temporaneous sources on President Tyler's administration, he could easily have found in that same Vol. 2, of "Letters and Times of the Tylers," on pages 447, 448 and 449, over the signature of President John Tyler himself, in three letters to his son Robert, the conclusive evidence that as late as December, 184S, and January, 1846 (i. e., more than two and a half years after Whitman's visit to the States), neither Whitman nor anyone else had changed Tyler's ideas as to the best policy to pursue on the Oregon and California acquisition problem, and that precisely what his correspondence shows that he hoped to accomplish in 1842-3, he still, in 1845-6, thought should be attempted by President Polk. The first letter is dated December 11, 1845, and after commenting on President Polk's discussion .of the Oregon question in his first annual message, continues, "I looked exclusively to an adjustment by the 49th parallel, and never dreamed for a moment of surrendering the free navigation of the Columbia . . . . .I never dreamed of ceding this country, unless for the greater equivalent of California, which I fancied Great Britain might be able to obtain for us through her influence with Mexico; and this was but a dream of policy which was never embodied. I confess that throughout the whole of this business I have been firmly impressed with the belief that our true policy was to let things take their natural course, under an improved treaty of joint policy."
The second was dated December 23, 1845, and again discussing the Oregon question and Polk's message thereon, he wrote, "I think it would be a high stroke of policy to interest Great Britain in our negotiation with Mexico, so as to lead her to concede California, and thus to bring about a tripartite treaty, according to Great Britain the line she offers" (i. e., 49 degrees to the most northeasterly branch of the Columbia, and thence the river to the Pacific), "and we take California, Great Britain to pay so much towards our purchase. It would require great skill to bring this about."
If it would have required "great skill" for Polk, fresh from a triumphant election by the people, and with a good working majority in both Houses of Congress eager to support him, to carry out this "dream of policy," the reader can see how utterly impossible it would have been for Tyler, hated by the Whig leaders, and distrusted by the most influential Democrats, and only half supported part of the time by discordant factions of both parties, to ever have "embodied" his "dream of policy" about Oregon in a treaty that would have had any chance of securing two-thirds of the Senate in favor of its ratification.
The third was dated January i, 1846, and after expressing his objections to war with Mexico iand England, if it can honorably be avoided, he continues, "The United States requires
