in defense of a cause so righteous; so it now rests with you, gentlemen, to say whether our rights and our firesides shall be defended or not. Hoping that none will be found to falter in so high and so sacred a duty, we beg leave, gentlemen, to subscribe ourselves, your servants and fellow-citizens,
JESSE APPLEGATE, } A. L. LOVEJOY, } Commissioners. GEO. L. CURRY, }
On the evening of the 13th December, 1847, a public meeting of the citizens was called, and a public loan effected, and subscriptions commenced for the equipment and supply of the army, as will be seen by the following report of the commissioners:--
To the Honorable the Legislative Assembly of Oregon Territory:
The undersigned commissioners appointed by your honorable body for the purpose of negotiating a loan to carry into effect the provisions of an act entitled "An Act to authorize the governor to raise a regiment of volunteers," etc., have the honor to inform you, that, fully realizing the heavy responsibilities attached to their situation, and the peculiarly difficult nature of their duties, they at once determined to act with promptness and energy, and to leave no fair and honorable effort untried that might have a tendency to a successful termination of their undertaking.
They accordingly proceeded to Fort Vancouver on the 10th instant, and there addressed a communication to James Douglas, chief factor of the Hudson's Bay Company, a copy of which is already given. The commissioners had anticipated the unfavorable reply of Mr. Douglas, as agent of the Hudson's Bay Company, and its only effect was to heighten their zeal and to occasion them stronger hopes of a more satisfactory reliance upon the citizens generally of our common country.
However, two of the commissioners, with the governor, became responsible for the amount of the outfit for the first regiment of Oregon riflemen, being $999.59.
Not at all disheartened by the unsuccessful issue of their mission, the commissioners returned to this city on the 13th instant, and at once entered into negotiations, the revelation of which herewith follows. The commissioners, through a public meeting held at Oregon City, on the night of the 13th instant, addressed the "merchants and citizens of Oregon," at which meeting, from citizens generally, a loan of about one thousand dollars was effected.----The commissioners are happy to state that they have succeeded in negotiating a loan of sixteen hundred dollars from the merchants of Oregon City, with, perhaps, a likelihood of a further advance. The commissioners feel well assured, from the interest manifested by our fellow-citizens in the matter, and the prompt action they have proposed to take in the several counties in the Territory to assist the commissioners in the successful discharge of their duties, that the government will ultimately succeed in negotiating an amount adequate to the present emergency of affairs.
The commissioners would beg your honorable body, with as little delay as possible, to appoint appraisers, whose duty it shall be to set a cash valuation upon produce and other property, which may be converted into means to assist government in its present operations.
Therefore, gentlemen, as we believe we can no longer be useful to our fellow-citizens as a Board, we hope to be permitted to resign our trust into the hands of the proper accounting officers of this government.
We have the honor to remain,
JESSE APPLEGATE, } A. L. LOVEJOY, } Commissioners. GEO. L. CURRY, }
It will be seen by reference to this last report of the loan commissioners, and the answer to their letter of the 11th December, 1849, that Sir James Douglas had made up his mind to enforce "the stringent rules laid down for his government by the home company." In other words, the time had now arrived to allow the Indians and half-breeds in the country to destroy the missionary settlements that were beginning to extend beyond the Wallamet Valley; and in case they succeeded in defeating the provisional troops, the settlement in the Wallamet would become an easy prey to the combined Indian forces, while the Hudson's Bay Company would pursue its accustomed trade without any further interference from American settlements.
In addition to the proceedings above referred to, the Legislative Assembly, on the 10th of December, on motion of Hon. J. W. Nesmith,--
"Resolved, That in view of our critical situation with the powerful tribes of Indians inhabiting the banks of the Columbia, and with whom we are actually in a state of hostilities, it is the duty of this Legislature to dispatch a special messenger, as soon as practicable, to Washington City, for the purpose of securing the immediate influence and protection of the United States government in our internal affairs."
On the 11th December, Cornelius Gilliam was elected by the Legislative Assembly, Colonel Commandant; James Waters, Lieutenant-Colonel; H. A. G. Lee, Major; and Joel Palmer, Commissary-General, in compliance with the bill passed on the 9th, authorizing the governor to call for one regiment of not to exceed five hundred men.
On the 13th, Mr. Nesmith presented a bill to provide for sending a special messenger to Washington.
On the 14th, on motion of Mr. Crawford, "Resolved, That a delegation of three persons be appointed by this house to proceed immediately to Wallawalla, and hold a council with the chiefs and principal men of the various tribes on the Columbia, to prevent, if possible, their coalition with the Cayuse tribe in the present difficulties."
On the 15th, it was "Resolved, That the commodore of the United States squadron in the Pacific Ocean be solicited to send a vessel of war into the Columbia River for our relief, and to send such other assistance as may be in his power."
A motion was adopted to appoint a committee of five to prepare a memorial to Congress.
On the 16th, an act was passed appropriating one thousand dollars to defray the expenses of J. L. Meek, special messenger to Washington.
On the 17th, Mr. Meek resigned his seat in the Legislative Assembly, preparatory to leaving for the United States with dispatches and a memorial to Congress.
As to what those dispatches were, we have no copy or public document that gives us any information, but we presume he carried a copy of Mr. McBean's mutilated letter, and one of Sir James Douglas's, such as we have already given; and also the following:
Memorial to Congress.
"To the Honorable the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled:
"Your memorialists, the Legislative Assembly of Oregon Territory, would respectfully beg leave once more to lay before your honorable body a brief statement of their situation and wants.
"Having called upon the government of the United States so often in vain, we have almost despaired of receiving its protection, yet we trust that our present situation, when fully laid before you, will at once satisfy your honorable body of the great necessity of extending the strong arm of guardianship and protection over this remote, but beautiful portion of the United States domain.
"Our relations with the proud and powerful tribes of Indians residing east of the Cascade Mountains, hitherto uniformly amicable and pacific, have recently assumed quite a different character. They have shouted the war-whoop, and crimsoned their tomahawks in the blood of our citizens. The Cayuse Indians, after committing numerous outrages and robberies upon the late immigrants, have, without the semblance of provocation or excuse, murdered eleven [seventeen] American citizens. Among the murdered were Dr. Marcus Whitman and his amiable wife, members of the American Board of Foreign Missions.
"Called upon to resent this outrage, we feel sensibly our weakness and inability to enter into a war with powerful tribes of Indians. Such outrages can not, however, be suffered to pass unpunished. It will be the commencement of future and more extensive murders, and our hitherto peaceful settlement will become the scene of fierce and violent warfare. We do not doubt the readiness of the people of this country to defend their lives and property, and to submit to all the privations incident to a state of war in a new and remote settlement like this. Circumstances warrant your memorialists in believing that many of the powerful tribes inhabiting the upper valley of the Columbia have formed an alliance for the purpose of carrying on hostilities against our settlements. The number of white population in Oregon is alarmingly insignificant compared with the swarms of Indians which throng its valleys.
"To repel the attacks of so formidable a foe, and protect our families and property from violence and rapine, will require more strength than we possess. We are deficient in many of the grand essentials of war,--such as men, arms, and treasure; for them, our sole reliance is on the government of the United States; we have the right to expect your aid, and you are in justice bound to extend it. For although we are separated from our native land by ranges of mountains whose lofty altitudes are mantled in eternal snows; although three thousand miles, nearly two-thirds of which is a howling wild, lie between us and the federal capital, yet our hearts are unalienated from the land of our birth. Our love for the free and noble institutions, under which it was our fortune to be born and nurtured, remains unabated. In short, we are Americans still,--residing in a country over which the government of the United States have sole and acknowledged right of sovereignty,--and under such circumstances we have the right to claim the benefit of its laws and protection.
"Your memorialists would avail themselves of this opportunity to invite your attention to other subjects of deep and vital interest to the citizens of this Territory. The very nature of our compact formed between the citizens of a republic and the subjects and official representatives of a monarchy, is such that the ties of political union could not be drawn so closely as to produce that stability and strength sufficient to form an efficient government. This union between the democrats of a republic and wealthy aristocratic subjects of a monarchy could not be formed without reserving to themselves the right of allegiance to their respective governments. Political jealousy and strong party feeling have tended to thwart and render impotent the acts of government, from its very nature weak and insufficient."
The deep, dark, and infamous schemes of a foreign monopoly and religious bigots were but just developing themselves; but, thank God, there was strength enough in the provisional government, which was formed in the face of their combined opposition. They had yielded to its power, to gain time to organize their savage hosts to crush it; calculating, no doubt, that the Mexican war would prevent assistance reaching us from the United States. The Indians, let loose upon the settlements, would soon clear the country. That such was the general English idea, we know from two different English subjects. The one, a chief trader in the Hudson's Bay Company, who said all they had to do was to organize the Indians, under the direction of their eight hundred half-breeds, to drive back any American force. The other, a gold commissioner, a Mr. Saunders, direct from England, in speaking of the small number of troops the English government had in British Columbia, remarked to us, that if they had not troops enough to subdue the Americans in British Columbia, "all they had to do was to let loose the Indians upon them."
Such being the facts, it is not surprising that our Legislative Assembly should be made to feel its weakness, under this powerful combination,--the British monopoly that had refused to furnish necessary supplies to the provisional troops sent to punish the murderers of our citizens. It was not yet apprised of the efforts made by Mr. Ogden to supply the Indians with munitions of war, and the determination of the company not to allow itself to be considered by the Indians as favoring the American settlement of the country. Mr. Hines' book, in which he says Dr. McLaughlin had announced to those Indians in 1843 "that in case the Americans did go to war with them, the Hudson's Bay Company would not assist them," had not yet been published. The memorial continues:--
"In establishing a regular form of government, creating tribunals for the adjustment of the rights of individuals, and the prevention and punishment of crime, a debt has accumulated, which, though an insignificant amount, your memorialists can devise no means of liquidating. The revenue laws, from not being properly executed, while they are burdensome to classes of our citizens and sections of country, are wholly disregarded by others, and whole counties, which for numerical strength are equal to any in the Territory, and fully participating in all the advantages of our compact, have never contributed any assistance in bearing the common burdens.[18]
"To coerce obedience to our temporary government would at once destroy the great object which called it into existence,--the peace and harmony of our country. Anxiously looking forward to that happy period when we should again be under the protection of our revered and parent republic, we have rather endeavored to maintain peace by forbearance, hoping that the dangers and difficulties to be apprehended from domestic discord and from the savages around us, would be postponed until we became an acknowledged people, and under the protection of our mother country.
"The action of your honorable body in regard to the land in Oregon would seem to justify the expectation that liberal grants would be made to our citizens; yet the uncertainty of our title, and the uneasiness which is felt upon this subject, urge to press this subject upon your attention. Our citizens, before leaving their homes in the United States for Oregon, have had the strongest inducements held out by Congress to settle in this country, and their just expectations will not be met short of liberal donations of land.
"On the subject of filling the offices that will be created in the event of the extension of the jurisdiction of the United States over this Territory, your memorialists would respectfully represent, that, as the pioneers of the American population in this country, the present citizens of this country have strong claims upon the patronage of the general government, and that it would be gratifying to have them filled by our fellow-citizens; but as few of them of an equally deserving number can enjoy this mark of the approbation of our parent republic, and in view of our peculiar and difficult situation, it is the opinion of your memorialists that it will be better for the future prosperity of our country, and that the great mass of the people will concur with them in requesting that important and responsible offices created here, such as the office of governor and the several judgeships, should be filled with men of the best talent and most approved integrity, without regard to their present location."
[Footnote 18] Champoeg County being one, and represented by Dr. R. Newell, then Speaker of the house.
In relation to this last paragraph, emanating as it did from the Legislative Assembly of Oregon, it may appear strange that a body of men possessing the talent and ability there was in that Assembly, should be so liberal in requesting that most of the important federal appointments for the Territory should be filled from abroad, or with strangers to the condition and wants of the people; but the fact is plainly stated, and it becomes our duty to impart such information as will explain so strange a request. No one will contend for a moment that we did not have the men who were abundantly qualified to fill those offices, for they have since been filled with far better satisfaction to the country by men who were then in it, than by those sent by the federal government; hence we are led to inquire what was the reason for this request.
The general politics of the country, as intimated in the memorial, were English aristocratic and American democratic. The parties were nearly equally divided. At the same time, there was the pro-slavery influence laboring to so mold the Territory as to bring it in as a slave State, though it had started free, and upon the most liberal principles of a free government. The democratic pro-slavery influence was not strong enough to secure the federal appointments without cousining with the English aristocrats, who looked upon African slavery with abhorrence. Under these circumstances, the democrats of this assembly became liberal, and naturally sought aid from that party in the United States to which the anti-slavery influence yielded, and took their chances in the federal appointments. There was also in this Assembly a strong personal feeling against Judge Thornton, who was supposed to be in the federal capital seeking the organization of the Territory, as also its governorship; and, in that case, though Mr. Thornton was then acting with the democratic party, should he become the governor, or one of the judges, the pro-slavery influence would be the loser. Hence the "rule or ruin" party chose to make the strange request found in this memorial. The closing paragraph seems to be a flourish of rhetoric, and an appeal to Uncle Samuel's tender feelings. Notwithstanding, it took him till August 14, 1848, to say that Oregon should be a Territory under its protection. The remainder of the memorial is as follows:--
"If it be at all the intention of our honored parent to spread her guardian wing over her sons and daughters in Oregon, she surely will not refuse to do it now, when they are struggling with all the ills of a weak and temporary government, and when perils are daily thickening around them and preparing to burst upon their heads. When the ensuing summer's sun shall have dispelled the snow from the mountains, we shall look with glowing hopes and restless anxiety for the coming of your laws and your arms.
"The accompanying documents will afford additional information concerning some of the subjects of which we have spoken.
"To insure the speedy conveyance of these papers to the federal government, your memorialists have elected J. L. Meek, Esq., a special messenger to bear the same, and respectfully ask your honorable body to make him such compensation therefor as you may deem just. And your memorialists will ever pray, etc."
It will be seen by a reference to the first day's proceedings of this Legislative Assembly that Dr. Newell was chosen its Speaker. In tracing the history of events, we find this man always intimately in council with the English aristocratic party in the country. Although he sometimes favored unimportant American measures, he seemed always to guard carefully those in any way affecting the interests of this English monopoly. Champoeg, the county he in part represented, was the most numerous in population and wealth, and by reference to the Spectator of February 4, 1847, we find the following: "Champoeg County tax.--There has been no tax for the year 1846, received by the treasurer from Champoeg County. How is this? Who is to blame, and where is the honorable County Court of Champoeg County?" This note explains the critical relations of the country and the scheming policy of the enemy we had to contend with, as also the personal bickerings among the Americans. When Mr. Crawford, on the 14th of December, introduced his resolution for a delegation of three persons to endeavor to prevent a coalition with the Indians, we find this measure deferred till near the close of the session, and this Honorable Hudson's Bay Company Speaker of the Assembly is one of the commissioners, as we shall see hereafter.
On the 24th of December, Messrs. Nesmith, Rice, and Rector were appointed a committee to correspond with the American consul at the Sandwich Islands, and also with the Commander-in-chief of the army and navy on this coast, in California, soliciting help from them. On the 25th, the house went into secret session for the purpose of conferring with the governor, colonel, lieutenant-colonel, and commissary-general, in relation to our Indian difficulties.
The result of that secret council was embodied in a resolution presented to the house by Mr. Nesmith.
"Resolved, That the executive, as commander-in-chief, has full power to adopt all measures necessary for the prosecution of the existing war, and that it is the opinion of this house, that it is expedient for the executive to issue orders for five hundred men, and trust to the patriotism of the citizens of Oregon for their support in the field."
It will be seen by this resolution that there was sufficient reason to justify the calling of the whole strength of the settlement into the field. The captives had reached the settlement, and his Reverence Bishop Blanchet had seen proper to inform the governor, "that by going to war with the Cayuses to get redress for the murders committed at Wailatpu, he would have the whole Indian combination, or confederation, against him. This, however, he must determine with his council," which we see was done, and the American settlement and Protestant missionaries gave them a cordial support. The Indian combination, which, the Jesuit Brouillet says, Dr. Whitman attempted to form, is here admitted by the bishop's letter to Governor Abernethy to have been formed, and ready to fight the American settlement. Who formed this confederation of Indian tribes is no longer a doubt.
But we have kept our readers too long from the proceedings of our little army, under the command of Captain H. A. G. Lee, which we left on its way to the Dalles, to save that station from falling into the hands of the Indians.