For a decade prior to the Mexican War, a well-defined movement for the annexation of California was developing in the United States. Various writers have given some attention to isolated incidents properly belonging to this movement, but hitherto no one has traced its growth in any systematic or connected way. To do this is the aim of the following discussion. In it, after roughly outlining the various ways in which California was first brought to the attention of the American people, I have devoted considerable space to the efforts made by Jackson, Tyler, and Polk to purchase the province from Mexico; to popular interest throughout the United States in its acquisition; and to the growth of emigration from the western states. I have considered it worth while, also, to show the effect of current rumors that one or more European nations were seeking to secure a foothold in the province; and to add a chapter on the influence of slavery upon the American program. To local affairs in California, I have given only so much attention as seemed necessary for a clear understanding of their relation to the movement for annexation.
Inevitably, in the treatment of a subject involving so many details, mistakes have arisen and faults can readily be pointed out. Yet I believe the account to be accurate in the main, and trust that it will shed some new light on a most interesting and important phase of westward expansion. Wherever possible I have gotten my material from manuscript sources, finding the official documents on file in the State Department; the Polk, Jackson, and Van Buren correspondence in the Library of Congress; and the Larkin correspondence in the Bancroft Collection of the University of California especially rich in this regard. Frequent use has also been made of contemporary writings of the time, whether in book, magazine, or newspaper form. These have been indicated by references throughout the text, as have also the considerable number of secondary authorities and government publications upon which I have been privileged to draw.
It would be but a poor return on my part if I made no mention of the assistance I have received in the preparation of this work. To the Chief Clerk of the State Department; to Mr. Gaillard Hunt, Chief of the Manuscripts Division of the Library of Congress; and to the authorities of the State University of California for permission to use the material of the Bancroft Collection, I am especially grateful. Two men, however, more than any others deserve my warmest thanks. These are Professor Herbert E. Bolton of the University of California, upon whose kindly interest and help I have never counted in vain; and Professor Robert M. McElroy, under whose direction this study was undertaken and whose friendship has been a constant source of inspiration.
The fur trade.—The interest of the United States in California began toward the close of the eighteenth century. It was at first due almost entirely to economic causes; and, like many commercial activities of the day, centered chiefly in New England. In 1787, shortly after the opening of the Chinese-American trade by William Shaw, Robert Gray and John Kendrick, commanding the Lady Washington and the Columbia, sailed for the northwest coast of the Pacific, partly on a voyage of exploration and partly for the discovery of new fields for commercial enterprises. 2
This venture though of primary interest in the history of the region around the Columbia, was also of great importance from the standpoint of California. In the first place it so aroused the jealousy of the Spanish government that the authorities of Mexico instructed those of California to seize “a ship named Columbia which they say belongs to General Washington of the American States,” should it arrive at San Francisco. 3 In the second place, it was by this voyage that Gray, having found a ready market at Canton 4 for a few hundred sea otter skins procured from the Indians, opened up a profitable fur trade with China 5 in which New England merchants were eager to participate.
The arrival of one of these American fur-trading vessels at Monterey on October 29, 1795, marks the beginning of a commercial intercourse between New England and California, that, assuming various forms, continued for half a century and did much in an indirect way to bring about the acquisition of the latter province by the United States.
In accordance with Spain's general colonial policy, the inhabitants of California were forbidden to trade or have any dealings with foreigners. But Spain lay many leagues away, and while some officials conscientiously tried to enforce the royal commands, they found the prevention of the illicit trade, for which both Americans and Californians were eager, quite impossible. 6 On the contrary, within a few years it had grown to a very considerable size, especially as from 1796 to 1814 the direct trade with China from the North Pacific Coast lay almost wholly in American hands. 7
Much of this early fur trade, it is true, was carried on north of the California line, but the most valuable furs—those of the sea otter—were found in greatest abundance along the California coast from San Diego northward. These were sometimes obtained, as already indicated, by illicit purchase or barter from the Californians, of whom the mission authorities were the most dependable sources of supply. More often, however, they were poached along the great stretches of unfrequented shore, or from the neighboring channel islands, and at times, indeed, from the waters of the principal harbors, to the great, but helpless indignation of the Spanish authorities, who had neither skiff nor scow in which to pursue the intruders. 8 The skins thus obtained were carried to Canton and there exchanged for tea, lacquered ware, silks, and the various other commodities of the Chinese markets. These in turn were brought back either to the Russian settlements of Alaska or to California, where they found ready disposal; or quite as frequently they were transported direct to Europe or the United States. 9
The whale fisheries.—In speaking of these early commercial enterprises, it is also necessary to mention New England's interest in the whale industry, which, like the northwest trade, gave her also a first hand knowledge of California. Edmund Burke's tribute to the men of Nantucket and New Bedford was not misplaced; 10 and while the Revolutionary War put a temporary stop to their voyages, no sooner was peace declared than they were again “vexing strange seas” with their fisheries.
Shortly after 1800, these vessels, oily, ill-smelling, and often sadly in need of repairs, began to touch at the California ports for fresh supplies before beginning the long homeward voyage around the Horn. As the North Pacific came to furnish a more and more valuable hunting ground, 11 these visits increased in frequency and soon a regular trade was established with the inhabitants of Monterey and San Francisco. This was largely a system of barter, by which, in exchange for some four or five hundred dollars worth of New England manufactured goods, carried for the purpose, a returning whaler could secure sufficient fresh provisions for its journey home.
Hide and tallow trade.—A third form of commercial intercourse between California and the United States, more direct than the other two, was begun in 1822, after Mexico had achieved her independence. 12 In that year, owing chiefly to the representations of William A. Gale, a former fur trader on the northwest coast, the Boston firm of Bryant and Sturgis, with several business companions, were induced to fit out a vessel to open up a new line of trade with the Pacific, exchanging New England's abundant stock of manufactures for the hides and tallow of the California cattle. From this time on, the “Boston ships,” as they were called, plied regularly up and down the California coast, disposing of their cargoes in all harbors from San Diego to San Francisco, and receiving hides and tallow in return. 13
The Russian advance.—By the end of the first quarter of the century a loose connection had thus been established with California through these various mediums of trade. In addition to this, the progress of the Russians down the coast from their settlements in Alaska had begun to attract the attention of the United States, even in an official way. As early as 1808, a warning was issued against this advance by an article in the American Register. 14 The author, Captain Robert Shaler, having been engaged in the Chinese trade some years before, had acquired an intimate knowledge of the conditions in California and of the undeveloped possibilities of the country. After describing these, he went on to point out the feebleness of the government and the ease with which it would become a prey to the attack of any hostile force, dwelling especially upon the unfortified state of the harbors. San Francisco, whose advantages were strikingly portrayed, was guarded by a battery which made only a “show of defence.” At Monterey conditions were no better. Santa Barbara “would fall an easy conquest to the smallest ship of war.” San Diego, with all its natural facilities, had only a “sorry” defence; while the harbors of Lower California were in an equally forlorn condition. But not only had the Spaniards failed to provide against the encroachments of their northern neighbors; they had rather, according to Shaler, made such encroachment easier by their very attempts at defensive measures, having taken “every obstacle out of the way of an invading enemy,” by stocking the province with cattle and colonizing it with a discontented lot who would welcome the security and kindly treatment of a foreign government. 15
Exactly how far Shaler aimed to excite an apprehension of Russia's dealings in the Pacific, and how far he desired to emphasize the desirability of California as an object for American annexation, does not appear. Probably, however, when he wrote, “The conquest of this country would be absolutely nothing; it would fall without an effort to the most inconsiderable force,” he had both purposes in mind, and thus made himself the pioneer of a not inconsiderable body of later writers who advocated annexation to forestall foreign interference.
However this may be, Shaler's warning against the Russians was well founded. 16 The hunters of the Russian-American company had long been coming to California in search of furs; and in 1812 Baranof, the “Little Czar,” succeeded in establishing a colony, to which he gave the name of Ross, not far from Bodega Bay, and some thirty miles north of San Francisco. The object of this settlement, in its commercial aspect, was not merely to secure a larger interest in the California fur trade, but to supply the parent colony of Russians at New Archangel, or Sitka, with grain and other food-stuffs which could not be produced in the bleaker north. In addition, Baranof had the more important purpose of ultimately extending the Czar's control over a large part of Upper California by means of this colony, and especially of seizing the Bay of San Francisco. 17
Against this encroachment the Spanish officials protested from time to time at the bidding of their superiors, but probably with no great desire of seeing their protests effective, as the trade conducted by the Russians proved of material benefit to the province. And even had it been otherwise, there was no force in California sufficient to expel them. 18 Before many years, however, the presence of the Russians in California began to excite comment in the United States and to receive a certain amount of official attention. On November 11, 1818, J. B. Prevost, a special commissioner of the United States government to the Pacific Coast, wrote from “Monte Rey, New California,” that the Spanish authority was threatened by the Russian Czar whose colony had already been planted close to San Francisco, a harbor that, ranking among “the most convenient, extensive and safe” ports of the world, was nevertheless “wholly without defense and in the neighborhood of a feeble, diffused and disaffected population.” 19
In the following year a rumor spread that Spain had ceded to Russia a strip of territory on the Pacific Coast 800 miles long, in return for assistance furnished in the expeditions against the revolutionists of Lima and Buenos Ayres. 20 In the St. Louis Enquirer an unknown writer (perhaps Senator Benton) issued a warning against the “Progress of the Russian Empire.” well calculated to arouse the apprehension of those to whom Russia, as a member of the Holy Alliance and a rival in the northwest trade, was already an object of sufficient distrust.
“Looking to the east for everything,” said the article, “Americans have failed to notice the advance of the Russians on the Pacific Coast until they have succeeded in pushing their settlements as far south as Bodega. Their policy is merely the extension of the policy of Peter the Great and Catherine. Alexander is occupied with a scheme worthy of his vast ambition. . . . The acquisition of the gulf and peninsula of California and the Spanish claim to North America. . . . We learn this not from diplomatic correspondence, but from American fur traders who learn it from the Russian traders now protected by the Emperor in carrying off our furs!” 21 How strong an influence these public rumors and Prevost's official report exerted upon the enunciation of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823 has not yet been accurately determined, but it is certain that the Russian colony at Ross lent color to the fear of a much farther advance to the south; and served also as a strong argument for the establishment of American settlements in Oregon. 22
Beginning of overland immigration.—Thus by degrees the far off Spanish province on the Pacific was brought to the attention of the American people not merely through the agency of commerce, but, in an equally effective way, through the danger to which it was exposed of passing into the hands of a powerful European nation. A third agency, beginning somewhat later than either of those just named, but operating in a similar manner, was the overland communication with California established by hunters and trappers, and the subsequent immigration that naturally followed from the Western states.
Jedediah Smith.—Two of these early journeys deserve special attention. In August, 1826, Jedediah S. Smith, a native of Connecticut, 23 who had been for some years associated with Ashley in the fur trade and was at this time a partner in the Rocky Mountain Fur Company, left the company's post near the Great Salt Lake and after four months' travel reached San Diego with his band of fifteen men. Here Smith was arrested by the California authorities, who demanded passports, in accordance with the Mexican law, from all strangers. His imprisonment did not last long, however, as he soon found a sponsor for his good behavior in an American sea captain by the name of Cunningham, whose ship, the Courier, chanced to be in the harbor.
Upon his release, Smith, in spite of the commands of the San Diego authorities that he leave the province, seems to have wandered pretty much as he pleased through the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys, being prevented from crossing the Sierra Nevadas by heavy snows and the loss of his animals. Late in May, 1827, however, leaving all but two of his companions, he made the difficult passage of the mountains and reached the Great Salt Lake in a destitute condition. 24 In the fall of that year, Smith was again in California, bringing with him a second company of eighteen men, to the rather indignant surprise of the Californians, who, however, while insisting that he leave the country, did not seriously molest him. After remaining for some time, the American intruders continued their journey northward to Oregon where they were attacked by Indians. Many of the company were killed and all the furs lost, but Smith and those of his companions who escaped, made their way to Vancouver, where they obtained assistance from the agents of the Hudson's Bay Company. Two years later this pioneer of California explorers was killed in New Mexico. 25
The Pattie expedition.—Two years after Smith's arrest in San Diego, a second party of Americans, eight in number, with Sylvester and James Ohio Pattie as leaders, having been found in Lower California without passports, were brought before the Mexican governor, Echeandia, and thrown into prison on the charge of being spies of old Spain. The two Patties, father and son, were Kentuckians who had gradually pushed farther and farther west until they reached New Mexico and Arizona where for some years they were alternately miners and trappers. In was on one of their trapping expeditions down the Colorado that they attempted to cross the desert to the Spanish settlements on the cost, succeeding only after the most distressing and unprintable hardships.
Their reception by the Californians has been noted; nor were they so fortunate as Smith had been in securing a swift release. On the contrary, their prison experience was bitter in the extreme, if we may judge from the younger Pattie's account. Sylvester Pattie died in his cell unattended by his son, who was forbidden to visit his father, and all the prisoners were treated with great severity. Eventually, however, they were released on condition that Pattie should vaccinate the mission Indians, who were dying in great numbers from an epidemic of smallpox. In fulfillment of this agreement Pattie journeyed as far north as San Francisco, and later reached the Russian settlement of Ross. Finally, quitting California, he returned home by way of Mexico, where he vainly hoped to secure an indemnity, 26 and reached Kentucky, a broken and ruined man. The experiences which he underwent, as well as some which he probably did not undergo, were shortly afterwards published under the supervision of Timothy Flint of Cincinnati. 27
The bitter and oftentimes extravagant criticism of the Californians by the writer was well calculated to arouse a prejudice against them, but for the country itself he had only praise. “Those who traverse it,” he wrote, “if they have any capability of perceiving and admiring the beautiful and sublime in scenery, must be constantly excited to wonder and praise. It is no less remarkable for uniting the advantage of healthfulness, a good soil, temperate climate and yet one of exceeding mildness, a happy mixture of level and elevated ground and vicinity to the sea.” 28
Results of the Smith and Pattie expeditions.—The arrival of Smith and the two Patties in California marked a new chapter in the relations of that country and the United States. Following them in a surprisingly short time 29 came other bands of trappers under such leaders as Young, Jackson, Wolfskill, Walker, and many others whose names are not known and who left no record of their journeys. 30 Not infrequently members of these early parties gave up their wanderings and became influential and peaceful citizens, while others were a constant menace to the California authorities. As for the rest, coming and going with the seasons, rough, carless of life, contemptuous of law, they wandered up and down the great inland valleys and rivers of California; or by frequent crossing of the Sierras prepared the way for the subsequent flow of immigration.
“One sees in his pages,” says Thwaites in referring to Pattie's narrative,
the beginnings of the drama to be fought out in the Mexican war—the rich and beautiful country which excited the cupidity of the American pioneer; the indolence and effeminacy of the inhabitants which inspired the backwoodsman's contempt; and the vanguard of the American advance, already touching the Rockies and ready to push on to the Pacific. . . . As a part of the vanguard of the American host that was to crowd the Mexican from the fair province of his domain, Pattie's wanderings are typical and suggestive of more than mere adventure. 31
Butler's negotiations.—In these three ways, therefore, first, by commercial intercourse, then through fear of the Russian advance, and lastly by the opening up of the overland routes of communication, California gradually became more than a passing name to the people of the United States. 32 It was not, however, until 1835 that this government, influenced largely by the representations of commercial interests, made its first attempt to secure the harbor of San Francisco. 33
This early negotiation for the purchase of California was closely interwoven with the contemporaneous negotiation for the acquisition of Texas, forming indeed, simply a minor part of the larger project. Anthony Butler, a man eminently unqualified for any position of trust, was sent to Mexico in 1829 to carry out a scheme for the purchase of Texas which he himself had probably suggested, 34 succeeding Joel R. Poinsett, the American minister who was recalled at the request of the Mexican government. For six years Butler was left free to work his will, so far as he was able, with the Mexican officials, and to discredit both himself and his government.
From the first, Butler's communications to the State Department began to hint at bribery as the best means of accomplishing his purpose, and soon were openly advocating it. 35 Early in June, 1834, he asked to return to the United States on the ground that a personal interview with the President was highly important, and that after it he could return to Mexico to be much more useful to his government. 36 Having finally secured Jackson's consent to his request, Butler landed in New York in the early part of June, 1835, with a still more extensive scheme of bribery in his head than any he had so far suggested, and in his pocket a note signed by Hernández, a priest standing close to Santa Anna.
On June 17 the returned Minister addressed a letter to the Secretary of State, John Forsyth, and enclosed the note from the Mexican priest. In this Hernández had promised to bring about a cession of the desired territory provided $500,000 were placed at his disposal “to be judiciously applied.” 37 In the accompanying letter Butler assured Forsyth that the plan, if followed, would result not merely in the acquisition of Texas but eventually in the dominion of the United States “over the whole of that tract of territory known as New Mexico, and higher and lower California, an empire in itself, a paradise in climate . . . rich in minerals and affording a water route to the Pacific through the Arkansas and Colorado rivers.” 38
This letter met with cool response from the President. 39 Nevertheless, after an interview with Butler he allowed him, at his earnest solicitation, to return to his post in Mexico. 40 Before Butler left, however, the suggestion he had thrown out with regard to “higher California” received additional impulse from another source. On August 1, William A. Slacum, a purser in the United States Navy, wrote a letter to the President which, according to Adams, “kindled the passion of Andrew Jackson for the thirty-seventh line of latitude from the river Arkansas to the South Sea, to include the river and bay of San Francisco, and was the foundation of Forsyth's instruction to Butler of 6 August, 1835.” 41
These instructions mentioned by Adams give the first official attempt of the United States to secure from Mexico any part of her territory on the Pacific. The chief object, as expressed by Forsyth, was to obtain possession of San Francisco Bay which had been “represented to the President” 42 as “a most desirable place of resort for our numerous vessels engaged in the whaling business in the Pacific, far superior to any to which they now have access.” 43 No definite sum which Butler was authorized to offer was specified in the dispatch, but Adams places it as $500,000. 44 It should also be noted that Forsyth expressly disclaimed any desire to secure territory south of San Francisco. 45
The proposition thus entrusted to Butler was doubtless never submitted to the Mexican government. On December 27, Butler wrote the Department that it would be useless to push the negotiations at that time, though there was a chance of securing certain commercial privileges for American vessels at San Francisco. 46 A few months later he received notice of his recall, 47 and shortly afterwards left Mexico, carrying off “some of the most important papers of the negotiation.” 48
Indeed, Butler's whole course was one of consistent dishonor. The most surprising part of it, however, was the ease with which he continually hoodwinked and misled his own government; and after reading his correspondence one is freely willing to agree with Adams, that “for six long years he was mystifying Jackson with the positive assurance that he was within a hair's breadth of the object and sure of success, while Jackson was all the time wriggling along and snapping at the bait, like a mackeral after a red rag.” 49 It may be further added that Jackson's estimate of Butler was even lower than that of Adams. An endorsement on Butler's letter of March 7, 1834, declared him a “scamp,” and when, in 1843, Butler charged Jackson with consenting to his schemes of bribery, the venerable ex-President wrote another endorsement pronouncing him a “liar,” in whom there was “neither truth, justice, or gratitude,” and whose whole accusation was “a tissue of falsehood and false colourings.” 50
Jackson's later attempts.—After Butler's summary dismissal nothing apparently was done toward carrying out the instructions contained in Forsyth's despatch of August 6. But Jackson before his administration closed made two further tentative efforts to secure California. About the middle of January, 1837, 51 Santa Anna arrived in Washington, after his liberation by General Houston, to request the mediation of the United States between Texas and Mexico. 52 In expectation of his request, or after it was definitely made, Jackson had drawn up the general terms upon which this government would assume the undertaking. That which concerns us, reads as follows:
If Mexico will extend the line of the U. States to the Rio Grand—up that stream to latitude 38 north and then to the pacific including north calafornia we might instruct our minister to give them three millions and a half of dollars and deal then as it respected Texas as a magnanimous nation ought—to wit (?)—in the treaty with Mexico secure the Texians in all their just and legal rights and stipulate to admit them into the United States as one of the Union. 53
At the time that Jackson was making this proposal to Santa Anna he was also urging upon W. H. Wharton, the Texan Minister at Washington, the necessity of including California within the limits of Texas in order to reconcile the commercial interests of the north and east to annexation by giving them a harbor on the Pacific. “He is very earnest and anxious on this point of claiming the Californias,” wrote Wharton to Rusk in reporting Jackson's suggestion, “and says we must not consent to less. This is in strict confidence. Glory to God in the highest!” 54
During Van Buren's administration no official action toward the acquisition of California was attempted. The straitened condition of the treasury precluded any idea of purchase, even had Mexico manifested a willingness to sell; while the strained relations existing between the two nations throughout the greater part of this period served as an equally effective barrier. 55 Nevertheless the affairs of the distant Mexican province were more than once brought to the attention of the United States and interest in its resources and ultimate destiny grew with every passing year.
Rebellion of 1836.—The first of these local events to attract attention was the revolution begun in the fall of 1836 by several of the prominent native Californians against the Mexican governor, Nicolás Gutiérrez. Without great difficulty the leaders 56 in this movement accomplished their purpose, and after shipping Gutiérrez back to Mexico, placed one of their own number, Juan B. Alvarado, in the governor's chair. 57
The success of this rebellion against Mexican authority was significant for two reasons. In the first place it was made possible largely through the aid furnished by a company of foreigners, mostly American trappers, led by Isaac Graham, a Tenneseean of the typical border ruffian type. And in the second place it gave promise for a time of assuming the characteristics and proportions of the Texas movement for independence. 58 But as the California leaders probably had no very great desire for actual separation from Mexico, its net result was merely the substitution of a native governor for one of Mexican appointment.
Exaggerated rumors of this disturbance soon began to circulate throughout the United States, and it was even reported to the State Department that California, having declared her independence, was on the eve of asking the protection of the Russians at Bodega—an event which would mean, said the writer, the United States consul at the Sandwich Islands, the unification of the Russians and Californians and the extension of the Czar's power from the Bay of San Francisco to the Columbia River. 59
Kelley's Memoir.—During the administration of Van Buren the question of the occupation of Oregon came also to be of critical importance; 60 and, as a natural consequence, California received a certain amount of the nation's interest. In a supplemental report on the Oregon territory submitted to Congress, February 16, 1839, by the committee of foreign affairs, many of the documents contained references to California. While one of them, a memoir by Hall J. Kelley, the eccentric emigration enthusiast of Massachusetts, devoted more than half its space to a description of that country. “I extend my remarks to this part of California,” from San Francisco northward, wrote Kelley in explanation, “because it has been and may again be, made the subject of conference and negotiation between Mexico and the United States; and because its future addition to our western possessions is most unquestionably a matter to be desired.” 61
Affairs between 1836-1840.—It cannot be said, however, in spite of such efforts as those put forth by Kelley, that the years between 1836 and 1840 were distinguished by any marked increase of immigration from the United States into California. 62 The early traffic along the coast in furs had materially decreased; and even inland, the business was becoming less remunerative. Yet the great interior valleys still offered lucrative fields for the roving bands of American, English, and French trappers who, when not engaged in their ordinary trade, frequently made additional profit by driving off the horses of the Californians, or by joining thieving expeditions sent out by the Indians for the same purpose. 63 The hide and tallow trade likewise continued to flourish, 64 and remained so completely a monopoly of the New England merchants, so far at least as Americans were concerned, 65 that, on the coast, Boston and the United States became synonymous terms. 66 An occasional vessel from the government's South Pacific squadron touched at California ports; 67 a trade in cattle between Oregon and the region around San Francisco served to bring these two territories into closer relationships; 68 the publication of various books upon California's resources and political condition tended to attract the attention of the outside world; 69 and, finally, the coming of John A. Sutter in 1839 and the establishment of his for at New Helvetia, the present site of the capital of the State, saved the period under discussion from being by any means barren of results for the American interests.
Neither should the reflexive influence of the events in Texas be omitted in this connection. We have already mentioned the revolution in 1836 and the reports that California was preparing to follow the steps of her sister province. The American mind, especially in the west, had never a high conception of the Mexican people; the ease with which Texas won her independence and the senseless atrocities of the Mexican soldiers had served to increase this feeling to a considerable extent; and restless spirits were already advocating a re-enactment of the scenes of Texas in California. Immigration, however, had not furnished sufficient Americans for carrying out such a program, but it was freely prophesied that these would shortly come.
“To such men as the Back-settlers distance is of little moment,” wrote Alexander Forbes in 1838, and they are already acquainted with the route. The north American tide of population must roll on southward, and overwhelm not only California but other more important states. This latter event, however, is in the womb of time; but the invasion of California by American settlers is daily talked of; and if Santa Anna had prevailed against Texas a portion of its inhabitants sufficient to overrun California would now have been its masters. 70
The Graham affair.—So common had become these rumors by 1840 that in April of that year nearly a hundred 71 English and American residents in California, who were without passports, were suddenly arrested for engaging in a plot to overthrow the government and declare the country independent of Mexican control. 72 Chief of these so-called conspirators was Isaac Graham, whose name has already been mentioned in connection with the revolt of the Californians four years before.
Graham and some fifty of his companions, after undergoing a farcical trial at Santa Barbara and some pretty severe treatment at the hands of the California officials, were shipped down the coast and thence to Tepic. Here the English consul, Barron, and Alexander Forbes secured the release of most of the prisoners and a speedy trial for the remainder, which resulted in their acquittal. Some received immediate indemnity for their losses and ill-treatment; others returned to California to secure legal evidence against the government, being aided in this by a vessel of the United States navy. 73
The illegal arrest of such a large number of American citizens naturally excited some comment in the United States. Powhatan Ellis, who had returned as Minister to Mexico in 1839, was instructed to demand satisfaction for the treatment accorded his countrymen and their immediate release if still in captivity. 74 Reports of the affair soon found their way into print and for a long time served as proof positive for American readers of the cruelty of the Californians. 75 Later, also, the non-payment of indemnity by Mexico was made the subject of official protest; 76 while several years afterwards, Polk was assured by his confidential agent that no claim or demand so strong as that of the Graham prisoners could be brought against Mexico to secure a cession of California. 77
As a further result of these arbitrary proceedings against foreigners, a petition was drawn up by the merchants of the California coast, many of whom, however, had little use for Graham and those of his ilk, 78 praying that a United States ship might be stationed permanently in California waters because of the insecurity of property, arbitrariness of the authorities, and mockery of justice prevailing in the province. 79 This request met with prompt recognition from the Secretary of the Navy, Abel P. Upshur, who on December 4, 1841 announced in his annual report to Congress that the protection of American interests in California demanded an increase of the government's naval force in the Pacific, and shortly afterwards despatched Commodore Ap Catesby Jones to take command of the enlarged squadron. 80
Immigration 1840-1.—More important, however, for the American cause than any of the results that came from the arrest of Graham and his companions, was the beginning of organized emigration to California during the years 1840-1841. The reports spread by trappers, adventurers, travellers, and Americans residing in California, had by this time begun to bear definite fruit. The west, especially, had become interested in the Pacific Coast and looked to Oregon and California as fields for future settlement. So great was the enthusiasm in Platte County, Missouri, for example, that public meetings were held, committees appointed, and a pledge drawn up, to which five hundred names were appended, binding its signers to convert their property into emigrant outfits and start in the following May 81 from the rendezvous at Sapling Grove, Kansas, for California. Though a number of circumstances served to cool this ardor, 82 and only forty-eight persons left for California at the time agreed upon, 83 the departure of these is significant as foreshadowing a movement that, with occasional interruption, was to continue with increasing energy during the next five years.
John Bidwell, a member of this early party, has left us a typical story of how he and his neighbors and many another family of the west became interested in California between 1840 and the outbreak of the Mexican War. At the time of which we are speaking, Bidwell's neighborhood had become considerably excited over the stories of one whom he described as a “calm, considerate man” by the name of Rubidoux. This story-stelling traveller, whose brother Joseph was a well-known western trader, having recently returned from a trip to California, brought back such marvelous reports of the productiveness of its soil and the genial qualities of its climate, that a public meeting was held “to hear more about this wonderful country on the Pacific Coast.” When Rubidoux had finished his address before this gathering, repeating perhaps in a more formal way what he had already told many in private conversation, he became the target of questions from the audience. One easily imagines the form these took, regarding some particular phase of California conditions in which individuals were interested; or in respect to the length and hardships of the overland journey.
One ague-racked member of the assembly even wanted to know if chills and fever prevailed in that country which Rubidoux had described as a “perfect paradise, a perpetual spring.” (“There never was but one man in California who had the chills,” replied Rubidoux. “He was from Missouri and carried the disease in his system. It was such a curiosity to see a man shake with the chills that the people of Monterey went eighteen miles into the country to see him.” 84 Unfortunately Bidwell neglects to state how many of the forty-eight who eventually left Sapling Grove were influenced by this answer to seek an escape from the malaria of the Mississippi Valley and the mournful sufferings to which so many of the early settlers were exposed.
The growing interest of the United States was not wholly confined to the west during these years, however. Notice of the emigrant parties that were leaving Missouri was printed in the eastern papers. In Rochester, New York, John J. Warner, while advocating the building of a railroad across the continent to the Columbia, devoted much of his public lectures to a description of California and the advantages of San Francisco Bay. 85 Harvey Baldwin, from the same neighborhood, perhaps influenced by Warner, addressed a long letter to the president, contrasting the commercial importance and resources of California with the comparative worthlessness of the Oregon territory and urging him to take immediate steps toward its acquisition. 86 It was in the summer of 1841, also, that an exploring expedition of six vessels under command of Lieutenant Charles Wilkes reached San Francisco Bay, with special instructions from the government to make careful surveys of that harbor. 87 And thus in many ways 88 the people and government of the United States were kept in touch with California and its affairs during the early part of the decade beginning with 1840.
Attitude of the Californians.—The feeling among the California officials over the arrival of the immigrant parties of 1841 was one partly of alarm and partly of acquiesence. Early in May, 1841, General Almonte, Mexican Minister of War, wrote to Vallejo, the Comandante General of California, concerning the reported emigration of fifty-eight families from Missouri, and gave strict orders that every foreigner should be compelled to show a passport or leave the country. In the despatch Almonte had also enclosed a clipping from the National Intelligencer regarding “the convenience and necessity of the acquisition of the Californias by the United States” and one of similar tenor from the Washington “Glova.” 89 Nor, with such evidence at hand, is it surprising that he further warned Vallejo to put but little trust in the alleged claim of the Americans that they were coming with peaceful intentions. The Texas immigrants had made the same false assertion.
But in spite of this command from Mexico, the Californians showed little desire to molest the respectable class of settlers from the United States. The members of the Bartleson party were compelled to explain their presence in the country and submit to the formalities of a nominal arrest after which they were free to go and come as they pleased. 90 While the reception of those arriving by the southern route, though tinged somewhat with suspicion, was equally free from any manifestations of hostility. 91
Efforts of Waddy Thompson.—A period of renewed activity in the efforts of the United States to gain possession of California, began with the accession of Tyler to the presidency. Shortly before his recall from Mexico, Powhatan Ellis had written to Webster, then Secretary of State, urging the necessity of securing certain ports on the Pacific on account of the increase of American commerce and the growing importance of the whale fisheries. 92 While with the coming of Waddy Thompson as United States minister, a very definite movement was set on foot looking to the purchase of the territory. 93
In his first despatch to the home government, Thompson showed himself a surprising enthusiast for such an acquisition. Mexico, he thought, would be willing to cede both California and Texas in return for a cancellation of the American claims against her. 94 But of the two, Texas was by far the less desirable, having no comparison in value with California—“the richest, the most beautiful, and healthiest country in the world.” Control of Upper California, continued Thompson, would eventually mean the ascendency of the United States over the whole Pacific. The bay of San Francisco was “capacious enough to receive the navies of all the world,” while the neighboring forests could supply timber sufficient “to build all the ships of these navies.” With this bay in her possession, and the harbors of San Diego and Monterey, the nation would have not only necessary ports for her whaling vessels; but by opening up internal communication with the Arkansas and other western streams, could “secure the trade of India and the whole Pacific Ocean.”
In agricultural lines, also, Thompson was assured that California would prove of immense value to the United States, and one day become the “granary of the Pacific.” He also believed that, as slavery was not necessary there, the north and south could arrange another compromise. “I am profoundly satisfied,” he concluded, after warning Webster against the designs of France and England upon the territory, that in its bearing upon all the interests of our country, agricultural, political, manufacturing, commercial and fishing, the importance of the acquisition of California cannot be overestimated. If I could mingle any selfish feelings with interests to my country so vast, I would desire no higher honor than to be an instrument in securing it. 95
Ten days after he had written this despatch to the Secretary of State, Thompson sent one of like tenor to the president. “Since my despatch to Mr. Webster,” he began, I have had an interview with Gen. Santa Anna and although I did not broach to him directly the subject of our correspondence I have but little doubt that I shall be able to accomplish your wishes and to add also the acquisition of Upper California.
This latter, I believe, will be by far the most important event that has occurred to our country. Do me the favor to read my despatch to Mr. Webster in which my views of the matter are briefly sketched—I should be most happy to illustrate your administration and my own name by an acquisition of such lasting benefit to my own country.
Upon this subject I beg your special instructions, both as to moving on the matter and the extent to which I am to go in the negotiations and the amount to be paid. The acquisition of Upper California will reconcile the northern people as they have large fishing and commercial interests in the Pacific and we have literally no port there. Be pleased also to have me pretty strongly instructed on the subject of our claims or leave the responsibility to me. Procrastination, the policy of all weak governments, is peculiarly so with this, and they are very poor and will never pay us one farthing unless pretty strong measures are taken. 96
Late in June Webster answered Thompson's despatches, giving him full liberty to sound the Mexican government upon the subject of ceding a portion of her territory on the Pacific in satisfaction of all, or a part of the American claims. “Although it is desirable that you should present the Port and Harbor of St. Francisco as the prominent object to be obtained,” wrote Webster, “yet if a cession should be made, the Province would naturally accompany the Port. It may be useful however for divers reasons, that the convenience and benefit of the Port itself, should at least for the present, be spoken of as what is chiefly desired by the United States.” In conclusion, Thompson was advised to proceed in a circumspect manner with the negotiations, and especially warned against giving the impression that the United States was eager for the purchase, since it would be far better to convey the idea that she was willing to settle the debt in this way simply for the convenience of Mexico. 97
During the summer of 1842 one further communication regarding California came from Thompson; but this, being in the form of a warning against English encroachments, will be considered in another connection. Toward the close of the year all thought of negotiation was temporarily cut short, as it happened, when Webster was especially anxious to secure Mexico's consent to the tripartite agreement, 98 by the seizure of the port of Monterey by Commodore Jones, who, as we have seen, had been placed in command of the Pacific squadron by Secretary Upshur nearly a year before.
The details of this incident have been described so frequently that it would be useless to repeat them here. 99 It may simply be said that the American commander, convinced by various reports that the United States and Mexico were at war 100 and that the latter was on the point of ceding California to Great Britain, 101 sailed as rapidly as possible from Callao to Monterey, which he took possession of without opposition, beyond a formal protest from the California officials. The next day, realizing that he had made a mistake, Jones surrendered the town to its former owners with formal apology for his error.
The seizure of Monterey, so far as the Californians themselves were concerned, seems to have been taken pretty much as a matter of course. A full report was forwarded to the Mexican Government 102 and the authorities at Los Angeles availed themselves of the opportunity to charge the captain of one of Jones's vessels, the Alert, with spiking the artillery at San Diego and injuring the harbor. 103 American residents were naturally uneasy for a time lest they should suffer from the ill-will engendered among the Californians by the occurrence, 104 but their fears were entirely groundless. 105
In Mexico, however, a different spirit prevailed. Jones had reported his action both to the authorities at Washington and to Waddy Thompson at Mexico City. 106 Without waiting for instructions from the department, the American minister at once disavowed the seizure of the California town and promised satisfaction for any loss thereby sustained. 107 Jones was recalled and temporarily deprived of his command; while Webster made formal apologies in the name of the government for the proceedings. But beyond this, in the infliction of a far heavier penalty demanded by the Mexican Minister upon the American commodore, both Webster and Tyler refused to go. 108
In the United States, also, the capture of Monterey furnished John Quincy Adams and others of his kind with fresh ammunition for onslaughts against the administration and its policy of annexing Mexican territory. 109 Reports of these attacks and overdrawn charges made by the Americans against the American president reached Mexico, and served to increase there the spirit of hostility and suspicion already engendered by the incident. 110 So that Thompson was compelled to notify his government that it was “wholly out of the question to do anything as to California and after recent events there it would be imprudent to allude to it in any way,” the only possibility of securing territory at all lying in a cession of San Francisco some time in the future when Mexico should find herself unable to pay the awards of the American claims. 111
The proposed Tripartite Agreement.—While this correspondence was being carried on with the American minister at Mexico City, Webster was also making tentative efforts to bring about an arrangement between Great Britain, Mexico and the United States for the settlement of the three vexed questions of Texas, Oregon, and California. As early as the summer of 1842, when Lord Ashburton was in this country as special commissioner, Webster had approached him with the suggestion of settling the Oregon boundary line by ceding the American claims to territory north of the Columbia to Great Britain, in return for a portion of California that should be purchased from Mexico by the two nations in common. 112
By the beginning of 1843 this idea had come to assume an important place in the plans of the administration. 113 Thompson was instructed to sound the Mexican government on the subject, and it was likewise brought to the notice of General Almonte, Mexican minister at Washington. 114 As England was known to favor it, a rough outline for the basis of negotiations was sent by Webster to Edward Everett, American ambassador at London. 115 The terms of this were as follows:
1.Mexico to cede Upper California to the United States.
2.The United States to pay — millions of dollars for the cession.
3.Of this sum, — millions to be paid to American claimants against Mexico.
4.The remainder to English creditors or bondholders of Mexico.
5.The Oregon boundary to be settled on the line of the Columbia. 116
Both Webster and Tyler felt that this tripartite arrangement would prove the means of satisfying all sections of the country. 117 Tyler, especially, was anxious to include the admission of California in the terms of any treaty resulting from it, writing to Webster that “Texas might not stand alone, nor . . . the line proposed for Oregon. Texas would reconcile all to the line, while California would reconcile or pacify all to Oregon.” 118 He was even anxious to send Webster on a special mission to Great Britain, 119 and Webster expressed a willingness to go provided he could settle the Oregon question and obtain California, for Webster had as much desire to secure the latter, if not more, as did Tyler. 120
The idea of a special mission was, however, cut short by the adverse action of Congress. 121 Tyler then endeavored to persuade Everett to accept the new embassy to China in order that Webster might take his place in London and carry through the measure under discussion. But Everett, preferring the pleasures of the Court of St. James to the uncertainties of the Mandarin ministry, declined the exchange. 122 About this time, also, Thompson's despatch of January 30 reached Washington, with the information that it would be useless to approach Mexico regarding the cession of any territory; and Webster, whose days of usefulness in the cabinet were over, and who saw no prospects of effecting anything further, either regarding the adjustment of the Oregon difficulties or the acquisition of California, retired to private life. 123
Following Webster's resignation, and the death of Hugh S. Legaré, after only a month's service as Secretary ad interim. the cabinet was reorganized, and in July, Abel P. Upshur, former Secretary of the Navy, became head of the Department of State.
Effect of Mexican hostility to England.—At this time interest centered primarily in Texas where matters were fast coming to a crisis; but in the fall of 1843 Thompson's despatches began to call attention again to California. On September 28 he wrote that the strong bond of friendship, formerly existing between Mexico and England, was fast giving way to a feeling of hostility that had manifested itself openly in an insult to the British flag. 124 A few days later he reported an interview with Santa Anna in which he had been told that, in the event of a collision with Great Britian, which seemed probable, Mexico would look to the United States to protect California. 125
In less than two weeks Thompson again referred to the subject of his conversation with Santa Anna and assured Upshur that if war actually broke out between the two countries, Mexico would certainly cede California to the United States to keep it from falling into English hands. The comparison suggested in this communication seems worthy of note: “You will remember,” wrote Thompson, “that it was the fear of the seizure of Louisiana by England that induced Bonaparte to cede it to us. The acquisition of California will be of little less importance . . . There is no prospect whatever of such a cession but in the event of a war between Mexico and England. Then nothing would be easier.” 126
Order against Americans.—In connection with this subject of the ill will of Mexico toward England the American minister had earlier reported a less hostile feeling prevailing toward his countrymen in Mexico and that the government was coming to look upon them with a far more friendly eye. 127 If this were true at all, however, the change was of a purely temporary nature. As far back as July 14, an order had been issued to the governor of California, 128 Manuel Micheltorena, to expel all citizens of the United States from his province and prohibit future immigration. 129 This, however, did not come under Thompson's notice until late in December, when he at once vigorously protested and demanded its recission. His communications on the subject remaining unanswered, he threatened next to break off diplomatic relations, and even called for his passports.
Upon this the Mexican Secretary of Foreign Relations assured him that the order was meant to apply to other foreigners as well as to Americans and had been aimed only at “seditious” inhabitants of the province, to whose governor “very benevolent explanations” had been sent. This, though not satisfactory, was sufficient to prevent Thompson from leaving Mexico, especially as he had no great desire to carry his threat into execution; while upon his further remonstrance, the order was entirely countermanded. 130 In obtaining the withdrawal of a somewhat similar law, prohibiting foreigners from engaging in retail trade either in Mexico or any of her provinces, Thompson was not, however, by any means so successful. 131
On February 28, 1844, Upshur lost his life by the explosion on board the Princeton, and Calhoun took his place in the cabinet, his appointment, according to Duff Green, having been urged for the three-fold purpose of conducting “the negotiation for the annexation of Texas, the purchase of California, and the adjustment of our northwestern boundary.” 132
Hasting's scheme for an independent California.—Ben E. Green, the son of Duff Green, who had been secretary of legation under Thompson, was appointed chargé upon the return of the latter to the United States, and entrusted with securing the assent of Mexico to the annexation of Texas. 133 This was no easy task. Whatever ill-will there had been against England had died away, and though in its place some difficulty had arisen with France, the great weight of Mexican hostility was directed toward the government at Washington. But whether with France or with the United States, Santa Anna was openly advocating a foreign war to develop the nation's resources, and Green could see no benefit to be gained by this country from becoming a party to such a quarrel, “unless, indeed, we should end by gaining possession of California, and thereby secure a harborage for our shipping on the Pacific and one of the finest countries on the Globe.” 134
A few days later, having received word of Upshur's death and Calhoun's appointment, Green wrote privately to the latter concerning some information in his possession, which he thought might prove important in the Oregon and Texas negotiations. 135 The substance of this was derived from a confidential interview about three months before with Lansford W. Hastings, a sometime resident of California, of whom we shall also have occasion to speak hereafter.
Hastings, on his way from California to New York, had given Green very positive assurance that a movement for independence was on foot in California, and only waited his return, with a party of emigrants as reinforcements, before materializing. There was also talk in Oregon of uniting with California and forming a separate republic; and the movement once begun would speedily be joined by the Mexican provinces bordering upon Texas. 136 The certainty of this was rendered more imminent by Santa Anna's attempt to provoke a war with France, which, if it came and were properly managed, would result in the annexation of the disaffected provinces to Texas. With such an addition of territory, Green warned Calhoun, who was already prone to alarms, “that Texas would no longer desire admission to our Union, but on the contrary would prove a dangerous rival both to the cotton interests of the South and the manufactures of the North.” 137
Efforts of Duff Green.—Following this despatch Calhoun received a more detailed report on California and the whole Mexican situation from a personal interview with Waddy Thompson who returned about this time from Mexico. 138 The rejection of the Texas treaty in the senate on June 9, however, left little place in the plans of the administration for immediate action regarding California.