"_For the first three years_ I had no cause of complaint. The interpretation was, in many cases, necessarily inefficient, and would have been sometimes a total failure, but for the kindness of the wives of the gentlemen in charge, who officiated for me; but I had the best interpreters the various posts afforded, the _supply of rum_ to Indians was restricted, and the company, I believe, fulfilled both the spirit and the letter of their agreement with us, as far as that fulfillment was then required of them, and their circ.u.mstances allowed.

"In giving, however, this favorable testimony, so far as the first three years are concerned, I must say, that in my opinion we should have been informed, before commencing our labors, that the interpreters at some of the posts would be found so inefficient as to leave us dependent on the kindness of private individuals, and reduce us to the very unpleasant necessity of taking mothers from their family duties, that they might become the only available medium for the communication of Divine truth.

"But after the period to which I have referred, a very perceptible change, _i.e._, in 1845, took place. [The company had decided to introduce the Roman Jesuits to aid them in expelling all Protestant missionaries and civilization from the Indian tribes.] There was no longer that hearty concurrence with my views, and co-operation, which had at first appeared so generally. The effect was as if the gentleman in charge of the southern department had discovered that he was expected to afford rather an external and professed a.s.sistance than a real and cordial one; and, under his influence, others, both of the gentlemen and servants, became cool and reluctant in those services of which I stood in need, until at length the letter as well us the spirit of the company's engagement with me failed." The reader will remember that while Mr. Barnley was receiving this treatment at the Hudson's Bay Company's establishment at Moose Factory, James Douglas and his a.s.sociates were combining and training the Indians in Oregon for the purpose of relieving, or, to use the language of the Jesuit De Smet, "to rescue Oregon from Protestant and American influence."

Mr. Barnley continues: "I was prohibited from entertaining to tea two persons, members of my congregation, who were about to sail for England, because I happened to occupy apartments in the officer's residence, and was told that it could not be made a rendezvous for the company's servants and their families." P. J. De Smet, S. J., on the 113th page of his book, says: "_The Canadian-French and half-breeds who inhabit the Indian territory treat all the priests who visit them with great kindness and respect._" On page 313, he says of the Hudson's Bay Company, just about this time: "In what manner can we testify our grat.i.tude in regard to the two benefactors [Douglas and Ogden] who so generously charged themselves with the care of _transporting and delivering_ to us our cases, without consenting to accept the slightest recompense?--How n.o.ble the sentiments which prompted them gratuitously to burden themselves and their boats with the charitable gifts destined by the faithful to the dest.i.tute missionaries of the Indians!" These last quotations are from letters of Jesuit missionaries, who were brought to the Indian country by this same Hudson's Bay Company, and furnished transportation and every possible facility to carry on their missions among the Indians all over the American Indian country.

These missionaries have made no attempt to improve the condition of the Indians, but have impressed upon their ignorant minds a reverence for themselves and their superst.i.tions. See Bishop Blanchet's reply to Cayuse Indians, November 4, 1847, page 44 of Brouillet's "Protestantism in Oregon;" also pages 34-5, Executive Doc. No. 38, J. Ross Browne, as given below:--

"The bishop replied that it was the pope who had sent him; that he had not sent him to take their land, but only for the purpose of saving their souls; that, however, having to live, and possessing no wealth, he had asked of them a piece of land that he could cultivate for his support; that in his country it was the faithful who maintained the priests, but that here he did not ask so much, _but only a piece of land_, and that the priests themselves would do the rest. He told them that he would not make presents to Indians, that he would give them nothing for the land he asked; that, in case they worked for him, he would pay them for their work, and no more; that he would a.s.sist them neither in plowing their lands nor in building houses, nor would he feed or clothe their children," etc.

At Moose Factory, Mr. Barnley says: "A plan which I had devised for educating and training to some acquaintance with _agriculture_ native children _was disallowed_, but permission was given me by the governor in council to collect seven or eight boys from various parts of the surrounding country, to be clothed, and at the company's expense. A proposal made for forming a small Indian village near Moose Factory _was not acceded to_; and, instead, permission only given to attempt the location of one or two old men who were no longer fit for engaging in the chase, _it being very carefully and distinctly stated by Sir George Simpson that the company would not give them even a spade toward commencing their new mode of life_. When at length a young man was found likely to prove serviceable as an interpreter, every impediment was interposed to prevent his engaging in my service, although a distinct understanding existed that neither for food nor wages would he be chargeable to the company. And the pledge that I should be at liberty to train up several boys for future usefulness, though not withdrawn, was treated as if it had never existed at all; efforts being made to produce the impression on the mind of my general superintendent that I was, most unwarrantably, expecting the company to depart from their original compact, when I attempted to add but two of the stipulated number to my household.----

"At Moose Factory, where the resources were most ample, and where was the seat of authority in the southern department of Rupert's Land, the hostility of the company (and not merely their inability to aid me, whether with convenience or inconvenience to themselves) was most manifest.

"The Indians were compelled, in opposition to their convictions and desires, to labor on the Lord's day. They were not permitted to purchase the food required on the Sabbath, that they might rest on that day while voyaging, although there was no necessity for their proceeding, and their wages would have remained the same.----

"At length, _disappointed, persecuted, myself and wife broken in spirit_, and almost ruined in const.i.tution by months of anxiety and suffering, a return to England became the only means of escaping a premature grave; and we are happy in fleeing from the _iron hand of oppression_, and bidding farewell to that which had proved to us a land of darkness and of sorrow.

"From the above statements you will perceive that if true in some cases, it is not all, that the company have furnished the 'means of conveyance from place to place.' They have not done so, at all events, in the particular case mentioned, nor would they let me have the canoe, lying idle as it was, when they knew that I was prepared to meet 'the expense.'

"And equally far from the truth is it, that the missionaries have been '_boarded, lodged, provided with interpreters and servants free of charge_.'"

In this last statement, Mr. Barnley is mistaken, for, to our certain knowledge, and according to the voluntary statement of the Roman Jesuits, Revs. Bishop Blanchet, Demer, P. J. De Smet, Brouillet, and many other Jesuit missionaries, they received from the Hudson's Bay Company _board and lodging, and were provided with interpreters_, catechist, transportation, and even houses and church buildings.

The only mistake of Mr. Barnley was, that he was either an Episcopal or Wesleyan missionary or chaplain, like Mr. Beaver, at Fort Vancouver, and he, like Mr. Beaver, was a little too conscientious as to his duties, and efforts to benefit the Indians, to suit the policy of that company.

The Roman Jesuitical religion was better adapted to their ideas of Indian traffic and morals; hence, the honorable company chose to get rid of all others, as they had done with all opposing fur traders. What was a civilized Indian worth to that company? Not half as much as a common otter or beaver skin. As to the soul of an Indian, he certainly could have no more than the gentlemen who managed the affairs of the honorable company.

CHAPTER VIII.

Pet.i.tion of Red River settlers.--Their requests, from 1 to 14.--Names.--Governor Christie's reply.--Company's reply.--Extract from minutes.--Resolutions, from 1 to 9.--Enforcing rules.--Land deed.--Its condition.--Remarks.

Before closing this subject we must explain our allusion to the Red River settlement, and in so doing ill.u.s.trate and prove beyond a doubt the settled and determined policy of that organization to crush out their own, as well as American settlements,--a most unnatural, though true position of that company. It will be seen, by the date of the doc.u.ment quoted below, that, four years previous, that company, in order to deceive the English government and people in relation to the settlement on the Columbia River, and also to diminish the number of this Red River colony, had, by direction of Sir George Simpson, sent a part of it to the Columbia department. The remaining settlers of Rupert's Land (the Selkirk settlement) began to a.s.sert their right to cultivate the soil (as per Selkirk grant), as also the right to trade with the natives, and to partic.i.p.ate in the profits of the wild animals in the country. The doc.u.ment they prepared is a curious, as well as important one, and too interesting to be omitted. It reads as follows:--

"RED RIVER SETTLEMENT,} "August 29, 1845.}

"SIR,--Having at this moment a very strong belief that we, as natives of this country, and as half-breeds, have the right to hunt furs in the Hudson's Bay Company's territories whenever we think proper, and again sell those furs to the highest bidder, likewise having a doubt that natives of this country can be prevented from trading and trafficking with one another, we would wish to have your opinion on the subject, lest we should commit ourselves by doing any thing in opposition either to the laws of England or the honorable company's privileges, and therefore lay before you, as governor of Red River settlement, a few queries, which we beg you will answer in course.

"_Query_ 1. Has a half-breed, a settler, the right to hunt furs in this country?

"2. Has a native of this country, not an Indian, a right to hunt furs?

"3. If a half-breed has the right to hunt furs, can he hire other half-breeds for the purpose of hunting furs? Can a half-breed sell his furs to any person he pleases?

"5. Is a half-breed obliged to sell his furs to the Hudson's Bay Company at whatever price the company may think proper to give him?

"6. Can a half-breed receive any furs, as a present, from an Indian, a relative of his?

"7. Can a half-breed hire any of his Indian relatives to hunt furs for him?

"8. Can a half-breed trade furs from another half-breed, in or out of the settlement?

"9. Can a half-breed trade furs from an Indian, in or out of the settlement?

"10. With regard to trading or hunting furs, have the half-breeds, or natives of European origin, any rights or privileges over Europeans?

"11. A settler, having purchased lands from Lord Selkirk, or even from the Hudson's Bay Company, without any conditions attached to them, or without having signed any bond, deed, or instrument whatever, whereby he might have willed away his right to trade furs, can he be prevented from trading furs in the settlement with settlers, or even out of the settlement?

"12. Are the limits of the settlement defined by the munic.i.p.al law, Selkirk grant, or Indian sale?

"13. If a person can not trade furs, either in or out of the settlement, can he purchase them for his own and family use, and in what quant.i.ty?

"14. Having never seen any official statements, nor known, but by report, that the Hudson's Bay Company has peculiar privileges over British subjects, natives, and half-breeds, resident in the settlement, we would wish to know what those privileges are, and the penalties attached to the infringement of the same.

"We remain your humble servants,

"JAMES SINCLAIR, ALEXIS GAULAT, BAPTIST LA ROQUE, LOUIS LETENDE DE BATOCHE, THOMAS LOGAN, WILLIAM MCMILLAN, JOHN DEASE, ANTOINE MORRAN, BAT. WILKIE, JOHN ANDERSON, JOHN VINCENT, THOMAS MCDERMOT, WILLIAM BIRD, ADALL TROTTIER, PETER GARIOCH, CHARLES HOLE, HENRY COOK, JOSEPH MONKMAN, JOHN SPENCE, BAPTIST FARMAN.

"ALEXANDER CHRISTIE, Esq., "Governor of Red River Settlement."

Governor Christie's reply to these inquiries was so mild and conciliatory that it will not add materially to our knowledge of the company to give it. But the eight rules adopted by the company in council let us into the secret soul of the _monstrosity_, and are here given, that Americans may be informed as to its secret workings, and also to show what little regard an Englishman has for any but an aristocratic or moneyed concern.

"_Extracts from minutes of a meeting of the Governor and Council of Rupert's Land, held at the Red River settlement, June 10, 1845._

"_Resolved_, 1st, That, once in every year, any British subject, if an actual resident, and not a fur trafficker, may import, whether from London or from St. Peter's, stores free of any duty now about to be imposed, on declaring truly that he has imported them at his own risk.

"2d. That, once in every year, any British subject, if qualified as before, may exempt from duty, as before, imports of the local value of ten pounds, on declaring truly that they are intended exclusively to be used by himself within Red River settlement, and have been purchased with certain specified productions or manufactures of the aforesaid settlement, exported in the same season, or by the latest vessel, at his own risk.

"3d. That once in every year, any British subject, if qualified as before, who may have personally accompanied both his exports and imports, as defined in the preceding resolution, may exempt from duty, as before, imports of the local value of fifty pounds, on declaring truly that they are either to be consumed by himself, or to be sold by himself to actual consumers within the aforesaid settlement, and have been purchased with certain specified productions or manufactures of the settlement, carried away by himself in the same season, or by the latest vessel, at his own risk.

"4th. That all other imports from the United Kingdom for the aforesaid settlement, shall, before delivery, pay at York Factory a duty of twenty per cent. on their prime cost; provided, however, that the governor of the settlement be hereby authorized to exempt from the same all such importers as may from year to year be reasonably believed by him to have neither trafficked in furs themselves, since the 8th day of December, 1844, nor enabled others to do so by illegally or improperly supplying them with trading articles of any description.

"5th. That all other imports from any part of the United States shall pay all duties payable under the provisions of 5 and 6 Vict., cap. 49, the Imperial Statute for regulating the foreign trade of the British possessions in North America; provided, however, that the governor-in-chief, or, in his absence, the president of the council, may so modify the machinery of the said act of Parliament, as to adapt the same to the circ.u.mstances of the country.

"7th. That, henceforward, no goods shall be delivered at York Factory to any but persons duly licensed to freight the same; such licenses being given only in cases in which no fur trafficker may have any interest, direct or indirect.

"8th. That any intoxicating drink, if found in a fur trafficker's possession, beyond the limits of the aforesaid settlement, may be seized and destroyed by any person on the spot.

"Whereas the intervention of middle men is alike injurious to the honorable company and to the people; it is resolved,

"9th. That, henceforward, furs shall be purchased from none but the actual hunters of the same.

"FORT GARRY, July 10, 1845."