The Shadow Monopoly Over Washington Territory
Legislators in 1854 struggle to reconcile the existence of a British-owned agricultural monopoly with American settlement goals.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The House resolved itself into a committee of the whole upon the memorial regarding the Puget Sound Agricultural Company, where a general and animated discussion took place. Mr. Chenoweth remarked that while a foreign corporation exists in our midst—its very existence is inconsistent with our institutions, our peace, and the general prosperity of our country. The danger of litigation, contention from conflict of boundaries, and the uncertainty of the nature and extent of their rights prevent many prudent men from settling within the limits claimed by them. Their monopoly of trade, owing to their immense capital, means that no American citizen can successfully compete with them. The irreconcilable differences between their policy and government and our own—their hold and unbounded influence over the Indian tribes—these are all facts which I wish to have clearly and emphatically set forth in the memorial.
“A foreign corporation exists in our midst—its very existence is inconsistent with our institutions, our peace, and the general prosperity of our country.”
This 1854 debate reflects the early territorial anxiety over corporate land-hoarding, a theme that echoes in contemporary Pacific Northwest arguments about the influence of global capital on local real estate and agricultural land prices.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.