Thurston also succeeded in having a proviso added to the fourth section of the bill, skillfully worded, which forbade anyone claiming under the Donation Land Law to claim both under that law and under the treaty of 1846, that treaty providing that possessory rights of British subjects should be respected. As Dr. McLoughlin had declared, in 1849, his intentions to become a citizen and renounced his allegiance to Great Britain, he probably was no longer qualified to claim under the treaty. But even if he could have claimed under the treaty of 1846, as a British subject, that would not have given him a right to obtain title to his land claim under that treaty. It was afterwards held by the Supreme Court of Oregon, in the case of Cowenia v. Hannah, 3 Oregon, 465, and by Judge M. P. Deady, sitting as United States Circuit Judge, in the case of Town v. De Haven, 5 Sawyer, 146, that the stipulation in the treaty of 1846 that the United States would respect the possessory rights of British subjects, was merely a recognition of such possessory rights and conferred no right to, or in the land, and that no means were provided by the Donation Land Law, or otherwise, to obtain title or a patent, but a British subject might have a claim against the United States for compensation; that a claim to land, under the treaty, was to be excluded from any rights under the Donation Land Law, and a claim to land, under that law, was a surrender of possessory rights under the treaty. Unquestionably the Supreme Court of Oregon and Judge Deady were right in their construction of the law, as they found it, as applicable to the points involved in those cases. Article III of the Boundary Treaty of 1846 is as follows: "In the future appropriation of the territory south of the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, as provided in the first article of this treaty, the possessory rights of the Hudson's Bay Company, and of all British subjects who may be already in the occupation of land or other property lawfully acquired within the said territory, shall be respected." Good faith, and to carry out the letter and the spirit of this Article III, should have caused Congress to respect these possessory rights of British subjects, so as to make them effective, and especially as they had acquired these rights under the Conventions for joint-occupancy of the Oregon Country. Means should have been provided in the Donation Land Law by which such British subjects "already in the occupation of land" in Oregon could have acquired the title thereto.