LAST PHASE OF OREGON BOUNDARY 195
following year saw the gold-rush, which had so momentous an effect. One result was that disappointed miners drifted back to Victoria and eventually over to the American side in search of new opportunities. Many of these men were Amer- ican, but in any case the land policy of the Hudson's Bay Company made settlement in British territory almost impos- sible. The attractions of San Juan were stronger than fear of Indians""and doubt of status, and a number oTuiereturning miners squatty according to the Company, pre-empted ac- cordfog- to the Americans, on thf island.^ The extent of occupation can be judged from a report by Mr. Henry R. Crosbie, an American magistrate who took part in some of the proceedings connected with the dispute. On May 20, 1859, the Company had
"4,500 sheep, 40 head of cattle, five yoke of oxen, 35 horses, and 40 hogs on the island . . . with about 80 acres fenced and under cultivation, sowed principally with oats, peas, and potatoes. There were attached to the Hudson's Bay Company station, besides Mr. Griffin, eighteen servants, three only of whom were white, and those three were naturalized American citizens, and exer- cised their rights as such at the territorial election held on the second Monday in July last, at which time there were twenty-nine actual settlers on the island." 26 The Hudson's Bay men were a motley crew, some of them South Sea Islanders.
Among the American settlers was Lyman A. Cutler, an- other "embattled farmer," who, as I shall tell, "fired the shot heard" throughout the North Pacific Coast region, the echoes of which were heard far off. In a sworn statement Cutler relates that in April of 1859 "he located on one hundred and sixty acres of land, agreeably to the pre-emption law." This, of course, was presuming that the sovereignty would be awarded to the United States. If San Juan eventually went to Great Britain, accounts as to title would have to be settled with the Hudson's Bay Company or with the Government of British Columbia; and the prospect could hardly be satisfac-
a$ See narrative of Charles McKay in the Washington Historical Quarterly Vol. 2, pp. 290- .203.
26 Ex. Doc. No. 77, 36th Cong. 1st Sess. p. 3.
