LAST PHASE OF OREGON BOUNDARY 191
sheriff had acted according to the general laws relating to the
duties of his office. "The ownership remains now as it did
at the execution of the treaty of June 15, 1846, and can in no
wise be affected by the alleged possession of British subjects."
After some arguments in support of his position he concludes:
"I shall take the earliest opportunity to send a copy of
your communication and of this reply to the secretary of
state of the United States, and in the meantime I have to
reciprocate most earnestly your hope that nothing may
occur to interrupt the harmony and good feeling which
should characterize the relations of neighboring states."
Tn nforrjflgr thp mfflpj to Washington, Governor Stevens
made_it an international question. The Com
cidmg to make it a question of diplomacy, presented a claim
for nearly $15,000 ( 2.'XX)-13s ) to the State Department
through the British Minister. The upshot was that Mr. W. L.
Marey. the Secretary of State, wrote to Stevens on July 14,
1855, and to the British Minister, Mr. John F. Crompton,
on July 17, defining the position as it was then understood.
As this point in the history of the question is important (it is
the point at which is fixed the status that was disturbed about
four years later as I shall relate), the communications had
better be given rather fully. To Governor Stevens Mr. Marcy
said:
"He (President Franklin Pierce) has instructed me to say to you that the officers of the Territory should abstain from all acts on the disputed grounds which are calcu- lated to provoke any conflicts, so far as it can be done without implying the concession to the authority of Great Britain of an exclusive right over the premises.
"The title ought to be settled before either party should exclude the other by force, or exercise complete and ex- clusive sovereign rights within the fairly disputed limits. Application will be made to the British government to interpose with the local authorities on the northern bor- ders of our territory to abstain from like acts of exclusive ownership, with the explicit understanding that any for- bearance on either side to assert the rights, respectively,
