Page:Oregon Historical Quarterly vol. 19.djvu/223

FEDERAL RELATIONS OF OREGON 211 that the report of a special committee which had not been accepted by the House, had little more weight than the speech of an individual member of Congress. 46 President Adams was inclined to look deeper for the causes of British feeling than committee reports and the like. 47 Even the assertion "of the late president" regarding colonization was inadequate to explain the English attitude. The President believed that Mr. Canning could not be so ill-acquainted with the state of affairs in America that he did not know the factious nature of Baylies' report, and he, Canning, would think it passing strange to be held to account for the offenses of a similar character when committed by Mr. Brougham or Mr. Hume. When it was evident that no agreement on the boundary could be reached, Gallatin reserved for the United States the right to put forth a claim to the fullest extent of its preten- sions, and turned to the question of renewing the Convention of 1818. Two details of this renewal occupied the attention of the negotiators during many conferences so that, although the question of definitive settlement of the boundary was dropped early in December, it was not until late in the follow- ing June that the new convention was signed. Gallatin, in accordance with his instructions, was insistent that the old agreement for joint occupancy should be so modified as to make no reference to other powers. This contention touched the real issue between the two countries; Great Britain in- sisted that the region was open to settlement by all peoples, while the United States contended that all claims to title between 42 and 54 40' except such as were held by Great Britain and the United States had been extinguished. In other words it was the American insistence on and the British rejection of the colonization portion of the Monroe doctrine which made the difficulty. The second point which occasioned much discussion was in itself of minor importance : what was to be the duration of the new convention ? Although not vital per se in conjunction with the other disputed point it seemed to have significance. 48 46 Gallatin to Clay, 27 Nov., Writings of Gallatin, II, 342-4. 47 Adams to Gallatin (private), 20 Mar., 1827, Ibid., 367. 48 The correspondence and the protocols are given in Am. S. P. For Rel.. VI, 645-96; also in H. Ex. Doc. No. 199, aoth Cong., ist Ses.