The Oregon Correspondence.
{"newspaper_name": "The New York herald.", "edition": "01", "page": "p1", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 6856, "word_count": 1168, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9541000127792358], "ccnet_perplexity": [1137.300048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
The Oregon Correspondence.


All OF the correspondence that took place be-
tween the American and British governments, on
this troublesome question, accompanies'the Presi-
dents Message that was lately delivered to Con-
gress 1t commences in 1912, and ends in 1916.
We give a condensed sketch of the preliminary
correspondence, but publish in full two most
important communications which passed between
the representatives of the respective governments,
viz;-Mr. Calhoun's, of the Sd Sept 1914, and Mr..
Pakenham's of the 18th of the same month.


Mr.. Fox to Mr.. Webster Nov. Is, 1Sl2-Mr.
Fox writes to Mr. Webster letter, under this date
which. contains an enclosed despatch from Lord
Aberdeen, stating that he had exchanged ratitica-
tions Of the treaty of the 9th August, with the
United States Minister also, requesting Mr. Fox
to propose to the American government to empow.
er the American Minister at London to enter upon
negotiations with regard to the Oregon boundary.
Mr.. Webster to Mr.. Fox Nov. 25, IS42-Mr
Webster, in answer to the note of the 18th, states
he had referred Mr.. Fox's note and the Earl of
Aberdeen's despatch to the President, and he was
directed to say that the President concurred in the
expedlency Of negotiating on the Oregon boundary,
and that at no distant day communication would
be sent to the American Minister on the subject.


MIR. Pakenham to Mr.. Upshur, Feb. "a, 1S44-Mr
Pakenham expresses the anxious desire of his go
vernment to come to satisfactory arrangement
with the government of the United States on the
subject of Oregon and acquaints MI. Upshur that
IN tulflment OF his commands, he is ready to con-
fer with Mr.. Upshur on the subject at Mr. Upshur's
convenience.


Mr.. Upshur to Mr. Pakenham, Feb. 26, 1874
MIR. Upshur appoints Feb q, (the next day,) at IL
O'Clock, to receive Mr.. Pakenham.


Mr.. Pakenham to Mr.. Calhoun, July D. I8H.-
Mr.. Pakenham alludes to the death of Mr.. Upshur
and referring to his note of the 24th February re-
peats the desire OF his government to make salts
factory arrangement of the question.


Mr.. Calhoun to Mr.. Pakenham, Aug. %, 1S4I-
Mr.. Calhoun was unable to appoint time to confer
with Mr. Pakenham before, but now appoints the
next day at p. M, if convenient for Mr. Paken-
ham.


Mr.. Pakenham to MIR. Calhoun, Axg. %, 1s44-
Mr.. Pakenham says he will have great pleasure in
waiting on Mr. Calhoun at the hour proposed.


PROTOCOLS.


On the 23d August 1874, conference was held
by the respective minister's After some prelimlna
ry assurances by each minister, the part of his
government its desire to approach the question
IN spirit of compromise, &C., &c, Mr.. Calhoun
desired to receive any fresh proposal which Mr.
Pakenham might be instructed to make. Mr.. PAX
enham reply, stated that he would be ready at the
next conference to make such proposal and hoped
that Mr. Calhoun would be ready at the same time
with a proposal from the American government
Adjourned to 25th August.


Conference of August 26.-Mr. Pakenham offered
a proposal which Mr. Calhoun declined. The re-
spective ministers agree in submitting written
ments OF their views. The proposal offered at this
conference by Mr. Pakenham, ,was IN addition to the
proposals already made, to make tree to the United
States any ports they might desire on the main land
or on Vancouver's Island, south OF latitude 49o.
/, Conference of September 2, 1sA-Mr. Calhoun
presented statement OF the claims OF the United
States, marked A.


Conference Of 18th September l8H-Mr. Palk-
enham presented his statement, marked d. counter
to that of Mr.. Calhoun's.


Conference of 10th September.-Mr Calhoun de-
lvered to Mr.. Pakenhaln statement, marked B.,
in rejoinder to Mr. Pakenham's, marked A. 4


Conference of 24th September this conference
Mr.. Pakenham stated, that he had read with
Mr.. Calhoun's statement, marked B. that it did
not at all weaken his views and declared that he
did not feel authorized to enter into discussion
respecting territory north of 49'.


Conference OF 18th July 1915, between Mr.. Bu-





resumed at this conference. Mr. Buchanan present.
ed statement, (marked J. b. made In compliance
with the request Of Mr.. Pakenham in his statement
(marked d.


WASHINGTON, Sept. 8, ls44.
The unde rsigncd, American plenipotentiary, declines
the proposal British plenipotenary the ground
that would have the effect of restricting the posses
scrbed than their claims CLEARLY ente them to. It pro-
poses to limit their northern boundary by line drawn
from the Rocky Mountains along the 49th parallel of Ia
tude to the northessternmost branch of the Columbia
river and thence down the middle of that river to the
to the United states all south Of that iine except de.
tachcd territory extending the Pacific and the straits
which is proposed in addition, to make free 10 the
United any port which the United States govern
ynent mig desire either on the land on Vancou-
ver's Island, south OF latitude 40 degs.


BY turning to the map heretofore annexed ana on
which the proposed boundary is marked in pencil, it
will be that it assigns to Great Britain almost the
entire region ION its north sde drained by the Colum
bs river lying its northern bank. Iii not deemed
necessary to state at large the claims of the United
this territory and the grounds which they
rest order to make good the assertion that restricts
the possessions Of the United States within
bounds than they clearly entitled to. 1t will be sui
fcient for this purpose to show that they fairly
titled the entire region drained by the river and to
establishment of this point the undersigned proposes
accordingly to limit his remarks at present.


Our claims to the portion the territory drained by
the Columbia river may be divided into those have
in proper right and those we have derived from
Great Britain on priority Of discovery and priority Of
exploration and settlement We rest claim to dis.
covery against her. that Of Captain Gray citizen
the United States who, the ship Columbia of Bos.
passed its bar and anchored in the river ten miles
above its mouth the lth of May, 1885, and who af
forwards sailed the river twelve fifteen miles and
left on the Goth Of the month, calling it Colum.
bis, y after his ship, which name it still retains


these facts claim to the discovery and
into the rests They too well attested to be
controverted But they have been opposed by the alle
ged discoveries OF Mearcs and Vancouver. II is tIue
that The explored portion Of the coast through
which the Columbia flows into the ocean, in 1888 (fvo
years before Capt Gray crossed the bar and anchored in
the rver in order ascertain whether the rveras land
down In the Spanish charts and called the 81, Roc
not but equally true that he did not dis
cover On the contrary, he expressly declares, in
nccount Of the Tho rosult Lis