ingrained in the minds of the Spanish people by long centuries of absolute rule, endeared to them in a manner by the glory of their greatest kings. But events at last compelled the adoption of more modern views, and in 1810 the revolutionary movement set in both south and north of the Isthmus, a movement which ultimately severed the vast aggregation of American provinces from the Spanish crown.

The causes of discontent in Mexico were not far to seek. In the first place it was the settled policy of the government to degrade the American born Spaniards to a position below those who came to the country from Spain. Almost all of the higher offices of state, army, and church went to Spaniards, while the creoles were forced to be content with positions of inferior honor and emolument. This manifest injustice and a system of commercial monopoly which was most grievous in its effects, especially upon the lower orders of the people, and burdensome taxation produced a feeling of discontent which at the beginning of the nineteenth century was augmented by the confiscation of some benevolent funds in which many were deeply interested.

By this time, too, there was more or less independent thought among the better classes of the native Mexican population. Education, while not universal, was widespread, and opportunities for higher instruction were furnished by the university of Mexico. The strictest literary censorship was enforced; nevertheless, the reading of French books upon social subjects could not be wholly prevented. Moreover, the examples of political liberty furnished by the American Union, and the more recently organized French Republic, encouraged the Mexicans to attempt to practise the theories instilled by the French philosophers. Added to these considerations were the facts that the Spanish monarchy was now virtually overthrown by the influence of Napoleon, and that the people of Mexico were just beginning to comprehend the economic possibilities of their own country.

The revolution broke out in the little town of Dolores in 1810, and soon spread through a large part of Mexico. The leaders were a native priest, Miguel Hidalgo, who was a reader of the proscribed books of the French philosophers, and a soldier named Allende, both men of remarkable personal qualities and earnest patriotism.

After the first skirmish a body of about five thousand of the revolutionists attacked and defeated an army under the Spanish intendant Riana, and later gained some other slight successes, so that three provinces came wholly under their control. But in January, 1811, a discouraging defeat was inflicted upon the rebels, and their cause seemed so nearly lost that they attempted to escape to the United States. The fleeing forces were captured, and the leaders

put to death.

A new leader arose and the revolutionary spirit was kept alive until 1817, when the authority of Spain was again absolutely asserted throughout the Mexican territories. It proved, however, a temporary return of despotism. In 1820, a new constitution was adopted in Spain, and another revolution occurred in Mexico, this time under the guidance of the leading general of the country-Iturbide. He overthrew the government of the viceroy, called a congress of delegates from the several provinces, and proclaimed the independent monarchy of Mexico in 1821.

Early in the next year, Iturbide was made emperor. The news was quickly carried to California and that province passed from its old allegiance into the hands of the new monarchy. The dominance of Spain on the Pacific coast, which had endured for more than three centuries, was at an end.

CHAPTER VI

EARLY PHASEs of the orEGON QUESTION

IT will be recalled that Astor's fort on the Columbia was, in 1813, transferred by his partners to the Northwest Company, and later in the same year taken possession of for the British government. When, after the War of 1812, the United States and Great Britain concluded a treaty of peace it was stipulated that: "All territory, places and possessions whatsoever, taken by either party from the other during the war, shall be restored without delay." As soon as peace was concluded Astor indicated a wish to resume the business formerly begun. The administration thereupon declared its intention of reoccupying the Columbia, and in September, 1817, Captain Biddle, with the ship Ontario, was despatched to the river with instructions to assert the claim of the United States to the adjacent country, in a friendly and peaceable manner." The British minister at Washington, Mr. Bagot, on learning of the mission of the Ontario, protested against it on behalf of his government. Astoria, he maintained, had not been captured during the war, but had been purchased by the Northwest Fur Company, while the territory itself "was early taken possession of in His Majesty's name, and had since been considered as forming part of His Majesty's dominions." This startling assertion marks the formal opening of the controversy between the two countries over the Oregon territory, which continued during almost a generation and war over which was barely averted.

་

In the correspondence upon the subject which began when the United States concluded to reoccupy Astoria, the British government finally conceded the right of the United States to occupy the old trading post pending the settlement of the question of title to the territory. An order for the restoration of the fort was accordingly issued, and on the 6th of October, 1818, Mr. J. B. Prevost, who had sailed with Biddle on the Ontario, received formal possession of the establishment at the hands of the British agents on the Columbia.

At this time, diplomatic representatives of the two countries were discussing a treaty to cover various questions relating to the two countries. One of these questions was in regard to the boundary from the Lake of the Woods to the Rocky Mountains. The British commissioners wished to settle also the boundary west of those mountains, and the Americans offered to extend the line of the forty-ninth parallel, already agreed upon as the northern boundary of the Louisiana Purchase, through to the Pacific. This offer was declined, and while the British made no definite proposition, they suggested that a line extended west on the forty-ninth parallel to the most northeasterly branch of the Columbia, and down that river to the sea, would satisfy their government.

The American administration at this time did not see fit to insist upon exclusive rights on the Columbia. In May, 1818, an invitation to submit the question to arbitration was declined, and Mr. J. Q. Adams wrote that "the minuteness of the present interests" of both parties made our government unwilling to include the Oregon question among the objects of "serious discussion." Whether or not we could have secured the line of forty-nine degrees by insisting on a settlement of the boundary, is a question that cannot be determined; but certainly the offer of that line, when the theory of the claim of the United States gave rights as far north as fifty-one degrees, must be regarded as weakening the case of the Union. Thereafter, however vigorous the

arguments to prove that the great valley belonged to America by right of discovery, exploration, and first occupation, this line would practically limit our pretensions.

The convention of October 20, 1818, terminated the negotiations of that year. It left the Oregon question open by providing for the "joint occupation" of the territory by the citizens and subjects of both nations, for a term of ten years. This provision was not to prejudice the claims that either government might have on any part of the territory in question, nor to affect the rights of other states; but was merely agreed upon "to prevent disputes and differences amongst themselves."

At the time when the provision was adopted, both Spain and Russia asserted rights of sovereignty over portions of the Northwest coast; but in 1819, the former of these powers transferred all her rights north of forty-two degrees to the United States. About a decade earlier, the Russian government had begun to put forth extravagant claims, stimulated by the Russian-American Fur Company, which wished to control the trade as far south on the coast as possible. It was at first asserted that the company's rights extended over the entire coast, to and beyond Columbia River, where at one time it had intended to found a colony. In 1821, when the charter of the Russian-American Company was renewed, the Czar issued a ukase, which asserted positively that the Russian claims extended southward to the fifty-first parallel.

Both Great Britain and the United States took official notice of the ukase. The claim was contested by the United States in negotiations begun in 1822. It was pointed out that by the company's first charter, Russia's pretensions were limited to the region north of fifty-five degrees, while the American discovery, exploration, and occupation of the Columbia gave the United States exclusive rights over the valley of that river. Finally, a treaty was signed at St. Petersburg, April 17, 1824, in which the question was settled in favor of the United States. That