Al small opening through the pickets, which was usually closed after certain hours by means of a door from the inside. though these forts differed considerably in magnitude, according to the importance of their station, there was little difference employed in their general construction. According to "Forster's History of Voyages," the first of these posts was called Fort Charles, and was built for the English by Captain Gillam, in 1668, at the mouth of Rupert River on Hudson Bay. This was the commencement of a vast series of fur stations or forts, which rapidly spread from the Atlantic to the Pacific over the whole upper portion of North America, which vast tract of country now comprises the Dominion of Canada; also a number of the northern states. And on the site of many of these fur posts now stand large commercial cities and towns. As for instance, Pittsburgh, Penn., is built on the site of old Fort Pitt; Detroit, Mich., on the site of old Fort Detroit; Chicago, Ill., majestically towers above the mouldering ruins of the old fur post of Fort Dearborn; Winnipeg, Man. (originally Fort Garry), was for years the prairie haunt of many a roving redskin, over whose sombre cyclopean features played a broad smile as he stacked with pride his assorted furs, for barter, alongside the cold, fish-rodlike barrel of an old-time flint-lock. Of course, these musket barrels were very expensive, probably cost twelve shillings a yard, but then the honest fur-traders didn't begrudge the poor Indian a few extra feet of steel tubing, especially when he so willingly gave up the same number of feet in furs, which were only worth in London not more than twenty times the amount which the shrewd Indian had succeeded in disposing of them for to the unsuspecting white man. This, however, is more in accord with public opinion than with the Company's regular method of trade. Besides these flourishing trade centres, there are various others similarly situated, but which, through lack of space, we prefer not to mention in these pages. -em After the coalition of the Hudson's Bay Company and the Northwest Company in 1821, parliament, in view of the fact that the Company's territorial rights were without limitaccording to the original charter granted by Charles II.— powered the crown to issue a new license. By this Act the Hudson's Bay Company acquired absolute control of the "Indian Territories," which lands were expressly declared to be all that region of British North America to the west of Rupert's Land. But instead of this new license being perpetual, as had the charter, it was only issued for short periods of 21 years each. This gave the British crown the privilege of allowing the license to expire without renewal, providing the home government deemed it advisable at any time to throw the country open to settlement. Shortly after the renewal of the first license, the region to the south of the Indian territory, through the liberal policy of the United States government toward settlers, became the abode of many soil-tillers, and as there was no boundary existing, these settlers very naturally crowded northward into the Hudson's Bay Company's possessions. These encroachments on the part of home-seekers called for a dividing line, which was finally settled by the "Oregon Treaty" of June 15th, 1846, which treaty established the 49th parallel as the national partition between the United States and the British American domains. The result of this was that the fur company was obliged to abandon its fur stations to the south of this line and to confine operations within its now well-defined but still vast tract of country. It now became apparent to the Hudson's Bay Company that it would soon be impossible to keep settlers out of this fertile region, and that its far-reaching game preserve was doomed. But in order to stave off the evil day as long as possible, the managers of the Company made a proposition to the British government to the effect that they were willing to undertake the colonization of Vancouver Island, providing parliament would invest them with the necessery power. Accordingly, on January 13th, 1849, the Crown granted the said Island to the Hudson's Bay Company for the purpose of settlement at a yearly rental of seven shillings, reserving the right to recall the grant at the end of five years, or at the end of ten years to buy it back, providing no colony had been formed. But as civilization is directly opposed and, consequently, very destructive to the fur traffic, it is not surprising that during the ten years which followed, this great monopoly did not use its utmost efforts in colonizing, for well it knew that sooner or later it only meant the complete overthrow of its own profitable vocation. Consequently, parliament, now fully satisfied that the colonization scheme in the hands of furtraders was a failure, purchased the Island from the Company at the expiration or the ten years' term, and at the same time allowed the Company's license of exclusive right to trade with the Indians to expire without renewal. Small settlements, which seemed impossible to prevent, were now rapidly springing up in different parts of its territory, so rather than have trouble, the Hudson's Bay Company, in 1869, disposed of all its territorial claims to the British government, receiving £300,000 as indemnity, but reserving at the same time all its forts, with ten acres of land around each, besides numerous other small tracts. The Hudson's Bay Company, although still in good working order, is no longer the great monopoly that reigned for two hundred years prior to July 1st, 1871, when the east and the west joined hands, as it were, in the celebration of their first union "Dominion Day." The fur business has not only rapidly decreased during late years, but has also fallen largely into other hands, so that the Hudson's Bay Company of to-day maintains but a few forts, and depends more for profits on the sale of real estate and general merchandise to Europeans than exclusively on the fur trade with the aborigines, as in days past. [P. S.-For more extended information we beg to refer the reader to the following volumes: Fitzgerald's 66 Examination of the Charter and Proceedings of the Hudson's Bay Company;" Montgomery Martin's "Hudson's Bay Company's Territories and Vancouver's Island;" also Hubert H. Bancroft's "History of British Columbia," "History of Oregon," and "History of the Northwest Coast" contain much interesting descriptive matter relating to the Company's operations on the Pacific Coast.] |