jewett, etc.

[Mike Cleven]

At 09:52 AM 1/19/99 -0800, David Lewis wrote:
>-snip-
>Point of order - the HBC did not "own the dry", not in the formal sense of
>its tenure east of the Rockies in Rupert's Land.  The HBC had no formal
>legal rights west of the Rockies; only a persistent trading presence that
>found itself forced to share territory with other fur companies (the NWC as
>well as the Astoria Company).  It also did not assert its presence on the
>Coast until the establishment of Fort Langley; not even Nisqually was
>founded until long after the formal British occupation (and evacuation) of
>Nootka Sound (I'm not sure of the date of the founding of Nisqually, but I
>know it wasn't when Capt. Vancouver was around).  In the sense that the HBC
>was the largest trading company, and more trade routes and more employees
>and more customers, in _that_ sense they did "own" the lands away from the
>Coast; but they were not alone, and did not have legal tenure or monopoly.
>-snip-
>

<snip of full quote from HBC Charter>

>Clearly, HBC assumed ownership over all the lands they could find.

If you read it carefully, and consult with appropriate historical legal
experts, you'll find that the Charter's terminology only grants monopoly
(and not exactly "ownership") over the lands draining into Hudson's
Bay/Hudson's Strait.  NOT to lands beyond that watershed, although the HBC
did manage to somehow get recognition of the Mackenzie watershed (and hence
the Athabasca, Peace, Liard, etc.).  But not those of the Fraser or
Columbia - hence the legal vacuum of the Oregon Territory/Columbia
District.  Unlike in Rupert's Land (the Hudson's Bay drainage, delimited by
the Rockies), the HBC did not have exclusivity west of the Rockies, and had
no legal title there whatsoever.  Otherwise the Crown Colony of British
Columbia (when it was founded in 1858) would have been able to assume that
title, which it did not - which is one of the reasons why we have the
present legal/constitutional impasse in British Columbia concerning
aboriginal title and the resilience of native government.  The HBC was a
force to be reckoned with, to be sure - which is why the Crown Colony of
Vancouver Island's first appointed governer (Blanshard) was not chosen from
among company ranks (although the job soon fell to Chief Factor James
Douglas).

Believe me, if there were any precedent for the HBC "owning" the lands in
the Fraser and Columbia drainages and "anywhere it established itself",
this would be well-known in British Columbia historical circles - and in
legal precedent.  The HBC didn't even "own" New Caledonia (the Babine
Lake-Fort St. James area north of Prince George) despite the area's
importance to the Rupert's Land-oriented trade.