States, canada as we know them today, starting in. 1818, Great Britain and the United States agreed to a joint occupancy of the oregon country that occupancy would last for the next three decades. By 1846, the two nations would sign a treaty that established the borders as know them today. And so in class, lets walk through those three decades of history, talk about the different interests that the two nations had in the regions. Youll see the differences in approaches to colonization on the part of Great Britain and the united all building up to the resolution of the oregon boundary. All right. Lets step back a little bit and lets begin with general process, by which the United States established itself as a nation and asserted control over borders. There are two broad factors at play here. When we. Territorial acquisition by the United States the first the United States needed dispossess the indigenous of the continent and extinguish their claims their land. Now this manifests federal indian policy and the removal of native peoples to reservations in the Pacific Northwest. That process starts in the 1850s. Thats going to be a subject, a future lecture. The second broad factor, which we will discuss today, is that the United States, the United States needed to interact with other nonnative tive powers, particularly the nations of europe, in order to define american to territory. Now, most american. Came into the nations possession by wars or purchases the revolutionary war, as you see here on this slide, produced most the territory east of the Mississippi River. The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 brought most of the lands between the Mississippi River and Rocky Mountains into the nation and then war with mexico. In 1846 to 1848. In incorporated american southwest and then in 1867 the United States purchased alaska from russia. And so see, with each of those territorial acquisitions, they are functions of war and or purchase. The terra that that becomes the Pacific Northwest however was appended to the nation in a somewhat unusual faction not war or not purchase rather the Pacific Northwest, the oregon country went through a phase which the two primary claimants to the region thats the United States and Great Britain agreed to share it for an indefinite time. This is the socalled joint occupation i referred to earlier the the convention of 1818 was an agreement between Great Britain and the United States that resolve territorial disputes following the war of 1812, the convention of 1818, first established the 49th parallel as the border from the great lakes to the Rocky Mountains. So this is the northern of the United States as we know it today. The border that separates present day north dakota from manitoba, montana, saskatchewan and alberta and so on. And so that convention of 18, 18. Then establish that border at the 49th parallel from the great lakes in the east to the Rocky Mountains in the west. And then the convention of. 1818 authorized the joint occupancy of the oregon country, whereby the rights of both british and american citizens to occupy and to trade in the region would be respected respected. Now, the second way then that the Pacific Northwest becomes american territory that differs from other acquisitions is that the was not resolved by war or by but rather by treaty. The two nations signed a treaty in 1846 in which britain and the United States negotiated a final resolution to this dispute. This was complemented by similar agreements on the east coast resolved in 1842 between maine and canada and both sets of regulations, then or both sets of negotiations me were part of a process whereby the two nations reached a substantial accommodation with one another, particularly after conflicts of the American Revolution and the war of 1812. All right. Lets take a look at the oregon country and define exactly what it is were talking here. The oregon country generally defined as region from the Rocky Mountains in east to the Pacific Ocean in the west, from. 42nd parallel in the south. This is the border between today, between oregon and california. And then north to 54 degrees, 40 minutes of latitude. Thats todays between alaska and columbia. Now, as you know from previous lectures, much of this was initially claimed by spain in 1770s. And the 1780s, even spains withdrawal from newcastle found on Vancouver Island, the 1790s. Spain still maintains a presence rather limited but still a presence on the northwest coast, in part virtue of its holdings in. California. We also have to remember russia, which by 1790 had established its colony in russian america or alaska, the north. And remember the russians had also established a trading post fort ross on the western, the california coast, north of San Francisco. So initially, least spain and russia are still nominally involved in the oregon country by about 1820. However, spain and russia had withdrawn from the region mostly for reasons. And so this leaves britain and the United States as two primary claimants to the region. All right. Remember the british presence in the oregon country took the form of the Hudsons Bay Company prior to the 1820s. The hudsons Company Operated exclusively east of the Rocky Mountains. This was in all lands that were part of the watershed, draining into hudsons bay and the hbc held a monopoly, a crown on all Economic Activity in that region in 1821. However, the Hudsons Bay Company merged with the northwest company and acquired its assets and holdings in the oregon country country. And here again, there see george simpson, who was the director, the governor of the abcs columbia department, which headquartered in Fort Vancouver on the Columbia River. Excuse me me. Now, American Interest in the oregon country at this time took the form not of any institutional of the national government, as was the case with britain and its monopoly company, the Hudsons Bay Company, but rather American Interest in the oregon country in this era took the form of individual individual americans who had migrated to the region. As weve discussed previous classes, the mountain men such as jedediah smith, these are fur trappers from the Rocky Mountains. Began to filter into oregon in the late 1820s, and then the 1830s, as we missionaries american missionaries begin to enter the region. Henry and eliza spalding, marcus and narcissa whitman. Here you see Marcus Whitman in a in an image. Marcus whitman arriving on the great divide, basically cresting Rocky Mountains and beginning entrance into the oregon country on the 4th of july, 1836. And these missionaries, of course, were arriving, the oregon country, in an attempt to convert indians janus peoples to christianity. But also to proselytize to the increasing numbers of of settlers american settlers who were arriving in oregon. That said, however the american presence in oregon was fairly limited initially at least 1840, there were only about 150 americans residing in the oregon country. Only 150 in that entire region. That would increase dramatically, however, by 45, just five years later, about 5000 u. S. Settlers had entered oregon country. Many having traveled overland on the famous oregon trail, and many them clustered in the Willamette Valley in present day state of oregon, drawn to the Willamette Valley, primarily for the regions fertile farmland. Remember also that in the 1830s epidemic disease such as smallpox, measles also a malarial in the willamette and Columbia River valleys in the 1830s had devastated communities. In the valley. Death rates for some native communities was as high as 90 . And so when missionaries and american fur trappers began, the country, they found Willamette Valley and other parts of. The oregon country depopulated. And they view this as open land theirs for the taking, not mention evidence of the providence of god that had directed them to these open lands. And so. From the 1820s to the mid 1840s, weve got the Hudsons Bay Company and then american settlers jointly occupying the oregon country. Exactly as had been spelled out in the convention of 1818 over time. Then both groups sought to their claims to the region now neither britain nor the United States expected to gain full control of. Lets at this map again east of the Continental Divide that is east of the Rocky Mountains, the us and britain, the convention of 1818 had agreed on that border running along the 49th parallel from the great lakes in the east to the Rocky Mountains in the west. Now, virtually from the start discussion over oregon, the british, except that border to continue west along the 49th parallel to the columbia. And then from there to follow the river to the ocean. So here we see the 49th parallel extending from the east. The british expected were the 49th parallel intersect did with the Columbia River. The border would then follow the columbia down into present day Washington State and out the mouth of the columbia at the border between present day Washington State and oregon. So the british were willing, in other words, to conceal read to the United States. All lands south and of the columbia. But they wanted to maintain access to the river itself, which of course, was the main transportation for the company. Remember, the Hudsons Bay Company had a number of trading posts, not just the columbia, the willamette and the snake and other rivers in the territory and so the british hoping that the border would follow the Columbia River would enable them to keep access to the Columbia River. And hold on to the trading forts that they had established along river. They wanted control over puget sound, which they rightly regarded as a superior harbor on the northwest coast. Now americans, for their part, did not expect to acquire any territory north of. The 49th parallel, but they also coveted puget sound and access to strait of juan de fuca fuca. Keep in mind that during the 1820s and the 1830s, the United States no good harbor on the pacific, san diego and San Francisco were first spanish outposts and then and then later part of mexico. The shoreline of oregon offers few good harbors and the mouth of the columbia, where the columbia empties into the Pacific Ocean. That region. Was notorious for interfere with attempts to to to travel from the river to ocean or from the ocean into the until the conclusion of war with mexico. In 1848, the us regarded puget sound as best protected deep harbor on the Pacific Coast coast. And so the boundary then between these two nations essentially down to puget sound and the area of land, the region between the Columbia River and the 49th parallel. So we look again at this map. Britain prepared to concede to the states, everything to the south and east of the Columbia River. Britain hoped to this region right here present day western washington everything north and west of the columbia and south of the 49th parallel, including puget americans, for their part, desired same area and wanted border between the two nations to run along the 49th parallel. All the way to the ocean. What were really talking about here then as far as this this this conflict thats controversy is this right here present day western washington. All right. Let me pause here for a sec. Any questions. Question was always assumed to be in british control. Vancouver island. I wouldnt say anything assumed necessarily if. The 49th parallel had historical precedent. And so the states expected nothing north of 49th parallel. But Vancouver Island, of course, is this sort of anomaly where the 49th parallel runs right through it. So there were no assumptions necessarily with regard to Vancouver Island, but the british certainly coveted that as well. Like the strait of georgia, the around the southern tip of Vancouver Island. Yeah. Other questions, everybody cool. All right. Remember, folks, i always say i understand every word thats coming of my mouth. If any of this is not clear, please stop me and ask for clarification clarification. All right right. So disputed area, britain and the United States both hoping to acquire the area surrounding puget sound, the british initially. Oh, question. Fred, you have a question on the top of this map. It says extra u. S. Claim. Does that mean that we claimed that part north to be part of alaska in certain respects, were actually going to get to the us going all the way to 50 or 40, a little bit later on today. But yes, the United States certainly, lee, especially given sort of the mood of National Expansion ism in the 1840s, which were going to talk about a little bit later, the United States certainly had designs on the entire Pacific Coast. Yeah, the William Henry seward secretary, state, two president s lincoln and the man who negotiated the treaty of session with russia that purchase alaska in 1867. William seward, even before he was of state when he was a senator from new york in the 1840s. He was an ardent expansionist who made no secret of the fact that he hoped to acquire not just alaska, but also British Columbia. And so yes certainly how serious the american claims were that far north is a is a matter for debate but it certainly was the Public Discourse it certainly was of interest to americans. Yeah, well, ill say more about that later on in lecture today. Thanks. Youre welcome. All right. So when it comes to this dispute then in the disputed area, Great Britain initially had a much stronger hand, then did the United States remember, George Vancouver had been the european to explore puget sound, not just explore it. He named it right he named it for for one of his one of his countrymen, peter puget. The Hudsons Bay Company, in the course of organizing the region as a colony and then a and an economy of extractive resources had established Fort Vancouver on, the Columbia River, a number of forts and trading posts, not just on the columbia, but also on the fraser and snake and other rivers of the oregon country country. And the bay company had also cultivate it and developed mostly cordial relationships with the Indigenous Peoples of the region. Remember the Hudsons Bay Company could not function without native labor. Many of the furs, both in the maritime fur trade of the 1700s, and then the land based fur trade of the early 1800s. Much of those furs were being harvested not by the european colonizers, but by peoples who then traded with the europeans for those furs. And so it was in the interest of the Hudsons Bay Company to develop with native peoples, which the company had done to great economic, not to mention social and political in the era. So britain has wellestablished claims and not just of occupancy but also use of the oregon country. Many of George Simpsons designs for the Hudsons Bay Company from the time he assumed the directorship in 1821. Well into the 1840s, were based on the assumption that the british would hold onto western washington and, lose eastern washington, oregon and idaho, the lands south and east of the columbia. And remember, of course, the washington territory does not exist at this time. Idaho does exist at this time, but im using the words western washington, idaho, so forth, simply to to you, to the regions that im talking about about. And so george simpson, in organizing the Hudsons Bay Company had operated under the belief that they would eventually lose south and east of the columbia, but that they would on to western washington. And so, for example simpson encouraged american missionaries to enter oregon and their missions south and east of the columbia he accepted settlement by american settlers in the Willamette Valley. And remember he also to extinguish the of furs south and east of the columbia. This is socalled scorched earth policy that i mentioned in a previous lecture whereby simpson instructed the Hudsons Bay Company personnel to trap beaver and, marten and other fur bearing mammals south and east of the columbia almost to extinction, thereby hoping to remove any incentive that american fur trappers might have for entering the region. Well into, the early 1840s, simpson, that the british had to hold on to western washington for the long term sustainability. The company. His thinking would change relatively quickly. However. In 1842, simpson decides to relocate the headquarters of the bay company from Fort Vancouver on the Columbia River up to on Vancouver Island. This signals a change in his thinking with more and more americans beginning to enter the oregon country, he begins to recognize that the loss of western is in fact a possibility. Its clear by that time, 1842, that the balance of power is shifting in the oregon territory. Now, when United States agreed to that joint in 1818, it was grateful for the opportunity. The us simply did not have resources at that time to make a great imprint on the Pacific Northwest and so even to be granted joint ownership or joint occupancy excuse me with britain was seen by americans as a win. The United States did not have a navy at that time that was as powerful as britains the United States did not any sort of colonizing agent that had the resources the capital expertise to colonize the region, the way britain, the Hudsons Bay Company been a monopoly for centuries prior to its entrance to the Pacific Northwest. The United States did not any sort of colonizing agent on par with a company like that. The great majority of American Population lived far to the east east of the Mississippi River, and american fur trappers for as much attention and interest as there was in the region. It wasnt until the end of the 1820s that american fur trappers had successfully traversed the Rocky Mountains and began to enter the oregon at all, and so these factors then put together would seem to indicate that britain had a much stronger claim. Then did the United States to the oregon country. In fact, the United States really held a very weak throughout the 1820s and 1830s. This begins to change, however, in part because ideas about american expansionism really had taken hold by the 1840s, the United States had annexed texas. In the 1840s went to war with mexico for the remainder of mexicos northern holdings. Upon the defeat, mexico in 1848, the united takes possession of the lands that would become the american southwest states of of new mexico, arizona, Southern California and so on. And moreover National Politicians in United States took up western as a key campaign issue. The monroe doctrine, 1823, something you have encountered in other history courses. The monroe doctrine, a position that opposed any europe colonization or involvement by european nations in the western hemisphere and the 1840s. The idea of, manifest destiny has really taken among americans manage destiny. The idea that america had a god given right to settle the continental to expand all the way to the Pacific Coast and settle the continent. Not just a right, but a right, a god given right. Here we see a famous painting by john gast, american. Im guessing you have probably encountered this painting before in other courses or other classes. And here, of course, its a its a not very subtle depiction, is it, of of manifest destiny, not many hidden metaphors here. Right we see columbia female personification of the states leading Settlers West bringing light into darkness right. We see a well, let me ask you what do you see in this in this painting are what are some sort of metaphors and things that you see sort of as evidence of of american expansionism and destiny. Here fred. And well go to the back of the the indians are fleeing toward the right yeah if you look to the far left of the image you see Indigenous Peoples being pushed out of frame if not pushed, you know, off the continent altogether, max in the back i was going to that you see roads being created where wagons are driving and you see railroads being created with the trains west where theres none. So its like infrastructure is being built where americans go look at all the transportation infrastructure, right . Weve got wagon trains, weve got steam locomotives. If you look sort in the far right frame, there are ships and bridges being constructed across across the rivers. Yeah. Was a i just wanted to add that i think you can kind of see a sea all over the top, far right of the picture. Yeah. Representing civilization and thats a better space to like thats what you guys this is speaking to west civilization right that it gets darker they have farther left you go to the picture so its like the light cross into the west actually. Cities already being constructed here, right . The rush of of quote unquote civilization, as evidenced, as you point out by the light of columbia being, brought into the darkness of the of the wilderness of the continent. Right . Yeah. What else . What what did you see holding in her right hand and in her left hand . Can you tell. The wire . Thats the way to address programs . And also was like a bible, which is important key aspects to ideology behind manifest destiny. It was really interwoven with christian beliefs that American Christians were you know inherently they were divinely appointed to, populate and settle this land. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. In her left hand, a telegraph line establishing communications in her right hand. Its a little difficult here to tell what the book is, but i think a bible is a pretty good guess i mean manifest destiny is the idea that americans have a god given to expand across the continent. So, yeah, i think thats i think thats exactly right. Again, not very subtle, right . Metaphors arent exactly hidden, but this is a good representation of the way Many Americans were beginning to think about. The western territories in, the 1840s. And remember as ive said in in previous lectures, this is Thomas Jeffersons dream, right . I mean, thomas, even before he was president , before the Louisiana Purchase, he recognized the lands what he considered open lands of the west. Of course. They werent open. People had been living on those lands 10,000 years. But in the american imagination, the continent was open, free land available, the taking. Jefferson believed that expansionism across, the continent was vital to the survival of this explorer immense known as american democracy and small republics. Ism right. Well, by the 1840s, Thomas Jefferson is deceased. But these ideas are certainly living on as more and more americans are seeking opportunity. Private land ownership, private enterprise wise in what were considered the open of the west. All right, so American Interest in the Pacific Northwest. Having stagnated for decades suddenly increases dramatically. It takes the form of both settlers emigrating to the west but then also politicians, american statesmen, increasingly becoming willing to confront the british in order to resolve this boundary dispute in americas favor favor. And again, the respective approach is to colonization on the part of britain and the United States are a study in contrast. Remember the hudsons bay. Discouraged settlement it made no attempt to bring europe and women to the region to start families and to establish a permanent Settler Society. No attempt at all. The hbc discouraged ownership of lands. It was purely and extractive resource colony and indigenous were viewed by the Hudsons Bay Company for their utility in company operations. There was no drive the part of the british to dispossess this native peoples of lands, no effort to place them reservations that would have been detrimental to the Companies Operations to mention its profits. Americans, by contrast, are essentially the opposite in every aspect. Americans expected. Bring it to the oregon country. The more individualistic and democratic attitudes of their society. Americans on private ownership of land. Americans insisted on having voice in their government, on permanent settlements and indeed, many of the american many of the american rivals in the west in this era are families. And then finally, for the american project at the displacement and dispossession of, native peoples was essential. If america is going to establish a permanent Settler Society on the lands of the west and of the oregon country, the indigenous population has to be removed in some way from those lands. That, of course is going to take the form of the removal of native peoples to reservations, which, as i mentioned, well talk about in lecture next week. One official of the Hudsons Bay Company, he summarized the in the the the two nations respective approaches to colonization. And this is what Hudsons Bay Company official had to say about farms in the Willamette Valley. Those farms, quote, could flourish only through the protection of equal laws, the influence of free trade, the expression respectable inhabitants, while the fur trade much suffers by each innovation. Close quote. Okay, lets go through again, sort of unpack what this official is saying. Farms in the Willamette Valley being established by americans at this time, quote, could only through the protection of equal laws. Thats the antithesis of monopoly. Right . Thats thats the antithesis of the manner with which the Hudsons Bay Company had been operating for centuries. The farms of the Willamette Valley could flourish only through the influence of free trade. Again, the antithesis of monopoly, the expression of respectable inhabitants. And hes referring there to the families of settlers, as opposed to unattached male fur traders working for the hbc. While the fur trade much suffers each innovation, close quote the respect of approaches of these two nations to this area could not be more different. And so americans, starting in the 1840s, began taking formal steps to assert control over the region. The americans borrow from the iowa territorys code of laws and oregon settlers, essentially replicating the laws. The territory of iowa form a provisional government or governments. In oregon between 1843 and 1845, the first laws enacted by those provisional that the provisional provided for the acquisition and secure ownership of land, the holding of elections and also the formation a militia. Later legislation then provides for an executive branch, a branch and then divide the territory into counties for local administration. Important the provisional government also outlawed the migration and residence of african, both free enslaved to oregon. This is something were going to talk about in a future lecture in this class. And so just like step back here and think about this for a minute. The American Interest in region went from almost nothing. In 1838 to 6. Difficult and, substantial, just five, six, seven years later. As i mentioned, the population itself, only 150 americans living in the oregon country in 1840. Five years later, 5000. These very rapid developments with regard to americas interest, the region. U. S. Officials, politicians become increasingly aggressive in their attitudes attitudes. James polk, running for president in 44, embraces a slogan 440 or fight, which means that if the if the british did not yield the entire country all the way to 54 degrees, 40 minutes of latitude, that very northern border of the oregon country, fred, that you were asking about a moment ago, if the if the british were willing to concede the entirety of the oregon country all the way to. 5440. Well, by god, americans were prepared to go to war over it. Now theres some debate among historians as to whether this was actually a Campaign Slogan made by polk or. If it only became so part of his rhetoric after, he had become president for our purposes, however, this slogan indicates the belligerent attitude that americans increasingly beginning to hold. Again. If we step back from this, its remarkable how quickly america and attitudes are changing. Almost complete disinter in oregon in the 1820s and 1830s save for a few mountain men and some presbyterian missionaries. By 1844, you have the president , the United States threatening war against britain over the oregon country. Now doesnt actually come to war, thankfully. And in 1846, britain, the United States agree to a formal resolution of boundary issue. The oregon treaty of 1846. And what the treaty does, as you can see here, it extends the between the United States and the nation that would become canada extends it all the way along. The 49th parallel. Exactly as the americans had wanted the us secured puget sound. The british then lost western washington but retained the interior coastline of the strait of georgia and Vancouver Island. The abc also retained the right of navigation ocean on the Columbia River and it retained substantial holdings along the columbia. Basically all the forts and supply depots that it had established over the decades in what was now american territory. The of the region of the columbia, that the lower columbia to the United States, however, did not bode well continued operations by the Hudsons Bay Company and the company would eventually sell its interests and its assets in the american northwest and retrench back to British Columbia. Okay, let me pause here. Any questions, any discussion. Actually, let me ask you a question and im genuinely curious about this. Its my feeling that there are very few americans aware of the fact that this area, the area in which we are living and studying today, was once essentially territory. Have you heard this story before . You aware of these developments developments . Yes. Well, that i am impressed. Its its experience that that not many people are anywhere oceans. Anything so far . Yes. I dont know if youre going to get to it, but how did the British Government take control of Vancouver Island completely but give up spots like Point Roberts and the San Juan Islands and just have that a bright stop of the 49th parallel. Yeah. How did that come to be . Yeah. The the the dispute over the San Juan Islands is an entirely different whats that an entirely different story. Its part of this story. Were not going to cover it today. We cant we can come back to that again. Yeah, its its interesting thats like any treaty. This is essentially a function of compromise. Right. And actually im quite done yet ill talk a little bit about how this this agreement, this treaty is remembered on both sides of the border. But yeah, it is it is fascinating as to exactly how the the british whose hand was once so strong, ended up relenting, ceding the territory to the United States, but maintaining Vancouver Island and the waterways. It really comes down to maritime transport, right . As long as both nations had access to the Pacific Ocean, which the treaty facilitated for both that was seen as beneficial for both nations. Now now another. Okay. Oh, in the back, i have to tell you, im really impressed that so many of you have heard of this story before. Think i need to give you all like a bonus point on your midterm exam or something . Just just for that. Yeah. Question yeah. So i was curious why, was the uk so like willing to relent . Did they not have like the same like cultural interest in the region . So they were just like, well give it up like the americans or yeah, its its a bit confuse saying what we see happening here in the era is that the the migration of so Many Americans into the region was really represented handwriting on the wall britain and britain came to recognize that any attempt to hold on to western washington in the face of so much migration was only going to sort of exacerbate hostility between the two nations. Theres also theres gold being discovered in the area, right . Theres potential for gold. And on the fraser river and in fact, there was a time in the 1860s after the period were talking about here where gold strikes and British Columbia actually meant that there were more in British Columbia than british subjects. Right. That comes after the events that were talking about here. But but really, what it sort of comes down to is george and the british, the directors of the Hudsons Bay Company, they saw what was and they knew that like the 5000 americans in the country in 1845, that number only going to continually grow. And so its its really of of compromise. One of the other things, although ill here in just a moment, is that the nation of canada not exist at this time. And so the british interests in region were back in london. Now opinion and attitudes about the british who actually lived in the region would have to maintain its presence in western washington. Back in london, however sort of viewing its you know, its holdings not just in north america, but British Holdings around the world. This is sort of one small part of that much larger picture to which the the british, the over this treaty would have had that much more global view. So i guess the answer max so many things in history is this really really complicated. Right. I said this to you before history is that unique where our goal historians is to make things more complex and not less right. Anyway, i hope that answers your question. All right. Lets lets continue then and lets wrap up here by thinking about this. How is this treaty remembered by american and by canadians today, if, in fact, its remembered at all canadians americans tend to the oregon treaty very, very. As with most historical subjects, how you view, how you perceive the meaning of the past depends very, very much on the position from which are viewing it in the present right. Do john finlay, Professor Emeritus of history here at the university of washington this, is what dr. Finlay has written about the treaty and, how it sort of exists in the public mind today. So this is dr. Finlay comment thing on the legacy of treaty of 1846. Quote few american today pay much attention to the oregon treaty of 46. The nations acquis missions by war have seemed more dramatic and even its acquisitions by purchase have seemed somehow more memorable all the diplomatic that produced treaty perhaps appear dull as if the two sides finally just arrived at. A fair compromise. Maybe there is a sense to that the United States did not take the far corner of the Pacific Northwest so much from another nation or as it did from a company, the abc, whose own operations were american Style Development out of the region. It would be best, however, to keep in mind that in canada, across the border that the oregon treaty extended in 1846 feelings are different there. The oregon treaty is often remembered vividly a loss and one of many examples of american for canadian borders and national integrity. And indeed dr. Finley may very well be correct. A canadian geographer, james gibson, writing in 1985, this is what this is what gibson, a canadian, had to say on this question. Quote, the oregon treaty was not a fair compromise. There was no division of the oregon trying go. Thats a reference to those disputed lands in western washington there was no division of the oregon triangle all all of which went to the United States canadian have valid reasons for regretting and even resenting the oregon settlement since the british to the territory north of the columbia Clearwater River system was at least as good as if not better than that of the United States on the grounds of discovery, exploration and settlement and since the future canadian dominion was deprived of any harbor on puget sound, canadians should not forget that they were dispossessed of a part of their rightful columbia heritage, a heritage whose economic potential in general and agriculture real possibilities in particular were initially and successfully demonstrated by the Hudsons Bay Company. They should also remember that whenever it is trite. Lee declared that canada and the United States share the longest under funded border in the world. It is so mainly because the stronger American Republic won its Northern Boundary disputes at the expense of its weaker neighbor, just as its southern boundary was gained at the expense of weaker mexico. Close. Oh. Oh, i right, i say to you guys all the time history is not the past, but history is not something that happened 200 years ago and has no bearing on our present lives. We live with history single day. I mean, did you have any idea that these of feelings, these sorts of resentments would exist, you know, going on two centuries after the treaty itself . We live with history every single day. Every single day. All right. Questions, comments, thoughts. What was the year on that for the the canadian that was 1985. Yeah. Like general British Population in the region once the treaty was signed. Oh well the at the time i mean the population it would have entirely the Hudsons Bay Company i mean it would have been person it would have company personnel. Excuse me. Like with the oregon country, the population of, british subjects in British Columbia have grown significantly over this era. And in fact, by 1867, when the United States purchases a alaska from russia. As i mentioned before, William Henry was very clear about his ambitions of acquiring British Columbia also and British Columbia becomes a canadian province in 1869, in large part an effort to sort of, you know, forestall any American Interests in the region. So so, so emigration to British Columbia have been increasing. At the same time in terms of numbers, im afraid i dont know. I cant give a population figures. But but there certainly would have been more more emigrants to the region, both british and american, as i mentioned, particularly once gold is discovered in region. Yeah. Yeah. But is it right to say that the American Interest in western washington was for settlement, whereas the british was just for fur . Yes, very much so. So i think you know that gives the americans probably a better claim. Well, i mean, it certainly worked out way, right . Yeah. I mean, thats an excellent point if this history may have played. Let me preface this by saying historians are loathe to engage what ifs. That said this history certainly would have played out very differently had the hbc encouraged permanent settlement that if european women been brought to the region, married the personnel of the hbc, they start, they establish permanent communities. Western washington again with the caveat that historians loathe to engage in what ifs. That is certainly the absence of british permanent settlement and the interest of americans in permanent settlement certainly plays out in very different ways. Yeah, thats a thats a good point. Any other thoughts, comments, questions as. All right. Well, thanks, everybody. Lets lets take a quick break and then well come back and keep talking history. All