THE CENTENNIAL HISTORY OP OREGON 87
nations of Europe are still enforcing their ideas of two hundred years ago upon the weaker peoples of Asia and Africa to maintain privilege and power to taxa- tion without representation. The decision of the Supreme Court in 1810 did not pass unchallenged. Justice Story, in his exposition of the constitution, page 13, says: "As to countries in the possession of native tribes at the time of the discovery, it seems difficult to perceive what right of title any discovery could confer. It would seem strange to us, if, in the present times, the natives of the South Sea Islands should by making a voyage to and discovery of the United States, on that account set up a right to this country. The truth is, that the European nations paid not the slightest regards to the rights of the native tribes. They treated them as barbarians that they were at liberty to destroy. They might convert them to Christianity, and if they refused to be converted, they might drive them from their homes as unworthy to inhabit the country. Their real object was to extend their own power and increase their own wealth, by acquiring the treasures as well as the territory of the New World. Avarice and ambition were at the bottom of all their enterprises."
Seventy-five years after this criticism by Justice Story. Theodore Roosevelt in his Winning of the West, treats this question somewhat differently, saying: "Looking back, it is easy to say that much of the wrong-doing (to the Indians) could have been prevented, but if we examine the facts to find out the truth, we are bound to admit that the struggle (between whites and Indians) was really one that could not possibly have been avoided, unless we were willing to admit that the whole continent west of the Alleghanies should remain an unpeopled waste, the hunting grounds of savages, war was inevitable. And even had we been willing and had refrained from encroaching on the Indians' lands, the war would have come, nevertheless, for then the Indians themselves would have en- croached on ours. The Indians had no ownership in the land as we understand that term. Undoubtedly the Indians have often suffered terrible injustice at our hands. The conduct of the Georgians towards the Cherokees, and the treat- ment of Chief Joseph and Nez Perces in Oregon, may be mentioned as indelible blots on our fair fame."
But what has all this to do with the history of Oregon ? A very great deal. It throws light on the great drama of settlement of this region of Old Oregon. It explains the massacre of Dr. Marcus Whitman and family, about which more has been written than any other one subject in the history of the Northwest.
The Americans made a great mistake in assuming when they came to this country, that the Indians had no rights to the land which they ought to respect. The missionaries who came professing to be the best friends to the Indians were as much to blame as those who made no pretense of religion. It was a fatal mis- take to think the Indians had no ideas on this first of all questions. They knew nothing of the practice of European nations or of the decisions of courts ; all the guide they had was the light of nature, and that first and greatest of laws — self- preservation. The Indian never troubled himself to inquire into what he could not comprehend. He did not launch into conjecture or give reign to imagination. His puerile mind followed the glimmering light which had led his forefathers. He saw that he must, like the deer and the buffalo, live on the land ; and that if another man crowded him off it he must die. Here he was where his ancestors had lived untold ages. He knew no other place. He was familiar with the Hud-
