IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I ■ii|2i US ■tt lii 12.2 1L25IU |L25 1I& U4 ^/ >^ V Photografiiic ScHioes Garporation 4S^A ^- -<> ^. as wht main strut VflUTIR,N.Y. I4SM (716)t72-4S03 4^ v\ MM CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVi/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Inatituta for Historical MIcroraproductions / instltut Canadian da microraproductions historiquaa Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notas tachniquaa at bibliographiquaa Tf to Tha Inatituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat original copy avaiiabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia copy which may ba bibliographicaiiy uniqua, which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha raproduction, or which may significantly change tha uaual method of filming, are chaclcflfd below. D D n D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagte Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurte at/ou pelliculte I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gAographiquea en couleur Coloured inic (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plataa and/or illuatrationa/ Planchaa at/ou illuatrationa an couleur Bound with other material/ RallA avac d'autres documents Tight binding may causa shadowa or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serrte peut cauaar da I'ombre ou de la diatortion la long da la marge int^rieure Blank leavaa added during reatoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II aa peut que certainaa pagaa blanches aJoutAaa lore d'una reatauration apparaiaaant dans la taxte, mala, ioraqua cela Atait poaaibia, cea pagaa n'ont paa «t« filmtes. Additional commenta:/ Commentairea supplAmantairaa: Various pagiiigs. L'Inatitut a microfilm^ la mailleur exemplaira qu'il lui a tt6 possible de aa procurer. Lea dAtaila da cat exemplaira qui sont paut-Atre uniquea du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^thoda normala de filmaga aont indiquAa ci-daaaoua. I I Coloured pagaa/ D Pagaa da couleur Pagaa damaged/ Pagaa endommagtea □ Pagaa restored and/or laminated/ Pagaa restaurAea at/ou pellicuMes Pagaa discoloured, atainad or foxed/ Pagaa dteolorAas, tachettea ou piqu6aa □ Pagaa detached/ Pagaa d^tachtes Showthrouglv Tranaparance Quality of prir Qualit^ in^gaia da rimprassion Includes supplementary matarii Comprend du material auppMmantaira Only edition available/ Saula MItion diaponibia FTI Showthrough/ I I , Quality of print variaa/ I I Includaa supplementary material/ r~n Only edition available/ Pagaa wholly or partially obacurad by errata slips, tissuea, etc., have been rafilmad to ensure the best possible image/ Lea pagaa totalament ou partiallement obscurcies par un feulllet d'errata, una pelure, etc., ont At* filmAea A nouveau da fapon A obtanir la maillaure image poaaibia. Tl po of fil Or ba th sit ot fir si( or Th sh Til wl Ml dif em bet rigl rec; ma Thia item la filmed at tha reduction ratio checked below/ Ca document eat film* au taux da reduction indiquA ci-daaaoua. 10X 14X 18X 22X 2BX 30X v' 12X 1SX 20X a4x 2BX 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Univanity of Windier Law Library L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grAce A la gAnirosit* de: Univanity of Windsor Law Library The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed papsr covers ere filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^»> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol y (meaning "END"), whichever applies. ISAaps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method : Les images suivantes ont At* reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la nettet* de l'exemplaire film*, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmege. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimte sent filmte en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la derniAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iilustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sent filmte en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iilustration et en terminant par la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la derniire image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols -^^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols ▼ signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre filmte A des taux de reduction diff«rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seul clichA, 11 est filmA A partir de I'angle supArieur gauche, de geuche A droite, et de heut en bes, en prenant le nombre d'imageb nAcesssire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mAthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 EVIDENCE VOR THE UNITED STATES IN THE MATTBR OF THE CLAIM OP THK HUDSON'S BAY COMPANY, PRNDTNG BEFORE THR BRITISH AND AMERICAN JOINT COMMISSION. FOK THE FINAL SETTLEMENT OF THE CLAIMS OF THE HUDSON'S BAY AND PUGEfS SOUND AQBICULMAL C0IPANIK8. WASHINGTON, D. C. : VOILL * WITHKROW, PRINTERS AND aTBBBOTYPBM. 1867. INDEX TO WITNESSES. .... , Pauk. Arlams, Tlioinas 112 AMon, J. Madison 551 Allen, Edwar.l Tay 305 Alvord, Benjamin 350 Atkinson, Robert J 181 AugurC.C. 101 Barnes, Tosepli K 09 fain, Andrew J 222 Davidson, rjeorge 305 Powell, Benjamin 357 ^iardner, Alexander , 319 Gardner, diaries T 320 riardner, (leorge Clinton 191, 521 (lililis, Oeorge 3;;9 flil.son, William 371 (lilisnn, William Huff , 1()5 flilpin. William .330 fi ranger, (iordon , 37S Grant, Ulysses H ]i] Ifardie, Tames A 10(> Harrison, Alexander M 312 Howard, W. A (JO Hudson, Francis , 339 Huntington 145 Ingalls, Kufus 1, 521 MacFeely, Robert ILS McKeever, Chaunoey 77 McMurtrie, William B 371 Moses, Simpson P. 327 Nelson, Tiiomas 8G Nesniith, James W 23 Noble, John F 394 Teale, Titian R 344 rieasonton, Alfred 134 Reno, Marcus A 208 .Slieridan, Philip H 2H« Shoemaker, George W 251 Simpson, George B 2t)0 IV. INDEX TO WITNESSES. • Paob. Smitli. Andrew J 83 Steinberger, Justus 50 Suckley, George 540 Swan, James G 342 Terry, William J 390 Thompson, Lewis S 217 Vinton, David H .' 129 Wagner, Charles B.. 50 Wilkes, Charlea 274 BRITISH AND AMERICAN JOINT COMMISSION HUDSON'S BAY AND PUGET'S SOUND AGRICUL- TURAL COMPANIES' CLAIMS. In (he matter of the Claim of the Hudson^ s Bay Company vs. the United States of America. Depositions of witnesses sworn and examined in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, by virtue of an agree- ment between Eben F. Stone, Agent and Attorney for the United States of America, and Edward Lander, Agent and Attorney for the Hudson's Bay Company, before me, Nicholas Callan, a Notary Public in and for the county of Washington, and District of Columbia, on the part of the United States. Testimony of Rufus Ingalls. Brevet Major General Rufus Ingalh, United States Volunteers^ being duly sworn according to law, says: Int. 1. — What is your name, age, place of residence, and occupation? Ans. — Rufus Ingalls ; forty-five yeafs of age ; occupation that of brevet major general United States Volunteers, quar- termaster in regular service; place of residence Washington city. District of Columbia. Int. 2. — Have you ever resided in Washington Territory; if yea, when and where, for how long a period, and what was your employment? Ans. — I went to Fort Vancouver in May, 1849, and was Chief Quartermaster of that military department until 1852. I was absent until March, 1856, and was from that period the principal quartermaster until 1860. ' Int. 3. — Are you acquainted with the post at Vancouver li and the land adjoining, Mliich is claimed by the Hudson's Bay Company ? A)i8. — I am. Int. 4. — Please to examine the map, hero produced, and state whether it is, in your judgment, a correct delineation of the post at Vancouver and of the country adjoining. Ans. — It appears to be. I7it. 5. — Please to describe, as particularly as you can, by reference to said map or otherwise, the extent of the claim of the said Company, at said post, giving the limits thereof, ter- ritorially, as nearly as you can, as you understand them. (Objecte. — Please to state whether or not any acts of aggres- sion on the rights of the Hudson's Bi»y Company have, to your knowle(lii;e, ever been committed by the civil or military offi- cers of the United States? Ans. — It depends altogether on circumstances whether or IJ not the Hudson's Bay Company were entitled to what they laid claim to. It was uniformly the expressed desire of the military authorities of the United States to protect the Hud- son's Bay Company in their possessory rights, particularly up to the time their charter terminated. It is undeniable that lands which the Company claimed were taken and made use of by citizens of the United States. Int. 4G. — Please to state, as nearly as you can, the number of vessels that yearly came to Vancouver from abroad, while you were there, that were owned or controlled by the Hudson Bay Company ? JB Ans. — I never kept any record, but I should say never to ^ exceed four, and rarely more than two. Probably one of the vessels referred to might have made various trips between Vancouver's Island and Columbia river. I don't know ever to have exceeded two from abroad in any one year. Cross-Examination. Int. 1. — Was there not in the vicinity of the post of the Hudson's Bay Company at Vancouver an amount of land, which, though not enclosed in 1849, bore marks of previous cultivation? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 2. — Was there not raised in the vicinity of Vancouver a considerable amount of hay from tame grasses sown previous to your arrival in that country in 1849? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 3. — You speak of the Company not having exclusive control of the unenclosed lands, you mean by that, I suppose, to refer only to the period subsequent to your arrival there in i: ii;, : it! il tl; ill ili 12 1849, and to the conduct and encroachments of American citizens claiming and exercising the right to settle in 1849 on lands claimed by the Company? (The word encroachment objected to.) Ans. — I refer to that period exclusively. When I said they had not exclusive control over unenclosed lands, I meant that the military and the citizens who had settled in the neighbor- hood, as well as the Indians, made use of these unenclosed portions at will. Int. 4. — Do you know anything of citizens settling on unen- closed lands being warned oflF or notified to leave by the agents of the Company? Ans. — Yes, it was done by the military as well as the Com- pany when the settlers came on the military reservation. At the time I speak of, during my first tour from 1849 to 1852, the military reservation consisted of four miles square, the flag-staff at the post at Fort Vancouver being the centre. Int. 5. — In your testimony you state that the Company at the time of leaving Vancouver abandoned all their posts on the American side. Do you feel certain that Colvile, Okana- gan, the Kootenay, and Flatheads were left by them at that time? Ans. — I was told they were. With regard to Kootenay I no not know, but I understood they were abandoned. With regard to Fort Colvile I have always understood it was just north of the 49th parallel. Int. G. — Were not most of the buildings used for oflicers' quarters at the military post at Vancouver built of logs or square timber, and were they not comfortable and convenient quarters ? Ans. — They were, all of them, originally built of logs, ex- cept the quarters occupied by myself, and were considered at that time and place quite comfortable? Int. 7. — Can you give the approximate cost of the largest of these buildings and its dimensions, and the cost of an average building? Ans. — In my report at that period, I think I put down the commanding oflicer's quarters at $7,500, and the smaller ones 18 American n 1849 on said they leant that nciglibor- ncnclosed ;on unen- lie agents the Com- ;ion. At to 1852, uare, the itre. npany at posts on , Okana- at that otenay I With was just officers' logs or tvenient ogs, ex- lered at largest of an wn the sr ones on the right and left of it at $2,500 each. Subsequently heavy expenses were incurred in fitting them up. I don't know tliat I can give the cost, but it would bring the smaller ones up to seven or eight thousand dollars a-piecc. It would have been a great deal cheaper to have built houses of the same dimensions framed and finished ofi'in the ordinary way than to have made these repairs. Int. 8. — Does this cost include the work done by soldiers or only the work done by mechanics? Ans. — It includes worl^one by soldiers when they were on extra duty, as most of those employed were, at what the Gov- ernment allowed at that period, not exceeding fifty cents a day for carpenters and bricklayers. The groat majority of all the work done was performed by citizen labor? Int. 9. — Did not the want of the clapboards and paint give the Company's buildings at their fort an old and dilapidated appearance ? Ans. — Yes ; undoubtedly it contributed to it. Int. 10. — Did not the families of th*e military officers of the United States seek shelter in the Indian war in 1855 and 1856 within the buildings of the Company ? Ans. — I belive on one or two occasions a portion of them did. Int. 11. — What do you know of the women and families of the settlers during the same war having come into the Com- pany's fort nightly for protection? Ans. — Some may have come into the Company's fort, but the great majority of the settlers were encamped near the bank of the river, on the edge of the present town and near the salmon-house. I regarded them as under the protection of the United States military authorities. The Hudson's Bay Company on that occasion co-operated cheerfully and to the fullest extent with the military authorities in the defence of Vancouver. Int. 12, — In stating what you have in reference to the fur trade of the Company, have you learned this from the books of the Company, or is it merely your own opinion ? 14 In: i I I i'li I' V\ •' Ji 'ill Ans. — It is from what I have heard from various sources. I never have had any access to the books of the Company at all, but have heard it remarked by members of the Company and other persons. Int. 13. — You have spoken of the overflow of the river. Is not the portion of the land overflowed in ordinary freshets on the mile-square, designated on the map as the Mission claim, which includes the front of the military reservation, the site of the old fort of the Company and much of the present town, very small, and does not this overflow improve rather than injure the grass, mowing lands, and pasturage? Ans. — The amount actually overflowed ordinarily is small. No, I believe it does not improve the grass-mowing lands and pasturages. This overflow happens at a season destructive to the growth on the portions overflowed. Int. 14. — Are the farming lands of the river banks over- flowed every year; and is it not rather an unusual circumstance for the water to be high enough to damage the crops on the land commonly cultivated ? Ans. — Yes ; unusual, happening hardly ever more than twice in ten years, though liable to happen every year when the snows on the main sources of the Columbia melt simul- taneously. Int. 15. — What is the effect of this overflow on the soil where it occurs? Ans. — Beneficial, rather than otherwise, as the sediment is of alluvial character. Int. 10. — Is not the greater part of the Company's claim free from this overflow, and is it not confined to a portion of the land bordering on the river above? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 17. — At what time did you first see the Company's place at the mouth of the Cowlitz ; also, at what time those at Fort George and Astoria and Cape Disappointment? Ans. — I saw those at Cape Disappointment and Astoria first in May, 18-49; those on the Cowlitz, near its mouth, in 1850; those above and on the sound, in 1857. ■i'i. m 15 ■4 '-I r. Int. 18. — How long were you at Astoria and Cape Disap- poiiitineiit and in Baker's Bay? Ann. — In 1849 I was in Baker's Bay one or two days, on shore several hours, walked all over the place, and was at Asto- ria several days on many occasions from 1840 to 1852. Int. 10. — Can you say from your recollection that there were not at Astaria in 1849 three dwelling-houses and a store? Ann. — I have no doubt that there Avas that number. Int. 20. — Is it your recollection that the buildings at the Cowlitz farms and at Nisqually were merely for the purpose of the passing accommodation of the Company's officers ; do you not, on calling them again to mind, recollect that at the Cowlitz Prairie the buildings were large and substantial, and so also at Nisqually ? Ans. — According to my understanding all those places were for the passing or temporary accommodation of the Company, though several of the buildiiif;s were large in order to afford the necessary accommodations for the farming and other opera- tions conducted by the Company. Int. 21. — AVlien you last saw Cape Disappointment was there not a light-house, fort, and other buildings there, erected by the Government of the United States? Ans. — Wiien I last saw it 18G0 there was a light-house, but no fort. Int. 22. — In reply to a question as to acts of transgression, you have stated that up the time their charter terminated it was the desire of the military authorities to protect the Com- pany. What do you mean by the expiration of the charter, and was there any care after that time as to their rights? Ans. — I had always understood that what was known as the charter of the Hudson's Bay Company expired on the thir- tieth May, 1859, and that whatever rights or privileges were accorded them afterwards was by favor of the United States Government. This was substantially stated to the chief agent of the Company in charge at Vancouver in 1860 by General Harney. They were not disturbed or threatened to be inside of their stockade by the military authorities, but every cour- 16 it.il I' tesy offered up to the time when Mr. Dallas informed General Harney that the Company would retire from the Territory. RuFUS Ingalls, Brevet Major General VoU. and Q. M. U. S. A. Washington City, D. C, 3Iay 1th, 1867. ;t;l Becalled. ; 1 ! . 1 • I 0!|i Int. 23. — Were there not several buildings, large and small, used occasionally for ordnance and hospital purposes, and for dwelling-houses, &c., outside the stockades and enclosures of the Company at Fort Vancouver by the military authorities, and for which rent was paid to the Hudson's Bay Company during most of the time you resided as quartermaster at Fort Vancouver ? Ans. — Yes, there were. Before the Government had time to erect the necessary buildings I rented some of the Company* In 1849 I rented two large unfinished houses outside of the stockade, and repaired them so as to subserve a useful pur- pose. Afterwards I rented some others, but long before I left there these buildings were given up, and the Government had erected good and sufficient ones of its own. Int. 24. — Was there not also a large building inside of the fort know^n as the quartermaster and commissary store, rented in the same manner from the Company? Ans. — Yes, there was. I rented and used it as a storehouse for the quartermaster and commissary departments. But I shortly afterwards built a fine wharf and large storehouses on the bank of the river, and this building was restored to the Company. When I left in 1860 it had been pulled down. It was old and of no value to the Government. ;itli Examination-in- Chief Resumed. Int. 1. — Did you or not, while at Vancouver, observe the policy of the Company in regard to the settlement of the coun- 17 General ritory. U. S. A. nd small, , and for osures of thorities, Company r at Fort try by American citizens? If yea, please to describe that policy, and state whether or not, in your opinion, it was, in this rejiaid, favorable or otherwise. Ann. — The policy of the Company towards American set- tlers was highly selfish and exclusive, especially so in and near their establishments and claims. The Company rendered much aid, I am told, to the early settlers by selling them food, clothes, and articles of husbandry on credit; but it was for the interest of the Company to do so. Settlements on lands claimed by the Company were always discouraged and opposed, and Avhat is now Washington Territory has suffered much since 1846 on account of the presence of the Conipany. Settlements have been retarded and titles to lands withheld and confused. RuFUS Ingall.^, Brevet Major General and Q. M. U. S. A. had time /ompany- ie of the jful pur- HVG I loft Dent had of the rented ^rehouse But I ouses on d to the wn. It rve the ■be coun* Testimony of Lieutenant General U. S. Grant. Lieutenant General U. S. Grant, being duly sworn according to law, says: Int. 1. — Have you ever resided in any part of Washington Territory? It yea, when, at what place or places, and how long at each place. Ans. — I was stationed al Fort Vancouver, as an officer of the United States army, from about the last of September, 1852, to about the same time in 1853, nearly a year in all. I never lived at any other time in Washington Territory nor at any other place. Int. 2. — Are you acquainted with the land and buildings at and near Vancouver, which are claimed by the Hudson Bay Company? If yea, please to describe and define, by reference to this map, here produced, or otherwise, as particularly as you can, the location and limits of this claim. Ans. — I am well acquainted with all the lands about Van- couver. I am not acquainted with the boundaries of the Com- pany's claim. I know the buildings and enclosures of their 2C •I "I; \ ' <■ iiii :i'!;i m ■' ' 18 claim in tliat noigliborhood. I have 1»com all around there, but have no ir which r a large e stock- outside ty acres vcr fer- ble you land on liles on reneral. Testimony of James W. Nesmitii. James W. Msmith, being duly sworn according to law, says ; Inf. 1. — What is your name, age, place of residence, and present occupation ? ^ns. — James W. Ncsmith, aged forty-five years, residence Polk county, Oregon, occupation farmer, and at present United States Senator. Int. 2. — Are you acquainted with the post at Vancouver which was formerly occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company ? Ans. — I am. Int. 2. — When did you first become acquainted with the post, and what was its condition when you first saw it? Ans. — The first time I was there was the 23d day of Octo- ber, 1843. It was in very good condition when I first saw it, considering tlie character and structure of the buildings aiul the materials of which thev were made. The stockade around the buildings was made of fir poles sot in the ground. Many of them were in a state of decav, others had rotted off at the surface of the ground and had been replaced by new ones. The buildings were rather a coarse rude structure, and un- painted. They Avere built in what was known to us as the Canadian style, with posts set upright and slots cut in the posts in which timber was placed to fill the interstices between the posts. That is a character of building which is not durable, being liable to be wrecked by the storm, and soon decay. The buildings were without any permanent underpinning, and were set upon wooden blocks, many of which were in a state of de- cay, and the buildings were becoming wrecked and dilapidated on account of the insufficiency of the foundations. There was some diff"erence between the buildings. I think the house in which Dr. McLauj'hlin resided and the buildiniv. oecupied '\-:ii: 10 as corn- condition )r as near ',■■■'' visit were iidition as ';.-;f» ral decay ■Ay': ts of the '$". ^e gone to the build- md fallen ^■rs 25 down ; what remained standing was in a very dilapidated con- dition. Int. S. — Have you any knowledge of the value of land at Vancouver; if yea, what in your judgment is the value per acre of the land at this post, including say a mile S(iuare on the river, which is claimed by the Catholic Mission. Anf<. — The town of A'^ancouvcr is embraced in this mile- square to which you refer. My knowledge of the value of lots in the town and the adjacent property is not sufficiently defi- nite to enable me to testify with certainty on that point. Inf. J). — What is the present condition of the town of Van- couver, and how does it compare in regard to trade and pros- perity witli its condition five years since? Ans. — When I was there last year I noticed but very little improvement in the place. It did not bear evidence of much enterprise or business. If there has been any improvement in the last five years it has been very slight. Int. 10. — Has there been any considerable groAvth in this place for the last five years, and in your judgment is it prob- able that it will increase very rapidly for some years to come? (All the portion referring to the judgment of the witness objected to.) Ans. — There has not been any considerable growth in the last five years. Considering its commercial and geographical" position, and the character and the resources of the surround- ing country, I do not believe that there will be any great im- provement for many years to come. Jnt. 11. — Have you or not paid particular attention to the course of trade for some years in Oregon and Washington Territory, and are you not familiar with the general character and condition of the principal places in this State and Terri- tory ? (The latter part of the question objected to as leading.) Ans. — I have paid a good deal of attention to the course of trade and commerce in Oregon and Washington for the last few year=i, and think that I have a pretty good general know- ledge on that subject, and am familiar with the general char- 26 ;!. acter and condition of the principal places in the State and Territory. Ini. 12. — What, in your opinion, is the principal cause of the establishment and growth of the town of Vancouver here- toforc ? A7)s. — I think the principal cause of the growth of the town was the establishment of the military post there . nd the depot for the army supplies for that country. That brought com- merce to the place; ships laden with Government supplies. Many persons congregated there for the purpose of procuring Government employment, which, together with the presence of the soldiers, caused some little trade to spring up there. Int. 1.3. — What is the present prosperity of the town of Portland, in Oregon, and how, in your judgment, does its in- terests and welfare affect the question of the possibility of building up a flourishing town at Vancouver? (Objected to as to Portland auu as to the judgmeut of the witness.) Ans. — Portland is, and has been, for the last six or seven years, in a very flourishing condition, and very rapidly im- proving. It is the emporium of commerce and crarde for nearly all of Oregon, all eastern Washington, and a large portion of Idaho, and portions of Montana. The lines of ships and steamers are owned there. The great wealth and present im- portance of the place is sufficient, in my opinion, to prevent any town of consequence being built up in so close proximity - as Vancouver. Int. 14. — Have you ever visited or observed any of the other posts of the Hudson's Bay Company? if yea, please to enu- merate the different posts which you have seen and observed. Ans. — I have been at Fort Hall, Fort Boise, Fort Walla- Walla, Astoria, Nisqually, the Cowlitz, and Champoog. Int. 15. — When did you see Fort Hall, and what was its condition when you saw it? please to describe the same as particularly as you can, the character and condition of the fort and the buildings, and their value, if you feel competent to state it. Ans. — I never saw Fort Hall but once. I stopped there 4 27 e State and pal cause of couver here- i of the town k1 the depot rouglit corn- lit sup])lie3. )f procuring lie presence up there, he town of does its in- )ssibility of neut of the X or seven ■apidly im- for nearly portion of ships and )resent im- to prevent proximity . f the other 50 to c'nu- obsorved. rt Walla- >cg, it was its same aa )n of the ompetent )od there four or five days in the autumn of 1843. It was then rather a rude structure, built of adobe, walled in with adobe, and within were some rude buildings of the same, covered with poles and dirt, the whole very rude and cheaply built. There was no lumber there of any kind, sawed or hewn. They could have been built by the rudest of labor; no skill was required in their construction. It was a mere mixing of mud to make adobes, and piling them up. At reasonable prices of labor, such as existed in the country at the time, I should think Fort Hall, as I saw it in 1843, could have been built for one thousand dollars. Int. IG. — Did you observe at that time any lands there which were enclosed and cultivated by the Company ? If yea, please to describe their character and extent. Alls. — I did not observe "ny lands there enclosed or culti- vated. Indeed, I do not thlniv ihere were any at that time, as our party could not get vegetables or supplies. Mr. Grant, who was in charge, told us they raised nothing there. Int. 17. — Please to state when you visited Fort Boise ; and describe the character and condition of the fort and buildings and lands which were occupied by the Company when you saw them. Am. — I visited Fort Boise in the autumn of 1843, on my way down to Oregon. Its condition was about the same as that of Fort Hall. The buildings were of about the same character, and of about the same value. There was a small piece of ground enclosed there with a pole fence, of, perhaps, two or three acres — there might have been five — in which they attempted to raise a few vegetables ; but they did not amount to anything. I saw them digging potatoes there. They were not bigger than bullets. Int. 18. — Has anything occurred since then in the develop- ment of the mining or agricultural resources, in the settlement of the country, which has given any expressed new value to the site of either Fort Hall or Fort Boise ? An%. — Nothing has occurred to enhance their value since then.. Pretty conclusive evidence of this is that, as I am informed, they have both been abandoned. 28 Int. 19. — When did you see Walla-Walla ? Please to describe the character and condition of the fort and the buildings and tlic lands and the value thereof as occupied by the Company at this post when you last saw them. Am. — I first saw Walla-Walla in October, 1843. Ii then consisted of a stockade, built of adobe or sun-dried brick, with a few buildinj^s inside, of the same material. It was more sub- stantial and better constructed than either Fort Hall or Fort Boise. I should think it might cost a couple of th'^usand dollars to have built Walla- Walla at the time I saw it. It was nearly new then. I encamped four or five days in the neigh- borhood of the fort, and was there every day. I saw no lands in its neighborhood enclosed or cultivated. It was a desert and a sand bank, the sand hills blowing about. I liave been in the neighborhood several times, but only once at the post. Int. 20. — Whore is this post situated ; and lo this place of any considerable value or importance as a commercial point ? Ans. — It is situated on the south bank of the Columbia river, near the line between Oregon and Washington. I have understood that there is a little town, since grown up, either in the neighborhood, or directly at the post called Wallula, at which goods and supplies have been landed for the present town of Walla- Walla, and other points in the interior. Int. 21. — From your knowledge of the situation of this place w^ith reference to the trade of the river and the surrounding country, and the discovery of mines in the interior, do you anticipate the growth of any considerable town here at present ? Ans. — I do not think that there will ever be a large town there. There are other points on the river more valuable. When I was there last summer the greater part of the supplies were being landed at Umatilla, which is some distance below Wallula. There is a better route to the interior from Umatilla. Int. 22. — When have you seen the post at Champoeg ? Please to describe the character and condition and value of the same when you saw it. Ans. — The first time I saw Champoeg was in 1844. I have seen it very often since, passing up and down the river. My recollection of it is that there was a small dwelling-house, a 29 granary, and a small store. They were all cheap, rough buikliii,i,'S. I should think the buildings, as I recollect them, might have been put up for one thousand or fifteen hundred dollars. The land is not valuable. I believe everything was washed away from there two or three years ago. Int. 23. — Is Champoeg a place of any trade or prospective importance, in your judgment, in the future growth or pros- perity of Oregon ? Ans. — None whatever, I think. Int. 24. — When did you visit and observe the buildings and lands occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company at Astoria, and please to describe their condition and character and value at the time you saw them, as fully as you can ? Ann. — 1 visited Astoria in August, 1844. There were then at that place two or three old buildings, one of which was a dwelling-house, in which the person in charge resided; the other was a salmon or store-house. There was also a small patch of ground enclosed. I think three or four buildings .comprised the whole; they were very old and dilapidated. It is pretty hard to tell what an old rotten building is worth. They might have been worth one hundred or two hundred dol- lars. I . — In the early settlement of Oregon, in 1.S44 and 184/), ditl not the settlers entertain great fears of the tribes of Indians in the Territory of Oregon ? Ann. — I don't think there was any ajtprehension entertained on that suliject up to the time of the Whitman nmssaere in 1847. The Indians of the Willamette valley, where the prin- cipal American settlements were at that time, were exceed- ingly docile, and not disposed to make war. Nearly all the Indian hostilities have been confined to the southern portion of territory, north of the Columbia river, and cast of the Cascade Mountains. Wc never had any Indian war in the Wil- lamette valley. , Int. 84. — You have spoken of these forts of the Hudson's Bay Company ; were they not strong and substantial fortifi- cations, ample to protect the employes of the Company ajjainst all attacks of hostile Indians, and suitable for the purposes for which they were erected? Ans:. — They were ample for all those purposes. Int. 85. — Did you in 1845, at Oregon City, sign a paper containing this language, viz: "That this mixed population exists in the midst of numer- ous and warlike tribes of Indians, to whom the smallest dis- sensions among the white inhabitants would be the signal to let loose upon their defenceless families all the horrors of sav- age warfare?" (Objected to as incompetent.) Ans. — In 1845 the Legislatui3 was in session in Oregon City. They drew up a memorial to the Congress of the Uni- ted States, which I, among others, signed. I have no positive recollection of the language, but I think it did contain some- 'I,, :"i|,: *" ' '' Til ■ i'! ■:'• 'Hi ^,''"4 '.'•1 ■ SI 'Jl' "'"I'I'I lih , l_^ ^ iij,i i!'W, M„ -i 48 thing of the character contained in the question. We were exceed iigly anxious for the United States to extend its laws and jurisdiction over us. Int. 80. — Did this paper which you signed contain this pas- sage, now read to you, viz : "Although such has been the result thus far of our tempo- rary union of interests; tlPough we, the citizens of the United States, have had no catise to complain either of exactions or oppression at the hands of the subjects of Great Britain, but on the contrary, it is but just to say that their conduct to- wards us has been most friendly, liberal, and philanthropic, yet we fear, as long .ontij;uance of the present state of things is not to be expected, our temporary government being lim- ited in its efficiency and crippled in its powers by ihc para- mount duty we owe to our respective Governments, our reve- nues being inadequate to its srpport, and the almost total absence, apart from the Hudson's Bay Company, of the niea.'.s of defence against the Indians, who, recent occurrences lead us to fear, entertain hostile feelings towards the people of the United States?" (Objected to as incompetent.) Ans. — 1 have not seen that memorial since I signed it. I think it is more than probable that it contained the statements in question. My impression is that it did. Int. 87. — Did this paper which you signed contain this pas- sage, now read to you, viz : " Your memorialists would further inform your honorable body, that while the subjects of Great Britain, through the agency of the Hudson's Lay Company, are amply provided with all the munitions of war, and can afford, by means of their numerous fortifications, ample protection for themselves and their property, the citizens of the United States are scattered over a wide extent of territory, without a single place of refuge, an J within themselves almost entirely destitute of every means of defence? " (Objected to as incompetent.) Ana. — As I said before, I have not seen that memorial for tv/enty-one years. I think it contained language similar to 49 We were its laws this pas- r toiiipo- United etions or tain, but duct to- itliropic, if things oing lim- he para- uv reve- 3St total lie nica.'.s ces lead le of the 1 it. I itcMucnts ;hid pas- iiorablo ugii the rovided eans of uisolves tes are I single cslitutc rial for lilar to that which you quote. We were endeavoring to make a strong case and get protection. I recollect the memorial, and the person who drew it, and I have no doubt but what it contained substantially what has been read. Int. 88. — Do you not know that tho cost of taking flour and other provisions to the Walla-Walla valley, in the Indian war of 1855-56, was very groat ? Ans. — It would have been very great to have transported flour or supplies there. Examination-in- Chief Resumed. Int. 1. — You have stated in effect, in reply to some question in the cross-examination, that you were unable to give from recollection the dimensions of the forts and buildings, which you have seen at different times, at the posts of the Hudson's Bay Company, nor to describe in detail their specific condi- tion in any given year; and you have stated also that the want of paint and clap-boards may possibly have contributed somewhat to tho dilapidated appearance of the buildings : please now to state whether your memory is or is not distinct, in regard to the general appearance of these forts and build- ings, as you saw them at different times, and whether or not, on reflection, you think that you have given in your tosti- mony-in-chicf, and now wish to alter any part of the same. Ans. — I do not think I have erred in my testimony-in-ehief. The question was asked me, in reference to Astoria, if the ap- pearance of the dilapidation of the buildings did not result from the want of paint and exposure to the weather. The buildings were very old and very much decayed ; paint might have kept them in a better condition. My memory is distinct on the general appearance of the b.Lildings. Of course there may be some things in detail which have escaped my memory. Int. 2. — Do you know of any operations of the Hudson's Bay Company, in the Territory west of the Rocky Mountains, on cither side of the Columbia river, in clearing the land of timber, or in making roads with a view to opening the coun- 4C 60 W-M try to settlement? If yea, please to describe the same as fully as you can. (Objected to, as nothing of that kind having been inquired into in the cross-examination.) A718. — I never saw any land about their posts that bore evi- dence of having been cleared, except about Astoria. There the timber had evidently been cut off many years before. I never saw anything deserving the name of a road, that had been made previous to my going to the country. J. W. Nesmith. Washington, 3Iat/ 15, 1866. Testimony of Justus Steinberger. iM »« Justus Steinberger, being duly sworn, according to law, de- poses, and says : Int. 1. — What is your name, age, place of residence, and present occupation? Ans. — My name is Justus Steinberger ; I am forty years of age ; my residence is Washington city, at present ; I have no occupation at present. Int. 2. — Have you ever lived in Oregon and Washington Territory ; if yea, when and where, and for how long a period at each place ? Ans. — I have ; I went to Oregon first in 18f50, I think in October, and remained there until, I think, April, 1851. I afterwards went to Oregon in February, 1852, to make it my residence ; it has since been my residence, although I have been absent frequently ; on one occasion for over two years. I spent a year in Washington Territory, in the service of the Government, in the employ of the army. I think that was in 1860 and 1861 ; I don't recollect the day I went there, or the day I left. I then left Washington Territory in the sum- mer of 1861, and returned to Fort Vancouver in April, 1862, and took command of the military district, of Oregon, with the rank of colonel of volunteers ; and from that time until March, 51 iame as 1865, was in the army service of the Government, in the dis- trict of Oregon. During my term of service, from April, 1862, to March, 1865, my immediate stations and head- quarters were in Washington Territory. Int. 3. — Have you ever visited any of the posts of the Hudson's Bay Company, in what was formerly the Territory of Oregon, west of the Rocky Mountains? If yea, please to name the different posts in their possession which you have seen, and with which you are acquainted, more or less. Ans. — I have visited Fort Vancouver ; have seen the site of the old Fort Walkv-Walla, and of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany's post on and near the mouth of the Cowlitz. I have seen the claim of the Hudson's Bay Company at Baker's Bay, mouth of the Columbia river, on the right bank. I have been at Champoeg, and Fort George, or Astoria. I know Pillar Rock; I have been by it frequently, and I think I've been ashore at or near there. I don't remember any other places. Int. 4. — Please to describe, as fully as you can, the character and condition of the fort and buildings of the Company at Vancouver when you first saw them. An8. — My recollection of Fort Vancouver in the winter of 1850, when I first saw it, is very indistinct, and my remem- brance of the fort refers to the time of my residence in Wash- ington Territory and Oregon, from lhi52 to 1865. During that time I mode frequent visits to the fort. 1 never made a careful examination of the character of the buildings, but re- member them as wooden structures, store-houses, and resi- dences of the officers and employes of the Company, surrounded by a picket stockade. The character of the whole structure looked to me as if for defensive purposes. There wore two bastions, if not more. I recollect two at least, with guns in them. Some pieces of artillery were in front of the Governor's house. There were one or two buildings which looked to me to be store-houses, outside the picket, said to belong to the Hudson's Bay Company ; an apple orchard enclosed, and a number of fields enclosed, (how many, I don't know,) and apparently under cultivation. There were also a number of old slab buildings collected together, and called Kanaka Town. 'yu|iivi jmtvm^mfi^ 52 imVI Whether tliey belonged to the Hudson's Bay Company or not, I do not knoAV. I never carefully examined the structures. They wore built of wooden material, and compared to the style of the recent buildings in Oregon, I tliinls were inferior in construction and material. Int. f). — Are you familiar with the country adjacent to the post and bounded on the river, extending say from i point six or ciglit miles above the fort westerly to the Cathlapootl or Lewes river, and back from the river for a distance say of eight or ten miles? Ans. — I know very little of the country beyond one mile back from the Columbia river except the Fourth Plain; I have seen that. Int. 6. — Have you any knowledge of the value of the land per acre at the post at Vancouver; if yea, please to describe the value thereof as fully as you can, discriminating between the ditterent varieties of the land. Ans. — It is impossible for me to answer that question in that shape, and for the reason that I never offered to purchase any of that land, and none of it was ever offered me for sale, with this one exception, that when a town plot was laid off and lots were sold in what is now called Vancouver, I owned the one-half of ten acres in the town site, and at a point that I believe the most valuable in the town. It cost at the rrte of one hundred dollars per acre. I have forgotten the year the purchase was made. It was purchased at a time that great expectation was had of the growth and prosperity of ^'^ancou- ver as a commercial town. I believe the property to be of less value now than when I purchased. My recollection of the estimated value of it, by other persons, differed so widely in price that I could never form an opinion as to its value. Int. 7. — What was the condition of the fort and buildings at Vancouver in 18G3? Please to describe the same as fully as you can. Ans. — I didn't pay much attention to the property in 1863. I did not live at Vancouver, but in several visits I made to Vancouver in that year, I saw the old site of the Hudson's 63 ■■'I i ■; ■'< s ■ i Bay Company, Fort Vancouver, and it presented to mo the appearcncc of old, dilapidated, and worthless ruins. Int. 8. — Did you, while residing on the Pacific const, observe the course of trade in that country, and the progress of settle- ment at different points? If yea, please to state what, in your opinion, is the prospect of the future growth and pros])ority of the town of Vancouver. (Opinion of witness objected to.) A71S. — I was personally engaged in business in Oregon for several years, and had an opportunity to observe the ])rogres8 of trade. It is my belief that, from present indications, Van- couver will not be a point of any great commercial impor- tance. Int. 0. — Has or has not the town of Portland advanced in wealth and population, materially, the last five or ton years? If yea, hoAV does it affect the growth and developmeat of the town of Vancouver? Ans. — It has advanced in growth and prosperity very much ; and its growth has retarded in some measure thnt of Van- couver. I believe that the principal purpose in the location of the town of Vancouver, and the inducements for tlie invest- ments in town property there, was the prospect of its success- ful rivalry with the city of Portland as a commercial port. In that I think it has failed. Int. 10. — Have you any knowledge of any of the other posts of the Company in wliat was formerly Or.egon Territory ? If yea, please to describe the same in detail, as fully as you can, giving the character and condition and value of the fort and the building's when you saw and observed them. Ans. — I saw, in 1850, at Baker's Bay, one old building of wood, reported to belong to the Hudson's Bay Company. There was very little cleared land around it. The building was of very little value ; it fronted on the bay ; the other three sides were surrounded by a dense forest. Adjoining what was reported to be the Hudson's Bay Company's claim, a town site had been located, I believe by Dr. White and others, called . Pacific City. There was but one building on the town site — a hotel kept by Mr. Ilolman. There were expectations of its 54 becoming a town of importance, as a seaport. The enterprise proved a complete failure, and was abandoned. I saw the buildings near the mouth of the Cowlitz, on the Cowlitz river, in 18r>0, said to belong to the Hudson's Bay Company. To the best of my recollection, there was one large storehouse, sev- eral small out-houses and sheds, and a few small bouses occupied by the officers and servants of the Company. The storehouse was a tolerably substantial building, and of rough material. The other buildings, compared to those built bv Americans at the present time, were of rude structure ; they were on the site of the landing where small steamboats now land. I cannot place any estimate upon the value of the buildings. 1 saw what was called Fort George, now Astoria, in 1850. To the best of my recollection, there were a few old buildings, said to belong to the Hudson's Bay Company, of very little intrin- sic value, and a very few acres of land, partially enclosed. It was occupied at the time by the troops of the United States Government as a militarj'^ post. I have no knowledge of the property of the Hudson's Bay Company at Champoeg. I saw the site of the Hudson's Bay Company's Fort Walla- Walla in 1802 for the first time, and had pointed out to me two old adbbe buildings and the remains of a stockade, said to have belonged to the Hudson's Bay Company. They had been repaired, and were occupied by a Mr. Van Sycle. I am un- able to put any estimate upon their value. The site was the landing-place for sttfamboats. Cross-Examination. Silt t Int. 1. — Between 1852 and 1856, were you residing at Fort Vancouver, or only visiting there occasionally ; if so, where did you reside, and in wbat business were you occupied ? Ans. — I lived at Portland, Oregon ; I was the agent of Adams & Co.'s express and banking establishment for Oregon and Washington Territory. I visited Fort Vancouver very frequently. Int. 2. — How far from the site of the fort, down the river, 56 \ was this ton acres you speak of purchasing ? Look on this map, and, if you can, locate it. Ans. — I can't on this map, because the Vancouver lots are not marked here. I can describe it by saying it was next to the saw-mill ; it was between a half-mile and a mile from the western picket line of the Hudson's Bay Company's old fort at Vancouver ; I don't recollect the exact distance. Int. 3. — On the land claim of Avhat American citizen was it situated, and of whom did you buy it ? Ans. — I don't recollect; I bought it jointly with another person, and paid no attention to the transfer. Int. 4. — Do you not recollect that the town of Vancouver was laid out in lots, and that this ten acres was below the part laid out in lots ? Ans. — I don't remember that, but my impression is that it was a part of the town site, though of that I am not certain. Int. 5. — When towns are laid out in lots, are they ever sold in acres, or are they sold by the subdivisions of lots, defined by the survey ? jlns. — I can only answer that question by stating a fact. I know that a town site was located on the Willamette river, in Oregon, embodying the whole of a land-claim of three hun- dred and twenty acres ; and that while a portion of the claim adjoining the river was laid out in lots of certain dimensions, a portion of the rear of the claim, of about forty acres, was sold by the acre, subject to an after subdivision of the town by the town or city authorities. Int. 6. — If you do not know whose title you purchased, or whose land you bought, can you tell whether you had a deed from the Hudson's Bay Company for this land? Ans. — I believe not. I believe no deed from the Hudson's Bay Company. Int. 7. — Do you still retain the part ownership of this land, or have you sold it? If so, for what price, and how long since? Ans. — I have no ownership in it at present. I sold my in- terest in it for six hundred dollars, which I considered was more than it was worth. I sold it about six years ago. lMiaii|i1,UFIii ik "li ' •■■■:' M '\ Villi , ■■■-'i"l. ■:! :'Wi:^ '■'li;'.' I '..:%' , .Hill iiii , , . IW.' f "-''if '^ i 'i ' '-i ■ '5 I'iijfii''! |if 56 7/*^ 8. — Arc there not some objections to Portland as a place of commerce, such us want of water in the river for ocean steamers ; is not the being oft" the line of travel, on the main Columbia to the mines, unother objection ; and is not the nivrrowncss of the Willamette river, at the site of the town, another objection ; and is not the tendency to open direct trade from the mines with San Francisco likely to do an injury to the commerce of Portland? A)iK. — The want of a sufficient depth of water at Swan Island bar and at the mouth of Willamette river, where it empties into the Columbia river, was, at certain seasons of the vear, an embarrassment to navisjation for ocean vessels of heavy draft. To the citizens of Portland, it was not consid- ered an insuperable objection to the commerce of their town. The citizens of Portland think being off" the line of travel is not an objection. I think the water-front at Portland is sufficient for the present commerce of the town. The only complaints I have ever heard of the Avant of room in the water-front have been of the little delay that has occurred in swinging around large steamships in their departure from the wharves. It never aff'orded an impediment for their depai*- ture, but took a little time to maneuvre their ships, and this only at a very low stage of water. The citizens of Portland do not think that the tendency of open and direct trade from the mines to San Francisco would be an injury to their com- mcice. They don't think any other city can compete with them. The town of Portland was first located with a view to the supply of the Willamette valley and Tualatin Plains, and as at the head of navigation of the Willamette river, which waters that country. The country in which the gold mines have since been dis- covered attracted to commercial men at that time no interest. The ocean vessels running to that town, and for a few years after its location, were able to supply the wants of the Willa- mette valley, and Tualatin Plains, without embarrassment in na\igation. Portland is twelve miles up the Willamette river, from where it empties into the Columbia river. As Portland increased 'i A ,' :^ 57 .i in population and prosperity, persons having an interest in property on the Columbia river, above and below the mouth of the AVillamette, made efforts to establish towns. Several points were spoken of as eligible points for sea-going vessels; among the rest, Astoria, Cathlamet, Rainier, St. Helen's, and Vancouver. Buildings were put up on them, and every effort was made by the proprietors of the land to attract attention to their eligibility for that purpose. The influence of the City of Portland has thus far over- come the embarrassments of the navigation of the Willamette river that I have mentioned, and has prevented any success- ful rivalry from these towns on the Columbia. It is now, after the discovery of the gold mines on the Columbia and its trib- utaries, the commercial port for 'not only the Willamette val- ley and the Tualatin Plains, but for all the country east of the Cascades. I think, to say nothing of the merits of the towns below the mouth of the Willamette river, there are obstructions in the water-front of the town of Vancouver equally as embar- rassing to sea-going vessels as those in the Willamette river before the city of Portland. Int. 9, — Have not St. Helen's and Rainier long since de- cayed, and lost any pretense of being sites of commerce? Ans. — They have failed to come up to vhc expectation of their original proprietors. Int. 10. — Did Cathlamet ever have, or has it now, more than five or six houses? Ans. — I don't know the number of houses. I never counted them. Int. 11. — Are not Astoria and Vancouver, of the places you have mentioned on the Columbia river, the only ones that have retained their growth and most of their population? Ans. — I believe that Astoria has a greater population now than in IS.'iG. I am doubtful if the town of Vancouver has as many citizen residents in it now as at some other time since its foundation as a town. I think I can recollect when it had a greater population than it had in March, 1865, when I last saw it. 58 ::i ■ , iiiiji Int. 12. — Who was in command of the United States troops at old Fort George, at the time you speak of, when tlie United States troops were in possession of it? Ans, — I think Major Ilathcway, of the Ist United States Artillery. Int. 13. — Does not the Walla- Walla valley, where you were stationed some years, contain a large and flourishing settle- ment? Ans. — I don't remember the population of the Walla- Walla valley. I know that along the Walla-Walla river and its tributaries there is fertile, arable land; I can't give the ex- act extent of it. The claims were taken under the pre-emp- tion laws, which have, in many instances, since been divided. This fertile land is generally occupied and improved. There is a town in the Walla- Walla valley, within three-quarters of a mile of Fort Walla-Walla, with a population varying from eight to fifteen hundred persons. I do not believe that any of the agricultural products are shipped from the valley, to any extent, except flour. Some cattle are raised in the valley, and a few of them sent to the mines for sale. The settlement of this valley was commenced and promoted by the establish- ment of a military post and the presence of United States troops, and for the purpose of supplying them. Until within the past four years the product of this valley in grain found its market in the United States Government, in the supply of United States troops at this post. Justus Steinberger. Washington City, J). C, May 16, 1806. Testimony op Charles B. Wagner. Charles B. Wagner, being duly sworn and examined according to law, says: Int. 1. — What is your name, age, place of residence, and occupation ? Ans. — Charles B. Wagner ; aged forty years ; place of res- 59 Idcncc, Washington City ; and occupation, an oflieor oT the* United States army — brevet colonel, captain, and quarter- master. Int. 2. — Have you ever lived in Washington Territory? If yea, when, and where, and for how long a time ? Ans. — Yes, sir; from the latter part of August, IH^T, to the middle of September, 1861, at Fort Vancouver, Washing- ton Territory. Int. 3. — Are you acquainted with the fort and l)uildings at Vancouver, which were formerly occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company? If yea, please to describe them as they were when you first observed them. Ans. — Yes, sir. When I first went there, in the hitter part of August, 1857, the buildings then occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company were principally embraced in what was known as the stockade, with the exception of the salmon-house near the river, which was outside the stockade. The buildings were old, and some were very much dilapidated. The build- iugs consisted of what was known as the store there, two or three store-houses, one of which was rented and occupied by the United States quartermaster at that time, 1857, and what was known as the Governor's house. These were the principal buildings within the stockade. In addition to those, there were four or five smaller buildings, occupied by the employes of the Hudson's Bay Company. There were a few buildings outside the stockade, of which the salmon-house was the prin- cipal, one small frame building, occupied by the ordnance de- partment as a store-house, one small log building, occupied by Mrs. Field, and four or five small huts occupied by Sandwich Islanders or Kanakas, and several old stables ; these are about all I remember. Int. 4. — How did the character and condition of the fort and buildings at this post, at the time you last saw them, com- pare with their character and condition when you saw and observed them for the first time ? Am. — They had gone very much out of repair ; a number of them were unoccupied ; some of them were partly fallen down. '"s 5 .1 ■•'^■, S w is m m 'sm'iu GO Inf. r>. — Aro yon ncquaintcd with the value of the fort and buihliii;,'s cithor collet'tively or in detail? If yea, please to .state, as fully as you can, yonr opinion of that value at the time you last saw them. (Ohjeeted to as a matter of opinion.) An8, — I could ;:;ive an opinion, so far as what I considered their worth when I last saw them ; Iamacquainte i) miPM -'■IDi'iMW I "-'I W ... > ' si 1) 1*1 .. 11 " Hi I tl tl 66 store — a doctor somebody; I can't recall the name; also a Mr. Rosonstock or Mr. llosoiibaiiin. Dit. 15. — Is not the Government wharf at the old Hudson's Bav landiniT and on the military reserve: and is not the deepest ^vater oft' the military reserve front? An><. — The Government wharf is on the military reserve. The deepest water on the front of the military reserve is at the wliarf. Jut. !(!. — Do you know on what part of the water-front, at and near Vancouver, the deepest water is to be found? If so, state it. Ans. — Yes, sir; about three-quarters of a mile below the military reserve, and just below the saw-mill and below the town, is the deepest water near the bank. Int. 17. — Is not the wharf of the Government built directly on the bank of the river, and would not a Avharf of proper length, run out from the bank at any place near Vancouver, reach deep water ? Ans. — If you go far enough out, except at one particular point, which is the bar. I/d. 18. — What is the greatest depth of water in the channel of the river oft" Vancouver and its immediate [vicinity]? Ans. — At ordinary stages of Avater, excluding the bar, it is fourteen, fourteen and a-half, and fifteen feet. The depth of the water in front of the wharf is about the average depth of the channel. Charles B. Wagner, Brevet Col. and Ass't Quartermaister. Washington City, May 11th, 18G6. ",rli*jSi' 11 ■' Mil \H 11; - Testimony of Captain William A. Howard. Captain William A. Howard, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says : Int. 1. — What is your name, age, place of residence, and occupation ? '«|| Avs. — My name is William A. Howard; aged fifty and up- wards; my occupation is captain in the United States Revenue Marine; niv residence is New York Citv, Now York. Int. 2, — Have you ever visited and observed any of the posts of tlie Hudson's Jjay Company west of the Rocky ^Nlouiitains? If yea, jjlease to enumerate tlie d'tterent posts which you have visited. Ans. — I visited the mouth of the Cowlitz, Nisqually, Van- couver, Cape Disap])ointment, and Astoria. Jnt. •). — How often have you visited the post at Vancouver, and are you or not acquainted with the fort and ])uiMings at this post which were occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company ? Ans. — I visited there repeatedly, I suppose as many as a dozen times. I was there in l^'A, 18.V2, and early in 1S53. I am acquainted with the fort and buildings of the Hudson's Bay Company at this post. Int. 4. — Please to describe the character, condition, and value of the fort and buildings at this post when you saw and observed them. Ana. — The character of the Hudson's Bay Company's trad- ing post and fort was an enclosed picketed post. There was certainly one bjstion there. The buildings were made in the (.'anadian style, of uprights, I think. The buildings were in good order at that time. There wore granaries, Avork-shops, dwellings, and stores, large buildings, some of which were one hundred feet long, I think. One of them was, certainly. The buildings were rude structures, made of the wood of the country, built by the common labor of the in' • »1" if- :il: iiili^' 68 anything in the way of wharves and piers, anil destroys navi- gation, which renders it ineligible for a good site for a town. Int. (J. — Please to describe separately the condition and value of the other posts of the Hudson's Bay Company which you have visited and observed at different tin\cs. Alls. — The mouth of the Cowlitz, when I visited there, was being destroyed very fast, being washed away by the en- croaches of the river. I think one of the stores was in the water. I visited the place a number of times, and these en- croaches Avere going on during my acquaintance with it. When I was first there there was a considerable body of land in front of it, and during my visits this land was being gradually washed away. My impression is that at my last visit one of the buildings had been somewhat undermined by the washing away. At Cape Disappointment, when I was there in 1853, I saw nothing there that could claim to be a station, except a fish house, or something of that kind. I remember two build- ings at Astoria when I was there in 1852 and 1853 — I spent a week there at one time — said to belong to the Hudson's Bay Company. It was not used as a trading post. These buildings were very old, out of order, and of little value. Cro88-Examination. lii 3l«)il! ;*:,s ii: ,f,iiiii>', ill!" If 1 ' fi Int. 1. — While at Vancouver did you have occasion to sound the river in front of the old stockade or near it, so as to locate the shoal you speak of, or is your knowledge of it derived from hearsay ? Ans. — My knowledge is derived from my own observation. I went there in a canoe frequently. I was there in the United States steamer Active. Int. 2. — Have you any knowledge of this water-front since 1853, and do you know its present condition of your own knowledge? Ans. — I know nothing. Int. 3. — Was not this shoal you speak of a shifting bank of sand, moving and liable to be swept away at any time by the strong current of the river ? 69 •J '. i Ans. — This was evidently of shifting sand. The shoal was a growing shoal in front of Vancouver, and was sufficient to destroy that place for a town site for shipping. Int. 4. — Did this shoal extend down the river so as to render the front below the fort a poor place for wharves? Ans. — I thinic at this time, if I mistake not, this shoal was considerably below the fort. Int. 5. — Do you know the fact that the Government wharf is now a little above the Hudson's Bay Company's landing, and has fifteen feet of water at ordinary low water 'i Alls. — I know there is deep water there. I am confident there was twelve or fifteen feet of water for some distance along that point inside the shoal. " Int. 0. — Did you make any particular examination of the buildings of the Hudson's Bay Company inside the stockade, so as to be able to say that many of them were not finished inside, lined and ceiled, and some of them framed ? Ans. — I made no particular examination of the houses, but know some of them were ceiled. W. A. HOAVARD, Captain U. S. 11. llarine. Washington City, D. C, 3Iai/ 21, 18GG. Testimony of Joseph K. Barnes. ington Joseph K. Barnes, being duly sworn according to law, says : Int. 1. — What is your name, age, place of residence, and present occupation ? 1/Js.— J. K.Barnes; agedforty-nineyears; residence, Wash- city; occupation, Surgeon General United States Army. Int. 2. — Have you ever visited Washington Territory ; if yea, when and where ? Ans.—l resided in Washington Territory four years, be. tween the years 1857 to 1861, at Fort Vancouver. Lit. 3. — Are you acquainted with the lands and buildings [•*).i;.if,i|V,. fi,i; '; .:jl "■ .. 'M % 70 at Vancouver which are claimed by the Hudson's Bay Com- pany ? Ans. — Yes. Int. 4. — Have you ever made any estimate of tlic value of the fort and buildinrif.s at Vancouver ■vvliich Avcrc formerly claimed and occupied by the Hudson's Bay CompaTiy ; if yea, when, and under what circumstances? Ans. — T Avas a member of a board of survey, ordered to make an estimate of the value of the buildings owned by the Hudson's Bav Companv at Fort Van ouver. Int. i). — Please to look at the paper here presented, and marked A and annexed, and state whether the same be a true copy of the report which was made and signed by you and others in pursuance of the order for a survey. Ans. — It is a true copy, according to my best judgment and belief. (The admission of the above paper objected to, on the ground that it is the report and decision of a military board or tribunal on some of the matters that have been, or may be, in (juestion before this joint commission ; and that, by the date of the report, it appears to have been made after the Hudson's Bay Company had left the premises, under notification of the com- manding oificcr of the department that they had no rights therein ; and, further, that the Company had no notice what- ever of the proceeding.) Int. 0. — Are you acquainted with the character and value of any other posts of the Hudson's Bay Company ? If yea, please to enumerate and describe them. Ans. — No, sir ; I am not. Int. 7. — What was the condition of the buildings at Van- couver at the time that your attention was called to them ; and what, in your opinion, Avas their value at that time? (Objectetl to as incompetent.) Ans. — The condition was the same as at the time when vacated by the Company; and they were utterly valueless, except for tlie Company's purpose. Int. 8. — Hid you, while there, observe the policy of the Com- pany in regard to the settlement of the country by American 71 Bay Com- ic value of formerly y; if yea, )r(lere(l to od by the ntcd, and be a true Y you and fluent and he ground r tribunal I (question to of the son's Bay ' the com- no rights lice what- and value If yea. ■me when valueless, citizens ? If yea, please to state whether the same was favor- iiblo or otherwise. AtiH. — I had no opportunity of judging of the policy of the Company in this respect. Int. t>. — Does this report, a copy of which has boon produced liere, contain a true and accurate account and estimate of the fort and buildings of the Company at the time the same were examined by you; and have you any desire or wish to alter the opinica which you then expressed in regard to the char- acter and value of the fort and l)uilf.\T(«.v, Ciii>f. %1 DriKjiiuHH, A. .1. Ailjt iirttl FullT VaNCOU villi, WASIirXCToN TkIUUTi'ILY, oxK O'CLOCK, r. M., ./(///. I."), ij?t;o. Tlio board inot pursuant to tin- above ordiT : ])ri'Sont, all the mcinl)c'rri and the Uocorder. The board llirn procroded to oxamino and appraise tlic buiblinj^s on llie military reserve vacated by the Hudson's Bay Company. The board doterniincd, respecting the probal)le value of these buildini^s, as follows: No. 1. — Store-house on the bank of the river in rear of the Government wharf, known as the salmon-house. Tiiis liuild- iiig has been used by the depot (luarternnister at dillerent times as a temporary storehouse, but is noAv useless for that purpose. Estimated value of material, §1-'). No. 2, — Two-storied building, with adjoining shed and out- house, used by the ordnance department as store-house, »S:c. ; out of repair, and useless except for the nnjst temporary purposes. Estimated value of material, $")0. No. 3. — rrincipal dwelling-house inside of pickets, known as Governor's house ; sills, llooring, and wood-work generally so much decayed as to be uninhabitable; entirely useless for any military purpose. Estimated value of material, $100. No. 4.— kitchen, (Governor's house,) entirely out of repair, useless to the public service. Material of no value. No. 5. — Butcher shop, &c., in a ruinous condition. Mate- rial of no value. No. G. — Bake-house, in a ruinous condition. jSIaterial of no value. No. 7. — Long building, used as quarters for employus, so auch out of repair as to be uninhabitable and useless for any military purpose. Estimated value of material, $20. No. 8. — Small store-house, long since abandoned by the Company, in a ruinous condition. Material of no value. <'^M W"., i'r ■ *, t ■ 76 No. 0. — Blacksmith shop, long since abandoned by the Company, in a ruinous condition. Materials of no value. No. 10. — Fur-house, long since abandoned by the Company, in a ruinous condition. Material of no value. No. 11. — Porter s lodge, useless for any military purpose. Materials of no value. Nos. 12, T3, and 14. — Three large store-houses, useless for any purpose connected with the public service. Estimated value of material, $800. No. lo. — Hudson's Bay Company's store, entirely unsuitable for any military purpose. Estimated value of material, $150. No. 10. — Block-hou&o, in a ruinous condition. Material of no value. No. 17. — Grar.ary, entirely unsuited to any purpose of the public service. Material of no value. No. 18. — Carpenter's wheehvright shop, long since aban- doned by the Company, in a ruinous condition. Materials of no value. No. 10. — Company's office, in tolerable repair, might be made use of temporarily. Estimated value of material, $75. No. 20. — GuarN. 1- — I LJ I — I ! ^ r i5j .5J i^ r"V — I 1 7\ ) I ^ ^' .1^.J =^ ^ o W w 77 such of the material as may be found to be of sufficient value. The board having ho fur .her business before it, then ad- journed sine die. GEOiifiE Naumax, Brevet Lieut. Col., Major <^d ArtiUerif. Jos. K. Bauxks, John F. llEvxoLr)-;, Captain, Brevet Major 3tZ Artillery. ClIAUNCEY McKeEVER, \»t Lieut. 3t? Artillery, Recorder. Official copy. E. D. Townsend, Assistant Adjutant G- neral. Testimony of Ciiauncey McKeever. Gen. Chauneey McKeever, being duly sworn, according to law, deposes and says: Int, 1. — What is your name, age, place of residence and occupation ? Ans. — Chauncey McKeever ; Major in Adjutant General'^; Department, Brevet Brigadier General United States Army; aged thirty-six years; residence, Washington City. Lit. 2. — Have you ever resided in Washington Territory; if yea, when and where ? Ans. — I resided there about ten months, from about No- vember, 18')i3, to September, 1850, at Fort Steihicoom, and afterwards at Fort Vancouver for about a year, from Septem- ber, 185lt, to September, 18(30. Int. 3. — Are you acquainted with the lands and buiblingi- at Vancouver which were formerly claimed and ocjupied by the Hudson's Bay Company? Ans. — Yes, sir ; I have been mer most all of tliem. Int. 4. — Did you ever estimate, as a member of a board of military survey, the lands and buildings at Vancouver which N ::■ I-- 5 ;l . I'll .'■1':;. Ii«- ■ 78 were formerly occiipiod l)y tlio lludson's Bay Conip.any ; if yea, ■wlieii ? Ajia. — I was ;. mcinljor of a board wliicli was directed to make an estimato of tlie value of the buildings, but not of the bimls, and was rocorder for a second board for tlie same purpose, l)ut liail no voice in tlie proceedings of tlie last board. The first survey was made in MaVcli, 18G0, and the second in June of the same year. lilt. f). — IMcase to look at the paper here produceil, and state whether, in your opinion, the same be a true copy of the report whidi was made by you and others in pursuance of a special order from General Harney. A71S. — I beliovt- tills to bo a true copy of tlie report. (All evidcMice with reforcnce to the authenticity of this re- port, and the report Itself, is objected to as irrelevant and in- competent, the re|»ort purporting to contain, and to be the proceedings and deelslons of a military board or tribunal sit- ting to detei-mlne and decide on matters that have been or may l>e in ([uestloii before this commission.) Inf. (i. — Did you personally inspect and appraise the build- ings and im])rovenieiits at Vancouver which were occupied by the Hudson's Day Company? If yea, please to describe their condition at the time you examined them, and your judg- ment of tiieir value at that time. Aus. — I did examine them. Although I had no vote, I participated in the discussions and gave my opinion. My impression is that the ap])raisement was made by myself and one other member of the board. I inspected the buildings in June, lS. They were all of them in a very dilapidated condition. Most of the lumber and timber about them was very much decayed. I considered the whole of them worth about one thousand dollars. Int. 7. — Did you ever give any attention to the growth and development of the country on the Pj,cific coast, and the probablo course of trade there in the future; if yea, what, in your oi)inion, is tl.'c probability of building up a large com- mercial town at Vancouver? Ans. — I cannot say that I have ever given any great attcn- 79 tioji to this sul)jet't, but I have always taken the ground there was no jrreat value to be attiicheil to Vaueouvor as a comuiereial ))lace, for the reason there is no back country likely to be settled back of Vancouver. The forests are very dense. 1 don't think it would ])ay to clear them. There is very little o]»en |)rairic land. Anijiiii ■ ^WfimiKJfJiiiWm r Mil Ml *'■ .■ 'I'll :. -i '%!,: |.:|^ ■■.■■l;» i 1 80 Ans. — I do not consider myself a very competent judge, but I know something about it, having had charge of the erection of some (fovernment buihlings, and having purchased the ma- terials at Steilacoom. Int. 0. — Were there any carpenters with you, ^r were any examined by the board at this time? Ans. — I think not. I think there was no one except the members of the uoard. Int. 7. — Do you feel certain that the officers comprising the board alone examined these buildings in the three hours you mention, and then, witliout getting information from builders or carpenters, formed .heir opinion':" Ans. — I think there was no one with the board at the time we examined the buildings. I don't know whether any of the board consulted the head carpenter or not. Int. 8. — Had not these buildings of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany, since their departure, been exposed to the soldiers, and been used by them for any purpose they saw fit? Ans. — I think not. I doubt Avhether they had been touched. I think this examination was about a month after the Com- pany left, and possibly less than that time. I7it. 9. — Is not your opinion of the value of these liuildings a military value, with reference to the ground they were on, being ou a military reserve, from which they would have to be taken down and removed? Atis. — y\y oi)inion of the value was based on what they would be worth, when sold, to be taken down and removed. Inl. 10. — Have vx>u been in Oretcon or Washino-ton since the trade with the mining country east of the Cascades has become so large and valual)le'.'' Ahs. — I have not been there since October, I860. Iwt. 11. — Do yoin know anything of the history of this shift- ing bar or sand-ba*nk yoa have spoken of, for several years years before you noticed it, or anything at all of it, except during the tim>e vou were at Vancouver? Ani^. — I re'imieinber I could not get up to the wharf-boat in the steamer in It^oo; and when I wont there in 18'/' there was a wharf anloove the town on the military reserv*;, and large i|pipiia«iii^ »wi,lIi».B^HWiM 81 steamers went up to it. This is all my knowledge about the bank, and hearing others speak of the shifting of the bar. Just before I left tiiero the ocean steamer had to lay below the town and communicate by means of a small boat. Int. 12. — Do you know whether that steamer being there was caused by the lowncssof the water, or some other reason, from having soldiers on board':' Ans. — My understanding was it was caused by the lowness of the water. I am not certain. Examination-m- Chief Resumed. Int. 1. — You have stated in your cross-cxumination that you estimated the value of these buildings and improvements on the supposition that they were to be taken doAvn and removed. Would they, in your opinion, have possessed any additional value if they could have been suffered to remain? Ans. — I don't think they would. I don't think there was any one there who wanted them for any other purpose than for the lumber. They were not in habitable condition. ClIAUNCEY McKeEVER, Brevet Bngadier General and A. A. G. Washington, D. C, June 12, 18G6. Proceedings of a hoard of officers loJiich convened at Fort Van- couver, W. T., pursuant to the following order: [extract.] Headquarters Department of Oregon, Fort Vanccjver, W. T., Fehruarg 28th, 18G0. Special Order, No. 25. 1. . . A board of officers will convene at Fort Vancouver on'the 1st day of March, 1800, at eleven o'clock, A. M., or as soon thereafter as practicable, to examine and re{)ort u])on the value of certain improvements on the military reserve placed there by the Hudson's Bay Company, in the event of any com- pensation being alloAvcd for them hereafter by the Government. GO 82 ! "it i *i:i I- Detail for the Board. Captain A. J. SJIITII, 1st I)raf/oon8. Captain J. A. ITardih, 3/v? Artillert/. 1st Lieutenant Ciiaun'cey Mc.vKeever, 3nZ Artillery. * ;|; ;(; ^ 4: * * By order of General Harney. A. Pleasonton, Captain 2d Drar/oons, A. A. Adft. Gen I. Fort Vancouver, W. T., Eleven 0' Clock, A. M., March l.s^ 18G0. The board met pursuant to the above order. All the mem- bers present. The board then proceeded to examine certain improvements on the military reserve placed there by the Hud- son's Bay Company many years ago, and lying to thcAvestof a line of stakes commencing at a point about eighty yards to the east of the Catholic Church, and running from thence in a southerly direction to the river. The board find that upon this portion of the reserve there are some four or five hundred yards offences, eight buildings claimed by the Hudson's Bay Company, (not including the house occupied by Mrs. Stubbs,) which the board understand is not intended to be removed at present. The board find that the fence is so much decayed as to be of no value, and that the buildings are mere shells, rapidly going to decay, most of them propped up to prevent their fall- ing down, the only exception being the dwelling-house in front of the depot quartermaster's office, which, although occupied, is also in a dilapidated condition. The board estimate the total value of the above improve- ments at $250, (two hundred and fifty dollars.) There being no further business before it, the board adjourned "sme die.'' A. J. Smith, Captain 1st Dragoons, Present. Jas. a. Hardie, Ccptain Brd Artillery. Chauncey McKeever, 1st Lieutenant Bd Artillery, Recorder. •■ i (I • 1 Approved. 88 Headquarters Dep't op Oregox, Fort Vancouver, W. T., March 5, 18G0. Wm. S. Harney, Briyadier General Commanding. Official copy. E. D. TOWNSEND, Assistant Adjutant General. Testimony oe Major General Andrew J. Smith. Major General Andrew J. Smith, being duly sworn according to law, says : Int. 1. — Wliat is your name, age, place of residence, and occupation ? Ans. — A. J. Smith, of lawful age. I belong to the United States Army, am Lieutenant Colonel 5th Regiment of Cav- alry, Brevet Major General United States Army. Int. 2. — Have you ever resided in Washington Territory ; if yea, when and where ? Ans. — I was stationed at Fort Vancouver in the winter and spring of 18G0. I have passed and repassed Fort Vancouver several times since on my way from Walla- Walla to Portland San Francisco. I was stationed at Walla-Walla in the sum- mer of 18G0. Int. 3. — Arc you acquainted with the fort and buildings at the post of Vancouver, which were formerly claimed and occu- pied by the Hudson's Bay Company ? Ans. — I am. Int. 4. — Have you ever examined and appraised any of the improvements and buildings at this post which were claimed by the Hudson's Bay Company ; if yea, what buildings and improvements have you examined, with the view of ascertain- ing their value, and where ? LM-K" I, I .,. I-' %!, C«' 1,.,- j' '" ■I 84 ^ns, — I recollect being a member of a ])oar(l, in 1800, to examine the improvements tliat belonged to the lliulson's Tlay Conipiitiy, and assess the valne as they then stood, or would be to the Government, in ease they should full into our hands. Jnf. T). — What was the condition, character, and value of the buililings, at the time your attention was called to them? A71S. — Very dilapidated, not habitable, of no value what- ever to the Government. I refer to the buildings on the out- side. Also the fences that enclosed the garden and orchard were very dilapidated. Int. 0. — Did you ever observe the character and condition of the stockade, and the buildings within it, while you were there? If yea, please to describe them as nearly as you can. Ans. — I several times visited the buildings inside the stock- ade of the Hudson's Bay Company, and know that they were in a very dilapidated condition, the larger store-houses being propped up, to prevent them from falling down. They were built of what we called puncheons. They were going to decay rapidly — dry rot. Int. 7. — What, in your opinion, was the value of their stockade, and the buildings within it, at the time that you speak of? Ans. — I should say two hundred and fifty dollars would cover the value to the Government. The stockade was worth nothing, except for fire-wood. I don't feel competent to give an opinion as to the value to any other person. Ini. 8. — Please to look at the paper herewith presented, and state whether the same, in your opinion, is a true copy of the report of survey made by you and others, in pursuance of an order from General Ilardie. Ans. — Not knowing, I presume it is. (xYnything in reference to this report, and the report itself, objected to on the same grounds set out in the deposition of McKeevei jey •) Cross- Examination. Int. 1. — Is the testimony you have given here your opinion, i \ 1 85 N as an actiii;^ iiiombor of a boanl to inspect and assc^ss tlic value of certain improveinciits ani the summer, owing to the melting of the snows; country north has not been ex- plored ; there are no trading posts north of the 49th° ; where they use the Columbia or Frazer's river, there are, or were, seven posts; they used to go to Okanagan, then strike across the country to Thompson river, then across land to Alexandria, in Caledonia, on Frazer's river; they used the Columbia in Cooing across the country to Red river and Canada ; it is best thoroughfare with Red river, but another could be made; it is of a strong, smooth current; it is navigable for steamboats in spring and fall, but there is no country to cultivate. In reference to forts and trading posts claimed [by] Hud- son's Bay Company: In 1846, Kootenay post., — South of Columbia, between that and Flat-Heads; a winter post; on the Kootanay lake ; a mere winter trading post; no farms, no cattle. Flat-Heads. — South and cast of the last; a trading post, called Flat-Heads; used only in the winter to trade with In- dians; the Flat-Heads used to be met there twice a year for trading, after buffalo hunts; mere log building. Fort Colvilc. — Was the headquarters of the former posts; in 1840 there was a farm ; used to raise from 1,000 to 1,500 bushels of wheat; there was a small mill forty feet square; large amount of cattle ; two or three hundred head of cattle in 1846; they were looked after by the people of the fort. Okanagan. — On the Columbia; a small post; a receptacle for the boats used in transporting goods to Frazer's river set- tlements and posts; soil around, barren; a small garden; cattle, new, sent there in 1826, for the use of the place. Walla-Walla. — Poor soil around ; a mere fort ; cost a good 99 deal, but made strong as against Indian attacks ; no farms there; a small garden for the use of the place; no trade in furs; object was to subdue Indians; to supply their wants, and bring them in subjection ; it was put there to subdue the Indians, and with a view of making Indians defend it; In. dians were gratified at the having of posts in their lands. Boise. — No farms there; in the Snake country; a trading post for Indians; post established to keep Indians in order; two men stationed there. Fort Hall. — built by Wyeth, an American, now in Boston; in 1834, in the Snake country ; object to supply the trappers; a,ttempted the salmon trade; failed; many American trappers in the country; Hudson's Bay Company bought of Wyeth; no farms made then by Hudson's Bay Company ; three or four cows sent there in 1835 or 1836 by the Hudson's Bay Company, for the purpose of giving to Indians ; land all barren around. Vancouver. — 1,000 to 1,500 acres used by the plough at a period prior to 184G. There had been that amount under fence. Saw-mill and grist-mill, about five miles east up the river; had from two to three thousand head of cattle ; permitted to stray where they could find pasture ; cattle are now wild ; five stores of 100 feet; granary 60 by 40; mess-house, office, $100,000 expended. On the] Columbia from Cathlapootl up to the river Duthfe, (sometimes called Vivet,) say about twenty miles, all over- flows ; cattle used to be there in winter, and then were driven back ; sometimes were driven back half a mile, and then again five or six miles ; cattle were permitted to pasture ; only occupied and tilled at and near Vancouver ; the rest was for pasture. Sophie's Island [Sauvie's.] — Was selected by Wyeth first ; ho built upon it and requested McLaughlin to keep it ; buildings fell down; McLiMighlin afterwards recorded it in Wyeth's name. Hudson's Bay never claimed it in McLaughlin's day. He left it in 1846. There were two buildings put up by Company for Wyeth. Fort George. — A store; a salmon shed; and oflScer's dwel- 100 ling. Astor was bought out. Hudson's Bay Company had a post there in 184G; no farms; nothing but garden; about eleven acres cleared; was once of the principal fort; aban- doned in 1825. For a time afterwards a small trading post for Indians, and to prevent the Indians from coming to Van- couver and engaging in hostilities with Indians there. In 1847 or 1848 moved it over to Cape Disappointment ; before that time no post at Cape Disappointment. After that, Ogden took a claim which he bought of one Wheeler, an American. Trade was then changed from Fort George and went to Dis- appointment. Fort Umpqua. — Post established in 1834 ; agriculture en- gaged in in a limited degree for the use of the post, and some cattle, pigs, and breeding mares sent there. Cattle, in fact, were sent to all the forts for the convenience of the forts, and to civilize the Indians; was a picket fort in 1846. Note, as to claims of Puget's Sound Agricultural Com- pany : Puget's Sound; began in 1837 for Hudson's Bay Company. In 1840 transferred to Puget's Sound Company. At Cowlitz farms had about 2,000 (acres) under cultivation. There werg lines designated around this farm, and fenced in some 1,500 acres; pasture was outside; three or four hundred head of cattle ; outside of the limits was common for feeding cattle. Considered the Cowlitz Farms to embrace about 3,000 acres of land. Nisqually. — About eight or nine miles of plain. The cattle and sheep pastured over three or four miles square. Some- times cattle strayed over eight or ten miles. Plain was bounded on one side by the Sound, on the other side by the Nisqually river, and the woods on the other side. 101 Testimony of Major General C. C. Augur. Major General C. C Augur, being duly sworn according to law, says: Int. 1. — What is your name, place of residence, and present occupation ? Ans. — Christopher C. Augur, Major General of Volunteers in the service of the United States, at present commanding the Department of Washington. Int. 2. — Have you ever resided in Washington Territory ; if yea, when and where, and for how long a period? Ana. — I hiive, from some time in November, 1852, to March, 1856, with an occasional absence. I was absent at onetime four months. I resided at Fort Vancouver. I was stationed there, and I was there two or three times a year after that until 1861. Int. 3. — Aj'e you acquainted with the fort and buildings at Vancouver which were claimed and occupied by the Hud- son's Bay Company? Ans. — I am generally. Int. 4. — Did you ever make an estimate of the value of the fort and buildings and improvements at this post which was claimed and occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company; if yea, where, and under what circumstances? Ans. — I did. I was a member of a board of survey, which was ordered to make such estimate. It was in the fall of 1853 or spring of 1854; I don't remember which. Int. 5. — Did this board of survey make a report in writing of their action in the premises? Ans. — It did. Int. 6. — Please to look at the paper here produced, (marked A, and hereto annexed,) and state whether it be, in your opinion, a true copy of the report which was made by the board. Ans. — I believe it is a correct copy of the report. Int. 7. — Are the other members of the board who acted with you in this matter now living? Ana. — They are not. (The introduction of this report and ail matters connected 102 with it objected to, as being the proceedings and decision of a military board or tribunal on matters that have been or may be in question before this commission, and because the same was ex imrte, it not appearing that notice was given to the Hudson's Bay Company.) Int. 8. — Please to look at the map here produced, drawn by Giddings, representing the claim of the Hudson's Bay Company, and say whether you recognize it as a just delineation of the country, including and adjoining Vancouver, on the north side of the Columbia river. Ans. — So far as this shows the topography of the country, I recognize it. Int. 9. — Were you acquainted with the general condition of the country described on this map, as claimed by the Hudson's Bay Company? Ans. — I was not. I was acquainted with only that part that was iaiuiediatcly about Vancouver. Int. 10. — What was the condition of that part of the country adjoining Vancouver with which you were acquainted? How much of it, if any, was enclosed and cultivated by the Hudson's . Bay Company; how much, if any, was in a wild, natural state, and used in common by all persons there for the purposes of pasturage or culture? Ans. — I knew the country for about six miles on the river, commencing two miles below the military reservation, and varying from a mile to four miles in the interior. A portion bordering on the river, averaging three quarters of a mile, perhaps more, in that vicinity was an open country, and mostly cultivated by settlers and mostly enclosed. The por- tion on the military reservation I should say was very nearly one half, recognized as the Hudson's Bay enclosures, and so far as I know was cultivated by their employes. The balance of it was mostly heavy fir timber. There were two or three small plains, called the second, third, and fourth plains, that were open; I couldn't judge the amount of land in them; per- haps there were one thousand acres. 103 Cross-Examination. Int. 1. — You stated, I believe, that you could not be very accurate about the laud around Vancouver; do you feel sure that this strip of open land was not wider than you have de- scribed ? Ans. — The average width, in my judgment, was three quar- ters of a mile in that vicinity, perhaps more. C. C. AUGtIR, Major General of Volunteers. Wasiiincton City, D. C, June 2, 1806. Copy A.— 3. Proceedings of a Board of Officers assembled at Fort Vancouver^ \V. T.^ by virtue of the following order: Headquarters, Fort Vancouver, W. T., January 17, 1854. Orders No. 1. In order to carry out instructions received from the War Department, dated October 29, 1853, and from the Headquar- ters Department of the Pacific, dated December 7, 1853, Sur- geon B. M. Byrne, Captain T. L. Brent, A. Q. M., and Cap- tain C. C. Augur, 4th Infantry, will constitute a Board to assemble at this post at 10 o'clock A. M. to-day, to examine and report upon the extent, condition, and probable value of all improvements contained within the limits of the present militai^ reservation at this post of six hundred and forty acres. By order of Lieut. Col. Bonneville. (Signed) John Withers, 2(i Lieut. 4tth Infantry, Act. Adjutant. Fort Vancouver, W. T., January 17, 1854. The board met pursuant to the above order. Every member of the board was present. To enable the members to possess 104 themselves of the necessary facts and information for giving an intelligent opinion upon the different points contemplated by the order, the board adjourned to Monday the 23d instant. Fort Vancouver, W. T., January 23, 1854. The board met pursuant to adjournment, all the members being present. The board determined as follows, respecting the extent, condition, and probable value of the improvements upon the reserve. 1st. — Extent of Improvements. The board find that the military reservation, as designated by the commanding officer, is a portion of the land claimed by the Hudson's Bay Company, and that it includes their entire establishment at this place, and that, with the exception of those belonging to the United States, they claim all the build- ings upon it as their property, and also all the improvements of whatever character. The board find that about one-half of this reservation has been under cultivation at various times, and that upon this portion of it there are about three miles of fence, about eighty fruit trees, about eight acres of wheat in the ground, and thir- teen small houses, some of them being rented at from $8 to $20 per month, one large building rented by the United States as a hospital at $40 per month, and one large store-house upon the river, and the Catholic Church and parsonage attached. Besides these, there is their trading establishment, surrounded by heavy pickets, consisting of store-houses, shops, offices, &c., and the dwelling houses of the officers of the Company. 2d. — Condition of Improvements. The board, find with few exceptions, all the above buildings, fences, pickets, &c., are what would be termed old, but it can- not arrive at the exact age of any of them. There are besides some shells of houses and portions of decayed fences, which they have not thought worth considering at all. 105 3cl. — Probable Value of Improvements. The board estimates the value of the above improvements to be as follows, guiding themselves in their valuation of buildings by what many of them are rented for, and for fences by the current rates for such improvements: For a a a (( (( <( a a a a (( a (( << a a a it a a « a a pickets around trading establishments thirteen houses outside of pickets - - . hospital buildings four old sheds Catholic Church parsonage attached court house three stables store-house on river ------ four large store-houses inside of pickets ($2,500 each) - -----_. one dwelling-house " (Governor's) one dwelling-house " (Graham's) three houses (officers' and inside the pickets) ($1,000 each) one granary ---.... blacksmith shop inside pickets - - - . one bake-house ------- magazine -----.-. washing-house -----.. one kitchen. Governor's house - - - . one butcher's shop ----.. three wells, at $250 each - . - . , eighty fruit trees, at $20 each - - . . eight acres of wheat in the ground, at $15 per acre, three miles of fence, at $300 per mile $3,000 5,200 1,333 100 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 10,000 4,000 4,000 3,000 3,000 500 1,500 500 500 1,000 500 750 1,600 120 900 Total probable value - $47,503 In estimating the above to be the probable value of the 106 property and improvements upon the reserve claimed by the Hudson's Bay Company, the board have proceeded as though they were claimed by private individuals, and have not deemed it their province to inquire whether they have an adventitious value, as being an integral portion of the Hudson's Lay Com- pany's establishments in this country, under the peculiar privileges and rights claimed by that Company. There being no further business before it, the board ad- journed sine die. (Signed;) B. M. Byrne, Surgeon U. S. Army. (Signed,) T. L. Buknt, A. Q. M. U. S. Army. (Signed,) C. C. Augur, Captain 'ith Infantry. In approving the proceedings of the board of officers, I do not wish it to be understood that the buildings will answer for the military service. They can stand a short period only when they cease to receive the great care bestowed upon them. The buildings now occupied as hospital and store-house will answer as they now do until others be erected more conveni- ently located. (Signed,) B. L. E. Bonneville, Lieut. Col. 4th Infantry, commanding. Official : Benj. C. Card. Col. Q. M. Bept., Bvt. Brig. Grenl. Quartermaster General's Office, May 10, 1866. Testimony of James A. Hardie. James A. Hardie, being duly sworn according to law, says: Int. 1. — What is your name, place of residence, and occu- pation? Am. — I am inspector general and brevet major general in 107 Territory ; the army of the United States. My habitual station is Wash- ington. JMy name is James A. Ilardie. Int. 2. — Have you ever resided in Washington if yea, when and where, and for how long a period? Ana. — I Avas an officer. stationed at Vancouver and the Cas- cades from 1858 to 1861. Int. 3. — Are you acquainted with the post at Vancouver which was formerly claimed and occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company? If yea, please to describe the same, giving the character of the construction of the fort and buildings connected therewith, and their condition and value, as par- ticularly as you can. An8.-^\ find here a certified copy of a report of a board of survey of which I was a member, to which I niiglit refer in answer to this question. There were some eight or ten build- ings within an old stockade. The buildings had been used for ware-houses and officers' quarters, and outbuildings belonging to the Hudson's Bay Company. These buildings were of log, with the exception of the Governor's house and a building which, I think, had been used as chaplain's quarters. When I say eight or ten buildings, I mean the principal construc- tions. There were sheds or huts, and perhaps one or two other unimportant buildings. Also, upon the reserve was a build- ing used as a residence, opposite the quarters of Captain Ingalls, Quartermaster, the extreme end of the property occu- pied by the Hudson's Bay Company. The log buildings (the store-houses) in 1860, the occasion of the survey, were in a state of great dilapidation, not worth repair, and having no value except as so much hewn seasoned timber, where sound pieces could be selected ; but very much of the timber, espe- cially the larger pieces, was decayed. The frame buildings were in not much better condition. The whole property had been deteriorating from the time I saw it, in 1858, until the time of the survey, in 1860. Int. 4. — You speak of a report which was made by you and others; please to look at this paper here produced, and say whether it be, in your opinion, a true copy of the report to which you allude in your last answer. 108 Ans. — It is, in my opinion, a true copy of the report. (The introduction of this report, and all matters connected with it, objected to, as being the proceeding aiid decision of a military tribunal on matters which have been, or may be, at issue before this commission, and further, because it does not appear that any notice of such proceedings was given to the Hudson's Bay Company.) Int. 5. — Have vou any knowledge of the character and condition of the land at or near Vancouver? If yea, please to describe it, giving, as particularly as you can, the quantity which was cultivated, if any, by the Hudson's Bay Company, and general character of the country adjoining, whether or not it was, for the most part, covered with woods, or for the most part cultivated, or in a wild state, and open to any one who had occasion to use it. (The latter part of the question objected to, because the same is leading, and suggesting to the witness an answer to the question.) An8. — I was necessarily somewhat acquainted with the land in and about Vancouver. The portion of the military Reserve on which were the fort and buildings of the Company was a flat plain of good land, and fit for cultivation. Back of that was an elevated plateau of inferior land, mostly covered for miles with timber. I have an indistinct recollection of fields cultivated by the Hudson's Bay Company, or by persons in their employ. The maximum amount of land under cultiva- tion by them could be obtained by judging from the amount of fencing found upon the land in their occupancy, and that was, I think, somewhere between seven and nine hundred yards of fence. Latterly, that is in 1860, the place was all open; any one could come or go through the fort or grounds at pleasure, and the only fields, I think, enclosed, were those the garrison used for company gardens. Lit. 6. — Have you any knowledge of the value of the land at and near Vancouver while you were there? If yea, please to state what, in your judgment, was the value of the same. Ans. — I consider the United States military reservation to be the most valuable land in that region, excepting, of course, the 109 town site of Vancouver. To the military reservation especial value would attach from the beauty of its site for handsome residences. I should think the flat, alluvial land outside this reservation ought to have been worth one hundred dollars per acre. Upon the plateau behind it I should have hositated to have given ten dollars per acre for any farming purposes. For purposes of timber it would have value according to the qual- ity of timber and its accessibility to the river. I do not, how- ever, consider myself perfectly well acquainted with the market value of real estate in 1858, 1859, and 18G0, in Washington Territory, although I could not escape knowledge of the fact that the town of Vancouver, the more valuable portion of this section, was improving but slowly, and had failed to realize the expectation, as to its growth and prosperity, of its friends. Int. 7. — Have you any knowledge of the condition of the town of Vancouver ? If yea, how [was] its condition, in respect to growth and prosperity, when you last had any knowledge of it, compared with its condition when you first heard it. Am. — It had improved slightly, but its growth was slug- gish. Cross-Examination. Int. 1. — How long were you at Vancouver, and at what time? Ans. — I was at Vancouver all of the interval between 1858 and 1861, except some six or seven months spent at the Cas- cades. Int. 2. — Was your examination of these buildings made at the time of the survey you have spoken of? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 3. — Was not that survey made for the purpose of ascer- taining the value of certain buildings which it was intended to move from the reservation for certain military purposes, and not intended to include the stockade and the buildings inside the stockade ? An9. — I am of the impression it was intended to include 110 the wli(»lc ; hut at tliis (JiHtancc of timo my recollection is not distinct. Jnt. 4. — Do you think that at the timo you made this sur- vey tho Company's aj^cnt had loft their fort? Ann. — I am not prepared to way. Int. i'). — JJo you recollect how 8oon after tlio survey was made the ('oiii|»aiiy did leave the fort? Ann. — I don't remember whether thev were there or not at the time of the appraisement. Jnt. 0. — l^o you recollect a line of stakes, commencing at a point about eighty yards to the east of the Catholic Church and running from that point, in a southerly direction, to the river, on the reserve at the time of this survey? Ann. — I cannot say I do; nor would I have thought of the line of stakes if 1 had not seen it alluded to in the report of the board of survey. Jnt. 7. — Do you not recollect that your board was ordered to survey certain improvements on the military reserve, and that you did examine improvements lying to the west ol i certain line of stakes? Ans. — It is my general impression that we took into con- sideration all the improvements of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany on the military reserve; I cannot be positive, however. Int. H. — Would your impression be so strong as not to yield to the fact, if, in a report made at the time, it appeared you did not so examine them? An-i. — My impression is not so strong as that I would allow it to weigh against the official report of the board. Int. U, — Were you on any other board to examine any other improvements of the Hudson's Bay Company on this military reserve ? Ans. — Not that I remember. Jnt. 10. — Do you recollect about what time the agents of the Hudson's Bay Company left Vancouver ? Alls. — I do not. Jnt. 11. — How were these buildings treated after the Com- pany left the fort, in the way of taking away materials and destroying the buildings ? Ill Avs. — Tlio buildings wove in an oxcpodiuf^ly dilnpidatod condition, nearly till ruined, in some in.stani'e.s faliin;^ down. The (Jovornor's residence had a lari^o decayed spot in the floor, throu;^h \vhi(!h theground was visible. Exposure to the weather caused sfill (Mrlher decay and dilapidation. At first so,,tinels wore placed to keep people out, but that diil not prevent dep- redations of material. I don't remember whether the senti- nels were removed afterwards or not. Home of the material was used at the fort for out-buildings, and for other purposes, I have no doubt that other material was taken by irresponsible persons. Jut. 12. — Was not this hole in the floor of the Governor's house observed by you after the Company's agents had loft the house and fort? Ans. — Yes, I think it was. Int. \'\. — When you wore at the Company's fort, in the win- tor or spring of 18(30, did you not observe lumber or timber, or both, in the centre A the stockade, intended for repairs? Arm. — My impression is I did. Int. 14. — Have you any distinct recollection of the amount or value of his timber and lumber and what became of it? Ans. — I iiavo none. Examination-in- Chief Resumed. Int. 1. — Was or was not the reason for permitting these buildings to be thus carried away piece-meal, that they were of no value whatever ? Ans. — I presume the buildings were esteemed to be of so little value that the use of small quantities of material at the fort was tolerated. Jas. a. Hardie, Inspector Gen' I, Brevet Maj. Gen. U. S. A. WAsniNOTON City, D. C, July 2, 18G6. 112 Testimony of Thomas Adams. Thomas Adams being duly sworn, according to law, says: Int. 1. — What is your name, present occupation, and resi- dence ? Ans. — Thomas Adams ; I am farming in Montgomery county, Maryland. Int. 2. — Have you ever visited the country formerly known as American Oregon, and now embracing, besides that State, the Territories of Montana, Washington, and Idaho ; if so, during what years were you there, and in what capacity ? Ans. — I first reached that Territory in 1853, as assistant artist in Gove; jr Stevens' Expedition. I was left in the Flat-Head country, with Lieuienant John MuUan, to assist him in his explorations in that winter. I was left as special Indian agent to the Flat-Heads, when Lieutenant Mullan was ordered to report, appointed by Governor Stevens. I remained there as agent until November, 1855. During that time I went through the whole country, including Puget's Sound and Willamette valley. From 1855 until 1860, I remained in the country on my own account, and not in Government employ. From the year 1860 to 1864 I was in the country, but made two trips to the States. Int. 3. — Did you during those years visit any of the posts occupied or claimed by the Hudson's Bay Company, and which ones? Ans. — Yes, I visited Ihe Flat-Head post. Fort Hall, and Walla- Walla post ; also Vancouver. I was at the Cowlitz landing, but don't remember whether there was a posn there or not. I also visited Nisqually. Int. 4. — In what year were you first at Fort Hall ? Please to describe it as you saw it then. What buildings and other improvements did it embrace ; of what was it constructed, and in what state of repair was it ? Ans. — I was first at l^ort Hall in 1853. It was a quadri- lateral fort, constructed of adobes, the walls of the fort com- prising the outer and rear walls of the buildings. The roofs 113 were of mud. The servants' rooms, kitchen, blacksmith shop, and so on, were very much dilapidated. The store-rooms, and the rooms occupied by the chief, Mr. McArthur, were in very good repair. The rooms occupied by Mr. McArthur had re- cently been fitted up. There were no buildings on the out- side of the fort, except a small shelter, about ten feet square, used as a milk house. There was no corral outside. The fort was used to corral the animals. I did not see any enclosed ground for cultivation outside the fort. There was the re- mains of an adobe wall outside the fort, but not in use when I was there. Int. 5. — How large a post was this, as near as you can re- member, and can you form an opinion wh'tt it would have cost to build such a post at the time you wery there, in 1853 ? Ann. — I think it was about one hundred and twenty feet by eighty feet. I should estimate the cost of construction in 1853 about six thousand dollars. Int. 6. — Do you remember any other buildings, especially mills, at this point ? Ans. — There were none there. Int. 'h — What force was employed, and what was the char- acter and apparent value of the trade, and with whom was it carried on? Ans. — I think there was about six employes in the fort besides the superintendent. I had no means of judging of the character and value of the trade during that visit, my stay was so short. Int. 8. — What did you learn of the trade subsequently ? Ans. — That the trade had fallen off so as to be entirely worthless, from various causes. This in 1854 and 1855. Int. 9. — Was there, judging from your knowledge of the number of Irdians, and the quantity and value of fur-bearing animals in that district, any considerable fur trade ? Ans. — Fur skins proper were scarce, but dressed skins were very considerable. Int. 10. — Did, or not, the business of the post appear to be inconsiderable, so far as you could observe ? Ans. — Yes, sir ; it was inconsiderable. 8 H 114 W If'' i Int. 11. — What is the character of the country, within grazing distance, around Fort Hall? Ans. — Excellent as a grazing country ; none better. Int. 12. — Was there any farming carried on by the Com- pany there ? Ans. — No, sir. Int. 13. — In what year were you first at the Flat-Head post, and when subsequently ? Ans. — I was there in the spring of 1864, and was there every year until 1862. Int. 14. — Please to describe it, as you have done Fort Hall; its materials, buildings, and improvements. Ans. — It was a wooden building, about twenty-four by six- teen feet, of one story, with a bark roof; one wooden bas- tion, about fourteen feet square ; and two store-rooms, each ten feet square ; also a log corral, about sixty feet square. Int. 15. — In what condition were the buildings, and what would it have cost to rebuild them? Ans. — They were barely habitable, and would have cost about twelve hundred dollars. This was in 1854 ? Int. 16. — What was the force there ? Ans. — Two men, an Indian boy to herd cattle, and a clerk. This was the permanent force at the post. When they moved or carried furs down, they got Indian help. Int. 17. — Do you know anything of the trade in furs or skins at that time, or subsequently ? Ans. — The trade there was considerable. I would not con- sider it a remun'^rative trade, for the reason there was a good deal of opposition in the trade, making the price of furs high. Cross-Examination . Int. 1. — Were you ever at Fort Hall, after your visit there in 1853, while it was occupied by the Company ? Ans. — No, sir. Int. 2. — Is not your personal knowledge of it, and of its trade, as a post of the Company, from your own observation at that time ? 115 Ans. — Yes, sir ; of course. Int. 3. — Were there not a good many skins held by the In- dians, and beavers trapped by them, in 1856, in the Snake country ? Ans. — Yes ; I should say there was. I was trading there myself in 1856. Int. 4. — Does not the land around Fort Hall produce fine grass, suitable for hay, and of great value for cattle and horses ? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 5.— In what Territory is Fort Hall at the present time? Ans. — Idaho. Inf. 6,— Do not the tribes which trade with the Flat-Head post, roam over countries abounding in furs, and have large quantities of furs annually to dispose of? Ans.— Yea, sir; between the years 1853 to 1860. The whites now catch ten beavers to the Indians' one. Int. 7.— In what Territory is this Flat-Head post at the present time ? Ans. — Montana. Uxamination-in- Chief Resumed. Int. 1.— What furs or skins are obtained at the Flat-Head post, or at Fort Hall? Ans. — Beaver, otter, marten, fisher, and fox — the red and cross foxes — winter weasels or ermine, and bear and wolf, and dressed-skins of deer, elk, sheep, moose, and antelope and buffalo. Int. 2. — Of the kinds of furs and dressed-skins you have mentioned brought into these posts, how many of them are valuable sorts, and what proportion do they bear to the whole amount ? Ans. — The bear, fisher, and marten are the valuable skins, and are obtained in less quantities than the beaver, otter, wolf, and fox. Int. 3. — Are those valuable skins obtained in large quanti- 116 ties or not ? Give, if you can, some idea of the amount of each, and whether the trade is now remunerative. Alls. — For reasons stated — that is on account of the oppo- sition — I do not think it is remunerative. Int. 4. — Have the Hudson's Bay Company ever, within your time, kept any large bands of cattle or horses at either of their posts ? Ans. — No, sir. Cross-Eamination Resumed. I>l! Int. 1. — Were you acquainted with the price of furs in London, England, during the time you have mentioned ? Ans. — No, sir. Int. 2. — Were there not bands of horses and cattle at these two posts in 1853 and 1854 ? Ans. — There were none at Fort H.all, to my knowledge; I did not see or hear of them. At the Flat-Head post I should say there were one hundred horses and about one hundred and fifty cattle. I understood they were private property of Mr. McDonald, agent of the Company at Fort Colvile. Thomas Adams. Washington, D. C, Jidi/ 2, 1866. District op Columbia, \ Counts/ of Washingon. J I, Nicholas Callan, a notary public in and for the county and district aforesaid, do hereby certify that the foregoing depositions hereto annexed, of Rufus Ingalls, U. S. Grant, James W. Nesmith, Justus Steinberger, Charlej B. Wagner, William A. Howard, Joseph K. Barnes, Chauncey McKeever. Andrew J. Smith, Thomas Nelson, C. C. Augur, James A. Hardie, Thomas Adams, witnesses produced by and on behalf of tlie United States in the matter of the claims of the Hud- son's Bay Company against the same, now pending before the British and American joint commission for the adjustment of 117 the sain 3, were taken before me, at the office of said commis- sion, No. 355 11 street north, in the city of Washington, Dis- trict of Columbia, and reduced to writing under my direction by Nicholas Callan, jr., a person agreed upon by Ebcn F. Stone, Esq., attorney for the United States, and Edward Lander, Esq., attorney for said Company, beginning on the 4th day of May, A. D. 1866, and terminating on the 10th day of August, A. D. 1866, according to the several dates ap- pended to the several depositions when they were signed respectively. I further certify that to each of said witnesses, before his examination, I administered the following oath: "You swear that the evidence you shall give in the matter of the claim of the Hudson's Bay Company against the United States of America shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ; " that after the same was reduced to writing, the deposition of each witness was carefully read and then signed by him. I further certify that Eben F. Stone, Esq., and Edward Lander, Esq., were personally present during the examina- tion and cross-examination of all of said witnesses, and the reading and signing of their depositions. I further certify that the certified copy of the proceedings of a certain military board of survey, annexed to the deposi- tion of Chauncey McKeever, and marked "A 1," is the one referred to in his testimony, and that of A. J. Smith and of J. A. Hardie; that the one attached to the deposition of J. K. Barnes, marked "A 2," is the one referred to in his depo- sition ; and the one annexed to the deposition of C. C. Augur, marked "A 3," is the one referred to in his deposition. In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand [l. s.] and official seal this tenth day of August, A. D. 1866. N. Callan, Notary Public, BRITISH AND AMERICAN JOINT COMMISSION ON THE HUDSON'S BAY AND PUGET'S SOUND AGRICUL- TURAL COMPANIES' CLAIMS. m U m In the matter of the Claims of the Hudson's Bay Company ayainst the United States, before the British and American Joint Commission on Hudson's Bay and Puget's Sound Agricultural Companies' claims. Deposition of Major Robert McFeeJy, of Cincinnati, Ohio, taken before me, George H. Harries, a notary public within and for the county of Hamilton, in the State of Ohio on the sixth day of October, in the year eighteen hundred and sixty-six, between the hours of eight o'clock, A. M., and six o'clock, P. M., at the law oflSce of Stallo & Kittredge, in the city of Cincinnati, Hamilton county, Ohio, pursuant to agreement, to be read in evidence on behalf of the United States. Testimony of Major Robert McFeely. Ques. 1. — What is your name, occupation, and place of res- idence? Ans. — My name is Robert McFeely; I am a major and commissary of subsistence and brevet colonel United States army ; my present place of residence is Cincinnati, Ohio. Ques. 2. — Have you ever resided in Washington Territory ? If yea, when, and where, and how long ? Ans. — I have ; at Fort Vancouver, from January, 1853, un- til the fall of 1860. I was stationed there at different inter- vals. Ques. 3. — Are you acquainted with the post Vancouver, in Washington Territory, which was formerly claimed and occu- pied by the Hudson's Bay Company? If so, please state when 119 you first became acquainted with it, how long you have resided there. Ans. — I am; I was first there in January, 1853, and was stationed at the military post in the vicinity of the Hudson's Bay fort for three or four months immediately succeeding this time, and at different periods from that until October or November, 1857, and continuously from that time up to Sep- tember or October, 1860. Ques. 4. — Will you please to describe the buildings of the Company at that post, giving, as nearly as you can, the num- ber, stating the material of which they were built, and the manner in which they were constructed, and their condition at the time when you last saw them. Ans. — The post or fort of Hudson's Bay proper was a stockade enclosure, the stockade being about 16 or 18 feet high, and occupying a space of ground about five acres, as near as I can tell. Within the stockade there were some eight or ten buildings, store-houses, and residences, all of which were wooden buildings. The store-houses were constructed of planks, about three inches in thickness, fastened to upright posts. The main store-house was a two-story building. I think the others were one story, except the residences ; they were old, almost uninhabitable, the material being rotten and decayed from time and exposure. Ques. 5. — What, in your opinion, was the value of the fort, buildings, and improvements belonging to the Company at this post? Ans. — To the United States, I would state the building had no value at all in 1860, either as store-houses or for quarters. If sold at public sale, I doubt whether they would have brought more than the value of the land, or a trifle more, at least. To the Hudson's Bay Company I could not state what was their value. That would depend upon the necessity. I suppose they were the only Company or individuals that kept any property of that kind. Ques. 6. — What, in your judgment, would the land and buildings have sold for at public sale? Ans. — I would like, before answering, to add a little to the 120 description of the property : When I first arrived there, there were a number of small buildings outside the stockade, and a large store-house, called the salmon-house, near the river. There were about fifteen small buildings occupied by the em- ployes, with fields enclosed by fences; probably 100 acres of ground, an old saw-mill, I think, and a grist-mill. I don't know whether either of them was running at that time. The land and buildings — the whole of it — could not, I think, be sold for $100,000 at the time when I first arrived there. Ques. 7. — What do you mean to include, all the land en- closed and occupied, as well within as without the stockade, with the buildings upon it? . Ans. — I mean to include the land enclosed by fences, with the buildings and improvements thereon, as well within as without the stockade. Ques. 8. — What was the character of the land enclosed *« that post? Ans. — The land was good for agricultural purposes, on the bottom of the river, as rich probably as any laud in the valley of the Columbia. Ques. 9. — What was the condition and value of the land adjoining Vancouver, and extending from a post say five miles above the fort, along the river to the Cathlapootl or Lewes' Forks, and reaching back into the interior an average distance of ten miles, not included in your previous answer. Ans. — The most of that country I could give only the character from hearsay. The portion of it of which I speak from my own knowledge is west of the Cascade Mountains, including portions of the country traveled over by me from Fort Dalles to the old Mission, where Pendosy was. The Yakama Mission was rough, rolling country, alternating with timber and prairies, and covered with good bunch grass, being good forage for animals ; some good agricultural land along the streams and water-courses. The land on the hills was generally of a sandy, gravelly nature. Ques. 10. — What was the character of the soil of the lands back from the streams as to its fertility ? 121 An8. — It was not fcrtilo land, being sandy and gravelly, and very dry during the summer season. Ques. 11. — Of the 100 acres (about) of land that you have spoken of as being enclosed near the stockade, what propor- tion of it was under cultivation ? Ans. — I don't think over twenty or thirty acres of it, which were cultivated for garden purposes, the lands within the enclosures being mostly used for grazing, and for hay or grass. Ques. 12. — Have you ever visited the old Fort Walla-Walla, near Wallula? If yea, please describe the fort and the country adjoining it as particularly as you can. Ana. — I visited it in July, 1853. The fort consisted of two or three, probably four, small buildings, constructed of adobe and logs. The buildings were small, and did not cover over about two acres of ground, to the best of my recollection. The nature of the country adjoining was barren and sandy, with the exception of narrow strips near the stream Touchet, and other streams, covered with little vegetation, except sage bushes. Ques. 13. — Have you any knowledge of the value of that fort, the buildings and improvements erected therewith ? If yes, state what, in your judgment, was their value. Ans. — I saw no land there enclosed or under cultivation. I do not think that the cost of the construction of the build- ings exceeded $5,000. Ques. 14. — What use, if any, was made of this post by the Hudson's Bay Company at the time you were there ? Ans. — I don't know, excepting that it was occupied by some one or two half-breeds, who were said to be employes of the Company. Ques. 15. — Have you ever visited che post of the Hudson's Bay Company at Fort Boise? If yea, state when, and de- scribe, as particularly as you can, the construction of the fort, and the buildings and improvements connected therewith. Ans. — I visited Fort Bois^ m the summer of 1854. The fort consisted of one or two adobe buildings, or one building, 122 with three or four small apartments, and a small corral. Those were all the improvements. Que8. 16. — Have you any knowlctlgo of the value of this fort, with the buildings and improvements connected there- with ? If yea, please to state what, in your judgment, was their value at the time that you observed them. Ans. — From the nature of the buildings, and the material of which they were constructed, I would say that the cost of the construction and material did not exceed $2,000. Ques. 17. — What was the character of the land in the vicinity of Fort Boise ; what quantity, if any, was enclosed and under cultivation ? k Ans. — The land seemed to be sandy and barren. I saw no lands enclosed or under cultivation. Ques. 18. — Have you visited any other posts of the Hud- son's Bay Company in Washington Territory ? If yea, state what ones, and when. Ans. — I never visited any other. Ques. 19. — Have you any knowledge of any other matter relating to the claims of the Hudson's Bay Company against the United States ? If yea, please to state the same as fully as if you were particularly interrogated in relation thereto. Ans. — I don't recollect of any information I have in regard to that. Cross-Examination hy Judge Edward Lander, on behalf of the Hudson's Bay Company. Ques. 1. — In reply to the question in reference to post Vancouver, you stated that the buildings were old, almost uninhabitable, the material being rotten and decayed from time and exposure. Is not the period of time to which you refer in the summer and fall 1860, or thereabout ? Ans. — Yes, sir, it is the time when I last saw the post. Ques. 2. — Had you, at that time, occasion particularly to examine these buildings, with reference to their condition, by any means of examination known to mechanics for the pur- 123 poso of testing buildings, or was your opinion formed by look- ing at thcin alone? Ans. — I had no occasion to examine them. My opinion was formed from general observation and from frequently visiting the fort, and also from having occupied one of the buildings as a commissary store-house for the United States, in the fall and winter 18r)7 and IS/iS, which I found insecure for the storage of Government supplies, and then vacated for that reason. Ques. 3. — You appraised the price and value of the 100 acres enclosed land and buildings of the Company at Fort Vancouver. At what time do you wish that valuation to be taken? An8, — At the time I last visited or saw the same to the fall of 1860. Ques. 4. — What portion of that value do you think applies to the land, and what to the buildings? Ans. — I should say about one-quarter for the lands, the re- maining three-quarters to the buildings. Ques. 5. — You have spoken in answer to interrogation 9, of your own personal knowledge of the country west of the Cas- cades ? Ans. — I mean to say east of the Cascades. Ques. 6. — Is that the country to which you refer, in answer to question 10, as to the character of the soil of the lands back from the stream? Ans. — It was; and in addition, the description would answer the country north of Vancouver, which I visited, for four or five miles, Avith the exception of the lands back of Vancou- ver being more thickly timbered and prairies smaller. Ques. 7. — Do you not know of large crops of wheat being raised upon the country called the Mill Plain, back of Van- couver, while you resided at Vancouver ? Ans. — I have no recollection nor knowledge in regard to that. Ques. 8. — Have you ever noticed or examined farms on the Mill Plain, or the other plains back of Vancouver, or have you 124 Mt i^■)< hi m any ncquaintnncc with the amount or kind of produce raised tlicrcoii? Ann. — I have not. Qucs. 9. — Have you ridden often over the land north of Vancouver? Ann. — I have ridden frequently north as far as what is called Fourth Plain, about four to four and a half mile.s. Qucs. 10. — Have you ever been off the road in that direc- tion ? Ann. — I never have to any great distance; probably a mile or so — huiitiii<;. Quis. 11. — Do you think that your recollection of the country back of Vancouver, of which you have spoken, ac- quired in the way you have mentioned, is sufficiently accu- rate at this distance of time for you to designate all of it as being sandy, gravelly, and very dry? Ans. — I think it is for that portion which came under my immediate observation. Qiu'n. 12. — IIow long were you at Fort Walla-Walla? Ans. — I was there for two or three days, in July, 1853, on my way to Fort Owen, and again in September, on my return, for two or three days more. Qucs. 13. — Did you go into camp near the fort, or did you, during the time, stop inside the fort? Ans. — I was in camp on both periods mentioned, within two or three miles from the fort. I visited the fort, I think, every day during the time I remained there. Ques. 14. — Was this fort a walled and bastion ed fort or not? Ans. — I think it was a walled fort ;; \fhether it was bas- tioned or not I don't recollect. The bvildings formed part of the wall. My impression is that it v.as not stockaded. Ques. 15. — Have you anjf recollection of length of a wall on either side of the fort, of its height and width ? Ans. — From the best of my recollection, I think either side was longer than forty or fifty feet, and the height of the wall not over eight or nine feet. Ques. 16. — Is your recollection of this wall and its dimen- sions as accurate as that of any other portion of the fort ? 125 Am. — r think not. QucH, 17. — You have spoken of tho biiil(liii;^s inside the fort as being constructed of adobe and logs. PUsise state in what manner they were constructed of those materials. Ann. — I think part or the whole of one or two buildings was of adobe, and others had tho api)earance of being con- structed >f logs ; but my recollection is not accurate enough to give anything but my general impression of their appear unce. Ques. 18, — Have you, at the present date, anything more than a general impression as to how the fort looked, without any very accurate or definite knowledge of it? Ans. — I have not; not more than a general impression, without any accurate or definite knowledge of it. QucH. 1!>. — Was tho estimate that you have given of the cost of Fort Walla-W^lla made at the time you saw it, or has it been made lately ? Ans. — I have no recollection that I made an estimate at the time I saw it ; only recently, after I read the pamphlet setting forth the claims of the Hudson's Bay Company. Qncs. 20. — Are you acquainted with the cost of making adobes ? Ans. — I am not. Ques. 21. — Could you make an estimate of the cost of build- ing a fort or other buildings of adobes, of which you did not know the actual length of the different walls, their width and height, the cost of making adobes, placed or getting it there, and the cost of the labor employed at the time of the building or fort ? Ans. — I could not ; my general estimate of the cost of these buildings was made on the basis of knowledge of the kind of labor and the wages of the employes of the Hudson's Bay Company, by whom, I presume, these forts were built.. Ques. 22. — Would not the cost of getting adobes far into the interior as this fort was, the provisioning of them there, and the force necessary to protect them from Indians while the fort was being built, add very largely to the cost of building it ? 126 t I Ans. — It would, if they were brought there for that especial purpose, and not employed for anything else, on account of the Hudson's Jiay Company always maintaining friendly relations with the Indians. On account of the kind of provision with which they subsisted their employes, the small wages which they paid to them, they were enabled to construct these build- ings at much less expense than they could probably be built by others. Ques. 23. — Is your estimate, then, based upon what, in your opinion, buildings, as you recollect them, ought to have cost the Hudson's Bay Company ? Ans. — It is. Qiics 24. — When you visited Walla- Walla, at the time you spoke of, were you not on the road from Fort Dalles to Bitter- root Valley ? If so, state by what road you came to Walla- Walla, and by what you returned. Ans. — I went by the interior trail or river road, and struck the river road eight or ten miles below the fort, then struck across to the Touchet, followed along that four or five miles, struck across to the Snake river, a distance of thirty-five or forty miles ; I came back the same road from the Touchet to Walla-Walla. Ques. 25. — Is the country described by you around Walla- Walla, that along the river bank, from eight to ten miles be- low the fort, and from the fort to the Touchet, and along that river, as scon by you in your journey ? Ans. — It is. Ques. 26. — Did you seo on that road, before you got to the Touched, any signs of bunch grass? Ans. — I think not ; it is about the worst country I ever saw, along the river, most of the way. Ques. 27. — At the time you visited Fort Boise, was it be- fore or after the flood that took place there, if you know ? Ans. — I don't recollect of hearing of any flood there. Ques. 28. — Who was the officer iu charge of For^ Bois^ at the time you were there ? Ans. — It was one of Governor Ogden's sons. Ques, 29. — Is your estimate of the cost of these buildings 127 based upon the same reasons as your estimate of the cost of the Hudson's Bay Comjiany, of buildings built by their ser- vants, or not? Ans. — It is. Ques. 30. — ITow long were you at Fort Boise ? Ans. — I was encamped in the vicinity, going and returning, some four or five days in all ; I visited the fort two or three times. Ques. 31. — Is not your knowledge and recollection of Fort Boisfe, at this time, rather indefinite and uncertain ? Ans. — It is. Ite- Examination. Qiies. 1. — When did the Hudson's Bay Company leave the buildings at Fort A^ancouver ? Ans. — I don't know. My impression is the buildings were occupied by some of their agents or employes, at the time I left, in the fall of 18G0. Ques. 2. — Did or not your description and estimate of the Company's property at or near Vancouver include the build- ings and improvements belonging to the Company on Sauvie's Island, or not ? Ans. — It did not ; I never was on Sauvie's Island. Maj. ^ C, Brvt. Col. U. S. A. Ques. 3. — In your ans^vor to the cross-interrogatory No. 4, w^bat portion of that valu do you think applies to the land, and what to the buildiitgs ? The notary has you now written down one-quarter, i. c. $25,000, for the land, and three-quar- ters, i. e. '^75,000, fo' the buildings. Is that what you said or intended? Ans. — What I ince.ided was, that the one-quarter estimate of tb . aluatioUj in my judgment, was what the land was worth, and the three-quarters of the estimate what I consid- ered the buildings and improvements of the Hudson's Bay Company worth. 128 Int. 4. — What, in your opinion, would the buildings and iniprovements have sold for independently from the land ? Ana. — For about what the material was worth for fuel, probably not exceeding $4,000 or $5,000. Re-Oross-.Exaniinaiion. '>)>,! ■W Int. 1. — Did you consider the price of $100,000, Avhich you put upon certain lands and buildings, a fair estimate at the time you made it? Ans. — I did ; a fair and full estimate. (Signed) R. MacFeely. Maj. ^ as., Brvt. Col. U. S. A. I, George II. Harries, a Notary Public within and for the county of Hamilton, in the State of Ohio, do hereby certify that Robert MacFeely was by me first sworn to testify the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and that the depositions by him subscribed, as above set forth, were reduced to writing by myself in the presence of the said R. MacFeely, and were subscribed by the said MacFeely in my presence, and were taken on the 6th day of October, A. D. 186G, by agree- ment, at the office of Stallo & Kittredge, in the city of Cincin- nati, Ohio; that I am not counsel or attorney of either party, or otherwise interested in the event of this suit. (Signed) Geo. II. Harries, Notary Public, Hamilton Co., Ohio. Notary's fees $10, paid by defendant's attorneys. 129 In the matter of the Claims of the Hudson's Bay Compamj^ now pending before the British and American Joint Com- mission on the Claims of the Hudson's Bay and Puf/et's Sound Ayricnltural Companies against the United States. Deposition of David H. Vinton, Deputy Quartermaster Gen- eral and Brevet Brigadier General United States Army, taken by agreement between Edward Lander, counsel Tor the Hudson's Bay Company, and E. F. Stone, counsel for the United States. First. To the first interrogatory, viz : What is your name, place of residence, and occupation ? — he saith, David H. Vin- son, New York, Deputy Quartermaster General and Brevet Brigadier General United States Army. Second. To the second interrogatory, viz : Have you ever been in what was formerly Oregon Territory ? If yea, when, and where, and for how long a period ? — he saith. Yes, sir ; in 1849, about four months, including the time going thither and returning to San Francisco. Third. To the third interrogatory, viz: Have you any knowledge of the post at Vancouver, which was formerly claimed and occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company ? — he saith, T have been there. Fourtij. To the fourth interrogatory, viz: Did you ever mo,k«, m iho form of a report, an estimate of the value of the fo; t ."o<^^ ")uildings at Vancouver, which were claimed and oc- cupied I vtho Hudson's Bay Company? — he saith, Yes; it was reduced lo writing. Filth. To the fifth interrogatory, viz : Please to look at the paper here produced, and stat^whether or not the same is a true copy of the report made by you, and referred to in the pre*rious question — he saith. It is a true copy of a copy con- te aed in ray official letter-book. .-^rth. To tht sixth interrogatory, viz: When was the copy in V' ur letter-book made, and have you or not any doubt that the 3ame is an exact copy of the original? — he saith, The copy 9 H M 1 1 I 130 Eli in my letter-book was made, I presume, on the day that the original was written ; I have not the slightest doubt that it is an exact copy of the original. Seventh. To the seventh interrogatory, viz : Please to look at the paper heretofore produced, and now to be annexed to this deposition, marked A, and state whether the same con- tains a true statement of your judgment, at the time, of the value of the buildings and other property described therein — he saith. The paper referred to contains a true statement, of my judgment, as to the value of the b aidings and other prop- erty described therein, (The introducti n of the paper marked A objected to as incompetent ; and 1 1 • , because the same appears to have been made by an office- 'ting in a judicial capacity under or- ders to form and set out a decision on matters now at issue ; and further, because it does not appear that the Hudson's Bay Company had any notice whatever of the proceeding. The latter part of the question objected to as incompetent.) The examination of the witness on the part of the United States, by E. F. Stone, counsel, was here concluded, and the examination on the part of the Hudson's Bay Company, by Edward Lander, commenced. First. To the first interrogatory, viz : In the estimate you made of those buildings, did you take into consideration their value to the owners as a trading establishment and post, or did you estimate the actual price and value of the improve- ments at a certain and fixed rate of wages, and a fixed and cer- tain price for lumber? — he saith, To the first part of this ques- tion, I will answer, that to the best of my remembrance it was surveyed and estimated for military purposes, for which purpose I understood that tile Hudson's Bay Company were willing to dispose of it. It was not my duty to estimate the value of this property for the use of others. To the other part of the question, I answer that the estimate was based upon the price of mechanics' wages and that of ordinary la- borers, and the price of lumber, as they prevailed prior to the gold excitement ; but those prices were adviouced five-fold, in 131 order, as I supposed at the time, to meet the increased value of every class of labor and of commodities to undertake the construction of buildings like those on the ground, the amount of which is estimated at three hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Second. To the second interrogatory, viz : Do you know anything of the price of labor in 1846, or previous thereto ? — he saith, Nothing. Third. To the third interrogatory, viz : Were not those buildings useful for military purposes at that time, and was there not an intention of acquiring them for the use of the troops then stationed at Vancouver? — he saith, They were not entirely suitable, but would be, after slight modifications, for quarters and barracks. The estimate was made with a view to the purchase of those buildings for the use of troops. Fourth. To the fourth interrogatory, viz : Have you ever expressed any other opinion personally as to the value of the Hudson's Bay Company's post and buildings, or of the post buildings and lands at Vancouver, claimed by the Company ? If so, please state it — he saith. No, sir; not to my knowledge. Fifth. To the fifth interrogatory, viz : What would it have cost while you were at Vancouver, in October, 1849, to have put up those buildings? — he saith. Referring to the letter already produced, I estimated the construction of the build- ings, and the property enumerated, at three hundred and fifty thousand dollars ; that comprehended land as well as build- ings ; and those buildings consisted of the dwelling-house occupied by the chief factor, Mr. Ogden, the dimensions of which were 80 by 40, and having ten rooms ; two houses, quar- ters for sub-agents, and office, 40 by 40 feet ; one building, 150 by 30 ; four store-houses, 100 by 40 ; three work-shops, 42 by 30 ; granaries, 50 by 50 ; guard-house, block-house, bakery, and smaller appendages, a well, &c., including stock ade enclosure. Outside the stockade there were three large store-houses, 80 by 30 feet; two buildings, occupied as barracks and commissary stores ; numerous out-buildings, such as quar- ters for laborers, barns, and stables ; also fences and other improvements. m ^v 132 Sixth. To the sixth interrogatory, viz : You have stated that you included hvnd in your estimate ; how much land was there, and at what price did you estimate it? — he saith, I don't know how much land there was, but so mucli as would form an enclosure around the buildings mentioned. I made no special estimate of the land. Seventh. To the seventh interrogatory, viz : What Avas your rank in the service at the time you were at Vancouver ? — he saith, Major and quartermaster United States Army. Here the examination on both sides was concluded. D. H. Vinton, Witness. 8S. State of New York, "1 Citt/ and County of New York, j ' I, Theodore Ritter, a notary public in and for the State of New York, duly appointed and authorized by the Governor of said State, under and by virtue of the laws of New York, to take the acknowledgment and proof of deeds, &c., and to administer oaths and take depositions, do hereby certify that on the ninth day of July, in the year of our Lord one thou- sand eight hundred and sixty-six, before me personally ap- peared David II. Vinton, of the city of New York, who having first been sworn according to law, gave the foregoing deposi- tion, by him subscribed in answer to the foregoing interroga- tories and cross-interrogations. Said deposition was written out by me, to be used in the matter of " the Claims of the Hudson's Bay Company now pending before the British and American Joint Commission on the Claims of the Hudson's Bay and Puget's Sound Agri- cultural Companies against the United States." In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal of office, at the city of New York, the ninth day of July, 1866. TnEODORE Ritter, Notary Public, New York. (Notarial) 1 Seal, i having Agri- 133 A. Fort Vancouver, Oregon, October. 1, 1849. ^orh. General : Pursuant to your order, I have examined the property and Ijuiklings belonging to the Hudson's Bay Company, and so far as is practicable, made a rough estimate of the cost of the buildings occupied by its agents and employes at a time when the gold discoveries had not influenced the prices of labor and materials. The property in question, exclusive of land, consists prin- cipally of a very comfortable dwelling-house, occupied by the chief agent, Mr. Ogden, 80x40 feet, and having ten rooms ; two houses, quarters for sub-agents, and office, 40x40 feet; one building, 150x30, having seventeen rooms ; four store-houses, 100x40; three workshops, 42x30; granary, 50x50; guard- house, block-house, bakery, and smaller appendages, well, &c., including stockade enclosure. These constitute the "fort" proper; and the estimated cost of their construction may be set down at $40,000; besides which there are, outside of the enclo- sure, three large store-houses, 80x30 feet, two buildings, occu- pied by the company of artillery and subsistence department, at this post ; numerous out-buildings, such as quarters for la- borers, barns and stables, also fences and other improvements which may be valued at $30,000. These estimates are based upon the prices of mechanics' wages, at $2 per diem, and or- dinary laborers at $1. The price of lumber $20 per thousand. At present, these prices are advanced five-fold, and if we mul- tiply the foregoing si ns accordingly, we shall obtain the esti- mated cost of the property enumerated, were we to undertake their construction, viz : $350,000. I am. General, most respectfully, your obedient servant, D. H. Vinton, Maj. ^ Qr. Mr. Maj. Genl. p. F. Smith, Comd'g. Pacific Div. U. 8. -4., Fort Vancouver, Oregon. The foregoing is a true copy. D. H. Vinton, Dep. Q. M. a. ^ Bvt. Brig. Gen. 134 Office of Army Clothino and Equipaok, New York, June 21, 1866. At the examination of David H. Vinton, a witness in the matter of the claim of the Hudson's Bay Company, now pend- ing before the British and American Joint Commission on the Claims of the Hudson's Bay and Puget's Sound Agricultural Companies against the United States, this paper writing marked A, was produced and shown to David H. Vinton, and by him deposed unto at the time of his examination, before Theodore Bitter, Notary Public, City, Co. and Stale N. Y. In the matter of the Claims of the Hudson 8 Bay Company against the United States, now pending before the British and American Joint Commission on the claims of the Hud- son's Bay and Puget's Sound Agricultural Companies against the United States. Deposition of Alfred Pleasonton, Brevet Brigadier General, and Major of the Second Cavalry, taken by agreement between Edward Lander, of counsel for the Hudson's Bay Company, and E. F. Stone, of counsel for the United States. The oath was administered by United States Commissioner Osborn. Testimony of Alfred Pleasonton. Qucs. 1.— What is your place of residence, and present occupation ? Ans. — Alfred Pleasonton ; I am Major of the 2d United States cavalry regiment. Brevet Brigadier General in the United States Army. 135 Qu€8. 2. — Have you ever resided in what was formerly Oregon Territory, now Washington Territory ; if yea, when, and where, and for how long a period ? An8. — I was stationed in Oregon Territory, on the staflf of General Harney, as assistant adjutant general, in the years 1858, 1859, and 1860 ; part of 1858 and part of 18G0. Ques. 3. — Have you any knowledge of the post at Vancou- ver, which was formerly claimed and occupied by the Hud- son's Bay Company? Ans. — Yes sir, I have. Ques. 4. — If you have any knowledge of the fcrt and build- ings at Vancouver, please to describe the same, giving their condition and constructive character, as near as you can, at the time that you were acquainted with it. Ans. — The Hudson's Bay Company had a large enclosure there, or fort as they call it, with a picket-fence around it, inside of which they had a number of large buildings, store- houses, and work-shops ; and outside they had a number of fields enclosed; and there were some houses that some of their employes used to live in ; but these latter were in a very dilapidated condition, and I think they were removed while I was there. The whole establishment, however, was out of re- pair — dilapidated; in fact I noticed when the wind would blow pretty high, (and it did not often blow hard there,) some of these pickets would fall down ; and the houses were in that way, out of repair and dilapidated. The buildings were rude; they evidently had been built for a number of years — a long time. They were built for the purposes for which they were intended. The material was substantial, but there was noth- ing beyond that. • Ques. 5. — Have you any knowledge, of the value of the stockade, with the buildings and improvements connected therewith ; if yea, what, in your judgment, was the value of the same? Ans. — I don't think the whole establishment there was worth $10,000; I would not have given that amount for it. That is about as near as I can answer it. Ques. 6. — Was this fort, and other buildings connected iii 1 ti 136 I' therewith, at the time you Avero there, in your judgment, of any considerable value for any purpose, or had tlie uses for which the property was originally built passed away ? (Objected to as leading and incompetent.) Ans. — They were not of any value whatever ; they had been built for a special object, and that object had passed away. Qucs. 7. — Was this post vacated by the Hudson's Bay Company at the time you were there ? If yea, please to state, if you know, what was the cause of their vacating this post. Ans. — They did vacate it while I was there, nearly a year after the charter, under which they held possessory rights, had expired. Their right to remain there had expired, and they went away. Qiies. 8. — Have you any knowledge of the character of the land at and near Vancouver ? If yea, please to describe the same, giving, as fully as you can, the character and extent of that part, if any, which was cultivated and enclosed, and the character and extent of that part, if any, which was wild and unoccupied. Ans. — The character of the soil there at Vancouverl or im- mediately around it, was gravelly and poor. There were some places in the neighborhood where you would find a rich spot ; but in the bottom, in the valley, the land was poor, and I have seen it overflowed by the Columbia river there in the spring of the year — all the lower part under water. There was a strip of land which I suppose ran up about three miles up the river, and from half to three-fourths of a mile wide, which was clear, and on that was the military fort, as well as the Hudson's Bay Company's possessions or fort; and the United States Arsenal was there too. Then immediately back of the military post — I suppose the military post was about half a mile, that is where the woods commenced, what we call the line of the post — the woods were very dense and thick, and continued to be so. There were roads through 'hese woods, at distances of four and six miles, and so on ; you would come to small prairies, which were of greater or less extent, and they would have people living in them — settlers, 137 111 cultivating. TIio Hudson's Bay Company had some few fields around their enclosure or fort. They had a vegetable garden, and they had an orchard there — not a very large orchard — and some few fields there. Ques. 9. — What was your duty while stationed at Van- couver ? Aii8. — I was the Adjutant General of the Department ; all the military correspondence of the Department passed through my hands. General Harney was the commanding officer. Qiics. 10. — Have you any knowledge of the career and growth of the town of Vancouver while you were there, and of the condition and resources of the country west of the mountains ? If yea, what, in your judgment, is the probability of building up at Vancouver a large commercial town ? Ans. — I know while I was there (I was probably as well ac- quainted with the country west of the Rocky Mountains as any one) that expeditions were sent out there, and the reports all came to me, and there wore many eflforts made to open and facilitate communication, that people could go and settle the country up while I was there ; it was done by the orders of the Government, and the question as regards the eligibility of a position on that river was considered from examinations made around the river, and the great objection to having the town higher up than the mouth of the Willamette river was a bar in the Columbia river above there, between that and Vancouver, which was a detriment to sea-steamers coming in when the river was low ; and that gave an advantage to the station at Portland, on the Willamette river. The principal progress of the town of Vancouver, while I was there, was due to the money which was spent by the soldiers — a pretty large garrison was kept there ; apart from the increase which was made by the trade of the soldiers, there was no increase there. I don't think there would be any town between the Cascades and the mouth of the Willamette river of any con- siderable magnitude ; that is, there is no advantages there for one ; and I remember that there was a survey made by the engineer of the river, for the purpose of finding out the advan- tages or disadvantages of navigation, and the report was un- 1 jiji . I' ill i 188 favorable. I don't know now whether that was ordered by General Harney, or the order came from Washington, but it ought to be in the records of the Department. Cro88-Examination. £.f|« Qnea. 1. — Did you ever make any particular examination of these buildings, within the stockade, while the Hudson's Bay Company remained in possession, and were not your examina- tions, if any, made at the time yoa visited the Company's of- ficers at their post ? Ans. — I have examined the establishment there of the Hud- son's Bay Company on several occasions, sometimes when I would go in there to make a purchase ; sometimes we would make purchases in there. They had a store there, and I would go in there with other officers and friends, and we would walk around and look through ; and I have also seen it when I have not been with officers of the Company — when I was associated with officers of the Hudson's Bay Company ; I mean to say I have seen it both with them and without them. The two places are very close together, the military post and the Hud- son's Bjiy Company ; I mean to say by that that I have had as good facilities of seeing it as I have had of seeing the United States military post. QuiS. 2. — Did you ever examine the inside of the store- houses or the other buildings with a view to ascertain if any portion of them were rotten or out of repair ? Ans. — Yes, sir; I have noticed that; I did not go in there for the purpose, but I noticed it while I was there. I never went in there for the purpose of making any special inspec- tion, but as if I would come in here and see the ink on that wall; but I didn't come in there for that purpose. Quea. 3. — State what particular portion of any building or store-house inside of the stockade was rotten or out of repair. Ans. — I would really say that they were all out of repair, and all had more or less timber decayed; but for me to spe- cify any particular building that I have noticed, particularly that the material was defective throughout the row of build- 189 ings on the cast ; if thoro was any building I noticed more than the other, it was that row of quarters on the cast. Qhch. 4. — Did not the appearance of dilapidation of these buildings arise greatly from their want of paint — discoloration from the weather? Ann. — No; I don't think it did particularly. Quc8. [). — When did this strong wind occur, that you speak of, that knocked down some of the stockade? Was it before or after the Hudson's Bay Company left? Ans. — It was before. I will tell you the nearest I can come to it: It was a storm that occurred on the coast, and there was a steamer shipwrecked there. I won't be certain whether it was in the winter of 1858 or not. There was a very violent storm, and a steamer coming from San Francisco was wrecked on the coast. Ques. 6. — Were these buildings outside of the stockade in a worse state of repair than those inside ? Ans. — Oh, yes ; they were not fit to be inhabited at all. Ques. 7. — Was there not a store-house or salmon-house out- side the stockade, used by the military, at the time you were there, for which rent was paid to the Company ? Ans. — Yes, sir ; I would say, as regards the salmon-house, it was under rent when General Harney came there. Ques. 8. — Was not an ordnance store, on [the] outside of the Company's buildings, hired by the military authorities? Ans. — I don't remember the particular details; I remember the salmon-house. There was a building there that was occu- pied by the ordnance, for which rent was paid. I don't know whether the rent was paid or not; on the contrary, in regard to the ordnance department, all that sort of business is done direct at Washington. Ques. 9. — Was there not a store, inside the stockade, occu- pied by the military authorities for storage? Ans. — Not that I know of. Ques. 10. — Are you acquainted with the cost ot constructing buildings in any way? Ans. — Yes, sir ; I have been a quartermaster, and built posts, bridges, roads, and pretty much everything. il • I I ! ii I j !l 1!^ 140 Ques. 11. — Do you knovr the price of labor for meclianica, and of lumber, at the time you speak of, about the town of Vancouver ? Ans. — I don't remember now what it was. Ques. 12. — Were not these buildings good enough for the purposes of the trade which the Company carried on at that post, and were they not capable of holding their stores, and proof from the weather? An8. — Well, their trade as far as I saw, didn't amount to anything; I could not answer the question. If you give me data, then I can; but I could not without it. Ques. 13. — Is not your opinion of the value of these build ings based on the fact that, in your own opinion, the obj-^ct for which they were built was no longer of importance ? Ann. — No ; for I don't think the material of which they were composed could have been taken down and used ; and I don't think there could be as much economy as going and get- ting new materials; and I formed that opinion from the fact of having been at several military posts similarly situated, and that very question came up, and the Government would leave the property rather than attempt to use it again, because it was as cheap to get new materials and build. Ques. 14. — Was not, then, your opinion of the value of these buildings made up with a view to taking them down and using the materials for other pnrposes? Ans. — No; because the question was discussed whether they could be used for anything. We wove in want of build- ings and stables at Fort Vancouver at that iime, and if they could have been used for stables or store- houses to advantage, they would have been used ; but it was decided that it would be a disadvantage, and stables and store-houses were built there after. Ques. 15. — Is the value you have placed on them, then, the mere value of the materials in thut at six cents per foot, running measure, in the Umpqua Valley. (^/vca. 12. — Are you aware of any settlers at the valley of the bmpqua before you arrived there in 1849 ? Ana. — There were six men and some families. Ques. 13. — How long had they been in the valley at the time of your arrival? Ans. — The first settler went there in 1848, tlj others had gone there in the early part of 1849. Ques. 14. — Is your estimate of the cost of the erection of those buildings based upon the price of labor and the value of material in the year 1850, or not ? Ans. — Yes, sir ; it is based upon the price of labor at that date ; the value of timber was nothing. Ques. 15. — The value of material at that date was simply the value of labor bestowed upon it. Is that so ? Ans, — I mean to say that these buildings could have been erected for the money I name, at that time. Ques. 16. — I will ask you this question : When you speak of material which is of no value, do you mean the material standing as timber in the wood? i 154 Ans. — Yes, sir; there was no other material in the con- struction — no iron. Ques. 17. — How many laborers were there in the valley of the Umpqua capable of putting up this building in the year 1850 ? Ans. — Tliere were some hundrer'^s who settled there that summer ; I do not know the number. There was a great num- ber of people passing back and forth through the valley who were al\\\\ys ready to work if we wanted to hire them. Ques. 18. — What was the price of labor per month in the valley in that year ; in the summer of 1850? Ans.—UO to $60, with board. Ques. 10. — Do you know the size of tliese buildings? Ans. — I do not; I could not give it accurately. Ques 20. — I will ask you if the dwelling-house was not 40 by 30 feet ? An.s. — My impression would be, from recollection simply, and of course rather vague, that it was forty feet long, and less than thirty feet wide. Ques. 21. — Was not the barn 45 by 30 feet ? Ans. — I should think, probably that size. Ques. 22. — Was not the stockade ninety feet square by twelve feet high ? Alls. — Yes, it might have been. Ques. 23. — Was not the store or range of stores 40 feet by 20? Ans. — Perhaps they were that size. Ques. 24. — And did not all these buildings average in height from twenty to thirty feet ? Ans. — No, sir ; they did not average in height more than eight feet to the eaves ; thijy were verv low. Ques. 25. — Was not the barn over eight feet high ? Ans. — I do not think it was over eight or ten feet. Ques. 20. — Was this barn lower in height than the usual log barns of Oregon, since that time ? Ans. — Yes, sir ; the build all Ques. 27.— What is the rery lo w. ^s were present value of land in the Ump- Hi 155 qua A^illcy per acre, where the title of land has been con- firmed ? Av}<. — The value of good agricultural land theiMi, unim- proved, is from $2 to $4 an acre. Qufs. 28. — Then I will ask the question entirely. What is the value of good alluvial bottom-land, that has been improved, per acre ? Aim, — Do you mean, including the improvements? Qncn. 20. — I mean by improvements, fence and plough; land that is not in a natural state. Avii. — The answer must depend on the character and ex- tent of the improvements. Qkcs. :50. — I will ask it again: What is the .value of culti- vated alluvial bottom-land per acre? A7i8. — Do ycu desire me to include the price of improve- ments — the house ? Ques. 31. — I cannot tell whether there is a house or not. Ans. — I cannot answer the question, unless you can tell me whether there is a house on it or not. Ques. 32. — I have asked you the value of cultivated alluvial bottom-land. Ans. — The value of unimproved is as I havo stated ; the value of improved or cultivated land would be enhanced pre- cisely by the value of the permanent improvements put upon it, which may be small or great; in fact, farms are ordinarily sold — they are now — M-ith dwellings, and large part of the land fences, for from $3 to $5 an acre. Ques. 33. — In the Umpqua Valley? Ans. — In the Umpqua Valley. Ques. 34. — At what time, and for how long, were you in the Walla-Walla Valley? Ans. — I was there in 18C2, from spring until October. Ques. 35. — Are all those answers that you have made to questions, put to you with reference to Wallula and Walla- Walla Valley and landing, based upon knowledge acquired at that time? Ans. — They are all based upon knowledge acquired at that time or subsequently. I' :i !il Mn, [! i , 156 Ques. 36. — Have you ever been in the Walla-Wallt^ Valley subsequently ? Ans. — Every season since ; I was there this year, in May. Ques. 37. — Do you own land, or have you been farming in the Walla-Walla "''alley ? Ans. — I have never owned any land there, or farmed there; I have kept cattle and sheep there in 1862 and 1863. Ques. 38. — At the time you kept stock in the valley, did you pay for it ; or were your stock ranging on the public lands ? Ans. — They were ranging on the public lands ; nobody thought of paying for grass. Ques. 39. — Are not those parts of the valley of the Walla- Walla where the alluvial land is found of much greater value than the surrounding uplands? Ans. — They are. Ques. 40. — Have you ever purchased or sold any of the alluvial lands of the valley of the Walla-Walla? Ans. — I never have. Ques. 41. — Are there any titles at present given to the United States Government in the valley of the Walla-Walla, so that the value of lands with good titles can be ascertained? (Mr. Gushing objected to this question, inasmuch as this witness is not the proper person to prove the United States grants of lands, if any, having no personal or official know- ledge of that matter.) (Witness. — I do not know whether the United States have issued patents of lands or not.) Ques, 42. — I will ask you this : Is not the sale of lands in the valley of the Walla-Walla a mere delivery of possession between the purchaser and buyer ? (Mr. Gushing objected to this question as incompetent.) (Witness. — I think it is not ; I think that lands are usually sold upon a land-office certificate ; that where the proper proof of residence has been made which entitles the resident to possession ; they are sometimes sold in that way, and some- times mere possession.) Int. 43. — Is the value of $8 or ^10 per acre, which you place up( in ion of mil 157 il upon these twenty acres of enclosed land at the Old Farm in the Walla-Walla, the value put upon it, in your own opin- ion, on knowledge derived from your observation of the sale of other lands? Ans. — From my observation of the sale of lands in that district. Int. 44. — How near is this to the farm formerly owned by Mr. Davis, and afterwards by Ruckell and Thomas? Ans. '- l do not know accurately ; I should think five or six miles. Int. 45. — How does this enclosed land that you have spoken of compare in value with that of the Davis farm ? Ans. — It is less valuable. Int. 4G. — To what extent is it less valuable ? Ans. — It is not as good land; the Davis farm is the choice piece of land in the Walla-Walla Valley, and indeed of all Eastern Oregon ; and it is so much further away from market than the Davis farm as to make its products less valuable. Int. 47. — Which is the nearest, at the present time, to the town of Walla- Walla ? Ans. — The Davis farm ; to go from the town of Walla-Walla you would pass right by the Davis farm. Int. 48. — What is the value of the Davis farm per acre? Or, if you know, state what was given for it. Ans. — I do not know what was given for it. I should think the Davis farm, in its improved condition, is worth from ^25 to $30 per acre ; it would be $10,000 for the half section ; if it is a half section, $10,000 ; or if a quarter of a section, $5,000. Int. 49. — What, if you know, is the present population of the valley of the Walla- Walla and the town of Walla- Walla ? Ans. — I cannot give either. ^ Int. 50. — Is not the town of Walla-Walla a place of consid- erable trade and importance for that section of country at which supplies are purchased for the mines? Ans. — It is. Int. 51. — Is there not a lino of stages running from Walla- III 158 W ' Walla acro^js the Blue Mountains to Boise and the mining regions? A718. — Tlioro is a line of stages running from Wallula to Walla-Walhv, and another from Walla-Walla to Boise City, across tlie Blue Mountains. Int. 1)2. — How many soldiers were there stationed in the United States fort of Walla-Walla, during the time you re- sided there? Ans. — When I first went there, there were six companies ; all but two companies were sent out on the plains that sum- mer, and, I tliink, returned there in the winter. Int. 58. — Are not the supplies for these troops, of beef and flour, necessary to their subsistence, produced in the valley of the Walhi-Walla ? Ans. — They are; all of them. Int. 54. — Have you any idea of the amount of freight de- livered at Wallula, for the use of the military at the fort of Walla-Walla? Ans. — I have not; but it is very large. I/it. 55. — Does not the town of Wallula possess at least 1,000 inhabitants? Ans. — I think it docs ; more than that. Int. 50. — Is there not now in the valley of the Walla- Walla, including the town population, 5,000 inhabitants? Ana. — I should think 5,000 a very high estimate, but it may come up to that. //(/. 57. — Are there not, to the east of Wallula, the mining towns of Orofino, Florence, and Elk City, whose supplies pass through the town of Wallula, and are landed at Wallula ? Ans. — No, sir; the supplies for none of those places pass through Wallula ; they are landed at Lewiston. Int. 58. — Do not the steamers that navigate the river, with the exception of a few to Lewiston and White Bluffs, all of them stop at Wallula in going up the river? Aus. — Some only go as far as Umatilla; some go on to Wallula ; the others go on to White Bluffs or Lewiston. Int. 59. — At the time you left Wallula, or the valley of the 159 lining pass pass with all of Walla-Walla, how many stores were there in Walliila for the sale of goods ? Ans. — I was there last April; there were then two stores there for the sale of goods. Int. 00. — How many hotels? Ans. — I do not know sir ; one or two. Int. Gl. — You have stated that it would be impos^.sible to make a mile square of enclosed land without cro.>isiiig the Walla-Walla river several times? A7t'<. — Twice. Int. 62. — What is the distance between the mouth of the Walla-Walla river and the mouth of the Snake; and in that distance is there a single stream to interrupt the enclosure? A)is. — I do not know the distance; my impression is, it is some fifteen miles; there is no stream intervening; I still repeat iny former assertion, however. Int. 03. — On what line of tliat enclosure would it be neces- sary to cross the river twice ; on the north and south, or the east and west line ? Ans. — The town Wallula — the Old Fort — stood on a narrow tongue of land, between the Walla-Walla creek and the Co- lumbia river, the creek or rivjr running nearly parallel to the Columbia ; no square mile of land could be laid oil' which would include the old adobe fort, and not cross that stream. Int. 04. — You mean by that, that no square mile could be laid off, at right angles to the course of the river, without crossing the river twice ? Ans. — I mean that no body or tract of land could be laid off containing a square mile, in a solid form, without crossing the Walla-Walla river. Int. 05. — Do you mean to say, that a mile of land, 640 acres, cannot be laid oflF without crossing the Walla-Walla river twice, and so as to include the Old Fort? Ans. — No. sir ; I do not think that at all ; I mean that no square mile of land, in a compact form, could be laid off there ' to include the old adobe fort, and not cross the Walla-Walla river, bounded by the Columbia river ou the other side; of w §■ 160 course there is more than 640 acres of land on that side of the river, more than 6,000 acres. Int. 00. — You mean then to say, that taking the Columbia river as one line, and the other lines being at right angles to the river, a square mile of land could not be laid out without crossing the river ? An8. — Yes, sir. ' Int. 67. — Does not the Walla- Walla river, a short distance from its mouth, in going up the river, change its direction to the South? * Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 68. — Do you know the amount of freight delivered at Umatilla in a year ? Ans. — I do not. Int. 69. — Do you know how many tons of freight are laid down at Wallula in a day ? Ans. — No, sir. Int. 70. — In a year ? Ans. — I am unable to give any statistics about it. Int. 71. — Is there not plenty of bunch grass, upon which cattle and stock can feed, immediately in the rear of the old adobe fort of Wallula? jlns, — Bunch grass is not abundant until you get four or five miles away from the river. Int. 72. — Is there any bunch grass suitable for pasturage near the old fort of Wallula? / Ans. — No, sir; there is not. Int. 73. — How far from the old fort can the first bunch grass be found? ^jtg. — The first bunch grass is found, I think, about three miles off; it does not come plentifully for stock until a greater distance is reached. Interrogatories in rebuttal hy Caleb Cashing, in behalf of the j United States. Int. 1. — Were the buildings which you have described at Fort Umpqua constructed of what is known as square timber, 161 or wore tlicy constructed of what is the usual material of log houses ill the western States? A7if(. — Tliey were what is known in Oregon as French-hewn log houses; a small portion of the timher was sfjuare on four sides, l)iit most of it was only hewn on two sides. fiif. 2. — Have you any knoAvledgeof square timber at Port- land, its marketable value, and the like? A)ix. — I had not at that time. hit. .'5. — Has the price of timber at Portland any particular relation to your estimation of the value of log houses in the valley of tlie Umpqua? Ai(N. — None whatever; no more than the value of timber in Paris; there was no connection between the two places, and no transportation; there was no lumber used in the construc- tion of these buildings. Jnt. 4. — You were asked in cross-examination the height of the stockade in tlie valley of the Umpqua; of what is that stockade made? ylns. — Tt was made of fir poles or small logs, planted in the ground and tied together Avith wooden strips at the top. Int. T). — What, in the year 1850, was the pecuniary value of those fir logs, standing as they grew? yln.s'. — They had no value — were*vorth nothing. Int. 0. — As raw material, they had no value? Ans. — They had no value. Int. 7. — What was the value, as raw material, of the logs of timber of which the buildings were constructed? Ani<. — Nothing. Int. 8. — From whoso lands must these logs and those fir trees have been cut? Ans. — From the public lands of the United States ; all of them. Int. 0. — There was nothing in the building or stockade except the labor? Ans. — No tiling. Int. 10. — Was there anything in the construction there, apart from the material and excepting the labor of cutting 11 II 162 them from the public lands of tho United States and putting; them up? Ana. — Nothing ; there was little or no iron used in the buildings, and no glass. Itit. 11. — Have you any knowledge, from your observation of tho country and its inhabitants, of the relative cost of labor in putting up a fir stockade in 1850 and at some time prior to that time? Ans, — Prior to the discovery of the gold mines in 1848 it would cost less money than in 1850, because labor was more abundant and much cheaper. Int. 12. — Was or not your estimate of the labor involved, in your estimate of the cost or value of those buildings in 1850 and of the work done upon them, greater in 1850 than it would have boon prior to the discovery of gold? Atis. — Much greater. Int. 13. — From your knowledge of the Indians there, and half-breeds, and work done by them, was or not, in your judg- ment, the cost of their labor prior to 1848, greater or less than the cost of white laborers in 1850? Ans. — It was far less ; the cost of Indian labor to the Hud- son's Bay Company was a mere nothing; they subsisted them on potatoes and salmon, and paid them in clothing and trinkets at most enormous prices. Int. 14. — What implements of labor, if any, would have been necessary for the construction of the stockade and the build- ings at Fort Umpqua? Ans. — An ax, broad-ax, and an auger. Int. 15. — What was the description of the enclosed land at Umpqua, as being upland or alluvial bottom-land ? Ans. — Alluvial bottom-land. Int. 16. — How much of the price, from $3 to $5, which you have said is the value of the best of such alluvial bottom-land now — how much of that is due to the Government as purchase money ? Ans. — I do not understand. Int. 17. — This is public domain; how much do settlers have to pay for it ? 163 id at you -land jhaso have Ans. — The price of Government land is $1 25 an acre. Int. 18. — In the cross-examination you state that improved land for which the United States has been paid, which belongs to a private proprietor now, and which is improved, not only by fencing and by buildings, the price is from $3 to $5? An8. — Yes, sir. Int. 19. — Is there, or not, any particular causes which tend to deteriorate the value of growing crops in the valley of the Umpqua? Ans. — I think not. Int. 20. — Are they, or are they not, subject to vicissitudes, such as uncertainty of weather, drought, or insects, or grass- hoppers, or any other cause which might affect their value? Ans. — The valley has occasionally been visited by grass- hoppers, which are very destructive, destroying crops and fruit trees; and indeed all the vegetation in the valley has been destroyed by them once or twice. Int. 21. — You have spoken in the cross-examination of the actual value of the Davis farm on the Walla Walla; please to describe what improvements there are upon that farm, apart from the mere earth. Ans. — There are some log dwellings upon it, several barns, granaries, and other buildings — farm buildings — and it is en- closed and subdivided into fields with good fencing, which is very expensive there; ten times more so than in some other parts of Oregon ; rails have to be hauled fifteen or twenty miles. Int. 22. — Do, or not, all these improvements enter into the estimate of the value of the Davis farm? Ans. — They do. Int. 23. — What is the precise character of the improvements made by the Hudson's Bay Company upon the farm claimed by them on the Walla Walla? Ans. — I do not know that they ever had any improvements on the farm except the cabin. I do not know that there was ever any fencing there; my impression is there fiever was; it was cultivated, and the Indians herded stock off of it. Int. 24. — You have spoken of hotels, one or more hotels at 164 Wallula ; be good enough to dcscribo those liotols (tliat being a term of sotnowhat vague application) as rehitively to the Fifth Avenue or \Vi Hard's Hotel. Aiis. — Well, tliey are a very uncomfortable sort of hash- houses, where a traveller is compeHed to stop and enjoy the vermin and tlie filth as well as he can. They are lik(! other stopping-places in a new, wild country; a man can get enough to stay Ills stomach and a blanket to sleep in, if he wants 't. Int. 25. — What arc the dimensions of the hotel that i:5 chiefly in your mind? Aus. — The one I have usually stopped at is kept in an adobe fort, the only one remaining of the Hudson's JJiiy Fort. It is, perhaps, 18 feet by 30 feet in dimensions, and two stories high. Int. 2G. — You have spoken of stores, two stores there; I would like to understand their dimensions relatively to Mr- Stewart's store in New York, as that word is also an extremely vague term. Ans. — One of them is, I should estimate very roughly, 20 or 25 feet front by 35 feet deep. The other one is much smaller. Int. 27. — Are these adobe or wooden buildings ? Ans. — Wooden buildings. 7w«. 28.— Of what height? Ans. — One story. I believe, upon reflection, that there is a third store now, of smaller dimensions than the one whose size I have just given. Int. 29. — Whether is the site of Nez Perces a tract of rich, alluvial land or not? Ans. — It is not; it is a sandy desert. Int. 30. — Whether there is anything of peculiar value in the tract that was apparently occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company at Nez Perces Fort as their farm? Ans. — It is no better than much other land in the Walla- Walla Valley. Int. 31. — Are the lands of which that farm constituted a part — have they ever been surveyed by the United States? Ans. — Yes, sir. I think they have. ^ 1C5 Int. 32. — Arc tlicro, or not, any unsold lands of the United States there in that rei^ion? An». — A very small portion have ever been claimed or pur- chased. Int. 33. — Does your answer apply to what has been called, in the cross-examination, alluvial lands, as well as others? Ans, — No, sir; it includes all uplands and the alluvial lands. A large portion of the hitter have either been pur- chased from the United States, or taken up as donui >\\ or pre-emption claims. Re- Cross- Examined hy FAward Lander., in behalf of the Hud- son a Bay Company. Int. 1. — Arc not those lands you have spoken of as untakcn and unclaimed, in the Walla-Walla Valley, pasturage lands, which are not valuable for cultivation? Ans. — They are pasturage lands; they are none of them valuable for cultivation. The alluvial land which is valimble for cultivation is nearly quite all held or owned or claimed by white settlers. J. W. Perit Huntington. James W. Tooley, Stenographer. Testimony of William R. Gibson. In the matter of the Hudson's Bay Company against the United States. Deposition of William M. Gibson, taken in behalf of the United States. 'I Interrogatories propounded by Caleb Cushing, in behalf of the United States. Ques. 1. — Please to state your name in full, your official station or rank, if any, and your place of duty. 166 An8. — My name 1*8 William R. Gibson; I am a colonel and paymaster in the Army of the United States, and am stationed at Washington. Qu(;>«. 2. — Have you any interest, direct or indirect, in the claim preferred by the Hudson's Bay Company against the United States, except as a citizen of the United States? Ann. — None whatever. Qwfi. 3. — Whether or not you have, at any period of time, resided in the former Territory of Oregon, and if so, from what year to what year inclusive? Ans. — From 1848 to 1856, I was stationed at what was originally the Territory of Oregon. Ques. 4. — In what part of Oregon did you chiefly reside? Ans. — At Fort Dallas, in the latter part of my residence, and in the prior part of it at Vancouver. Ques. 5. — Have you any knowledge of the site of the old fort of Nez Perces ? Ans. — Yes, sir : I have been there very frequently. Ques. 6. — Please to describe the situation of that fort rela- tively to the United States fort of Walla-Walla? Ans. — That I cannot do ; the present United States fort was not built when I left the country. Ques. 7. — State exactly where the fort of Nez Percfes was situated ? Ans. — The fort of Walla-Walla was then at the mouth of the Walla-Walla river, on a sand-bank formed at the junction of the two rivers, the Columbia and the Walla- Walla. Ques. 8. — Is or not the fort of Walla- Walla of which you speak a different place from the United States fort of the Walla-Walla ? Ans. — Yes, as I understand it ; I do not know the location of the present United States fort of Walla-Walla. Ques. 9. — You understand it is a different place ? Ans. — Yes. Ques. 10. — And is it or not the same place which is some- times also called Nez Percys ? Ans. — Yes, sir. Ques. 11. — Please to describe what buildings, if any, existed 167 at tho Hudson's Bay post of old Walla- Walla at the time when you saw it. Ann. — There was an old stockade fort with storcliousos and 'Iwollin^^-Iiuuses, two or three of them, inside the stockade; I d'^ not know tho number ; it is some years ago since I saw it; I huve not hcen there since 1853, and then I only made casual visits whilst passing to and fro. QucH. 12. — Do you know anything of a place near that fort called VVi.llula? Ann. — That was the landing, I believe. Que». l-'{. — At tliat time was there or not any landing-place near the old fort of Walla-Walla ? An8. — There was no special landing-place other than the beach ; the boats landed there going to and from the lower river. Ques. 14. — Was there or not at that time any town on that beach ? Ans. — No, sir ; no town there at all. QucH. 15. — Were there or not any buildings there? Ans. — I remember none. Ques. 16. — Are you acquainted with Fort Hall ? Ana. — My knowledge of Fort Hall is very limited indeed; I have been there three different times in passing. Qucs. 17. — Was there or not any considerable establishment of buildings there ? Ans. — No, sir ; I believe not. Ques. 18. — From your observation, for what uses, and in what manner, was that post occupied ? Ans. — Well, the trade [had] run down vei*y much when I was there ; they were trading more with emigrants than anything else ; they had stock there. Ques. 19. — Have you ever been at the place called Fort Boise ? Ans. — Yes, in going to and from Fort Hall. Ques. 20. — Please to describe that place, as far as you remember it. Ans. — It was a small trading-post, much less than Walla- I 'iii 'It ■ I'r- HP: m *■ C-r- >{>■*■■ -'^i'' 168 Walla or Fort Hall, but I cannot describe it ; I cannot dis- tinctly remember what it was like now. Ques. 21. — What, according to your observation of it, was the apparent value of that establishment in money? Ans. — Well, it had no value for me . t all ; I would not have bought it at an}'^ price; I could not have been hired to have lived there ; the buildings were in a very bad condition when I saw them; they vere in a very tumble-down condition; I would not have given anything at all for them. Ques. 22. — What, from your observation, were the apparent uses and occupation of the establishment of Nes Porces or old fort of Walla-Walla? Ans. — From my knoMdedojo uf it, it was more a halting or resting-place for the potiies of the Hudson's Bay Odmpany going up into the interior with packs, than anything else. They did some Hitle trading with the Indians with ponies. Ques. 23. — What apparent Indian trade, other than that of ponies, did you observe there ? Ans. — Very little, except that they got a few skins there; a few bear skins were taken there, and they traded beaver, because they were compelled to do so, or they could not other- wise have got any bear skins. Ques. 24. — What was the quality of the land around the old fort of Walla-Walla ? Ans. — Immediately around the fort [it] was a sand bank, pretty much; about twenty-five or thirty miles from there was good land. Ques. 25. — Whether or not on the hills at some dirftancc from the fort there was pasturage of bunch grass ? Ans. — Yes, sir, an abundance ; the country was noted as a pasturage. (Objection taken by Mr. Edward Lander to this question and a^i^wer, on the ground that the question was a leading one.) Ques. 2G. — On those hills, did you or not, notice any ponies or cattle pasturing ? Ans. — Yes, sir ; I have frequently seen tliem there, ponies and cattle too. III 'I ■"w^wwifn »i««>y 169 Ques. 27. — Have you or not, at any time liad conversation with Peter S. Ogden, the chief agent of the Hudson's Bay Company, in regard to the condition' of the forts of the Com- pany in Oregon ? Ans. — I have, in relation to the business of the Company. Qucft. 28. — IMcase to state what he communicated to you on that subject. (Objecteil to by Mr. Lander, on the ground that the state- ments of Mr. Ogden arc not within the scojie id' liis agency, as shown by tlie testimony in this cause.) Witness. — Mr. Ogden has frequently said to mo that the Company merely kept up their establishment in order to make good their claim, and that their trade had entirely fallen oiF, and the fin- trade was worthless. Qucx. 20. — What did you understand by the expression "make good their claim," if anything was said by Mr. Ogden that should communicate an explicit idea of the meaning of the word ? (Objected to by Mr. Lander, on the same grounds as befor(\) Witness. — I understood that it was necessary for them to be in possession of and occupy the property claimed, in order that their claim might be valid and have effect. Ques. 30. — Claim against whom ? Ans. — Against the United States. Ques. 8L — Did or iioi , Mr. Ogden U'^e any words commu- nicating to you the idea that what he spoke of was claimed against the Unittd States? (Objected to by Mr. Lander, upon the same grounds as before, the incompetency of the evidence; and upon the further ground that the question is leading, and directing the attentio?! of the witness to the answer to be marie.) Wilneita. — He stated distinctly it was a claim against the United States; there was no misunderstanding in the matter. QiKt. 82. — What, according to your observatio i, was the condition of tlie fur trade when you arrived in Oregon, as whether on the increase, or stationary, or on the wane ? Ans. — It was very much on the decrease, atid continued to decrease during my stay in that country. 170 Quci.. 33. — Did or not Mr. Ogden say anything in regard to the fur trade, and the kind of fur purchased by the Indians at that time ? An%, — He suid that the fur trade had become Avorthless ; that the beaver had ceased to pay ; and the only skins they cared for were the bear and a few fox skins ; and those were all they could get. (The whole of this question and answer objected to on the grounds heretofore taken, in reference to any conversation with Mr. Ogden.) Wit)hi()i>e thi-ee times; Id's. -•). how 1< A. )U'f did you remain there at each time th :h ti Jl.ni:!. -Not )ver a day or two at any one time. QucH. 2l). — Is the knowledge which you have e.\j)ressed Avith reference to the trade at Fort IJoisc derived from vour visits there at those times? Am -No, sir; not so much as fr om my conversations Avi til Mr.Ogden in relation to his trade; and all theollicers, in fact, of the Comi)anA- talked the same Avav. Qnc.^. 27. — Then your statement Avith reference to the trade is made up more from statements of Mr. Ogden than your own observation y Ans. — Yes, sir; that and the supplies they sent in to the post, and the trade Avith the emigrants. Qtu'i<. 28. — Did you examine those supplies, or is your knoAvledge of those supplies derived from the statements of the officer in charge? Ans. — I saAv them landed and put on the animals, and car- ried up into the country. Oiicx. 29. — Were not these supplies in i)ackao;r I' d I UHl POUIU around, so that in order to ascertaiu the contents the pack- a^-es would have to opened? A)ii<. — Xo, sir; I know they Avere provisions tiom the man- ner in Avhicii they Avere packed, and also from the statement of the ollieer in charge of them; I have fretiucntly acted as 174 * ^■ * h-* agent for Mr. Ogdcn, in forwartling off these packages, at his request. Ques. 80. — Can you give the exact language made use of to you by Mr. Ogdcn in any conversation you have hehl with him? Ann. — No, sir, I cannot; it was a frequent subject of cou- vc'sation, and that was the burden of it — the falling off of their trade, and their object in remaining there. Ques. 31. — Is not the statement you have made, in refer- ence to what Mr. O^rden told vou, the statement of an im- prcssion made upon your mind by various conversations, none of which you can distinctly relate! Ans. — No, sir; it is the substance of the conversations 1 had with him; the substat ce, and not the impression left with me; I have a distinct impression of the substance of the conversation, not in so many words, but that was the charac- ter of it. Ques. 32. — Can you state Avhcrc conversations occurred — at what place, and at what time? Ans. — In his house at Fort Vancouver; the times were numerous; I cannot say what time; I never expected to give any testimony in the matter, and I never noticed it particu- larly; in visiting the post, coming from Fort Dalles, I always stayed with Mr. Ogden; he was a warm personal friend of mine, and very kind. Ques. 33. — Was there any person present at these numer- ous conversations between Mr. Ogden and yourself, in which the subject was talked about? Ans. — No, sir; there was no sccresy about it. I do not remember any parties being present. Ques. 34. — Can you call to mind any particular conversa- tion, giving tile date tlierewf, wliieh oceurred between you and Mr. OgdiMi, or the date as near as you possibly can? Ans. — No, I cannot; my visits there were fro((uent, and wo were ccnstaiitly talking (OiEi the subject; he, time and again, expressed the opinion r.hat they would go, all of them, to ViMm- couver's Island before a great while; and Uio conversation was brought about in tliat way, more particularly about our 175 separation, and my not seeing him ; but as for any particular dates, I said before, I never had any particular reason to take notice of tlicm for future reference. Qucs. 35. — Can you give the time of the year that any one of these conversations took place? Ans. — I cannot. I have been there repeatedly at all seasonti of the year, and wo were continually talking of these things — repeatedly. Qucit. oG. — Can you state the time of day at which any one of these conversations took place? • AvH. — Well, I really don't understand the object of the question; I have stated that I cannot particularize any time that these frequent conversations took place, except that it was when I ^*- .s visiting him, and I cannot f^ay if there were any persons present; there was no secrc-sy about it; there ni,ay have been persons there; it was talked of continually; it was impressed on my mind by the fact that the Hudson's Bay Company expected to get out of that country. Ques. oT. — Did not Mr. Ogden, in speaking of the Hudson's Bay Conipiuiy getting out of that country, also couple it "with a further idea that they would get out of the country when their lands were purchased by the United States? Ans. — Yes, sir; they expected a settlement with the Gov- ernment; and ho frequently said that it was the interest of the Government to buy at once, bcfoi-e the property had more value. Qucs. 38. — Did he not, in the same conversation, complain strongly of the treatment which he had received from the United States authorities, and especially of the manner in which their land was trespassed unon by settlers? Ans. — lie complained very bitterly of the settlers taking their land. Quen. 39. — Did he not, tit the same time, express the opinion that the United States authorities ought, in someway, to have protected them in their rights? Ans. — Yes, sir; and frequently asked that protection. Qaes. 40. — Did he not, at the same time, when speaking of the decay of trade, state that it was caused by the encroach- I 170 mcnts of the settlers upon the lands of the Company in some degree ? Ans. — No, sir; there were no settlers encroaehinjf upon any of their liinds, e.\cej)t near Vancouver and thei^e other lands down in the settlenuiits. There were no settlers in the Indian counti'V, Avluie tlii'y were trading for furs, lie has made the remark that he did not consider Oregon a fur country, since beaver had depreciated in value. (Jiirs. 41. — Did y(»u ever have any access to the books of the Conij)any, so as to knov,- the amount of trade, and the chaii'fes of trade, after vour arrival in the country? Aiii<. — Xo, sir; I ceitainl}'^ would not seek it, and do not sup])ose it would be olfered voluntarily. Qhcs. 42. — Do you think that any one can tell about the decrease of any trade in a country unless he himself is specially interested in it? (Mr. Cushing ol)jected to this question as too general, spec- ulative, and argumentative, even in cross-examination.) Wltiiciink, sir. Ques. 9. — Please to state, particularly and circumstantially, for what length of time, more or less, you acted as the agent of^Mr. Ogden, in the business of the post, at Fort Dalles. Ans. — Well, it was not a regular thing. He would frequent- 1}'^ write to me to see to sending his supplies up. It was not a CO tinu il a* ;ency, and on ly wh en receivin0 .... 6.62 2 pr. strap-hingos, at 62Ac., $1.25; 1 door-bolt, 45c. 1.70 269 lbs. cut nails, at 35c. pr. lb. - - - - 94.15 $392.66 Which, toi>other with the voucher marked "C," given as follows : " Account of labor performed in December, 1859, and Janu- ary, 18G0, by employes of the Northwest Boundary Sur- vey, on the buildings at Colvilc depot : 3 men, 1 month at 850 each per month ... $150 4 " 1 " $45 " " ... 180 15 " 1 " $40 " " .... 600 $930 "I certify that the labor, as stated above, was expended upon the winter quarters of the Northwest Boundary Survey at Colvilc depot. "G. Clinton Gardner, ^^Amst. Astr. jf Surveyor.'' Gives the entire cost of those buildings. (The whole of the above ansAver objected to as irrelevant and incompetent. The statements or writings of other per- sons than the witness also objected to for the same reason, and the papers introduced and the calculations.) Int. 3. — Would the materials employed in erecting these buildings cost private individuals more or less than it cost the Boundary Commission? Ans. — I should think the materials used in these buildings would cost private individuals about the same. The only dif. fercnce in cost would be in the labor, which, I think, would not exceed ^500. The doors and windows, and all the hardware* were transported there, and probably at a greater expense than private individuals could have transported them. 203 Int. 4. — "What do you estimate it would have cost private individuals to have erected these buihlings in 1859? Ai^s. — From the data 1 have, I should . estimate it at ^3,880.J}0. The cost of material and, labor, as given in pre- ceding voucher, Avill be us follows : Cost of material for officers' quarters - - ^1,735.70 Cost of labor for officer's quarters, as follows : For carpenters ... - - ^240 Extra-duty mens' labor, reduced to citizen labor at %\.^0 per day, being 200 days - 300 Rations for above laborers, 280, at 30c. - - 84 Cost of officers' quarters _ . - Cost of materials on out-buildings Cost of labor " - - Cost of rations for above laborers, 660, at 30c. per ration Cost of out-buildings - - . . 024.00 ^2,3ry.).70 392.66 930.00 198.00 $1,520.66 Int. 5. — How did the buildings erected by the Northwest Boundary Survey, at Colvile Depot, whose cost you have just estimated, compare in value with those occupied by the Hud- son's Bay Company at Fort Colvile, in 1859? Arts. — From what I remember of the buildings of the Hudson's Bay Company at Fort Colvile, I should think they were not more than twice as extensive, and probably of not more than double the value. I would not exchange on any higher terms. (All the foregoing questions and answers objected to as in- competent and irrelevant.) Int. 6. — Have you ever followed any of the brigade trails of the Hudson's Bay Company in what was Washington Territory ? Ans. — Yes ; I have been over parts of the trail, between Colvile and Fort Hope, on Fraser river. Int. 7. — What was the character of this trail ? 11 '' i I' 204 Arts. — It was a broad road way, through the portions of tho country not timbered, and through the timbered portions opened sufficient to allow their packs to pass. Tho brigade trail around the Kalespelm Lake, which is part of tho brigade trail from Colvile to Fhit-IIead trading-post, follows the water's edge, and is impassable at high-water. The most of these brigade trails follow old Indian trails, with but little improve- ment upon them. Int. 8. — What do you estimate would be the average cost per mile of these trails? Ans. — From the cost of the trails that we opened in carry- ing on our work, I should judge these trails did not cost as much as ours, and the estimated cost of a portion of our trail across the Cascade Mountains is about $20 per mile. Cro88-Examination tins April 30, 18G7. Int. 1. — At what time were you at Fort Colvile ? Ans. — In March or April, 1861. Int. 2. — How long were you there at that visit, and did you go to the Company's post? Ans. — I don't remember whether I went to the Company's post or not upon that occasion. I was at the post a few days previous. Int. 3. — Was there any difference in the buildings at the post at the time you first saw them, and at tho date of your last visit? Ans. — No marked change that I observed. Int. 4. — Had any of the buildings been rebuilt? Ans. — I don't think any of them had. Int. 5. — How many buildings were there at Fort Colvile, within the square ? Ans. — I don't know what you would call the square ; there was but three sides when I was there. On the north side were store-houses, my impression, under the same roof; and on the east side were the officers' quarters, with an extension to the north, if I remember ; on the south side were two or three small houses for employes. 205 Int. G. — Is that tlio best and most accurate description that you can give of the buihlings at the Hudson's Day Company's post at Colvile? Attn. — No; it is only the buiUlings fronting or facj ig the court-yard of the Hudson's Bay post. Int. 7. — How far was the Company's post at Colvile from the IJoundury Commission's quarters, which you have spoken of? Ann. — About seventeen miles, by the road. Int. 8. — How far from the Hudson's Bay Company's post were the buildings of the British Boundary Commission? An%. — Between one and two miles. Int. 0. — Were these buildings erected for the accommoda- tion of the British Boundary Connrission during the same winter that the American Commission pasiicd at their quar- ters ? Ann. — Yes ; but no* at the same time that ours were erected; they were built afterwards, and I visited them first in the win- ter of 18(50 and 18G1. Int. 10. —How did they compare with the buildings of the American Commission, in number, size, material, construction, and finish? Ans. — First, as regards to number, they Averc more numer- ous ; and as regards size, they were not as large ; in regard to material, it was about the same, I think. They probably were not constructed with the same care, and not as well fin- ished. . ' . Int. 11. — You have compared the value of the Hudson's Bay Company's buildings at Colvile with that of the value of the American Boundary Commission at Colvile. Will you now state the values of the American Boundary Commission build- ings, and the British Boundary Commission buildings ? Am. — The British Boundary Commiss'on buildings were more numerous than the American Boundary Commission buildings, and were worth, I should think, three times as much. Int. 12. — Do you not know that Hiram Field was paid the sum of $20,000 for erecting the buildings of the British Bound- ary Commission? ' vrr li :! 206 Ans. — No ; I did not know that Tliram FleM was paid that amount; I understood he had the contract for building them. Int. pi. — Was there three times as ranch lumber and other materials used in the construction of the British Boundary Commission buihlings as in those of the American? Anf). — I should think there was. Int. 14. — Were you employed in any way in the erection of the buildings of the American Boundary Commission, the cost of which you have detailed? Ans. — I was employed after my arrival at Colvile from the field ; and in order to expedite the work, the men of the differ- ent parties were also placed at Avork upon them. Int. 15. — AVas tli' • labor charged in estimating the cost of the buildings ? An>'. — Yes; as per voucher marked "C," previously re- ferred to. Int. IG. — Whntdocs voucher marked " C" contain? Ahs. — Voucher marked " C" is a certificate of labor placed upon those buildings by tho employes of the Boundary Sur- vey. Int. 17. — Was there no other labor placed on these buildings by the members of the Boundary Commission than that men- tioned in voucher " C" ? Ans. — Tiiere was other labor placed on those buildings, as charged in voucher marked '' A." Inf. 18. — Do you recollect the price of labor, at that time, in Colvile Valley? Ans. — Yes ; the price of labor wns the same as given in voucher " C." Int. 10. — Was not, at this time, Colvile and its vicini'ty i'ull of miners and prospectors, seeking to pass the winter, many of whom Aveve glad to be employed to procure food and shelter for tho winter ? ^1/KS'. — There- were a good many that we could have cm- ployed; but they were not willing to remain with us the fol- lowing season, which we required of every employe, before we consented to keep them during the winter. Some that were 207 discharged upon going into winter-quarters returned to our employ, in the spring, at the same wages. Int. 20. — Is not your own personal knowledge of the cost of these buildings confined to knowledge of the number of men of the Boundary Commission employed, and the price paid them; and is not the rest of your knowledge of the cost de- rived from inspection of vouchers and certified accounts or in- voices read off by you and copied into your answer to 2d interrogatory to your examination-in-chicf in this case? Alls. — My knowledge of the cost of those buildings is from the amount of labor placeil upon them by the cniployos of the Boundary'- Commission, together with the cr-st of material and labor placed upon them by portions of t'.'.o escort employed, as certified to b^' I\Iajor Lugcnbeel. Int. 21. — Is your knowledge of the material and values mentioned, and the labor charged in voucher marked "A," introduced into vour testimonv, purportinL!' to be si'j;ned bv P. Luc-enbocl, Brevet Maior, derived from the account itself, and the certificate 'i Ans. — ]\Iy knov,-lcda,c of the amouu t of nmternil am 1 lab or is partly from tlie account and partly from tlie results of that material and laljor. My knowledge of tlie value of the material and labor is from the certificate. Int. 22. — Is your knowledge of tlio material fnrni^lied, and the prices i^harg.'d i.i voucher "B," derived from an inspec- tion of the document itself? Ans. — Partly fi\na the inspection of the voucher itself, and partly from the inspection of the materials, as nearly as I re- member them. Int. 20. — Is not vour knowlediio of the price of these art!- cles derived entirely from the voucher itself? Ans. — Yc!- ; because there was no otiier price paiil for them than that charged in the voucher. Int. 24. — Did you pay for these articles yourself, or do you know that they were paid for, except through the inspection of this voucher ? Ans. — I ('id not pay for them myself, and the receipt to the voucher is the only evidence I have of payment. m ii t '"it" m ]\m 208 Int. 25. — How many officers and men were employed, on an average, on the Boundary Commission -when at work in the field? Ans. — I do not remember; I should judge about sixty. Int. 26. — IIow many companies of soldiers were employed as an oscort and guard for the Commission? Ans. — On tlio western slope of the Cascades there was one company of infantry. To the east of the Cascades there was four companies of infantry, Avho established a military depot at Colvile Depot, sending detachments sufficient to guard and protect the parties [tiiat] were at work in the field. Int. 27. — What escort did the British Commission nave ? Ans. — The Englisl Commission, I believe, liad sappers and miners as their escort, as well as to do the work ; the number I do not know. Int. 28. — How many companies were there at Colvile Depot at the time the buildings of the American Boundary Com- mission wore begun ? Ans. — Two companies of infantry, I believe. Int. 29. — State, if you know, what was the cost of bring- ing the Company's soldiers to Fort Colvile, and maintaining them there while acting as guard. Ans. — I don't know. • G. Clinton Gardner. Deposition of Marcus A. Reno, a witness examined in the city of Washington, at request and in behalf of the United States, in the matter of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany against the United States, Caleb Cushing appear- ing as counsel for the United States, j nd Edward Lander for the said Company, sworn before Nicholas Callan, a notary public in and for the county of Washington, Dis- ti'ict of Columbia. Testijmony of Marcus A. Reno. ' ' Int. 1. — State your name, rank in the army, post or station. Ans. — Marcus A. Reno ; Captain of 1st cavalry, and Bre- 209 vet Colonel in the United States Army; my regular station is Fort BoLsb, Idaho Territory. Int. 2. — Have you, at any time, been on duty at the post of Fort Boise? Ans. — I have, at some time heretofore, hcen acquainted with Fort Boise, a post of the Hudson's Bay Conipan}'. I was there first in the summer of 18a9; there tuico tl:at summer. I was tlierc four times in the summer of 18G0; was there in the capacity of a subaltern in the 1st dragoons, that was scouting along the emigrant route in that country'. The first time I was there a day and night, the second time I spent about three days there, in the summer of 18G0. I camped there two weeks the first time, the second time I was there about two days. Fort Boise, of the Hudson's Bay Company, was situated on the right bank of tho Snake river, fifteen or twenty miles below the mouth of Bois(5 river; the present ])ost, held by the United States, is on the Boise river, about thirty miles above its mouth. The Snake river is the main river ; the Boiso is tho branch river. Am not certain as to the distances ; they are about the distances above stated. Int. 3. — State whether you noted, with more or less particu- larity, the condition of the Hudson's Bay post at Fort Boise. An.'^. — I took notice, with some particularity, of the condf- tioii of Fort Boise at the time of my first visit there. I took the dimensions of the building, and noted the condition of the country back of it, in reference to pasturage for tho animals of our command. I kept a journal regularly every day. I reported the rosult of my observations to the commanding ofiiccr on my return to camp. Int. 4. — Please to describe the character and condition of the buildings there. Ans. — The buildings were pretty much in ruins ; one was quite so, the other was simply four walls that had been cov- ered with a single slant roof; the face looking up the river seemed to have been arranged for defence, Indian defence; this is what I understood to be called a bastion. I only saw two buildings there. The whole locality was entirely over- grown with wild rye grass, very tall grass. 1-t H il ' 210 Int. 5. — Were the buildings occupied or deserted? Ans. — These buildings -were in a deserted condition; no in- dications of any one having been there for some time. Inf. G. — iVt what pecuniary value should you estimate those buildings, in the condition in M'hich they were at that time? A}is. — I should say they Avere worthless. The walls were built of this adobe sun-dried brick; would hardly have sup- ported the roof; they had crumbled away, from the rain. I think it would have been economy to have built anew, rather than to have attempted to make them habitable. Int. 7. — Please to state, according to your judgment and experience, how many of your men would it have taken, and how many days' time, to construct two such buildings. (Mr. Lander objects to this question, unless it is previously shoAvn that the witness had some experience in putting up adobe buildings.) An><. — I do not feel myself competent to answer this ques- tion fully. Int. 8. — Have you ever had occasion to witness or direct the making of adobe bricks. If so, state briefly the material and process. A/nf^. — I have. The United States post at Fort Wallula was built of frame work, and lined Avith adobe brick. It is a kind of mortar formed of the ground and water, with the ad- dition of straw; the time of making depends a great deal on the weatiicr; dried in the sun. Int. 9. — What is the common size of these sun-dried blocks of mud, called adobes? (Mr. Lander objects to this question.) An.i. — The size varies according to the differerit uses they are put to. The sizes I saw made were almost cubes, about one foot. Those I saw in the buildings at Boise were the size of ordinary bricks. Int. 10. — State, if you please, how these adobes are formed. An.9. — Those that I saw made were as follows : An excava- tion was formed in the ground, the dirt from which was wet and then manipulated with shovels. Some were made in that way. Then, afterwards, they improved on that maniier and ii 211 had a kiutl of mill. This mill was nothing more than a cylin- der and awheel to turn around by a horse, of the very simplest construction imaginable. Int. 11. — Please to state whether you saw any enclosed land at Fort Boise. Ans. — I did not. I saw no evidence of cultivation or im- provement except the ruins of those buildings I spoke of. Int. 12. — What was the (|uality or character of the land immediatclv around and in the neighborhood of those two adobe ruins? Ann. — In the immediate vicinity of the post it was level bottom; they call that country sage-brush country. The soil of alkali nature. The sage-brush land is very indifferent for cultivation ; it would require great labor to make it profitable ; and as to pasturage, I do not think a herd of a hundred ani- mals could live within range of the fort, and be at all service- able. Sage brush is not considered feed for cattle; horses and cattle will not eat it. I have heard it said mules would eat it, but I don't believe it. I found, in the execution of the orders I had received, that it was useless to send animals there for pasturage. Int. 13. — Please to state whether you have at any time been on duty at the United States fort of Walla-Walla ; and, if so, how long and at what time? Ana. — I have been stationed at United States Fort Walla- Walla from September, 18.39, to May, 1860. I spent the winters of 1850 and 'GO and 18G0 and 'Gl there. Int. 14. — State whether or not in the vicinity of the United States [Fort] Walla- Walla there was a post of the Hudson's Bay Company, known by the name of Walla-Walla or of Wallula. Ans. — There Avas a post of the Hudson's Bay Company on the Columbia river called Old Walla-Walla, at the mouth of the Walla-Walla river, not a mile above the mouth of the Walla- Walla river, about thirty miles from the United States fort of Walla- Walla. I never heard Fort Walla-Walla designated in any other way than the old fort. ■I Mi 212 Int. 1/5. — Did you at any time or times visit old Fort Walla- Walla; and, if so, how many times? AiiH. — I visited there frequentl}'; the drst time was in May, 180/«. — There was no pasturage around Fort Boh'e in the inune«liate vicinity ; there was grass there that would sustain life, scattered through the sage grass, [brush.] If it had been optional with the commanding officer, he would not have re- mained there the time he did. I remember, in our homeward march, men were made to dismount and lead their horses, they had been so reduced by scant feed at Fort JJoise. Jnf. 8. — You stated the horses were sometimes sent six miles for feed. Were they not often herded at shorter distances from the fort ? A'ii.i. — Yes, sir; herded in every direction; this six miles [was] f»robably the longest distance. Int. 9. — From your knowledge, derived from your camping at Fort lioise, would it not have required a great deal of land on both sides of the Snake river to have pastured large bands of horses, kept by persons living at old Fort Boise? A)i8. — It would so ; it would have required a very extensive range. Int. 10. — Is not Fort Boise on the emigrant trail, and the usual and common camping-ground for parties passing up and down the Snake ? An8. — It is so ; but I do not think it [was] is so [much] on account of the pasturage at that time, as for wood and water. The Snake river is difficult to water stock in ; it is miry along that portion of it. Int. 11. — Might not the camping of these parties, passing up and doy, '>. the river so often, at the same spot, have injured the pasturage in the vicinity of and around the fort? Ans, — The first time I was at the fort, in 1860, there had been no encampments there that year ; the year before, the emigration that had passed over might have destroyed it to some extent. Int. 12. — Do you know anything of the effect of emigration on sage-brush lands ? Ans. — Not from my personal knowledge. Int. 13. — Is not the bunch grass of that country often found, to some extent, on what is called sage-brush land? Ans. — It is, to a very limited extent. 215 J)it. 14. — 111 your examination of Fort Boise, did you not ob- serve an enclosure, or the remains of one, similar to that at old Fort Walla- Walla, although not as great in extent? Ans. — The building spoken of in my evidence as in ruins, looked like it might be an enclosure ; but it was so crumbled it was difficult to say what it looked like. Inf. 1'). — You have spoken of the south face of this build- ing with a bastion to it. Was not this the south wall of an enclosure, similar to that of Fort "Walla-Walla ? Ans. — No, sir; I don't think it was ; it had been a building arranged for defence, but built more especially for a store- house. Int. 10. — What was the length of this south wall you spoke of? Ans. — I do not remember sufficiently the dimensions to say. Int. 17. — Where was this other building situated that vou spoke of, and how near to the building you have last spoken of? Ans. — Situated off the northwest angle of the main build- ing, towards the river, from thirty to fifty yards distant ; may have been a little less than that. Int. 18. — Was this an enclosure resembling the old fort at Walla- Walla ? Ans. — It was too much in ruins for me to say what it had been; but the extent of the foundations were greater than they could have roofed out there. Int. 19. — Could not buildings have been erected on the in- side of the enclosure, and roofed, leaving an open space within the enclosure ? Ans. — It might have been so. Int. 20. — You have some acquaintance with adobes, as made by soldiers. Have you any idea how long they would last? Ans. — I have not. Int. 21. — Is all the earth you found fit for adobes ; and does it not require a peculiar kind of earth for the purpose of making adobes? Ans. — Some kind of earth you can make adobes of with less trouble than others. m i 1 i'l M h 1 iy:: ill > iiii ! mil iiiiiiffii 216 7w/. 22. — Could you make adobes at old Fort Walla-Walla, of the earth there? Ans. — Very near there ; in the bottom of the Walla-AValla river. I?)(. 23. — Is not the earth preferred for adobes generally a sort of clay ? Ans. — Yes. Int. 24. — Does it not require working by the feet of cattle and horses, driven about, or in some other way, to make it fit for bricks ? Ans. — Depends upon the number you want; they require to be worked in some way. Int. 25. — How is the shape and measure of the brick ob- tained, that you have spoken of? Ana. — They have some form of mould. Int. 26. — If you cannot [give] the length of the Avails at Fort Boise, can you give its height or its thickness ? A71S. — I think the short wall that was standing was seven feet high, and one opposite was ten or eleven ; I should say they were a foot and a half to two feet in thickness. Int. 27. — Can you give any approximate idea of their length ? Ans. — I should think not more than thirty feet. Int. 28. — You have spoken of rye grass springing up and almost concealing the ruins ; is not this rye grass, in the spring of the year, a good pasturage for horses ? Ans. — It is not considered good pasturage ; it scours the horses very much. Int. 29. — Does not all new grass, in the spring of the year, have that effect on horses ? Ans. — Yes ; but not to the same extent. A horse that has been pastured all winter would not be scoured by the moun- tain grass, even when green ; but he would by the rye grass. Int. 30. — Did you give a particular examination to old Fort Walla-Walla ? Ans. — I did not ; I was frequently in the enclosure, but did not take the dimensions. 217 Int. 31. — Have you any particular recollection of the wall of the fort, its height or its thickness. Ans. — I have not. Int. 32. — Can you say that there were not, inside of the walls of the fort, some houses and ranges of stores ? Ans. — I cannot. Int. 33. — Have you any recollection of two bastions, be- longing to the fort ? Am. — I remember there was something of the kind. M. A. Reno, Capt. 1st. Cav., Bvt. Col. U. S. A. J. Sworn and subscribed before me this ninth day of L^' ^'-1 November, A. D. 1866. N. Callan, Notary PiihUf. In the matter of the Claim of the Hudson s Bay Company against the United States. Deposition of Leiois S. Thompson, a witness examined in the City of Washington, and District of Columbia, on the part and behalf of the United States, Avho, being duly sworn, deposeth and testifies as follows : Testimony op Lewis S. Thompson. Int. 1. — Please to state your name at length, residence, and profession. Ans. — Lewis S. Thompson; residence in Jacksonville, Jack- son county, Oregon ; I am a physician. Int. 2. — Have you any personal knowledge of the Hudson's Bay post at Umpqua ; and if so, under what circumstances acquired, and at and for what time ? Ans. — I have, having resided at Scottsburgh, the road to and from which passes immediately in sight of the post. My I" ' I i i;< r Ij; !,^' ii.:i!'. i )l ■1 ;l '2. State what buildings were there. A)if<. — T eannot exactly recollect. The buildings were dilapidated; a portion of them were standing, and a portion had fallen down. lilt. 4. — Did you take notice of the character and quality of the land about the post? And if so, please to state what proportion of it was good land, and what, in your judgment, was the value of a mile sfjuaro of the land at and around it. Ann. — I did ; one-half was good land. Two thousand to twenty-five hundred dollars. A portion of the land was good, and a portion of it was hilly, mountainous land. The hilly land had no particular value for tillage or grazing. I desire to explain that I base my estimate of the land on the assump- tion that the post stands in the centre of the land up and down the river; a half-mile up the river, and half-mile doAvn the river. Int. o. — What person, if any, was in apparent charge of the post, in behalf of the Company ? Ans. — I do not remember the name of the person in charge of the post ; it was a Frenchman. Int. 0. — On which side of the river, relatively to the road to California, and how far from it, is the post at Umpqua. Is it on the right or the wrong side of tlie river, relatively to that road? ^w«.-:-Umpqua is on the south or west side of the river, the road to California passing on the opposite side at no great distance ; the road is on one bank of the river, and the post on the opposite bank. hit. 7. — Have you or not any knowledge of cattle belong- ing to the post being killed by the settlers ; and if so, under what circumstances, and for Avhat apparent cause ? Ans. — Nothing beyond common talk. The common repu- 219 tiition wnx tliat tlic stock was wild, and liatl not lioou liaiidlod for sovenil voars, and tlic conscoueiice was that they wore very tronldt-soine, ami thercforo wi-ro killed. Int. H. — Have you or not knowledge of cattle or horses he- loii<;iiig to the post heiiig sold hy the Company's a;xent? A)i9. — I have not, personally. I have seen tlie corral in Mhich the i orscs were collected, and saw persons who were < jiployed i'l collecting them. I also saw some dead animals, and heard statements made as to the cause of their death, and statements conccrninj; sales. Int. i'. — Have you or not knowledge of the farm in that region owned or occupied by Mr. Chapman ; and if so, how is it situated relatively to Fort I'mpqua? Ann. — Mr. Chapman lived on the Fort Un pf|ua farm. Int. 10. — What is the estimated value, in that country, of Mr. Chapman's farm at tMs time? Ann. — Fifteen hundred dollars; the land not being so val- uable as it formerly was, when I valued it at twenty-five hun- dred dollars. Cross-IJxam ination . large repu- Int. 1. — How far is this town of Scottsburgh from the Com- pany's post at Umpqua? Ans. — Twenty miles. Int. 2. — You speak of the road running from Scotsburgb to the interior. To what places of importance did that road lead? Ans. — It leads to the main trail running through Oregon to California, and is the trail over which goods are shipped to the towns in the interior of Oakland, Winchester, Roseburgh, Canyonville ; which towns supply the settled portions of Umpqua valley with goods. Int. 3. — How far from the bank of the Umpqua was the Company's post? Ans. — About one hundred and fifty yards. Int. 4. — Is the Umpqua a fordable river near the fort or not? Ans. — It is not. There is a ford, used in summer time, about M :,'" ; 220 three miles above the fort. I think there is a bridle trail from tlie ford to the fort, but no wagon trail. Int. 5. — Is there any diflSculty in crossing the river near the fort by canoes or boats? Ann. — There is none. That was the means of crossing from the trail to the post, Int. 6. — Was it not common reputation that a good many cattle had been killed by the settlers belonging to the Com- pany? Ans. — It was. Int. 7. — Was it not also common reputation that the beef cattle of the Company, killed by the settlers, had been sold in Scottsburgh and other places by the settlers? Ans. — I think not. There were reports occasionally of cattle being killed by packers passing through the country ; they usually called the cattle elk. Int. 8. — Were not the cattle usually kept by the settlers in that country, many of them, of the Spanish breed? Ans. — They were not, until, about 1854 or 1855, some cattle of the Spanish breed were driven into that country. Int. 9. — Did not all the cattle in that country range loose as a general thing ? Ayis. — They did. Int. 10. — Who is the present occupant of the farm at the post? Ans. — I cannot tell. My belief is that it has not been oc- cupied for several years. Int. 11. — Are you acquainted with Governor Gibbs ? If so, state what is your judgment of his competency to pass upon the value of land personally known to him in the valley of the Umpqua. (Mr. Cushing objects to the question, as not matter of cross- examination, and not competent testimony in any point of view.) Ans. — I am. I should think he was. Int. 12. — Have you bought or sold any farming land in the Umpqua Valley during the last year ? Ans. — I am now trying to sell a farm which I have owned 'll'lli iii'ii 221 since 18.jT, coiitaining 040 acres, for two thousand dollars, witliiii sight of Fort Umpqua, and which I would not ex- change for the Fort Umpqua Farm. Examlnation-m-CJiii'f liesuined. Int. 1. — AVhcn you say that in your opinion (jovernor Gibbri is competent to pass judgment on the value of land in Umpqua Valley, do you mean to bo understood as implying that he has any special competency su})erior to your own ? Ans. — I do not. Lit. 2. — Do you think he is any better judge of the money value of your own farm than you yourself arc? Alts. — I do not. Int. 3. — Do you think that he is any better judge than you yourself arc of the relative value of your farm and the Fort Umpqua Farm ? Ans. — I do not. Int. 4. — What are your means of information as to the value of lands in the Umpqua Valley ? Ans. — From actual transactions, lands being bought and sold under my knowledge. (Mr. Lander objects to this last interrogatory, upon the ground that it is incompetent and irrelevant, in the renewal of an examination-in-chief.) (Mr. Gushing res; jnds that this question is not renewal of an examination-in-chiof, but i.-' the cross-examination of the witness relative to the eleuKats of the matter of opinion, as to which Mr. Lander made the witness his own by the in.tro- duction of new matter) Int. 5. — Who is Governor Gibbs, and how does he get the title of Governor ? Ans. — 1I{? is a .:nap v'lo weighs about 250 lbs., and served four ye" '- as Govcruov of Orc!|on. Int. 0. — You have stated that there was a report that cattle were killed by packers going through the country, and called elk meat. Did the report run that ihese cuttle were killed in the corral of the Company ? 000 Ans^. — The report did not. The Company could not have corralled tlicir cattle had they tried. Int. 7. — Have j'^ou or not any kno'w ledge of «oa-otter or other furs heitig traded hy the Indians to the Company, when you first went tiicre ? Ans. — There was little or no trade at Fort Umprjua when I went there. L. S. Thompson. Wasj[tngtox, D. C, December 18, 1866. m I Claim of the Ilcdsons Bajj Company againnt tJie United States. Deposition of A. Jl Cain, taken at the request and in l)ehalf of the United States, hy agreement between Caleb Cush- ing, on behalf of the United States, and Edward Lander, on behalf of the Hudson's Bay Company^ Testimony of A. J. Cain. Int. 1. — Please to state your name at length, and your present occupation and residence. Ans. — !Mv name is Andrew J. Cain : have been residing at t.' ■' o Walla-Walla, in Washington Territoiy ; engaged in real estate business. Int. 2. — Have you, at any time, been employed as Indian agent in Oregon or Washington ? And if so, please to state for what district, and for what years. An-'j. — I was employed as Indian agent in Washington Territory for three years, up to SejUenibcr, 1861, in charge of the Walla-Walla district, which embraced all of Washinjiton Territory between the Columbia river and the Bitter-Root Mountains. Int. 3. — For what length of time, since then, have you re- sided at Walla-Walla? Ans. — Up to my departure for that city in March last. 223 Int. 4. — Please to describe tlio structure'?, if any. of the Hudson's Bay Company at old Walla-Walla, at the time whcu you first had kiioAvIodge of them as Indian agent. Ann. — An ordinary sized trading-fort, made of adobes, with a main build mir msule, w hieh I suppo so was about si\ ty ^y thirty, all in a very dihipiilateil conditi(jn. There wi-re evi- dences of there having been some small tenements, but I could not judge of their character. There was but the one Imilding left standing, which had no roof on it. Int. o. — In what manner were these structures oceupied, if at all, at that period ? A n.i. ■Tl ley were unoccupied uuring Idi 18,->1). ;ome trad ers repaired the building, and occupied it in 1^^^J0. fi)t. 6. — What is the present conditi n)n oi t\n uildings, an( 1 if at all, occunied ? Ans. — They have been almost entirely rebuilt; they are now occupied by traders. New roofs have been put on tlie build- ings, and the walls repaired — putting in doors and v indows. Tlie walls of the fort and building, when I first saw iheui, were in a very bad condition. lose expense these repairs Ii^t. 7. — State, if ou k ilOW at wl were made, and who were the traders occupying the ];i'emises. Ans. — To the extent of my knowledge, at individual ex- pense; Higgins and Greenwell first occupied them, al'lerwards, Van Sickle ai\d Tatem ; I am not acquainted with the parties occupying them of late. IJy expense of indi- w ho viuuai 1 . ')ce.i ;>'i an private individuals, traders. — I low manv vears have vou l)een engaficl in land or re I est ;te b usiness ; and have vou or the not hiid expe- rience in t'.e purchase and sale of real estate? And if so, to what extent? Ans. — Engaged in that business since ISGl ; have owned property in Wada- Walla, and negotiated large amounts of pur- chases and sales for others. 7 '. 9. — Please to state what, in your judgment, was the in- trl : > \(ecuniary \^alue of those structures as structures, and apan lom tlie laud, as they stood in 1850, and befuro they were lopaired by private traders. 224 Ai(S\ — Twcnty-fivc buiulrcd to tliree thousand dollars, at the price of luiildiMg material then. Jut. 10. — Describe the character of the land, as adapted to agricultural or grazing uses, at and about old Walla-AValla. Ans. — Land in the immediate vicinity is a sandy waste ; there are no good farming or grazing lands until you reach Touchet river, fourteen miles in the interior. Int. 11. — Please to state the character of the roads, if any, at or about ohl Walla-Walla; whether any particular road, leading to or from old Walla-Walla, exi -ed at the time when y(Mi first became acquainted with the y ost ; and whether trav- elling at or al)out old H'alla-Walla requires the expensive con- struction of roads. Ans. — The character oj .o countr}^ did not, and never has re(|uired any labor in making good wagon roads, beyond the bridging of streams ; the reason of this is, because it is a prai- rie couTitry, universally a sandy soil ; the grade of the highest plateaux is of that eas}' character that good natural wagon roads could always be obtained by simply making a reconnois- anee, except as to crossing; the mountains, which are fifty miles distant from the post. Even at the mountains, natural roads can be obtained. Int. 12. — Are you acquainted with the Hudson's Bay Com- pany's post at Fort Colvile? And if so, how much, and at what time i ^1?)*. — I am; having spent some time in the Colvile A^'alley in the fall of 1859. Inf. 13. — Please to describe the buildings which you saw there at that time. Ans. — They were of the most ordinary character, built of logs, put u\> in a rough manner; I don't remember their di- mensions ; I was particularly struck with the dilapidated air the place wore. Int. 14. — What, in your judgment, was at that time the value in money of those buildings? Atis. — From five to seven thousand dollars, to any one who needed those buildings at that point. Int. 15. — Please to inspect the lithograph Qv.iOtograph] sub- 225 mitted to you, and hereto annexed, and marked with your name, and state whether it does or does not represent any structures with which you are acquainted. And if so, what ? Ans. — It represents one view of the buildings at Fort Col- vile. Cross-Examination. Int. 1. — What trading-posts, other than those of the Hud- son's Bay Company, have you ever seen in Indian country ? Am. — I have seen none in Oregon and Washington but those of the Hudson's Bay Company. Int. 2. — When you speak of an ordinary sized trading post, you mean a Hudson's Bay Company's post? Ans. — Yes. Int. 3. — Was not this fort that you have spoken about, 113 feet square, and the walls about 12 feet high, and about one and a half foot thick ? Ans. — My recollection serves me that the fort was from 100 to 120 feet square ; adobe walls, from ten to twelve feet high ; that is, the walls that were standing. Int. 4. — Did the traders that you have spoken of repair the walls with adobes, as well as roof the buildings ? Ans. — They repaired the buildings, and also repaired the walls somewhat, and used it as a corral. Int. 5. — You have spoken of the intrinsic pecuniary value of these structures as structures, and apart from the land in 1859. What was the value, in your opinion, of a mile square of land, including the old post at Walla- Walla, and landing, at the time you last saw it ? Ans. — In 1859, a mile square had no particular value apart from these improvements ; since then it has become valuable as a landing, owing to the development of the mines ; it has been quite a shipping point for the Walla- Walla Valley and interior mines. Int. 6. — Has not this landing a value also, caused by the settlement of the surrounding country, for agriculture, as well as the mining improvements ? Ana. — To a limited extent. 15 H i! ^; f I, .J Iff I -} i ■ II; r^ 111 if n; 220 Int. 7. — From your knowledge of the surrounding country, west of the Cascade, and east of the Bitter-Root Mountains, what, in your opinion, is the best landing on the Columbia river for the transaction of business? Ans. — Wallula is the most important landing. Int. 8. — Can you place any pecuniary value on it as a town- site? Ans. — It would be difficult to do so, owing to the efforts being made to establish two other points above it, one at White Bluffs, and the other at Palouse llapids on the Snake river. I)tt. 9. — Will not the fact that the rapids on the Columbia and Snake prevent navigation at low-water above Wallula, and the fact that these two other places communicate only with extreme northern mines, prevent their becoming rivals of Wallula to any great extent? Ans. — Low-water, at certain seasons of the year, obstructs navigation above Wallula, but whether to the extent of inter- fering with the mining trade with those upper points, I am unable to say. Int. 10. — Do you not think yourself that the advantages which Wallula possesses over White Bluffs, and the point on the Palouse, will secure to Wallula the start which she now possesses over both those places ? Ans. — I think she possesses advantages arising from the agricultural resources of the Walla-Walla Valley ; but as to whether she will rival other points above in controlling mining trade is questionable in my mind. Int. 11. — Has not the main business transacted at Wallula heretofore been with the southern mines and the valley of Walla-Walla ; and does it not owe to that chiefly its present position ? Ans. — It does. Int. 12. — Can either of these places you have spoken of rival it in the trade of the southern mines or Walla- Walla Valley? Ans. — No. Int. 13. — Are there not good grazing lands on the hills 227 south of the Walla-Walla river, and within two or three miles of the old fort ? Ans. — There is good grazing on the plateau and hill sides, on the south side of the Walla-Walla river, within about three miles of the old fort ; more than two miles ; about three miles. Int. 14. — Are there not agricultural lands for farming pur- poses along the valley of the Walla-Walla river, which flows into the Columbia river, a short distance south of the old fort ? Ans. — No, sir ; there is a small piece of bottom-land, forty or fifty acres, two miles and a- half from the fort up the river, and som further bottom-land, a little higher up, in detached pieces. Int. 15. — Do you know as to the price of the old store at Wallula? -4/^?. — I think at one time $150 a month was paid for the store. Int. 16. — At the time you were at Fort Colvile, in 1859, was or was there not a stockade around the buildings of the fort? Ans. — Not around all the buildings ; there was some stock- ade ; cannot say how much. Inf. 17. — Where did you stop when in the Colvile Valley? Ans. — At the military post, about 12 or 14 miles from Fort Colvile. Int. 18. — How often were you at Fort Colvile when in the valley ? Ans. — I made two special visits to the fort, and was there an entire day each tin . Int. 19. — At the times of your visit there, did you give a particular examination to the building at the fort? Ans. — I gave no further examination than natural curiosity, under the circumstances, would induce one to give. Int. 20. — What was that examination? Ans. — The gentleman in charge of the post went with me, and an officer of the army, round the post and surroundings, explaining in a general way the character of the operations. ■ :!' if " il. ■ I" i I'll ki liii ■I i i 'i ill! ilj^:' 228 Inl. 21. — Did these buildings face outwardly or inwardly upon as((uare in the centre? Ann. — I cannot answer that question distinctly. There were some old buildings detached from the main building. Jilt. 22. — Do you remember whether the stockade of which you have spoken extended on three sides? Ans. — I can't say. Saw evidences of there having been a stockade. //(/. 2;>. — Was there an open place in the centre, surrounded hy buildings? Ans. — I don't remember such. J71I. 24. — Do you remember a large frame dwelling-house, about .00 by 23 feet, a story and a half high, clapboarded and shingled and plastered ? > Ans. — I remember being in a house of similar dimensions ; do not recollect it as described. Int. 2.'). — Do you remember any clapboarded and shingled house there ? Ans. — I can't say that I could speak particularly of the character of the roofs. Int. 20. — If you cannot speak as to the roofs, can you say whether any building was clapboarded? Ans. — My ii ipression is, that there were some that were clapboarded. Int. 27. — Is it not a very unusual thing to clapboard any building in that country, unless it be a very valuable one? (Mr. Gushing objects to this question as too argumentative, and as ar^suming facts for the premises which do not a^jpear.) Ans. — No, sir. Int. 28. — Did you notice chimneys to these buildings ? A71S. — I cannot remember the chimneys. I saw fire-places. Int. 20. — Did you notice a store-house 60 feet by 20 ? Ans. — I was in a store-house, but did not take sufficient notice as to size. Int. 30. — Were you in or did you see any other store-house than the one you have mentioned? Ans. — I was in the attic of the building, looking at some furs, 229 but I do not know whether it was in the same building I had been in or not. Int. 31. — Do you or not recollect whether there was another store-house than the one j'ou first mentioned? Ans. — I do not remember. Int. 32. — Do you recollect a timber bastion of two stories high ? An8. — My impression is that I saw such a bastion — a vague impression. Int. 33. — Have you anything now but a vague impression of the buildings you saw there in 1859 ? Ans. — Yes, sir. I have distinct recollection of the officer's quarters and the trading-house where they were trading with the Indians; and there were some out-buildings occupied by some half-breeds and some Indians. Int. 34. — Are these the buildings you noticed, and to which your testimony already given applies ? Ans. — One of those buildings I was in. Int. 35. — You have stated, in answer to the last interroga- tory, that you were in one of these buildings, and you have also stated that you "have distinct recollection of the officers' quarters, the trading-house, and some out-buildings;" which of these buildings and out-buildings do you now mean to say that you were in Ans. — I accepted the hospitality of the officer in command of the post in the building occupied by him. I visited, with him, another building where there was trading with the In- dians, and then visited another building separate and apart, to see some half-breed Indians. AVhen I said " one of these buildings," I was alluding to the building on the lithograph. Int. 36. — Is the building in which you say you accepted the officer's hospitality the same which you before mentioned as that of the officers' quarters? Am. — Y"es. Int. 37. — Do you know whether the officers' quarters was a frame building or built of logs ? Ans. — It was a log building. Int. 38. — Was it clapboarded and shingled or not? ! 'H 'n 230 iii' I i|',, V' vm Ans. — I only remember examining the interior of the build- ing, and its general appearance outside. Int. 39. — Was it plastered inside or not? Ans. — Remember no plastering ; saw some wood-work and papering. I}it. 40. — Was there a good roof on the house or not? Arts. — From the general appearance inside, I suppose there was. Int. 41. — From the general appearance of the house inside, do you consider the house in good repair? Ans. — Very good repair, for the character of the house, and what you would call good repair for this part of the country. Int. 42. — Was the store-house you have mentioned in as good repair as the officers' quarters ? Alls. — The building was not near as well finished, and would not need as much repair. Int. 43. — Were the goods of the Company stored in the store-house of which you have been speaking ? Ans. — I know nothing about any other goods than those I saw displayed in the store-house alluded to. Int. 44. — Do not all buildings, built of squared timber, and neither clapboarded or painted, after exposure to the weather, look both worn and dilapidated? Ans. — As a general rule, they do ; but they maintain their proportion. Int. 45. — Does this lithograph you have referred to exhibit anything more than the side and rear of one of the buildings at Fort Colvile, and the out-building, shed, and stable belong- ing to it? Ans. — My recollection is that this lithograph gives a side- view of one of the main buildings, out-houses attached, and stabling. Int. 46. — Is this building, the side-view of Avhich is expose;! in the lithograph, one of the buildings you have mentioned as visited or noticed by you ? Ans. — The main building to the left, in the lithograph, is the officers' quarters. 231 Int. 47. — Were or were not the officers' quarters and store- Louse built of square timber ? Aiu. — The logs had been faced ; I cannot recollect whether they had been squared or not. Int. 48. — State what position, relatively, the valleys of Col- vile and Walla- Walla bear to the country east of the Cascade Range and the mining regions, and their relative value to the surrounding country as agricultural and farming sections. Ans. — Walla-Walla and Colvile Valleys are the only two agricultural districts east of the Cascade Mountains in Wash- ington Territory; Colvile Valley bears the same relation to the northern mines in British Columbia that Walla-Walla Valley does to the southern mines in Idaho Territory. Int. 49. — IIow does the value of the agricultural lands of these two valleys compare with the value of lands in the coun- try there and east of the Cascade and west of the Bitter-Root and Rocky Mountains? Ans. — Walla-Walla and Colvile Valleys embrace the only two large bodies of agricultural or valuable lands east of the Cascade Mountains in Washington Territory ; other lands in the same district of country are available for grazing pur- poses alone. Int. 50. — Are you acquainted with the prices of transport- ation on the Columbia river and in the interior, prior to the gold excitement? Also state what was the price per ton of freight from Portland to old Walla-Walla, and what would have been a fair price for freight, at the rates then charging per pound, from old Walla-Walla to Fort Boise? Ans. — Yes, sir. The price of freight per ton from Portland to old Walla- Walla was from ^120 to $130, and a fair charge of freight from old Walla- Walla to Fort Boise would be 20 cents per pound. Direct Examination Resumed. Int. 1. — Are there any rocks or stones in the neighborhood of Fort Colvile, as marble, sandstone, quartz, or any other? !i '1 232 f'A lli. '■ is; ■.ii 11^ Ann. — I observed nothing but some limestone. The lime- stone was from 12 to 15 miles from Fort Colvilc. Int. 2. — Wliat is the character or nature of the earth about FortColvile? Ana. — Some santly loam, and a good deal of gravel, called gravelly land. Int. 3. — Did you notice any quartz rocks there, on the banks of the river ? Ans. — I did i.ot observe any, and none have been discovered to my knowledge. Int. 4. — Is it inferable, because of a house being clap- boarded, that it necessarily follows that the house is an ex- pensive one or intended for expensive uses? Ans. — Quite the reverse. Int. 5. — You said you had some impression of seeing a bas- tion at Fort Colvile ; was the thing of which you thus speak a large projecting mass of earth or masonry at the angle of a fortified work, which is the definition of a bastion in the dictionary before me? Ans. — No, sir. Int. 6. — Did you see any guns mounted on that or any other fortifi'^ation at Fort Colvile, or any port-holes for guns? Ans. — No, sir. Int. 7.- -What, so far as you recollect, was the particular thing at Fort Colvile dignified in the cross-interrogatory by the name of bastion ? Ans. — It was what on the frontier is called a small block- house, built of logs, and capable of containing six or eight men, for defence against Indians. Int. 8. — When, in the course of the cross-examination, you spoke of the agricultural capabilities) of the valleys of the Colvile and the Walla- Walla, did you or not intend that word agricultural as implying tillage only ? Ans. — I meant tillable land only. Int. 9. — From your knowledge of land and its uses, do you or not say that land may well be profitably used in grazing as in tillage? Ans. — Yes, sir. 233 Int. 10. — What proportion, in your judgment, a«< convorsnnt with the ])iirchiisc and wale of land, of the surface of Wash- ington Territory lias passed into the hands of private pro- prietors ? uiitH. — Not over one-thousandth part. Int. 11. — What is the present population of Washington Territory, as estimated at the present time? Ans, — About twenty thousand. Int. 12. — What, in your estimation, is the extent of surface of land in the Colvile Valley? Ans. — About three hundred square miles. Int. 13. — What is, at this time, the price per acre of land of average quality, for mere agricultural purposes, in the valley of the Colvile? Ans. — Value of land there is entirely estimated by the amount of improvements on it? Int. 14. — If unimproved, has it any marketable value per acre; and, if so, how much? Ans. — Not aware that it has above government price, there ,eing so much subject to public entry. Int. 15. — What is the superficial extent of the land of the valley of the Walla-Walla? Ans. — About a thousand square miles. Int. 16. — What is the value per acre of the average land, for agricultural use, in the valley of the Walla- Walla? Ans. — From $5 to ^20 per acre, owing to the character of the lands and the improvements. Int. 17. — If the land be wholly unimproved, what is its market value? • Ans. — Except a few choice localities, not above government price. Int. 18. — Is there or not a river named Walla- Walla, from which the valley derives its name? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 19. — At what distance from the old English post of Walla-Walla is the town of Walla- Walla, and hew is it situated relatively to it? Ans. — The town of Walla- Walla is situated fn the centre of the valley, 30 miles distant from the old English post. m Ill '. , ■; I.-' I. II:! ill 234 /w^ 20.— Is the United States post of Walla- Walla in the same place as the Hudson's Lay Company's post ; and if not, how far off? • Ans. — No, sir; it is about thirty miles distant, in the inte- rior, one mile from the town of Walla, Walla. Int. 21. — How does the river Walla- Walla run, relatively to the Columbia? A71S. — The Walla-Walla river, in its course from the Blue Mountain to where it empties into the Columbia, makes a right angle with the course of the Columbia, below the mouth of Snake river, which also flows into the Columbia. The Blue Mountain is on the south side of the Columbia. From the point where the Walla-Walla enters the Columbia, the course of the Columbia is nearly east and west, and that of the Walla-Walla from south to north. Int. 22. — Is Wallula the name of a river, or a landij g only ? An8. — Tiie name of a steamboat landing only. I7it. 23. — How is this landing situated relatively to the Walla-Walla and tl-e Columbia rivers ? Ans. — It is situated in the angle made by the two rivers, and about half a mile above the mouth of the Walla- Walla river. Int. 24. — Whon you first saw this landing-place, in 1859, was there any wharf, pier, jetty, or other such structure at the landing-place ? Ans. — Nothing of the kind, either then or since. Int. 25. — Was it or not simply the bank of the river in its natural state ? Ans. — Yes, sir. I)it. 26. — Was there at that time any enclosure of this land- ing, either above or below, or any other sign of private ap- propriation? Ans. — None whatever. Int. 26 n5. — Has any wharf been co'^iStructed or placed there since ; and if so, of what character, and by whom ? Ans. — There has been no improvement made of that character. The Government has a wharf-boat moored there. Int. 27. — In the last cross-interrogatory there is question of freight from Portland to old Walla-Walla, and from old 235 Walla- Walla to Fort Boise, "prior to the gold excitement;" what year do you intend by that? Ans. — I allude to the years 1858 and 1850; ISo'J, more particularly. Int. 28. — State particularly what freigh': you speak of from Portland to old Walla-Walla, how much of such freight there was, by whom transported, and where landed, and what your means of knowledge were on that whole subject. Ans. — Quartermasters' and Indian Department freight, of goods belonging to the Government. The amount Avas very limited, sufficient only to employ one small steamboat, making weekly trips from the Des Chutes to Wallula. The sstcamboat was private property, belonging to Thompson, Coe >!c Co. Freight was landed at Wallula, the most of it, but a portion was carried above, up Snake river. My knowledge on the subject is derived from my having made shipments as Indian agent. Int. 20. — What amount of freight at that time, bv whom transported, and on whose account, went from old Walla- Walla to Fort Boise ? Ans. — I know of none being transported there until after the d iscovery oi rold. Int. 30. — Please explain what you intended by stating, in answer to the cross-interrogatory No. 50, that freight would be twenty cents per pound from old Walla-Walla to Fort Boise, when it now appears that no goods were transported. Ans. — I meant that that would be about a reasonable price if there had b )on goods to be transported at that time, based on the prices of transportation and labor since that time. Int. 31. — By Avhat route, and in what manner, would such freight have been conveyed from old Walla- Walla lu Fort Boise ? Ans. — It would be transported across the mountai.i.i upon what is called the old emigrant road, the road made bv the first emigrants that came into Oregon. It could bo trans- ported on pack animals, or in wagons. Lit. 32. — You have stated that your estimation of what such freigiit would be, if it had existed, is founded on know- is. m t !'*i l:!:i 236 ledge of the prices since 1859. Are the prices the same as before 1859 ; and if not, in Avhat respect do they differ ? A)is. — Prices have been reduced since, owing to competition and the large amount of freight to be transported. In 1859, the amount of freight to be transported was so limited there were no persons engaged in land transportation. Int. 33. — As to transportation from above the Dalles to old Walla- Walla, how does the price of freight, since 1859, range as compared with the price at that time? Am. — It is greatly reduced, having been as low as $20 a ton, when there were opposition boats running. Int. 34. — Since 1859, how many boats, and how many times in the course of a year, touch at Wallula ? Ans. — The number of boats gradually increased, first making semi-weekly and tri-weekly trips to Wallula, and for the last two or three years making daily trips, except a por- tion of the winter season, when the water would be very low, scarcity of business, or ice in the river. Int. 35. — State whether or not, within your knowledge as a shipper, or otherwise within your knowledge, any person or company has claimed dockage, wharfage, or tolls of any sort, on account of boats touching at the so-called landing of Wal- lula. Anfi. — I have no knowledge of anything of the kind. Int. 36. — Describe by name and locality the landing-places referred to, in the cross-examination, as existing above Wal- lula. Ans. — White Bluffs is about 60 miles above, on the Colum- bia river; Palouse Rapids about the same distance up the Snake river ; Lewiston about 160 miles up Snake river ; these places arc in an easterly direction from Wallula. Int. 37. — Relatively to the business of the northern mines, how far does competition exist belween the four landing-places of Lewiston, White Bluffs, Palouse Rapids, and Wallula? Ans. — Nearly all the freight for the northern mines goes above Wallula to the three points named. Int. 38. — Whether or not, below Wallula, there is a landing- place at Umatilla, and how far, relatively to the southern 237 mines, there is actual or possible competition between Uma- tilla and AYallula ? Ans. — Umatilla has competed so successfully as to obtain the greater share of the trade of the southern mines. Int. 39. — From your knowledge of the progress of settlement of the new States and Territories, and of the rise and growth of settlements on rivers, whether or not the growtli of such settlements depends more or less on the combination between natural advantages of locality and the enterprise of individ- uals ? (Mr. liander objects to this question as rssuming facts, and being argumentative.) Ans. — Of course. Int. 40. — Whether or not the value of landing-places and town-sites on the rivers in Washington Territory is more or less prospective and speculative? Ans. — It is. Int. 41. — You state in cross-examination that a mile square, at old Walla-Walla, lias become valuable since 1859, because of the landing. State Avhat portion of the mile square, having the old fort for its centre, has thus been raised in value. Ans. — That portion in the vicinity of the old fort that has been built upon. The building of the trading-housc< estab- lished the landing there. Int. 42. — Who were the persons carrying on trade at that point? Ans. — I am only personally acquainted with a few; I sup- pose there are twenty or thirty persons engaged in different branches of trade. Int. 43. — So far as you know, are they not private individ- uals, engaged in their own business. Ans. — They are. Int. 44. — What proportion of the mile square, having the old fort for its centre, is occupied by the buildings of these traders ? Ans. — About 80 acres. Int. 45. — What, in your judgment, is the average value of the residue of the mile square per acre? 238 Ansi. — It has no value, except a speculative one. Inf. 4<5. — Has the Hudson's Bay Companj', to your knowl- edge, any enclosures on this mile square, other than the site which the structures of the fort occupy ? Ans. — None. Inf. 47. — You stated in cross-examination that at one time $150 a month store- rent had been paid. State how long time, by whom, and to whom. Aniii. — It was in 18(52 or 1803, during the first mining ex- citement ; I understood from Mr. Tatem that he and his part- ner wore then receiving that rent ; I was not ac(|uainted with the party occup^'ing the building and paj ing it ; I have no knowledge of the length of time stores rented. Int. 48. — What is the present rent for similar storage ? Ann. — I would suppose about $50 a month. Inf. 49. — What would have been the rent prior to 1862 ? Ans:. — There was so little business done there then, there was no fixed value. Int. 50. — What are the dimensions and capacity of storage of the building or buildings which you rate at $50 a month? An$. — A store-room, in a business locality, of from 60 to 80 feet by 25 or 30. lit. 51. — Do you now speak of a particular store-room, or store-rooms in general? Ans. — I speak of store-rooms in general, at business points in that coun- -y. Int. 52. — Of what material would such a store-room as you speak of be constructed? Ans. — Of wood, generally. I)tt. 53. — What would be the cost of construction of such a building ? J».>.— About $2,500. Int. 54. — In the cross-examination, you spoke of a forty-acre lot, of tillable quality land, about two and a half miles from old Fort W^alla-Walla. How much good tillage land is there in those intervening two and a half miles? Ans. — There is none at all. . (.1 Ni; 239 Cross- Examination Resumed. Int. 1. — Are not the square buildings, of two stories high, erected at the corners of stockaded forts, in such a manner as to command by the fire from them one or two sides of a stock- ade, usually called and understood to be bastions in Washing- ton Territory and the Indian country of the United States ? (Mr. Gushing objects to the question, because the witness is not a military expert.) Ans. — Usually called bastions, sometimes block-houses. Int. 2. — You have spoken, in answer to interrogatory 13, as to the value of land for mere agricultural purposes iu Colvile Valley. Do you mean to include in the term agricultural both grazing and tillage lands ? . Ans. — I can't say that I do. Int. 3. — Do you wish to be understood as saying that at the present time there is no difference in value in the Colvile Valley, between land capable of tillage and that suitable only for pasturage? Ans. — In the Colvile Valley proper there is but little dif- ference. Int. 4. — When were you last in the Colvile Valley ? Ans. — Late in the fall of 1859. Int. 5. — Can you answer, as to your own knowledge, any- thing as to the value of land in Colvile Valley, since 18G0, per acre ? Ans. — I can only speak of my intercourse, business rela- tions, with residents of the valley. Int. 6. — With how many of them have you talked, in refer- ence to the value of the land, since 1860 ? Ans. — Have had repeated conversations, I suppose, with fifteen or twenty of the early settlers there. Int. 7. — When was the last conversation you had with any person in reference to the value of land in Colvile Valley, and who was it ? Ans. — With H. P. Isaacs and Mr. Lasiter, of Walla- Walla, \M !■ M'^ 240 ■'H'm li : I !. *'! i'? ir. §■■ ^' Ml last February ; Mr. Isaacs being the owner of a farm in that valley. Int. 8. — Have you ever had any conversation with any one with reference to the value of lands immediately around the Hudson's Bay Company's Fort at Colvile, and claimed by them? Ans. — I cannot now remember having had any special con- versation with reference to those lands. Int. 9. — Have not your conversations been with reference to lands lying around and near the United States post in Col- vile Valley ? Ans. — My conversations were generally about the improved lands, most of which are in the vicinity of the post. Int. 10. — Have there been any United States surveys ex- tended over Colvile Valley ? Ans. — None, unless made during last summer, since my absence. Int. 11. — Where there are no surveys, and no title in case of sale of lands, does the vendor transfer or convey anything but a mere possession ? Ans — He does not. Int. 12. — Have you, then, in what you have stated in refer- ence to the value of land around the United States military post in Colvile Valley, had any reference to the value of lands to which a title could be had ? Ans. — All the inhabitants in Colvile expect to perfect their titles under the Government by purchase, under the pre- emption laws. Int. 13. — Do you wish to be understood as saying that a man who sells his possession of land ever expects to obtain a title from the United States? (Mr. Cushing objects to the question, inasmuch as it puts words into the witness's mouth which he has never uttered.) Ans. — I don't exactly understand the question. Int. 14. — Do you understand the difference between a squat- ter upon land, and one who owns and can make title to it ? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 15. — Does the fact that the vendor being in possession 241 and able to make a good title make any difference in the price of the land which he occupies and the land equally good and ■well situated occupied by a s(|uatter? A71S. — There would be a difference ; in some localities, very great ; and in others, very little. Int. 15 a. — Do you know whether or no the Indian title to lands in the Colvile Valley has been extinguished so as to open them to settlement ? Arts. — I don't know ; I don't know whether they made any treaties last summer or not. Int. 10. — Do 3''ou not know that there are no lands i?ubject to public entry, at Government price, in the Colvile Valley, at the present ti/ne, or during the last few years ? Ans. — There was none at the time I left Walla- Walla ; but the citizens of Colvile Valley liave been anticipating every year, for three years past, being able to perfect their titles. Inf. 17. — Do you not know good tillable lands have been sold in the Walla- Walla Valley for .$50 per acre ? Ans. — Have known farms to be sold, with the improvements, at th?t price, including dwelling-house, out-houses, barns, and fencing, 160 acres in the tract. Several acres sold at this price. They had fine buildings for tlia.t country. Int. 18. — V^ould not any good land, unimproved, in the valley of the Walla-Walla, capable of tillage, be worth at the present time from $10 to $20 per acre? Ans. — No, sir. Int. 19. — How much is such land worth? Ans. — It would be difficult for me to put an estimate on unimproved lands. Int. 20. — Was there any wharf, wharf-boat, or jetty at Umatilla landing, when you were there last? Ans. — There was a Avharf-boat only. Int. 21. — When were you last at White Bluffs? Ans. — It has been three or four years. Int. 22. — Was there any wharf, wharf-boat, or jetty at White Bluffs when you were there ? Ans. — No. 16 H n -I"! ';! ■'i.tliiri' 242 Int. 23. — Was there any hcuse at White Bluffs when you were there ? A )!.<<. — No. Int. 24. — Was tlicre any wharf, wharf-boat, jetty, or any house at Palouse Landing, Avhcn you saw it last? Ans. — There Avas one house only. Int. 25. — AVhat was the size of that house, and by whom was it built? A71S. — I do not remember the size; I am under the impres- sion that the house had been built by the proprietors of the ferrv. ft/ Int. 20. — Was it anything else but a small log-house? Ans. — It was more than that. • Int. 27.— What was it ? Ans. — A frame building, with considerable storage room, freight being frequently stored there. Int. 2(S. — In estimating the cost of transportation of freight from old Fort Walla-Walla to Fort Boise, did you not take into consideration the price paid by you for transportation by land, at the time you speak of, from old Walla- Walla to the Indian agency at LapAvai ? Ans. — I did. Lapwai is twelve miles above the point where the Koos-koo-ski or Clear Water empties into the Snake river, beinff on the Koos-koo-ski or Clear Water. Int. 21). — What did you pay per pound for transportation? Ans. — Six cents. Int. 30. — Is not Wallula the only landing, of those you have mentioned, on the Columbia and the Snake, that has a productive country back of it ? Avs. — Umatilla landing has a small amount of productive country back of it, but not in the immediate vicinity of it. But there is no point compares with Walla-Walla in that respect. Int. CI. — Do not unoccupied lots, in new towns, that bear a speculative value, have an absolute value and a price asked for them? .rl«».— Not always. 243 Examination-in- Chief Resumed. Int. 1. — At the close of your first cross-examination by Mr. Lander, he put a question to you which he prefatorily intro- duced by stating that it was new matter, namely, cross- interrogatories 48 and 49, in which inquiry was made of you how the value of the valleys of Colville and Walla- Walla, as agricultural and farming sections, compared with the value of lands in the country east of the Cascades and west of the Bitter Root and Rocky Mountains, as to which you made answer. Have you any personal knowledge of the country west of the valley of the Columbia river in the region of Fort Colvile (assuming that to be the region you designate as the Colvile Valley) and the country intervening between that valley and the Cascade Mountains, 'so as to enable you, from personal observation, to compare the lands of one of those regions with the lands of the other? Ans. — I could not, from personal observation, compare the two regions, not having visited the region between Colvile Valley and the Cascade Mountains. Int. 2. — Have you any personal knowledge of the whole region of country between the Colvile Valley and the Bitter Root Mountains, so as to enable you to speak, from personal knowledge, as to the character of the lands in all that region ? Ans. — My knowledge of that portion of the country alluded to, from personal observation, is very limited. Have roda over it very hastily. I7it. 3. — Please to state what portion of the country between the mouth of the Walla-Walla on the south. Fort Colvile on the north, the Columbia river on the west, and the Rocky Mountains on the east, you have personally observed, so as to be able to state, by absolute exclusion, that in all that vast region east of the Colville and Walla-Walla valleys, no agricultural or farming lands exist, and grazing alone? (Mr. Lander objects to the question, because it puts words into the witness's mouth, and because the witness has not stated that there was no such land in th ) section of country spoken of.) 244 M'^' f ;^ . ■ (Mv. Cusliing adheres to his question because, although it docs not profess, as the objection implies, to repeat any words of the witnoss, yet it does apply to his statcmen'. in answer to cross-interrogatory 49, that the " Walla- Walla and Colvilo Valleys embrace the only two large bodies of agricultural or valuable lands east of the Cascade Mountains in Washington Territory," and adds "other lands in the same district of country are available for grazing purposes alone.'') (Mr. Lander renews his objection to the interrogatory, on the further ground that the witness has said nothing of a country west of the Ilocky Mountains alone, but of a country west of the Bitter Root and Rocky jNIountains, and of no country whatsoever lying east of the Bitter Root Mountains.) (The Commissioners' attention is respectfully called to the fact that Mr. Lander, in the 49th cross-interrogatory, calls for comparison of the Colvile and Walla- Walla Valleys as to the whole region east of the Cascades and west of the Bitter Root and Ilocky Mountains. If the Bitter Root and Rocky Mountains are identical, and represent one and the same line of longitude, then his objection is pertinent; but if there be any space of territory east of the Bitter Root Mountains and west of the Rocky Mountains, then that territory is compre- hended by his interrogatory, and by the answer of the wit- ness, and is a fit subject of explanation.) Ans. — I have no personal knowledge of the country lying between the Bitter Root and Rocky Mountains, but have trav- elled over the balance of the country designiied, but never gave any special attention to lands except in the Colvile and Walla- Walla Valleys and the Nez Perc<5s reservation. Int. 4. — What do you understand by the Bitter Root Moun- tains ? Is it a ridge or a dispersed body of mountains ? If a ridge, does it run north and south or east and west; and if it be a ridge, where is its point of commencement, and where does it end ; and what relation, if any, have they to the Bitter Root river? Ans. — They are a separate and distinct range of mountains; it runs in a northwardly and southerly direction; it begins* near 48th parallel; they have been called by early explorers 245 spurs of the Rocky Mountains. The Bitter Root river flows through the Bitter Root Valley, which lies between the Bitter Root Mountains and the Rocky Mountains. Int. fi. — Assuming, as you state, that the Bitter Root Moun- tains commence at the 48th parallel, near Lake I'end-Oreille, how far south does the range extend? A718. — I should think between three or four hundrcfl miles. Int. 6. — That is to say, some five or six degrees of latitude southwardly? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 7. — In all this region of four hundred miles in length, what proportion of the land have you seen with your own eyes, so as to determine its quality for use? Ans. — I have seen scarcely any south of the 4Gth parallel, and none east of the Bitter Root Mountains. Int. 8. — How much have you seen of the tract within the large westwardly bend of the Columbia river, between the mouth of the Walla- Walla and the mouth of the Spokane ? Ans. — I have travelled across it, in difl'erent directions, two or three times. Int. 9. — How much have you seen of the country on the upper waters of the Pelouse and the Spokane rivers ? Ans. — I never made but one trip across that part of the country. A. J. Cain. Examination of A. J. Cain resumed hy consent. Int. 1. — Have you any knowledge concerning the use of bateaux for transportation on the upper waters of the Colum- bia river ? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 2. — Have you or not transported goods, or caused them to be transported, by such bateaux ? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 3. — At what time, and in what capacity ? Ans. — In the year 1860 I acted in the capacity of Indian agent for Washington Territory. 24G :;; f" Mil I"' . U'nii l! ,1 I ;j;, im ;""!'! Jnt. 4, — Is or is not the transportation of goods by bateaux still continued on the upper waters of the Columbia? Ahx. — No, sir; all the transportation is by steamboat. Jnt. /j. — State, if you know, why transportation by steamers has taken the place of transportation by bateaux. An8. — Transportation by steamboat is so much cheaper. I built five four-ton bateaux in 1800, for the purpose of trans- porting Indian Department goods from the Des Chutes to Lap- wai, on the [Nez] Perce reservation, under the belief that I could save in transportation, but the experiment was a failure, so far as economy was conceriicd. I sold the bateaux, and shipped by steamboat and wagon. I employed Indians ex- clusively, with the exception of one white man. I employed Indians because it was cheaper. Int. 6. — State whether or not, during your knowledge of that part of the country, there has been any impediment to prevent anybody — the Hudson's Bay Company, or anybody else — from transporting goods by bateaux on that river, apart from the question of expense. Arts. — I am satisfied there has not, as there are a nnmber of persons, besides the Oregon Steam Navigation Company, engaged in transportation from Portland to the Upper Colum- bia and Snake river. Int. 7. — State, if you know, whether or not the steamers plying on the Upper Columbia have any special privileges as such. Ans. — None that I am aware of, except being able to com- mand a large capital. Int. 8. — State, if you know, whether or not these steamers are common carriers, taking all such lawful freight as offers. Ans. — They are common carriers, and take all lawful freight offered. Int. 9. — Have you any knowledge of the portages in that region .'' Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 10. — State, if you know, whether any of those portages are or have been obstructed. Ans. — The portages on the Washington Territory side of 247 the Columbia river have never been obstructed. I am not familiar Avitli the Oregon side, on the Lower Columbia; but the portages of the Upper Columbia, on both sides, both Ore- gon and Washington, have never been obstructed. Cro88-U.rnni inntion. Int. 1. — Are there any steamboats running on the upper waters of the Columbia, on that stretch of the river, of about one hundred and twenty miles, between White Blufl's and Fort Colvile? Ana. — No, sir. Int. 2. — At the time you speak of, at which you constructed bateaux, for the purpose of transportation, what did you pay per ton for transportation by steamer from the Des Chutes to Wallulp. ; and what per pound for land transportation, from Wallula to Lapwai ? Ans. — My recollection is about ^75 a ton, by measurement, from the Des Chutes to old Fort Walla-Walla. I paid six cents per pou)iLl, for land transportation, from old Fort Walla- Walla to Lapv, ;ii. ^ Int. 3. — Was this, at the time y©u speak of, in the former part of your examination, as being before the gold excitement? Ans. — Yes; prior to the gold excitement. Int. 4. — Has not the Oregon Steam Navigation Company, to whom the steamers plying on the Upper Columbia belong, control and ownership, through the stockholders of the rail- roads at the Cascade Portage, on both sides of the river, and of the only railroad at the Dalles portage? Ans. — Members of that Company claim the ownership of the land on the Oregon side of the Cascade Portage, but never had any exclusive control on the Washington side, beyond the control of the railroad built by themselves. Int. 5. — Does not the railroad, on the Washington side o^ the Cascade Portage, obstruct the landing of freight at some stages of the water ? Ans. — Yes, sir. Int. 6. — Is not the whole of the land on the Cascade Port- 'I' . M* ' i .'V-v'l 248 ago, including' the landings claimed by donation or pre- emption claimants, under the laws of the United States, and as United States military reservations, the only privilege granted through these lands being a right of way b^ the rail- road and a wagon road ? Alls. — Yes, sir. Int. 7. — Can goods be transported r.p the Columbia river, without passing over these different portages ? Ans. — No, sir. Examination-in- Chief Resumed. Int. 1. — Are not the three railroads, of which you have spoken, one at the Dalles, and two at the Cascades, public railroads for the transportation of passengers and freight ? Ans. — They are. Int. 2. — Is there not a wagon road at these portages ? Ans. — Yes ; there is a wagon road on each side of the river at the Cascades, as I know, having been over it. The one on the AVashington side has always been a public highway. There is also a wagon road at the Dalles Postage, which is a public highway. ' Int. 3. — Whether or not the means of transportation across these portages, for wagons or pack animals, or for the backs of men, are as good as they were prior to the construction of those railroads? Ans. — They are, in fact, better. Int. 4. — Whether or no<; any person may not now pass those portages with pack-animals or a pack on his back ? Ans. — I know that they can on the Washington Territory side. Int. 5. — You spoke of i landing at the Casc"des being oc- cupied by the railroad ; whether or not there are other land- ings there ? And if so, what ? Ans. — Another landing could be made just below or just above. 249 Cross-Examitiation Itcsumed. Int. 1. — Is tliere now, or can there bi obtaineil, a landing on the Wasliington Territory side of the Cascade Portage, which is not now or would not liave to ho located on the land of some private person, or of a corporation, or on the Unitcm ation-in- (Jliief. Int. 1. — Was not this a public railroad, chartered by the Legislature? Ans. — The Company built the road under a charter from the Washington Territory Legislature, with provisions similar to usual railroud charters. Int. 2. — Do you mean to be understood as stating, in an- swer to the two last previous cross-interrogatories, that the officers of the railroad unlawfully, and in violation of their charter, excluded freight therefrom? Ans. — No, sir. Int. 3. — Have you any knowledge of any freight having been excluded from that railroad by its officers? Ans. — 1 have not. 251 Int. 4. — State, if you know, for what reason, on the occasion or occasions of which you speak, such freight not being ex- cluded from the railroad was transported by wagons. (Objected to by Mr. Lander as assuming the facts that freiglit was excluded, when the witness merely stated that he personally did not know of any exclusion.) (Mr. Cushing adheres to the question, because its object is to disprove an influence which the cross-interrogatories in- tended to iiliply contrary to the fact.) Ans. — U:.3 of the owners of the Peoples' Line informed me they shipped their freight over the wagon road in order to se- cure a sufficient sympathy and influence to obtain a charter for another road, thus demonstrating one road was insufficient to do the business. Cross-Examinatio n Ilesum ed. Int. 1. — Have you not heard other reasons, given in con- versations, for the course adopted by the Peoples' Line? (Mr. Cushing objects to this question as incompetent, and- as out of time.) Ans. — None ofher than the Oregon Steam Navigation Com- pany, when there »vas a rush of business, would send their own freight over the railroad first. A. J. Cain. Washington, D. C, December 19, 18G6. Claim of the Hudson s Bay Company against the United States. Deposition of George W. Slioemahcr, taken at the request and in behalf of the United States, by agreement between Caleb Cushing, on behalf of the United States, and Ed- ward Lander, on behalf of the Hudson's Bay Company. Testimony of George W. Shoemaker. Int. 1. — Please to state your name at length, your place of abode, and your official capacity, if any. Ans. — George W. Shoemaker; at present in the city of Vi' I-: 1 >"■- ■'■III i\-. >n\ 'Hc: :i''' t •■ ' ' 7 ^" ■l^.. ■ ' ; i ■ ■ pl^' B;,i!i . *■ m i •' 'irM , '.ifi,':ii! '^KW:i 252 Philadelphia ; I am in no business at present ; have been in the Quartermaster's Department, and .^ince that, been farm- ing. I was farming in Walla-Walla Valley several years. Int. 2. — Please to state during what years you were in the Walla-Walla Valley. Ans. — I went there in 1858, and left there in 18G4. Int. 3. — Whether or not you had charge at anv time of the sutler's store at new Walla-Walla, and h.ad teams running to and from the landing at old Walla-Walla? Ans. — I did have charge of the sutler's store, and had teams running as in((uired of. Int. 4. — State, if you know, at what time, and under what circumstances, the landing-place at old Walla-Walla came to be called Wallula. Ans. — I think it was in 1862 that J. M. Van Syckle christ- ened it Wallula. He was the government transportation agent stationed at old Fort Walla-Walla, also afterwards steamer agent — express agent. Int. 5. — When Van Syck'e went there, were the buildings of the old fort occupied by anybody? Ans. — About that time occupied as an embarcadera by a few persons engaged in transporting goods up the Columbia river, and also some Indians were there fishing for salmon. Int. 6. — State, if you know, whether there was any apparent occupation of the buildings by the Hudson's Bay Company or its agents. Ans. — None, to the best of my knowledge. Int. 7. — State, if you know, whether Van Syckle settled there in local business, and whether the same proved profitable or not. Ans. — He kept a store, general grocery, of supplies; proved profitable at that time, under the gold excitement. Van Syckle's exertions caused Wallula to be an important place. After the gold excitement died out, business declined, until Umatilla sprung into existence some twenty-odd miles below on the Columbia river, which turned the trade from Wallula, and Van Syckle became a ruined man. Int. 8. — How many buildings were constructed there at the been in ;n farm- irs. c in the c of the ming to 253 landing during the period of its prosperity or before, and what is their present condition? Aiis. — Some twenty-five or thirty; of Avhicli the principal building was constructed by Mr. Van Syckle and his partner Tatem; the other buildings were what is commonly called bal- loon frames, with one or two exceptions, being very cheap structures, the cheapest known to carpenters, and some of them part or wholly of canvas. After Mr. Yiiu Syckle became embarrassed, the place went down; nearly all the buildings ceased to be occupied, or to have any value as buildings, and a number of them were torn down and the materials sold for 'umber. One building was sold to the Government for a store- house. Int. 0. — Tlease to state the condition and apparent value of the old buildings of the Hudson's Bay Company there. Aiis. — The whole place Avas in a dilapidated condition ; the buildings were built of adobes. At the time I saw the old buildings, they were worth from $500 to $1,000, provided any- body Avantcd them. Ltt. 10. — State what means of personal knowledge you have concerning these buildings, and whether or not, by profession or experience, you are a judge of the value of the buildings. Ans. — My l)usinoss called me there for several years. Be- ing a house builder and carpenter by trade, I consider myself a judge of the value of buildings. Jnf. 11. — Please to state whether those buildings, as they stood when you first saw them, were or were not capable of any beneficial use. ^ Ans. — None of them tenantable. Int. 12. — Whether or not was the landing-place enclosed in, or the open beach or bank of the river? Ans. — No enclosure; open beach and bank of the river, com- mon to all. lid. lo. — "What trade now stops at "Wallula? Ans. — The California Steam Navigation Company and some sail vessels touch there, on their way up the river ; also, a stage line runs there, in connection with the steamers, and teams Hi 1 m 254 " : ' r ' •■': ' .'^,'' flip ■I, 5, .-JS :.:s'l:. •V ,,; li'"' 111' '' 111 ! 11' haul up tlio valley. Most of the goods of the trade there are for the Walla-WaHa Valley. Ivt. 14. — In addition to Umatilla, below Wallula, is there any place or places above, which have affected, by competi- tion, the business at Wallula? Ans. — The town of Lewiston has. It has taken all the upper trade from it. Int. 15. — Arc all the supplies for the valley of the Walla- Walla, through the whole j'ear, landed at Wallula, or are they conveyed partly by some other route? Ans. — They are conveyed to a great extent by another route. That route is overland from the Dalles city. Int. 10. — At the time of your last being at Wallula, what persons were doing local business there, if any, and what kind of business ? Ans. — I do not remember their names. There are two houses selling goods there — small stocks, small retail busi- ness — and one person selling bad whiskey. There had been a hotel there, but it was being closed up for want of business. Int. 17. — Have you personal knowledge of the quality of the land at and around old Walla- Walla; and, if so, what are your means of knowledge, either by observation or by prac- tical experience? And, if so, state the same. Ans. — I have such knowledge. My means of knowledge were by observation and practical experience in farming and teaming. For several miles around old Fort Walla- Walla, it is nothing but sand, rocks, and alkaline bottom-lands, and of no value for farming or grazing. The bottom-lands are sub- ject to overflow, which prevents the cultivation of the few acies that might otherwise be cultivated. Int. 18. — Who is the nearest settler to old Fort Walla- Walla ? Ans. — A man by the name of Pambrill, about two and a half to three miles up the Walla-Walla river ; and he does not live by farming, but by fish or game and teaming. Int. 19. — Please to state what you know regarding the Hud- son's Bay Company's farm. Ans. — It is about 18 or 20 miles from old Fort Walla- Walla, 255 up the river, on the east side. I do not know tlic extent of it; it is immediately west of the Whitman farm ; it is called the Protestant Mission. Int. 20. — What was the value of the said farm wiien you first saw it, and now? Ans. — Cannot form any idea, not knowing the boumlaries. Int. 21. — Whether or not the farms in that region have any value, independently of actual occupation and improvement'.'' Alls. — Very little, if any. Int. 22. — State, if you know, what has been the chief cause of value to Wallula, and to cultivation in the valley of the Walla-Walla. Ans. — The establishment of the Government post in Walla- Walla Valley. The post created the town of Walla- Walla, and in order to draw settlers there, for the supply of the post, it became necessary for the officers of the Government to en- courage settlers to come there by the supply of seeds and other proper means, including, in some cases, farming implements and teams, which obviated the necessity of bringing grain from Vancouver at great expense to the Government. Tiie families there previously were half-breed families, or Cana- dians, or others, and those, not many in number, sent there for trapping in former years, and who did not cultivate the land, except in little garden spots, affording no surplus. Cross-Examination. Int. 1. — When did you leave Wallula? Ans. — In November, 18G4, and have not been there since. Int. 2. — During the summer of 18G4, were you engaged in the sutler's store at the military post in Walla-Walla Valley? Ans. — I was. Int. 3. — Was that your business all the time you remained in the valley of the Walla-Walla? Ans. — No. I was there two years and ten months in that business; then farming for several years, in person. Int. 4. — Where were you farming? Ans. — On the west line of the Government military post. 25G iHi ,' '*! i :! f.'ii m Int. ''). — AVcro you on your own farm, or farming for others? An». — On my own farm. Int. (3. — Arc you still the owner of that farm, or have you sold it ? Ana. — I lijive sold it. Inf. 7. — Wa- it land you had entered and paid for? Anx. — Y(',«. Inf. 8. — J low much did you sell your land for ? AnK. — Twenty-six hundred dollars — with the improvements and sonic fuinifure and farming implements. Inf. !.'. — Is it your opinion that you obtained a fair pi ice for your farm? Ana. — 1 think I did, for the time I sold it. Inf. 10. — l>id not Van Syckle or others repair and occupy a portion of the Hudson's Bay Company's old fort, "Walla- Walla? Ans. — Yes. Int. 11. — At what time did the gold excitement go down? Ans. — The Salmon river and Oro-Fino gold excitement died out in spring of 1802 or 'G3. Inf. 12. — Were there not, in the spring and summer of 1863, a large numher of passengers and a great deal of freight landee you have mentioned? Ans: — No other time. Int. 8. — What do you mean by personal information, other than what you saw in 1852 and 1855? Ans. — Information derived from others; one of whom, Mr. Sinclair, was an officer of the Company — the agent at Fort Hall in 1853 and 1855. Int. 9. — Did you go out upon the range at either time that you were at Fort Hall ? Alls. — I did not go out upon any special range; I passed up the river bottom from the emigrants' trail to the fort: and, in 1855, I passed up the bottoms, between one and two uiiles, to Mr. McArthur's trading, p^st then crossed the river, above the fort. Int. 10. — In making- your valuatioTi of the land and l)uild- ings at Fort Boise, how much land did you include as belong- ing to tiio Company ? Ans. — I did not include any specific amount of land, as it was nearly all a sage plain, and of no comparative value. Int. 11. — Have you not seen sage plains cultivated by means of irrigation ? Ann. — I have seen them so cultivated. Int. 12. — What length of time were you at Fort Boi^e, at your different visits, and at what seasons of the year ? ■n] [j i i s :il ■'i '[4 264 Ans. — I was at Fort Boise about one clay each in 1852 and 1853; and in 1855 I was there three or four, and I may have been five, days. George B. Simpson, Late Add'l Paymaster U. S. A. Washington City, D. C, December 21, 1806. '':i| t^l^li ii J District op Columbia, \ County of Washingon. j I, Nicliolas Callan, a notary public in and for the county and District aforesaid, do hereby certify that the foregoing depositions, hereunto annexed, of Robert J. Atkinson, George Clinton Gardner, Marcus A. Reno, Lewis S. Thompson, A. J. Cain, George W. Shoemaker, and George B. Simpson, wit- nesses produced by and on behalf of the United States in the matter of the claims of the Hudson's Bay Company against the same, now pending before the British and American Joint Commission for the adjustment of the same, were taken before me at the office of said Commission, No. 355 H street north, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, and reduced to writing, under my direction, by a person agreed upon by Caleb Gushing, Esq., attorney for the United States, and Edward Lander, Esq., attorney for said Company, beginning on the 6th day of August, 1866, and ending on the 21st day of December, 1866, (excepting the resumed examination of George Clinton Gardner, which was commenced on the 28d April and concluded on the 30th April, 1867,) according to th -^veral dates appended to the several depositions, when they were signed respectively. I furthe?^ certify that to each of said witnesses, before his examination, I administered the following oath : " You swear that the evidence you shall give in the matter of the claim of the Hudson's Bay Company against the United States of America shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the timth, so help you God." And that, after the same was reduced to writing, the depo- 266 sition of each witness was carefully read and then signed by ln'm. I further certify that Caleb Gushing, and Edward Lander, Esqs., were personally present during the examination and cross-exam aation of all of said witnesses, and the reading and signing of their depositions. Witness my hand and notarial seal this 19th uay of June, [L. s.] A. D. 18G7. N. Callan, 'Notary Public. „j.. ill f V*- wmm M nil • . Hi* BRITISH AND AMERICAN JOINT COMMISSION CN THE HUDSON'S BAY AND PUGET'S SOUND AGRICUL- TURAL COMPANIES' CLAIM. In the matter of the Claim of the Hudson's Bay Company vs. The United States. 'i Ji'iii Deposition of Major General Philip H. Sheridan, a witness sworn and examined in the city of New Orleans, in the State of Louisiana, by virtue of the commission hereto annexed, issued by the Honorable John Rose and the Honorable S. Johnson, commissioners, to me, the under- signed commissioner, directed, for the examination of the said witness, in the matter of the claim of the Hudson's Bay Company against the United States of America. Testimony of Philip H. Sheridan. Philip H. Sheridan, Major General in the Army of the United States, now on duty at the city of New Orleans, a witness produced on the part and behalf of the United States, being first by me, said commissioner, duly and solemnly sworn, pursuant to the directions hereto also annexed, in answer to the interrogations and cross-interrogations propounded to him in the matter aforesaid, deposeth and says as folioAvs, to Avit : Ans. 1. — To the first interrogatory he saith: Major General Philip H. Sheridan, United States Army; city of New Orleans, State of Louisiana. Ans. 2. — To the second interrogatory he saith: I w-^s in Washington Territory from about the 1st of Octobci-, I800, until some time in May, 185G. During this period I was on the expedition against the Lakina Indians, and stationed, for 267 short intcrv f V*' I ''1 III.;! ii In the matter of the Claim of the Hudson s Bay Company afjainst the United States of America. To James Graliam, Commissioner, New Orleans, Andrew Hero, Jr., Notary Public, New Orleans, or any other person duly authorized to take depositions in the State of Louis- iana : Know ye, that in confidence of your prudence and fidelity, you have been appointed, and by these presents you, or any one of you, is invested Avith full power and authority to examine Major General Piiilip H. Sheridan, on his corporal oath, as a witness in the above-entitled cause, upon the interrogations annexed to this Commission on the part of the United States, and the cross-interrogatories thereto annexed by the Hudson's Bay Company. Therefore, you are hereby required, that you, or either of you, at certain days and places, to be appointed by you for that purpose, do require the said Major General Philip H. Sheridan to come before you, and then and there examine him on oath on said interrogatories, and reduce the same to writ- 271 ing, in conformity with instructions hereto annexed. And when the said deposition shall have been completed, you will return the same, annexed to this writ, closed up under your seal, and addressed, by mail, to George Gibbs, Esq., Clerk of said Commission, at the office thereof, in the city of Wash- ington. Witness: Alexander S. Johnsox, Comnmsioner. John Rose, Com. for Great Britain. INSTRUCTIONS. BRITI.^II AND AMERICAN JOINT COMMISSION ON HUDSON'S BAY AND rUGET'S SOUND AGRICULTURAL COMDANIES" CLAIMS. In the matter of the Claim of the Hudson's Bay Company against the United States of America. Instructions for the Execution of the Commission. The deposition may be preceded by the following heading: "Deposition of , a witness sworn and examined in the city of New Orleans, in the State of Louisiana, by virtue of this Commission, issued by the Honorable John Rose and the Honorable Alexander S. Johnson, Commission- ers, to me directed, for the examination of a witness in the matter of the claim of the Hudson's Bay Company against the United States of America." The Commissioner then calls the witness before him, and administers to him the following oath, namely : "You swear that the evidence you shall give in the matter of the claim of the Hudson's Bay Company against the United States of America shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God." The witness having been thus sworn, the evidence given by him will be reduced to writing, thus : ''''Philip H, Sheridan^ Major General in the Army of the i \\ m * • f!| 1 pi lili 4i mn •I: ^' ■'w-affl ^■: M 272 United States, now on duty at the city of New Oidcans, a wit- ness produced on the part and behalf of the United States, in answer to tlic following interrogatories and cross-interrog- atories, deposeth and says as follows :" When the deposition of the witness is concluded, he must suh.scribe his name thereto. The deposition, with all documents and papers, if any, accompanying the same, will be returned before the Commis- sioners with all convenient diligence. Attest : George Gibbs, Clei'k. :^dii In the matter of the claims of the Hudson's Bay Company, now pcndiny before the British and American Joint Commission on the Claims of the Hudson's Bay and Puyefs Sound Agricultural Companies against the United States. Interrogatories to be addressed, on behalf of the United States, to Major General Philip H. Sheridan, now stationed at New Orleans, in the State of Louisiana. Ques. 1. — What is your name, place of residence, and pres- ent occupation? Ques. 2. — Have you ever resided in Washington Territory; if yea, where and when, and for how long a period? Ques. 3. — Are you acquainted with the post in Washington Territory, called Vancouver, that was formerly occupied by the Hudson's Bay Company? If yea, will you please to de- scribe the same, as it was, when it came under your personal observation, giving, as fully as you can, the number and char- acter of the buildings and improvements which were in the possession of the Company, and the extent of land which was occupied by them, and the nature of their occupation. Ques. 4. — What, in your judgment, was the value of the buildings and improvements at that post, which were claimed and occupied by the Company, at the time that you had an opportunity to observe them ? Ques. 5. — Have you any knowledge of any other matter which may affect the claims of the Hudson's Bay Company r 278 against the Unitoil States? If yea, please to state the same as fully as if you were specially interrogated in relation thereto, C. Cusiiixa, Counsel for the United States. In the matter of claims of the Hudson's Bay Companif now jjendint/ before the Britinh and American Joint Commission on the Claims of the Hudson's Baij and PujieCs Sound Aijrieultural Companies against th'. United States. €ross-intcrrogatories to be addressed, on behalf of the Hud- son's Bay Company, to Major General Philip II. Sheri- daji, now stationed at New Orleans, in the State of Lou- isiana. Ques. 1. — During the time you were stationed at Fort Van- couver, was there not an Indian war going on in Washington Territory? Ques. 2. — Did you at any time give a particular examina- tion to the Hudson's Bay Company's fort at Vancouver, with a view to ascertain the number and condition of the buildings, so far as regarded decay and repair or necessity for it? Ques. 3. — Is not any knowledge you may have of those buildings and their condition derived from your casual obser- vations made while going in or out of the fort for business, or on visits to the officers of the Company? Ques. 4. — Can you give the number of buildings inside the fort in 1856, stating how many of them were store-houses, how many were dwelling-houses, how many small shops, what the size of the largest dwelling-house was, what that of the smallest? If so, please give the answer in the order in which the questions are put. Ques. 6. — How many buildings were there outside the fort or stockade? Ques. G. — If you have placed any value on those buildings, you will please state whether you have any experience in 18 H '?' 1' 11 4\ ■ ■ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) />.*^!^ K^ ur ^^ ^ 1.0 1.1 £ ta IIP u M v-^mm < 6" » Photographic Sdmces Corporation 3>^ <^ ^. 23 WK/ MAIN STMIT Wn»TCII,N.Y. 14Str v\ '^i whether you remembered it to have embodied a part of Mr. Drayton's report. Ana. — I did use it, and firmly believe it to be true, both in facts and circumstances. (The above question and answer objected to as incompetent.) Int. 48. — Whether or no you detached Lieutenant Johnson, an officer under your command, to visit Forts Okanagan, Col- ville, and other places, and gave him these orders, and others: "Your inquiries at posts and forts will lead to much informa- tion of the country, with capabilities, productions, climate, soil, &c. ; they will particularly embrace the following, viz : How long ih^ posts or forts have been occupied; state of fur trade in tl^e interior; number of forts established; where, and among what tribes." Ans. — I did. (The above question and answer objected to as incompetent and irrelevant.) Int. 49. — Whether or no Lieutenant Johnson visited Forts Okanagan and Colville and officially reported to you what he saAv and learned there, and whether he is now alive. Ans. — He did ; he visited those forts in obedience to his orders, and made his report, including note-books, maps, and surveys, to me. He has been dead some six or seven years. (The above question and answer objected to as incompetent and irrelevant.) Int. 50. — Whether or no you used this language in your re- port : " Okanagan is situated on a poor, flat, sandy rock, about two miles above the junction of the river of that name with the Columbia. It is a square, picketed in the same manner as those already described, but destitute of bastions; and re- 285 movctl sixty (GO) yards from tho Columbia, within the pickets, there is a large house for the reception of tho Cnmpany'H offi- cers, consisting of several apartments, and from each end of it two rows of low mud huts run towards tho entrance. These serve as offices, and dwellings for tho trappers and their fami- lies. In the centre is an open space. Besides tho care of the barges for navigating tho river, and the horses for the land journey to the northern posts, they collect here what skins they can. Tho country affords about eighty beaver skins during the year, the price of which is usually twenty charges of powder and ball. Some bear, marten, and other skins are also obtained, for which the prices vary, and it appears to bo the practice of the Company to buy all the skins that uva brought in, in order to encourage the Indians to procure thoLi. At this post they have some goats and (35) thirty-live Iioad of very fine cattle, which produce abundance of milk and '• tter. The soil is too p^'^r Cor farming operations, and only a few potatoes are grown." Ans. — I did. (Above question and answer objected to as incompetent.) Ifit. 51. — Whether or no you now remembei that, in the words just quoted, you embraced a part of Lieutenant John- son's official report to you? Ans. — I do remember it, and believe the facts and circum- stances therein stated to- be accurate and true. (Above question and answer objected to, as incompetent and irrelevant.) Int. 52. — Whether or not you used this language in your report: "The largest stream passed was one near Colvile, on which the Hudson's Bay Company have their grist-mill. Within two miles of the fort, the house of the Company's storekeeper was passed. Lieutenant Johnson having reached Fort Colvile with his party, it Avas determined that they should spend three days there. Fort Colvile is situated on the east bank of the Columbia river, just above the Kettle Falls. In this place, the river, pent up by the obstructions below, ha. formed a lateral channel, which nearly encircles a level tract of land containing about two hundred acres of rich soil. Of this peninsuk about f I 286 one hundred and thirty r ores are in cultivation, and bear crops composed chiefly of wheat, barley, and potatoes. Fort Col- vile, like all the other posts of the Hudson's Bay Company, is surrounded by high pickets with bastions, forming a formidable defensive work against the Indians. Within the pickets all the dwellings and storehouses of the Company are enclosed. At Colvile the number of beaver skins purchased is but small, and the packs which accrue annually from it and its two out- posts, Kootanay and Flatheads, with the purchases made by a person who travels through the Flathead country, amount only to forty, (40,) including the bear and wolf skins. Muskrats, martens, and foxes arc the kinds most numerous in this neigh- borhood. The outposts above mentioned are in charge of a Canadian trader, who received his outfit from Colvile." J./ V. — I did. (Above question and answer objected to as incompetent.) Lit- 53. — Whether or no you remember that in the words just quoted you embodied a part of Lieutenant Johnson's offi- cial report to you? Ans. — I remember that I did embody part of his report, and believe the facts cited to be true. (Question and answer objected to as incompetent and irrele- vant.) Int. .54. — AVhether or no you detached Lieutenant Emmons, an officer under your command, and gave him this order and others: " Should you visit any of the forts or stations of the honorable Hudson's Bay Company, you will procure every information relative to them, together with that of any mis- sionaries;" and whether or no he officially reported to you what he saw and learned in regard to FortUmpqua? Ans. — I did give him those instructions; and he made a full official report. Int. 55. — Whether or no you used this language in your report? Fort Umpqua was, like all those built in this coun- try, enclosed by a tall line of pickets, with bastions at diag- onal corners. It is about two hundred (200) feet square, and is situated more than one hundred and fifty (150) yards from the river, upon an extensive plain. It is garrisoned by five 287 men, two women, and nine dogs, and contains a dwelling for the superintendent, as well as storehouses, and some smaller buildings for the officer's and servants' apartments? Ans. — I did. Int. 50. — Whether or no you now remember that in the words just quoted, you embodied a part of Lieutenant Em- mons's othcial report to you? Ans. — I remember that I d,id embody a part of his report in the words quoted, and believe the facts and circumstances related to be true. (All the above questions relating to Lieutenant Emmons and the language relative to the Umpqua post, and the answers thereto, objected to as incompetent and irrelevant.) Int. 57. — Whether or no you used this language in your report in reference to the tract of country known as Van- couver's Island, Washington Territory, and Oregon : "I satis- fied myself that the accounts given of the depopulation of this country are not exaggerated, for places were pointed out to me where dwelt whole tribes that have bden entirely swept off, and during the time of the greatest mortality the shores of the river were strewed Avith the dead and dying. This disease occurs, it is said, semi-annually, and in the case of foreigners it is more mild at each succeeding attack. Owing to the above causes, the population is much less than I ex- pected to find it. I made every exertion to obtain correct information. The whole Territory may be considered as con- taining about (20,000) twenty thousand Indians ; and this from a careful revision of the data obtained by myself and some of the officers I am satisfied is rather above than under the truth. The whites and half-breeds are between seven and eight hundred." Ans. — I did; and now remember it to have been derived from the best authority. (The above question and answer objected to as incompetent.) Int. 58. — Whether or no you used this language in your report: "At Vancouver I was again kindly made welcome by Dr. McLoughlin, Mr. Douglas, and the officers of the establishment. During my absence, Mr. Peter Ogden, chief I n 11. I it I I 288 factor cf the northern district, had arrived with his brigade. Mr. Ogden had been (32) thirty-two years in this country, and consequently possesses much information respecting it, having travelled nearly all over it. Furs are very plenty in the northern region, and are purchased at low prices from the Indians. His return this year was valued at ($100,000) one hundred thousand dollars, and this he informed me was much less than the usual amount. On the other hand, the southern section of this country, I was here informed, was scarcely worth the expense of an outlay for a party of trappers." Ans. — I did. (The above question and an ,vcr objected to as incompetent.) Int. 59. — Whether or no you now remember the language just quoted, and declare the same to be true ? Ans. — I do. (Question and answer objected to as incompetent.) Int. GO. — Whether or no you used this language in your report: "The trade and operations of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany are extensive, and the expense with which they are attended is very great. I am inclined to think that it is hardly possible for any one to form an exact estimate of the amount of profit they derive from their business on the west side of the mountains. The stock of the Company certainly pays a large dividend ; and it is asserted that, in addition, a very considerable surplus has been accumulated to meet any emer- gency; yet it may be questioned whether their trade in Ore- gon Territory yields any profit, although it is now conducted at much less cost tl>an formerly. This diminution of cost arises from the fact that a great part of the provisions are now raised in the country, by the labor of their own servants. The value of all the furs obtained on this coast does not ex- ceed forty thousand (^40,000) pounds annually; and when the costs of keeping up their posts, and a marine composed of four ships and a steamer, is taken into account, and allowances made for losses, interest, and insurance, little surplus can be left for distribution. I am, indeed, persuaded that the pro- ceeds of their business will not long exceed their expenses, even if they do so at present. The statement of the Com- 289 pany's affairs presents no criterion by which to judge of the successor their business on the Northwest 'coast. I learned that it was the general impression among the officers that such has been the falling off in the trade that it does not now much more than pay the expenses." Aiis. — I did. (Question and answer objected to as incompetent.) Jilt. 61. — Whether or no you now remember the. language just quoted, and declare the same to be true ? Ans. — I do. (Question ard answer objected to as incompetent.) Int. G2. — What opportunities did you have for learning the value of the trade of the Hudson's Bay Company ? Ans. — I had a great many opportunities of learning, in conversation, and eliciting opinions, in relation to the then value, as well as future prospects, of the trade in furs and peltries obtained, the modes of trapping, fitting out, disci- pline, and operations at their various posts, the times and sea- sons best suited for the conveyance of the articles dealt in, both by land and water, and also information in regard to the climate, and the character and numbers, and intercourse with the Indians. Also, the emigration from the States, and the condition in which the parties arrived in the Territory, together with the routes most practicable through the Rocky Mountains. (Question and answer objected to as incompetent.) Int. 63. — What do you mean by the southern section of this countr}'? Ans. — The section south of [the] 49° parallel. ■1 * ^i Cross-Examination, Int. 1. — How many buildings and out-buildings were there at Astoria ? Ans. — I think about five (5.) Int. 2. — How many of these were main buildings, and how many out-buildings? Ans. — I think there was one main building; Birnie's head- quarters had two rooms. 19 H m m in . ifil lii 290 Int. 3. — How many sheds were there? A71S. — I should like to know the definition of a ftJtcd. Int. 4. — Have you not stated and caused to bo published in the year 1850 the following about the post at Astoria: "Half a dozen log houses, with as many sheds, and a pig-stye or two, are all that it can boast of." Ans. — It was published in 1845. The paragraph alluded to was descriptive of the famous Astoria as it first met my e\c in the morning after my arrival, and it is accurate as a de- scriptive view of it embraced in the landscape. lilt. 5. — In estimating the cost of buildings at Astoria, did you make your estimate of their cost at the time you saw them from their then appearance or not ? Ans. — Having given my estimate of their cost in the direct examination, I make the same answer I did then. Int. G. — Do vou now say that the cost of those buildings at the time of their erection was five or six hundred dollars? Ans. — I do not knoAV when they were erected, but I say that they ought not to have cost more than that. Int. 7. — What is the value to the United States of a position on which a light-house can be Greeted, and a fortification built, commanding to some extent the entrance of one of the largest rivers within its domain? Ans. — I think it is of no value to the United States, but of great value to the commercial world, if a light-house is needed there. I am of the opinion, and always have been so, from the knowledge I have of the Columbia river and its approaches, that where the light-house is placed it is useless. Its proper position should have been on the top of the cape, solely for the purpose of indicating the position of the. cape to vessels approaching at night. No light-house can bo of any service for any vessels entering the Columbia river at night. For that reason I deem it useless where I understand it has been placed. Int. 8. — Was there any settlement or clearing whatever at any place on the right bank of the Cowlitz when you were there? Ans. — No, sir. 291 Int. 9.— Did you notice, within two miles of the place you called Champoeg and described as low prairie, any higher ground on the same bank of the river? Ans. — Yes, sir, I did. The low prairie terminates a short dis- tance below the sandspit of Champoeg. There the rocky ledge rises some fifteen hundred (1,500) feet in height, and continues on the other side of the river, and back on the same side, ex- tending down the river some fifteen miles, to where the Willa- mette river falls abruptly some fifteen or twenty feet. All this tract with rocky ledges is unsuitable for cultivation. Above Champoeg, on the right bank of the Willamette river, the lower prairie extends a long distance, some four or five miles in width : thence it rises to a second, and finally to the upper prairie. Int. 10. — You have estimated the cost of the erection of the fort at Vancouver and the accompanying buildings. Do you know the date when they were built, the cost of labor at the time, the value of the materials, or the danger from Indians to be guarded against ? Ans. — I do not know the time the buildings or the pickets of the lower fort were put up. The building of the original forts on the second steppes is alleged to have been in 1825, at which time it is deemed that no establishment could be erected on the lower prairie, on account of its overflow. It was subsequently built, and the estimate I have formed of the cost of the buildings is derived from information given me by Dr. McLoughlin, Sir George Simpson, Mr. Ogden, and Mr. Douglas, who described to me the facility and speed with which such buildings could be constructed; likewise the quan- tity of lumber and the materials used in the construction. At the time of ' i building, and from the nature of its pickets, without defences, it was evident that all apprehension from attacks of Indians had passed. Int. 11. — How long did you stop at the saw-mill and grist- mill at the time you say the water had backed up so as to affect the running of the mill ? Ans. — I suppose I was there some three hours; ample time to inspect the whole establishment, and to take lunch. i I ' I , 11 H 292 Int. 12.— Did you ever visit and inspect these mills at any- other time, and is all your personal knowledge from observa- tion derived from the visit you have described in your last answer 'i Ans. — No, sir ; I think I rode out there several times during my stay. Int. 13. — Were these rides you have mentioned taken at the time of your first or second visit to Vancouver ? Ans. — My second visit. Jnt. 14. — At the time of your second visit to Vancouver what was the stage of the water in the Columbia river ? Ans. — It was much lower than at the first. Int. lo. — Could the mills you have spoken of, the saw and grist-mills, have been built without the aid of experienced or skilled workmen and millwrights ? Ans. — I think they could with an intelligent superintendent. Int. 16. — Do you suppose that the person who superintended the erection of those mills and their machinery could give a more accurate statement of their cost than you could from your inspection of them? Ans. — He might in a few particulars, but generally I think not. Int. 17. — Were not the materials used in this saw-mill better than what are used in most buildings, so that in few indeed can such materials be seen ? Ans. — No, sir; economical construction of both saw and grist-mills requires strong framing, on a good, strong founda- tion. The husk frames that support the stones require special attention. I have spoken of this mill a& being constructed of good timber, but it was apparent to me that it had been badly located, on several accounts, and the gang of saws was indis- putable evidence of the paucity of stream. On account of the want of water for any duration of time, it was necessary to have it speedily done. The presence of the blacksmith shop at that locality was, in my mind, a proof that repairs are fre- quently required, and promptly to be made, in order to insure no loss of time by the advance of the season. Int. 18. — Have you not, in speaking of this mill, made this 293 statement, and caused it to be published, in the year 1845, as follows: "It is remarkably well built. In few buildings in- deed can such materials be seen as are here used? " Ans. — Yes, sir, I have. I will add now that the buildings themselves have very little more to do with the mill than the watch-case has with the works. Int. 19. — Is not the smith's shop you have mentioned a large one; and is it not used for the manufacture of axes and hatchets for trappers, at the rate of from twenty-five to fifty per day ? Ans. — So I was then told, and believed so. Int. 20. — Were you not surprised at seeing the celerity with which these axes were made? Ans. — I might have been. Int. 21. — Have you not once positively stated that you were so surprised at this celerity ? Ans. — I probably have so stated in my book. Int. 22. — At what time did you visit the Dairy Farm, on the Callapuyas, [Cathlapootl,] in company with one of its officers, at your first or second visit to the post ? Ans. — I think I must have visited it at both times. Int. 23. — Did you ride through the woods, or through the open prairies on your way ? Am. — Both. Int. 24. — Did not the high water compel you to go through the woods, at the time you rode there, on your first visit to Vancouver ? Ans. — Yes, sir ; we went through the woods, and through prairies on the verge. Int. 25. — Is not the Callapuya also called the Cathlapootl ? Ans. — I presume it is ; I did not know of it until this ex- amination. Int. 26. — At which visit to the Callapuyas [Cathlapootl] farms did you see the large herds of cattle feeding and re- posing? Ans. — At my first visit. Int. 27. — At the time you visited Callapuyas, or Cathla- 294 pootl farm, was there not a dairy establishment, managed by a Canadian and his wife? Aus. — So I was told. Int. 28. — Have you not stated, and is it not printed, as follows : *' And at the dairy we were regaled with most ex- cellent milk, and found the whole establishment well managed by a Canadian and his wife?" An)i. — I have so stated in my report of the expedition published by the Government. Int. 20. — You have stated that you were at Vancouver, at your first visit, for eight or ten days. Will you state, as near as you can, the date of your arrival at Vancouver, and the date of your departure? Ans. — I got there first about the last of May, and left on the 4th day of June, for the Willamette Valley ; got back the 12th, and left again on the 17th of June. I call all this one visit, and my first visit. Int. 30. — At what time did you return at your second visit, and how long did you remain ? Ans. — I returned about the first of September, and re- mained several weeks. Int. 31. — What difference was there in the height of the water in the river, between the time you arrived there on the last of May, and when you left there on the 4th of June? Ans. — The river was rising, and was higher on the 4th of June, than when I first arrived. Int. 32. — Had it began to fall when you returned from the Willamette ? Ans. — It was higher when I left, on the 17th of June, than at any time during my first visit. Int. 33. — Does the Columbia river overflow its banks any- where, except in the lower prairie, and does it rise anywhere, except on the lower parts of the prairie? Ans. — I don't know that it overflows its bank anywhere, but the percolation causes all its own, and the backwaters of its tributaries, to set back and submerge the lower grounds. Int. 34. — Have you not stated, in speaking of the Columbia 295 and its rise, and the effect on the prairie, that the water rises on the low parts of the prairie ? Aiis, — I liave so stated. Int. 3o. — Did you not see in the granary of the Company, wheat, flour, barley, and buckwheat? Ans. — Yes; but I do not know that they came from the farm. lut. 30. — At the time you were at Vancouver, did you see any bulls, of the English breed of cattle ? Ana. — I think I saw one or two. Int. 37. — Do you not know that a milch cow sold in the Willamette Valley about the time you were there for sixty (60) dollars? Ans. — Yes; the enhanced price was owing to the great diffi- culty in breaking the wild cattle to milch cattle. Int. 38. — Do you not consider the situation of Vancouver favorable for agricultural purposes, and have you not so stated? Ans. — I think I have not so stated, nor do I consider its value to consist in agricultural purposes. Int. 39. — Have you not stated in a report purporting to be written by you after a certain exploration, and published, that the situation of Vancouver is favorable for agricultural pur- poses ? Ars. — I think not, sir; on the contrary, I think I have given reasons why it is not so. Lit. 40. — Is not Vancouver at the head of navigation for sea-going vessels on the Columbia river? Ans. — I've said that it may be so considered, but vessels go above it /ibout forty miles, to the foot of the Cascades. \_Addition to the answer to cross-interrogatory 39. — I find on examination that I made this statement, but it has reference to the mile square around Vancouver.] Int. 41. — Can a vessel drawing fourteen feet of water reach Vancouver at the lowest state of the river ? Ans. — Yes, I think she can ; indeed I may say I know she can. Int. 42. — Is not Vancouver the most eligible site on the • n m n 'III! I ■ I Hij llllit ||||| lill wIIh' iI 1 ^Ulni i mn 296 river for the building up of a commercial town when the coun- try should become populated ? Ans. — As far as my opinion goes I think it is. Int. 43. — Have you not stated that "Vancouver is a large manufacturing, agricultural, and commercial depot; and also that the Company's establishment at Vancouver is upon an extensive scale, and is worthy of the vast interest of which it is the centre?" Atis. — I have, or words to that effect. Those remarks are to be confined to the operations of the Company, to its wants and business. It is not to be understood as embracing a gen- eral view of manufactures and trade relative to commerce. Int. 44. — When did you see the Columbia river at its lowest stage? Ans. — In the latter part of September. Int. 45. — Did you visit the Callapuyas or Cathlapootl farm in the latter part of September? Ans. — It strikes mo that I did. Int. 46. — State, if you can, w^hcther there is not a lake, or a series of "lakes, at low water, extending from a point two or three miles below Vancouver nearly to Cathlapootl. Ai}S. — The whole country within a mile and a half of Van- couver westward, has the appearance of a low, marshy ground, such as the retiring of the Columbia floods would present. Int. 47. — Did you, or did you not, observe any collection or collections of water between the points described in the former question at the time specified? Ans. — The Callapuyas or Cathlapootl creek might be traced to some distance by large spaces of water lying on either side of it as far as the eye could reach. Int. 48. — Did you witness the Columbia at its greatest and least heights? Ans. — From the accounts I received from creditable wit- nesses, I do not believe that I saw it either at one or the other. Int. 49. — Have you not stated, in a report made after your visit to Columbia river in 1841, and published, that " I wit- nessed the Columbia at its greatest and least heights?" Ans. — If I did so, it was with reference to the time of my 297 visit. I could not have intcnfled those words to apply to all times and all seasons, for I had the most reliable information from Mr. Ogden and Mr Birnie, that the Colunil»ia had swept over even the site of the present Fort Vancouver. This circum- stance, when there, I should have deemed almost impossible. About two miles below Fort Murrier, at the mouth of the lower Willamette, there is a bar, which at times I've been informed has less than ten (10) feet of water on it in the lowest stages of the water. (The portion of this answer of the witness stated upon in- formation objected to.) Int. 50. — What section of country did you mean, when, in speaking of the number of cattle in it, you stated that there were upwards of (10,000) ten thousand cattle in 1841. Was it, or was it not, the Willamette Valley? Ans. — It was not, as regards the Willamette Valley. It was most probably intended for the whole country as far as 54° 40', and derived from most reliable information. Int. 51. — What country do the parties which trap on their way go to from Vancouver, and return with cattle? Ans, — California. Int. 52. — Is this a country which is very well adapted to the raising of cattle and sheep? Ans. — There are plenty of cattle, no sheep in California. Int. 53. — Have you not used this language in a report made after your exploration : " This southern country, as Avill be seen from what has already been stated, is very well adapted to the raising of cattle and sheep; of the former many have been introduced by parties which trap on their way thither and return with cattle?" Ans. — Yes sir, that is stated in my report. Int. 54. — Did not Mr. Ogden bring in the furs collected from all the posts on the Columbia and its tributaries above Van- couver, including New Caledonia and Colvile? Ans. — I understood from Mr. Ogden that he had brought in all the furs from the northern posts, and doubt whether any of the posts of the southern section of the country were re- ferred to. ' 298 Int. Cn. — Was it from this statement of Mr. Ogdcn that you have stated that the southern section of the country was scarcely worth the exi)ense of an outlay of a party of trappers? Ans. — Not only from the statement of Mr. Ogdcn, but from the statonients of Dr. McLoughlin, Mr. Douglas, and Sir George Simpson; with all of whom I had frequent conversa- tions relative to the value and expense of the several post- throughout the whole country, in which they coincided very nearly in opinion. Int. AC). — Did you not understand distinctly that the south- ern section of the country was that portion of the country not included within the business control of those posts of the Company from Avhich Mr. Ogden brought the furs, with his brigade, arriving at Vancouver in the month of June, 1841? A7\s, — From the indistinctness of the question, I can give it no definite answer. If put in a more definite form, I should bo glad to afford all the information in my power. Int. ku. — Were there any settlers at Vancouver and Fort Astoria Avhen you were there in 1841, other than the officers and employes of the Hudson's Bay Company? Ans. — I think there were a number of persons intending to settle, or who so expressed themselves to me; whether they had settled or located themselves, I've no actual knowledge. Itit. o8. — Did you, at either of your visits to Vancouver in 1841, see a single house or dwelling, of any kind whatever, belonging to or in the possession of any person other than an officer or an employe of the Hudson's Bay Company, or of some one or more of the officers or men of the vessels under your command? Ans. — I may have seen houses or shanties erected about Fort Vancouver that might have bee.i occupied by others than officers or employes of the Company. While there, I was fre- quently asked by the visitors and emigrants from the United States, what rights they had in the country, and whether or not they could choose locations on which to erect shanties and occupy land. * * Int. 50. — Was there any government in the country at the time of your visits in 1841 ? , 290 , or of under Auf. — I and-beach ; tl . bold headland on tho northwestern part of this sketch, is, ^t ]i\^M tide, an elevated island, with rocky and bluff shores; tlie first small dotted lino outside of the shore-line represents the mean low-water mark. Qiies. 9. — Will you state any particular opportunities you had for knowing the character of this point? Ans. — I was there in tho neighborhood of four months, from some time in June to some time in October, and the minute- ness of my survey necessitated a personal inspection of the entire ground. Qufis. 10. — Will you now describe the character of the cape 'i Ans. — The shore-line, with tho exception of that portion formed by sand-beaches, consists of bold, abrupt, basalt-rock, presenting, in some places, almost a perpendicular face to the sea; a sharp, high ridge, extending along the southern and western shores, from which the land slopes irregularly to the east and north ; the ground for tho most part is densely wooded, and not at all available for agricultural purposes ; there are one or two small patches, none of them of a greater area than an acre, which could bo made available as truck- gardens. Qiies. 11. — Were there any inhabitated buildings or ruins of buildings within tho limits of your survey ? Ans. — £ saw none whatever. Ques. 12. — Was there any cultivated ground within the limits of your survey ? Ans. — No. Ques. 13. — What would you estimate to be the value of the land embraced in your survey ? Ans. — I would not have given the Government price for it i! 1 '!.„,,„ ^-.. 314 and paid taxes. I can conceive of it having no value except for the timber, of which there was an abundance in this whole region much more accessible. Ques. 14. — Whether or no your party made any examina- tion with a view to locating a light-house on this cape? Ans. — Yes, sir; we did. Ques. 15. — Where did you locate it ? Ans. — On the highest point of the cape, nearest its south- ern extremity. Ques. 16. — How much land would be needed for the light- house you located ? Ans. — About from three and a half to four acres, extendino; across the cape from the selected position, to include the first cove in the height of the cape. Ques. 17. — What would be the value of this land for public purposes ? Ajis. — About the Government price. Ques. 18. — Whether or no you knew or heard of any occu- pation of this cape at the time you were there by any officers or servants of the Hudson's Bay Company? Ans. — I did not. (The portion of question 18, asking if the witness heard, ob- jected to.) Ques. 19. — Whether or not you knew of a house on this cape occupied by a man by the name of Kipling? Ans. — My memory is not clear as to names; but I did knoAv of and visited a house a few times on the inner shore north of the limits of my survey, occupied by, I believe, a half-breed, whom I also employed on one or tv/o occasions to take me across to i'oint Adams. I think he mentioned having been once in the employ of the Hudson's Bay Company ; but I am pretty clear in my recollection that he intimated, if he did not dis- tinctly assert, that he was now trading for himself. I knoAV I made purchases of him, for the Indi?,ns which I employ, and for my own men, of tobacco, and, at the time, I wa'^i clearly under the impression that it was on his own account. As I remember, his house was a log-house. My recollection as to the size of the house is crude, but I should say it was about 315 forty foet by twenty feet; it was one story high. I should say the house was worth then considerably less than one thou- sand dollars. (Interrogatory 19 objected to as incompetent, and all the ansAver thereto, and especially the statement purporting to be made by a half-breed.) Ques. 20. — Whether or no there was any cultivated ground around this house? Ans. — I don't remember. Ques. 21. — What was the character of the entrance of the Columbia river ? Ans. — It is very difficult of entrance, and at times impossi- ble. It is not, or was not at that time, ever entered at night. I have seen a continuous line of breakers from Cape Disap- pointment extending across to Point Adams. Tlie ])ar is con- tinually shifting. I surveyed Sand Island, lying between the two points of the entrance, and know that it is continually changing in position and configuration. Ques. 22. — What, in your judgment, would be the import- ance of [a] light in Cape Disappointment ? Ans. — Merely as a mark to hold your position. It is use- less to enter by, without a range on the shore of IJaker's Bay ; and the north channel, for which it would be available, is rarely used, and never at night. Adjourned to May 7. Gross- Examination hy Counsel for Company. (If this map is proposed to ' e introduced in the trial of the case, or if it has been introduced in any deposition, or the in- troduction of it, either us annexed to this deposition or any other in which it is mentioned, objected to as incompetent.) (All the testimony in legard to the bar in tlie mouth of the Columbia river object**,^ to.) Ques. ".. Are you certain of the length of the land sur- veyed by you? If so, state its greatest length, and in what direction. Ans. — About a mile long, and in a northwesterly direction. I il p : JS'EI ' i ^i|i'! ■ m *i '