clared that at no time had he been prepared to accept a boundary less favourable than the forty-ninth parallel. Hence, if he was willing to give up our claim to Northern Oregon at all, we must infer that he would have yielded it only in exchange for something he deemed more valuable to the United States, and possibly he thought Northern California would be more valuable. But California belonged to Mexico and could be secured by treaty with IMexico, not by treaty with Britain. Why, then, did Webster mention this matter to Ashburton? To this question one answer is, that Webster was willing to receive from the British government a tender of their good offices with Mexico to induce her to sell Northern California to the United States. Had Britain responded in this way, and had she secured Mexico's consent to the transfer, it is possible that Webster would have been willing to sign a treaty giving Britain the Oregon boundary she desired. Since Ashburton merely answered that Britain would make no objection to our acquisition of Northern California, but assumed no responsibility in the matter, Webster refused to discuss the Oregon boundary question further at that time.
Wilkes's report. Ashburton concluded that the return of Lieutenant Charles Wilkes to Washington from his famous exploring cruise in the Pacific, during which he had visited both Oregon and California, was the cause of Webster's loss of interest in the Oregon boundary settlement. It was understood, he wrote, that Wilkes reported very unfavourably upon the har
