History of Oregon (Bancroft)/Volume 1/Chapter 14

by Frances Fuller Victor

CHAPTER XIV.

OREGON BEFORE CONGRESS.

1820–1846.

Oregon's Early Champion—Irrepressible Destiny—Crude Ideas of the Country—Expediency of Occupying the Columbia—Tortuous Course of Floyd's Bill—The Russian Ukase—Baylies, Tucker, Colden, Mallary, Wood, Walker, Breckenridge, Buchanan, Dickerson, Benton, and Others Express their Views—End of the First Epoch of Legislation—Linn, Clay, Calhoun, Pierce, Cushing, and Pendleton, of the Second Epoch—Linn's Bill—Popular Feeling—Petitions for the Occupation of Oregon—The Question of Slavery.

I have shown how, step by step, without the aid, of congress, a hundred Americans established a government in Oregon, and while professing allegiance to the United States, were in fact independent. But congress was not indifferent to the movement; and whatever opinion in their isolation the colonists may have held, the archives of the national legislature contain the proofs of a watchful care over the United States claim to the Oregon Territory, and a determination not to relinquish it to any foreign power; the only doubt being as to the expediency of pressing that claim while other matters of immediate importance to the government and the commerce of the country were pending. Before proceeding further with the history of the Oregon colony, a brief review of the action of congress will tend to make clear the mutual action of the national representatives and the people in promoting the settlement of the disputed territory on the Pacific coast. It is not to be supposed that at the period of the convention of 1818, or the Louisiana purchase of 1819, the people of the United States were much interested in or well informed as to the geography or history of that region, or that they understood the gounds of the controversy with Great Britain upon the sovereignty of the Columbia. But they were not long to remain in ignorance.

On the 19th of December, 1820, Floyd of Virginia, a member of the house of representatives, a man of ardent temperament, ability, courage, and persistent purpose, took up the Oregon Question with the determination to champion it in congress against whatever indifference, opposition, or ridicule it might meet.^[1] From many years' residence in Kentucky, he understood the character of the men of the western states, each a pioneer of the Alexandrian type, sighing for more worlds to conquer, more wilderness to redeem to civilization by the sheer strength of brawny arm and independent will. Of the support of this portion of the people he was sure, as soon as they should be informed of the value of the territory in dispute, and the foundation of the American claim.

Encouraged by the well-understood sentiments of President Monroe and certain younger men of the Jeffersonian school, Mr Floyd began the contest by a motion in the house that a committee be appointed to inquire into the situation of the settlements on the Pacific, and the expediency of occupying the River Columbia, and procured the appointment of that committee with himself as chairman, the other members being Metcalf of Kentucky and Swearingen of Virginia.

On the 25th of January, 1821, Floyd presented his report, giving an abstract of the history of the United States from the discovery of the continent down through the mutations of more than two centuries embracing in his review an account of the several treaties by which the United States had enlarged their original boundaries since achieving independence. Following this was an able and suggestive examination of the profits of the fur-trade in the west and north-west over the territory acquired by discovery and treaty, but which was still almost a terra incognita to the citizens of the union.

As to the expediency of occupying the Columbia, Floyd was sanguine, for the reasons contained in his report on the fur-trade, the profits of that business, and the opportunities for greatly enlarging the commerce of the United States by direct communication with China by way of the Columbia and Missouri rivers, that idea of which the eccentric John Ledyard Was author, President Jefferson, however, usually receiving the credit of it, and in whose mind it was confirmed by the expedition of Lewis and Clarke. The route recommended by Floyd was the same, namely, up the Missouri, across the mountains, and down the Columbia.

Accompanying the report was a bill authorizing the president to occupy the Oregon Territory, extinguish the Indian title, and provide a government.^[2]

The bill was twice read, and referred to a committee of the whole for the following day, but was not taken up, and nothing further appears to have been said upon the subject till the 10th of December, when Floyd again made a motion for a committee to inquire into the expediency of the measure, with leave to report a bill. This was agreed to, and he was appointed chairman of the committee, with Baylies of Massachusetts and Scott of Missouri as associates. The report of the committee, accompanied by a bill authorizing the occupation of the Columbia, was presented to the house the 18th of January, 1822. This, hke the previous bill, was twice read, after which it disappeared for the remainder of that session. Meanwhile Floyd had submitted a resolution requiring the secretary of the navy to report on the expense of examining the harbors on the Pacific, and shipping artillery to the mouth of the Columbia.

The secretary's estimate for the survey and transportation was $25,000. In February, in consequence of rumors that the emperor of Russia had promulgated a ukase in relation to the western limits of the United States, Mr Floyd offered a resolution requesting the president to communicate to the house whether any foreign government laid claim to any part of the territory of the United States upon the coast of the Pacific Ocean north of latitude 42°, and to what extent; whether any regulations of a foreign power existed, affecting the trade of the Pacific; how far the trade of the public was affected by it; and whether any foreign power had made any communication "touching the contemplated occupation of the Columbia River."^[3]

In reply to this resolution, the president submitted a report by the secretary of state containing the correspondence with the ministers of Great Britain and Russia relative to the respective claims of those governments,^[4] which communication was referred to the select committee of which Floyd was chairman, on the expediency of the occupation of the Columbia.

At the second session of congress for 1822, Floyd's bill of January previous was discussed in committee of the whole, and certain additions and amendments were made. Floyd made the opening speech, which was an exhaustive resume of the values of certain articles of commerce to the countries which were so fortunate as to secure them, being the same which the settlement of the Columbia would secure to the United States; advocating its military possession, and the steamboat route to it before mentioned. As the first speech ever made in congress on this subject, it is especially interesting.^[5] But from the remarks of Wright of Maryland it evidently awakened no enthusiasm in the minds of his listeners; and it is shown by Floyd's admissions that he had been called fanciful and a bold projector, that few persons either in or out of congress were as yet much agitated over the United States claim to the Oregon Territory.

The second speech of importance was by Mr Baylies of Massachusetts, who began by saying that all the objections to the bill which he had heard had been outside of the house; and of these he was willing to admit that some were weighty, and all plausible. The first, that of the expense of the territorial establishment with no immediate prospect of a revenue, was, he thought, not valid: to prove which position he offered a correspondence with the collector of customs at New Bedford, showing the profits of the whale-fishery, and estimating its annual value in the Pacific, with the vessels already employed, at $500,000, while the profits of the same business to Nantucket were not short of $1,000,000 annually. "A settlement on the Columbia," said this correspondent, "if properly conducted, would insure to our nation an immense source of wealth," not only on account of the whale-fisheries, but of the lumber trade, it being known that a vessel loaded with spars from the Columbia River had recently arrived at Valparaiso.^[6]

The objections that by extending the territory of the United States too far it would be exposed to dismemberment, and that by occupying the Columbia the chances of war would be increased, were met by Baylies with arguments not necessary to be reproduced here. He supported the position taken by Floyd of the value of the fur trade on the Northwest Coast, and advanced many proofs of the advantage of colonies to an empire; the arguments in favor of a settlement on the Columbia being chiefly of a commercial nature.

Tucker of Virginia expressed surprise that "three long and eloquent speeches" should have been made in support of a measure to which he had intended to give a silent negative. He did not object to the occupation of the Columbia River because it was visionary, but because he thought it too practicable, and likely to draw off population and capital to a point where they would be less useful than where they then were; and because the people of the Pacific coast would, by their local position, carry on their trade with China and the Orient rather than with the Atlantic states. He could not see what interest the Pacific and Atlantic states would have in common, and mentioned the appalling fact that the mouths of the Mississippi and the Columbia, by any route then known, were four thousand miles asunder!. Colonies he declared were of no advantage to the parent country, unless that country enjoyed a monopoly of the colonial trade, which in this instance the United States could not hope to do.

The 13th of January, 1823, Golden of New York spoke, giving facts concerning seal-fishing designed to favor the bill; and also an interesting history of the trade with China, showing that although that country was said to be the sink of coin, the cargoes brought from there were sold in Europe at a profit of more than twice the cost in China, and for coin. He cited also the treasury report for 1821, which gave information of seventeen vessels from the United States sailing for the Northwest Coast, which he took to mean° the vicinity of the Columbia River, carrying goods to the value of $400,000; and although he was not informed who were the purchasers, he thought under such circumstances the mouth of the Columbia must be a point of importance to commerce. Unlike his predecessors in the debate, Colden referred to the subject of title, and gave his views of the security of the United States claim, which were entirely favorable to it.

Mallary of Vermont did not wish for the establishment of a civil government on the Columbia, before there were people in that territory over whom it might be exercised; but approved of occupation by a military force only, with encouragement to settlers. As to the rest, he was decidedly in favor of occupying the country, and entertained no fear of consequences. The smallest nation of Europe would not hesitate to plant her colonies in any part of the world; and yet American enterprise, so often vaunted, dared not venture beyond the Rocky Mountains. The subject, he declared, occupied a large share of the public attention, and the action of congress was anxiously looked for. The only objection he found to the argument which had preceded him was the advocacy of the colonial system by Baylies, to which he could not agree, as being foreign to the principles of the American republic.

Then followed Tracy of New York, and overturned all the specious reasoning of his colleague, Mr Colden, by giving information of the real nature of the country which would be embraced in the thirty square miles of territory over which the United States, it was proposed, should extend its laws and protection. Tracy chanced to have made the acquaintance of several gentlemen who had been at the mouth of the Columbia, from whom he had learned that the imaginary Eden of the gentleman who had spoken in favor of the bill was an inhospitable wilderness, confined within a rugged and iron-bound coast. The entrance to the Columbia was dangerous, and only with a fair and free wind could be undertaken; the climate was bleak and inhospitable; so humid and with so feeble a sun that the grains could hardly be raised, though the soil was deep and good. For a long distance from the ocean the country was so broken and rugged that no place could be found for a settlement of more than a few families. Only the Willamette Valley afforded any prospects ot an agricultural nature, and these were not alluring. And as for the country east of the Cascade Mountains, it was nothing but a waste of sand and gravel.^[7]

Mr Wood, another member from New York argued against the passage of the bill, because, first of ah there was no necessity for such a measure. No one had denied the jurisdiction of the United States go eminent. None of the commercial portion of the public had petitioned for it; not a single memorial from any quarter could be found upon the table No public interest demanded it; and it was not to the benefit of the country at large to force the settlement of the Columbia River. Such a settlement must result either in a colony, which would be of no advantage to the government, or an independent state, which would take to itself the commerce of the Pacific to the permanent loss of the United States, both in citizens and trade. To these considerations must be added the expense attending the establishing of so remote a territory, and the danger of provoking Indian wars, which would retard the growth of the new states on the border. To effect a settlement communication by land would be indispensable; and a chain of military posts must be extended from b Louis to the Columbia, where a strong fortification must be erected, and a considerable naval force maintained for its protection; all of which would more ti exhaust th P e profits of the trade in that quarter. Wood's plan was to permit a company to occupy that region, to extinguish the Indian title to form a settlement, and when they were able, to form an independent government;^[8] but in his opinion the longer this was delayed the better.

At the close of this day's arguments some amendments were offered to the bill, Mallary moving to make the occupation merely military, over the territory north of the 42d parallel, and west of the Rocky Mountains, which section should be known as the Territory of Oregon; a fort was to be erected at the mouth of the Columbia River; as soon as expedient the Indian title to a tract of country not exceeding thirty miles square, including the place selected for the fort, should be extinguished. To every head of a family settling in the territory should be granted three hundred and twenty acres of land; to an unmarried settler, farmer, or mechanic, two hundred acres; this to apply only to citizens of the United States, and for six years only after the extinguishment of the Indian title. The president was authorized to open a port of entry for the territory, and to appoint officers for the revenue service, the revenue laws of the United States being extended to the territory. An appropriation of §60,000 was also made by the amendments, to carry into effect the provisions of the bill.

The consideration of Floyd's bill being resumed on the 24th, Walker of North Carolina made a motion to amend by inserting Columbia in place of Oregon as the name of the territory to be erected, which did not prevail; and Floyd amended Mallary's amendment, so as to call the tract of country over which the Indian title should be extinguished, and where the fort should be erected, the District of Astoria, the object of which was to restore the original name of the establishment at the mouth of the Columbia made under the auspices of Astor. This amendment was accepted. Smith of Virginia and others then spoke for and against the bill. Baylies replied at some length to the objections of the opponents of the bill that the Rocky Mountains were the natural boundary of the United States.

"As we reach the Rocky Mountains," said the advocate of the occupation of Oregon, "we should be unwise did we not pass that narrow space which separates the mountains from the ocean, to secure advantages far greater than the existing advantages of all the country between the Mississippi and the mountains. Gentlemen are talking of natural boundaries. Sir, our natural boundary is the Pacific Ocean. The swelling tide of our population must and will roll on until that mighty ocean interposes its waters, and limits our territorial empire Then, with two oceans washing our shores, the commercial wealth of the world is ours, and imagination can hardly conceive the greatness, the grandeur, and the power that await us."

Baylies then reviewed the statements of his opponents that the country was sterile and the climate inhospitable; that the mouth of the Columbia was a bad entrance and worse departure, and the harbor indifferent, quoting from the official reports of Prevost, Lewis and Clarke, Cook, and Vancouver. He again presented the facts, as they appeared to him, connected with the commerce of the Pacific, present and to come He reverted to remarks made in debate that there was nothing to fear from Russia because the autocrat of that country had himself fixed the southern limit of his territory at 51, and to other remarks that if Russia chose to enforce the limits set the United States could not successfully encounter that power; to both of which conclusions he took exceptions, and also to the prediction that the proposed settlement could not sustain itself against the savages, instancing the early New England settlers, who for fifty years maintained peace with the savages, and when at last they were compelled to fight, vanquished On the following day, being the last of the discussion, Breckenridge of Kentucky made a speech in which he opposed the bill, because as it now stood it provided neither legislation nor courts; all the power and authority being confided to a military chieftain, in whose hands were placed the legislative, judicial, and executive functions of the country, subject only to the control of the president; and this he denounced as unconstitutional, also denying the right of congress to colonize. Or if it was pretended that the step contemplated was preparatory to admission into the union within any short period, had the promoters of this scheme thought of the probable consequences? Were they prepared to go to war to protect the territorial or commercial rights of Oregon, and to extend to that state equal laws, and afford it equal rights and privileges, when there could not be any community of interest with the rest of the confederacy? He looked upon the proposition as impolitic and dangerous; upon the appropriation to carry it out as entirely inadequate; upon the troops who should be stationed on the Columbia as the prisoners in their own fort of the beleaguering Indians, unless, indeed, a naval force, should be stationed there for their protection. He doubted if the possession of the country would add anything to the validity of the claim of the United States; or that if it should fall into the hands of a foreign power, that would weaken the title of the United States, He was opposed to emigration while the population of the states and territories was not yet sufficient to occupy the public lands within their boundaries. Not until their posterity, he said, should occupy the seats in congress which the supporters of the bill under discussion now filled would the measure proposed be justifiable.

On the 27th the yeas and nays were taken to decide whether the house were really determined to act upon the subject at that session, when it was found that the vote stood sixty-one for, to one hundred against, taking up the bill. The influence of the discussion was observable, however, when on the 22d of February Little of Maryland presented a memorial from eighty farmers and mechanics within his district, praying congress to pass the bill, and intimating their desire to emigrate to, and for the improvement of that country.^[9]

At the next session of congress, in December, on motion of Mr Floyd, a committee on the expediency of occupying the Columbia was again appointed, consisting of Floyd, Gurley of Louisiana, Scott of Missouri, Hayden of New York, Bassett of Virginia, Frost of New York, and Baylies of the former committee, with leave to report a bill; and on the 19th of January, 1824, Floyd presented a bill to authorize the occupation of the Columbia or Oregon River, which was twice read, and referred to a committee of the whole house on the state of the union. This bill, unlike that immediately preceding it, authorized the president not only to establish a military colony, but to erect a territorial government whenever he might deem it expedient to do so— Floyd's first proposition, but one which was opposed by a majority of the friends of military occupation. The bill also granted a section of land to actual settlers, instead of the former amount.

On the 26th a resolution, of which Floyd was the author, was agreed to by the house, requesting the president to cause to be laid before the house an estimate of the expense which would be incurred by transporting two hundred troops from Council Bluffs to the mouth of the Columbia. The reply by the war department was that the transportation of the troops by the Missouri and Columbia rivers, with boats, horses, and equipments, would be $30,000; and the transportation by sea of the heavy baggage, ordnance, and supplies would amount to not more than $14,000 extra; the report being referred to the committee on the occupation of the Columbia or Oregon River, and by them laid before the house. The estimates contained in this report were made by Thomas S. Jessup, quartermaster-general. He recommended a post to be established at the Mandan villages, to control the natives in that quarter, and hold in check the British fur companies; another at the head of navigation on the Missouri, to control the Blackfoot, and remove the British companies from that part of the territory, as well as to serve as an intermediate supply post, and a depot of trade for the Indian department. To keep open communication through the mountains, he advised the establishment of a small post between the Missouri and the Columbia; and on the Columbia and its tributaries three other posts. These, were to give protection to American traders for the time being, and when the convention with Great Britain should have expired, to remove the traders of that nation from the territory. As to the expense, it would be trifling. Once established, in a few years the cost would be greatly diminished by farms, mills, and the good grazing of the country in the interior; and the posts on the Columbia could be cheaply supplied with beef and wheat from California, and salt from an island on the Lower California coast.

Floyd's bill did not come up for discussion till the following December. In the mean time much information had been gained concerning new routes to the Columbia by passes recently discovered by American fur-traders, and other matters of interest in debate. The speech with which Floyd opened the discussion was not only in answer to former arguments, but was loaded with accumulations of facts concerning the geography and topography of the country; but more than anything else, concerning the commerce of the United States between 1804 and 1822, interesting even at this day, and intended to exhibit the existing necessity for a port upon the Pacific coast to serve as the American mart for the precious goods of the Asiatic continent and islands of the oriental seas.

The message of President Monroe had contained a recommendation of the propriety of establishing a military post at the mouth of the Columbia, or at some other point within the acknowledged limits of the United States territory,^[10] for the protection of the increasing commerce of the Pacific; and of making an appropriation for employing a frigate, with an officer of the corps of engineers, to explore the mouth of the Columbia and the adjacent coasts, with a view to selecting the site for such a military station. But Floyd contended that a territorial establishment was quite as necessary as a military one, it being evidently unjust to the settlers who should go there to place them under military law, or subject them to the caprice of the commander of a force of two hundred men, which it was proposed to station on the Columbia.

Considerable opposition was made by members to the proposed land grants, and by others that clause was defended half in derision. "After all," said Trimble of Kentucky, "what is the value of the land proposed to be given as a bounty to the first settlers? In that remote region the. land as yet is worth nothing, it has no value . . . But, in the mean while, give your people the bounty land and let them go and make a settlement, and form a nucleus around which other emigrants may collect, and time will gradually consolidate them into a powerful community, and your treasury will be relieved from the annual expense of maintaining the proposed military post." Smyth of Virginia was opposed to the territorial establishment and grants of land, on the ground that too rapid an increase of the states, and bringing too much land into market, was already severely felt by the older communities, which were perpetually drained of the flower of their population—an evil which would increase the further the limits of the United States were extended. In his judgment, it would be well if the ultimate limit were fixed by a line far enough west of the Mississippi to include two tiers of states.

In reply to these and other objections, Floyd contended that, admitting them, and that the future state of Oregon should separate from the confederacy, it would still be better that the region embraced byit should be peopled from the United States than from other nations, with whom we might—nay, must — have to go to war; and peopled by other nations it would be, unless the American people took measures to prevent it.

In none of the arguments was the question of title touched upon, except to suggest caution in coming in conflict with the terms of the existing treaty. No doubt was ever expressed of the validity of the claim of the United States. When Buchanan of Pennsylvania objected that the establishment of a port of entry would interfere with the treaty, Floyd explained that the section objected to directed the president to open a port of entry only whenever he should "deem the public good may require it;" and that it was intended to put the citizens of the United States as early as possible on an advantageous footing for prosecuting commercial enterprises. When it was feared that Great Britain might look upon the founding of a military establishment as an act of bad faith, Smyth replied that Great Britain at that moment had a military post on the Columbia, and that the rights of the two governments under the treaty were at least equal.

At length, after four years of constant effort, on the 23d of December, 1824, Mr Floyd had the satisfaction of seeing his bill for the occupation of the Columbia River and the establishment of the territory of Oregon passed in the house by a vote of one hundred and thirteen to fifty-seven, and sent to the senate.^[11]

So far discussion had been confined to the house, except in February 1823, when Benton introduced a resolution in the senate that the committee on military affairs be instructed to inquire into the expediency of appropriating money to enable the president to take and retain possession of the territory of the United States on the north-west coast of America. Benton explained that his motive in offering the resolution was to prevent the territory in question from falling into the hands of another power.

When Floyd's bill was brought up in the senate, in February 1825, it found an advocate in Barbour of Virginia, who believed both in the right and the policy of the United States in forming an establishment on the Oregon River,^[12] the arguments used being in essence the same as presented by the friends of the bill in the house. Dickerson of New Jersey took opposite grounds. He not only contended that the military occupation of the Oregon would justly lead to war with Great Britain, but that the territory would never, in any event, become a state of the federal union. He ridiculed the idea of a senator from Oregon to Washington City going and coming in less than a year, whether he travelled overland, or by sea around Cape Horn, or through Bering's Straits round the north coast of the continent. "It is true," he said, "this passage is not yet discovered, except upon our maps; but it will be as soon as Oregon shall be a state."^[13] When Dickerson came to talk of cost, he had reason and common sense on his side. The appropriation of $50,000, he said, was a mere bagatelle. A sum ten times larger would be required to carry into effect the provisions of the bill; to prove which he cited the expense of the Yellowstone expedition, $255,000, besides other expenses which swelled the amount to $300,000. At that rate it would require a million of money to establish a post on the Oregon, and other posts at proper intervals across the continent. Besides the wrong to the natives of despoiling them of their territory, Oregon could never be of any advantage to the United States, and the best use that could be made of it was to leave it as a retreat for the red men. From Council Bluffs to the Rocky Mountains the country was sterile, without wood or water, and could never be cultivated.^[14] The mountains were inhospitable, and altogether the only purpose to which this region could be devoted was a range for buffaloes, and to serve as a frontier to prevent the too great expansion of the settlements.

To this Benton replied by giving a résumé of the arguments for the United States title, with which the reader of my Northwest Coast is familiar; and thus closed the debates on the subject of the occupation of the Oregon Territory for a term of years, the bill being laid on the table, from which it was never taken to be voted upon in the senate,

From and after this session of congress, for a period of more than three years, the subject of the occupation of the Columbia was suffered to lie perdu in the minds of the people of the United States, except as attention was called to it by the writings of Hall J. Kelley, or by some more obscure person. For this silence there is an explanation in the probable desire of the president that the negotiations between Great Britain and the United States should not become more involved by any overt act. The negotiations being finally terminated in 1827 by an indefinite renewal of the convention of 1818, which could be terminated by either party on a year's notice, left the subject where it was before they were commenced.

In December 1828 Floyd returned to the contest, being, as he said, more convinced than ever before of the importance of the question. In a speech of some length he reverted to the movement of population westward, and the means resorted to by governments to prevent it private enterprise being always in the advance. He referred as in former speeches to the commercial advantages of the Columbia; and warned congress of the loss with which the country was threatened through the occupancy of Great Britain, citing a fact, as he believed, of much significance, that an act of parliament of 1821 had extended the civil jurisdiction of the courts of Upper Canada, "within the Indian territories and other parts of America, not within the limits of Upper or Lower Canada, or of any civil governments of the United States; "including in this description not only the territory west of Canada, and north of latitude 49°, but all of the territory of the United States not yet erected into territorial organizations. "This insolent and outrageous act," exclaimed Floyd, "we ought promptly and efficiently to resist and repel."^[15] A citizen of the United States, west of Arkansas, he said, under this act might be taken to Upper Canada, and tried for his life. The country ought not for a moment to submit to it. "If England has not yet learned to respect the sovereignty and rights of the confederacy, she must be taught that lesson; and, sir, it must and shall be taught her; and that, too, at no distant day, in a way which she will not easily forget." The remainder of Floyd's speech was devoted to an exposition of the profits of the fur trade, and to strictures on the tariff regulations, which prevented the American from realizing the same benefits enjoyed by the British trader, who introduced his goods free of duty, and sold them at an advance of more than a hundred per cent, while the American trader, selling at the same price, made no profit at all;^[16] and to the importance of the mouth of the Columbia as a naval station, either for the protection of commerce, or in case of war as a port from which the vessels of the United States could annoy the East India trade of Great Britain.

In the course of the debate which followed, the result of the former agitation was strongly brought out in the fact that three several companies of emigrants were petitioning congress for land grants in Oregon, one of which in Massachusetts numbered three thousand persons,^[17] farmers, artisans, and others. Neither of the three obtained a grant, because it was objected that two schemes of settlement, one by the government and another by private individuals, were incompatible; and because the plan of granting exclusive privileges to one class of citizens was not republican in spirit.^[18]

The question was again discussed at length, occupying the greater portion of the time of the house for more than two weeks, from December 23d to January 9th, New men took up the discussion;^[19] but new arguments were difficult to find. The expediency, and not the right of making settlements, was the subject of doubt, as it had been in 1821 and 1825. Yet it was acknowledged that delay, by strengthening the number of British posts, increased the difficulty. The question of the conflicting sovereignty claims was referred to oftener than in former debates; but only added to the more easily understood obstacles of expense, and the objections to making land grants before the boundary should be settled. At length, after amending the bill several times, it stood as follows, in four sections: First, authorizing the president to erect a fort or forts west of the Rocky Mountains, between latitudes 42° and 54° 40', and to garrison them; second, authorizing the president to cause the territory to be explored by engineers, selected by himself, accompanied by a military escort; and also authorizing the delay of the troops mentioned in the first article until the exploration should have been completed; third, enacting that any citizen of the United States who should commit any crime or misdemeanor in the territory should, on conviction, suffer the penalty attached to the same offence in any district of country under the sole jurisdiction of the United States; the trial to take place in the first district where he might be apprehended or brought, that was under the laws of the United States; the courts being by this act invested with the power to try such offenders in the same manner as if the crimes had been committed in the district; fourth, the sum of $25,000 was appropriated to carry into effect the provisions of the act.

But although this bill seemed free from the objectionable features of the previous ones, it was rejected when it came to a third reading, by a vote of ninety-nine to seventy-five.^[20]

When Floyd's congressional term ended, no successor was found to take up the subject where he had left it. But he had succeeded in infusing into the minds of the American people a romantic interest in the Oregon Territory, and above all a patriotic feeling of resistance to the reputed aggressions of the British in that quarter, which eventually served the purpose for which he labored, the settlement of the country by citizens of the United States. American traders pushed their enterprises beyond the Rocky Mountains, and to the Columbia River, attempting to compete with the English company, but failing for the reasons he had pointed out. Through these traders the missionary societies heard of the superior tribes of red men in the Oregon Territory who sought a knowledge of the white man's God, and prepared to respond to the call, with the results which have been recorded in previous chapters of this history. The enthusiast Kelley, having failed in securing a grant of land, finally reached Oregon, sick, and in poverty and unmerited disgrace, to be rescued from perishing by the foreign company he had beforehand determined to regard with suspicion and hatred. But the little company he persuaded to accompany him from California as colonists really became such, and together with the missionaries, formed the nucleus round which grew a population which soon rivalled the fur company. I have shown how this little colony was encouraged and fostered by the heads of the government; how President Jackson sent Slacum to inquire into their condition; how the Mission colony was assisted; the commander of the Pacific exploring squadron ordered to examine into their causes of complaint; and how Elijah White was commissioned sub-agent of Indian affairs to keep up their courage and loyalty.

Between 1829 and 1837 the people as well as congress had become comparatively well informed as to the value of the Oregon Territory, its natural resources, independent of the fur trade, and its commercial position with regard to the coast of Asia; nearly every person known to have returned from that quarter having been put upon the witness-stand. On the 16th of October of the latter year, a resolution was passed in the senate, requesting the president to inform that body at its next session of any correspondence between the United States government and any foreign power relative to the occupation of the territory of the United States west of the Rocky Mountains. The president's reply, made in December, was, that since the convention of 1827 no such correspondence had taken place; those negotiations being communicated in confidence to the senate in the early part of the 20th session of congress.^[21]

The 7th of February, 1838, Lewis F. Linn, senator from Missouri, introduced a bill for the occupation of the Columbia River, the establishment of a territory north of latitude 42° and west of the Rocky Mountains, to be called the Oregon Territory; the erection of a fort on the Columbia, and occupation of the country by a military force; the establishment of a port of entry, and requiring the country to be held subject to the revenue laws of the United States, with an appropriation of $50,000 for the purposes mentioned in the bill. This was referred to the committee on military affairs. After some discussion of the question of title, Benton procured the reference of the bill to a select committee of which Linn was chairman.

This led to a resolution that the secretary of war be requested to furnish the senate with all the information in his department relating to the Oregon Territory, and with a map embracing recent discoveries of all the country claimed by the United States in the region between the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific Ocean. Out of a mass of material obtained from this and every other available source, Linn prepared his report, which was presented to the senate on the 6th of June. After referring to the message of President Monroe recommending that a military post should be established at the mouth of the Columbia, or at some other point within the acknowledged limits of the United States, which should afford protection to American commerce on the Pacific Ocean, and his suggestion with regard to an armed frigate to explore the mouth of the Columbia and the coast contiguous thereto, for which he advised an appropriation by congress sufficient for the purpose; and after alluding to the subsequent negotiations with Great Britain which ended in nothing definite concerning title; and after referring to the mission of Slacum—he entered on a history of the several treaties with Great Britain affecting the title, and the correspondence on the subject between the two governments having adverse claims, taking the American view of the question that the line between them could not fall below the 49th parallel.

He pointed out that the occupation by the United States of the Columbia River would secure the sources of vast wealth in the fur trade, the fisheries, the trade with China, Japan, and the Orient generally, and with the Hawaiian Islands and California. He dwelt on the importance of a harbor on the north-west coast of America, where the whaling fleet of the Pacific might refit, and prophesied that direct communication between the Atlantic and Pacific would soon be opened by a canal across the isthmus of Darien, by which the whole trade of the eastern hemisphere would be changed in its course, which would then be toward the shores of North America. He spoke of the ease with which the Rocky Mountains could be crossed by the passes discovered by the fur-hunters, of the magnificent scenery described by travellers, of the fertility of the soil, and the mildness of the climate, testified to by various authorities. To conclude, the title of the United States was asserted by the committee to be beyond doubt, the possession of the country important, and delay in occupying it dangerous. The committee therefore reported a bill authorizing the president to employ in that quarter such portions of the army and navy of the United States as he might deem necessary to the protection of the American residents in that country.

Although ardently labored for, the bill for the occupation of Oregon failed of its passage in the senate. But Linn's report furnished that kind of information to the American people in which they were deeply interested. Pioneer sons of pioneer ancestors, they delighted in the thought of founding another empire on the Pacific Ocean as their sires had done on the Atlantic seaboard. Resolutions began to be adopted by the legislative assemblies of different states favoring the speedy settlement of the Oregon boundary, and its occupation by the government.^[22]

On the 11th of December, 1838, Linn introduced a second bill for the occupation of the Oregon Territory, and the protection of citizens of the United States residing there, which was referred, as before, to a special committee of which he was chairman, his fellow-committee-men being Clay, Calhoun, Walker, and Pierce. In January 1839 the petition of which Jason Lee was bearer was presented, and ordered printed; and the correspondence between Cushing and Lee, given in a former chapter, took place; all of which went to strengthen Linn's position and inform the public. On the 22d of February Linn spoke on his bill, against the advice of other senators, who feared the effect of the agitation of such a measure on the attitude of Great Britain in disputes of another nature involving the Maine boundary and some important commercial interests; but in deference to this feeling, refrained from asking that it might be put to vote. It was referred to the committee on foreign relations, and five thousand extra copies ordered printed, the circulation of which aided in forming public sentiment.

About the same time Cushing, chairman of the house committee on foreign affairs, to whom was submitted a resolution "to inquire into the expediency of establishing a post on the River Columbia, for the defence and occupation of the territory of the United States watered by said river, the extent of the country claimed by the United States west of the Rocky Mountains, the title under which it is claimed, with its correctness, the extent of sea-coast and number of harbors, the nature of the soil, climate, and productions, the expense of establishing one or more forts, what ships and what soldiers and sailors would be required," and all questions concerning occupation, presented a report adverse to the expediency of establishing a territorial government. The reason given by the committee for making an adverse report was that they were "anxious to observe the letter and spirit of the treaties between the United States and Great Britain." Yet they accompanied their report by a communication from the secretary of war, and another from the secretary of the navy, containing estimates of the expense which would probably be incurred in "certain assumed contingencies contemplated by the order of the house;" by the letter and petition of Jason Lee before adverted to; by a memoir from Wyeth on the soil, climate, and resources of the country, and the business of the Hudson's Bay Company, representing the value of the fur trade; by a letter from the secretary of the Oregon Provisional Emigration Society, to which reference has been made in one of the early chapters of this volumne, with a copy of the constitution of the society; and by Slacum's report, and a memoir by Kelley. Of this voluminous document, the whole of which took, from having so much in it that was furnished by persons interested in the occupation of Oregon, a tone of accusation and enmity toward the British fur company, ten thousand extra copies were ordered printed, which were scattered broadcast over the land, educating the people to an exalted idea of the worth of the Oregon country, and at the same time to a hatred of the British traders who had so far succeeded in driving out of it American competitors.^[23]

On the 18th of December Linn again called the attention of the senate to a series of resolutions on the subject of Oregon, which were referred as usual to a select committee, who reported, on the 31st of March, 1840, a substitute, asserting the title of the United States to Oregon, authorizing the president to take such measures as might be demanded for the protection of the persons and property of citizens of the United States residing in that territory, to erect a line of military posts from Fort Leavenworth to the Rocky Mountains, for the protection of the Indian trade, and provided also for the appointment of an Indian agent for Oregon Territory. The chief feature in these resolutions was a provision for granting to each white male inhabitant over eighteen years of age one thousand acres of land.

This was the measure of the 'liberal grant' to settlers, which was, on the suggestion of Jason Lee, to reward the pioneers of Oregon, a suggestion which was eagerly caught at by the western people. A petition was presented to congress at this session from twenty-seven citizens of Elizabethtown, Kentucky, setting forth that in their opinion the United States government should plant a colony in the Oregon Territory giving it such nurture in its infancy as to enable it to establish itself permanently, and to develop the natural resources of the country making it contribute to the national wealth. They believed it necessary to the success of the enterprise that a road should be cut^[24] from some point on the Missouri River to Astoria, at the mouth of the Columbia. "As soon as this passage can be opened," said the petitioners, "a colony of farmers and mechanics should be conducted across the mountains and settled, with a military power stationed, strong enough to protect the colony. Donations of land should be made to those who would become actual settlers, sufficiently large to induce emigration. At convenient distances across the mountains, small garrisons should be placed to protect travellers from the hostilities of the Indians." These measures it was thought would secure a more important commercial position than any yet enjoyed by the United States.^[25]

Forty-four citizens of Indiana also petitioned congress for the "occupation and settlement of Oregon Territory, and the construction of a road thereto;" and remonstrating against the proposed ship canal across the isthmus of Darien; urging as a reason for the construction of a national road to the Pacific, that the commerce of the United States was then, and had always been, exposed to the dangers of the stormy seas of the high southern latitudes, with long voyages at great expense and toil; whereas these dangers might be avoided, or greatly lessened, by an inland and coast trade, and a route across the continent to a point on the Columbia which could be reached by sea-going vessels from the Pacific side. These memorialists were, like those of Kentucky, of opinion that the United States ought to induce emigration by liberal grants of land to persons removing with their families to Oregon; and suggested that alternate sections might be reserved, as their value would be greatly enhanced by the settled portions; and also that grants should be confined to a limit within ten miles of the Willamette River,^[26] in order to secure the early support of steamboat navigation.^[27]

A similar memorial was presented by the legislative assembly of Missouri, asking for grants of land to settlers.^[28] On the 26th of February a report was made to the senate by the secretary of war, in reply to a resolution asking his opinion of the expediency of establishing a line of military posts from the Missouri River, near the mouth of the Platte, to the pass or passes of the Rocky Mountains, with the object to protect the American fur trade, to facilitate intercourse between the valley of the Mississippi and the Pacific Ocean, and to hold in check the native tribes; also the number and kind of troops which would be required for such service, the probable cost of keeping up the posts, and whether it would be necessay to increase the military force of the United States in order to garrison such establishments.

Poinsett's report set forth that the question as to expenditures and troops could not be satisfactorily answered before the completion of certain explorations undertaken by his direction, and which were expected to be extended to the passes of the Rocky Mountains during the summer. He however believed that a line of posts such as proposed would be of great benefit to the whole stretch of country to be traversed; and that the route ordinarily pursued by the fur-traders would be the most practicable line, for various reasons, including its directions, and its being perpendicular to a line of defences on the frontiers of Arkansas, Missouri, and Iowa. Three posts were considered to be sufficient to "prepare the way for the peaceable settlement of the fertile valleys west of the Rocky Mountains;" one at the junction of the north and south forks of the Platte, and another at the confluence of the Laramie branch of that river. The third might be either at the junction of Wind River and Popoagie, the principal sources of the Big Horn, or at the confluence of Horse Creek, called by travellers the Seedskeeder, with the Colorado. And to these, the secretary thought, the stations for the present might be limited. "Under their shelter the rich and fertile valleys west of the mountains may be settled and cultivated by a population which would pour forth its numbers to the shores of the Pacific as soon as the question of boundary shall be definitively settled."^[29]

Such was the not very intelligent report of the secretary of war in 1840. It is doubtful if he, or any of those persons, citizens or others, who talked of a road or a line of forts to the Pacific, at all comprehended the fact that when the Rocky Mountains were reached there remained the hardest, if not the most dangerous, part of the route, or that a colony transported to the western base of the Rocky Mountains would be hopelessly removed from a source of supplies on either side of the continent for at least half the year.

Soon after the resolution above referred to had been reported to the senate, Linn was placed in possession of Farnham's letter to the secretary of war, with the petition which accompanied it, and which was drawn up during his visit to the Willamette Valley, complaining of the introduction of English emigrants by the Hudson's Bay Company, the pretended recent extension of the laws of Canada over the inhabitants of Oregon, and exhibiting alarm lest the company entertained hostile intentions toward American settlers. Acting upon this information, Linn introduced, on the 28th of April, a bill to extend a portion of the laws of the United States over the territory of Oregon. On the 24th of May, on his motion, the Oregon resolutions were made the special order of the day for a fortnight thence; but by the advice of other senators, were posponed for the time, lest their consideration by the senate at this juncture should prejudice the adjustment of important questions then pending between the United States and Great Britain.^[30] In the mean time, Captain Spaulding's report had reached Washington, and although the same cause for silence existed, on the 8th of January, 1841, Linn brought the topic, of which he was now the acknowledged apostle in the senate, to the attention of that body, by moving a joint resolution to authorize the adoption of measures for the occupation and settlement of the Oregon Territory, and for extending certain portions of the laws of the United States over it. The resolution was referred, as before, to a select committee of which Linn was chairman, who reported it to the senate, without amendment, on the 14th of January, nothing further being done at this session.

But at the extra session in August, Linn submitted another resolution, that the president be requested to give to the British government the twelve months' notice required by the convention of 1827, of a desire to put an end to the treaty of joint occupation of the territory west of the Rocky Mountains. This resolution was subsequently amended so as to direct the committee on foreign relations "to inquire into the expediency of requesting the president" to give the notice. As the subject was permitted to drop there, it is presumable that it was pronounced inexpedient by that committee.

The president, however, in his message to congress December 7, 1841, recommended to its consideration the report of the secretary of war, John C. Spencer, a strong advocate of the occupation of Oregon,^[31] who favored extending military posts as far as the Rocky Mountains; and who believed with John C. Calhoun that silent emigration would do the rest, and settle all disputes about that region.^[32] On the 16th of December Linn again introduced a bill in the senate, the preamble to which declared that the title of the United States to the territory of Oregon was certain, and would not be abandoned,^[33] authorizing the adoption of measures for the occupation and settlement of Oregon, for extending certain portions of the laws of the United States over that territory, and for other purposes, following it on the 4th of January, 1842, by a resolution similar to that of the preceding August, requesting the president to give notice to Great Britain of an intention to terminate the treaty of 1827. It was about this date that Elijah White was urged to return to Oregon with all the powers the government could at that time confer, and with assurances to the settlers on the Willamette that congress would remember them, and the hope expressed that in the pending negotiations the Oregon boundary might be determined, and that at all events it would be determined at an early day. About this time, also Lieutenant Frémont was despatched upon an expedition for the purpose of ascertaining the best location for a line of military posts from the Missouri River to the Rocky Mountains, and to collect information concerning the country on his route.

Linn's bill contained a section authorizing a line of forts from the Missouri into "the best pass for entering the valley of the Oregon," and also a post at or near the mouth of the Columbia River besides one granting six hundred and forty acres of land to every white male inhabitant of eighteen years of age or over who should cultivate the same for five years. These were its popular features. It also authorized and required the president to appoint two additional Indian agents, with a salary of $1,500 each, to superintend the interests of the United States with all the tribes west of any agency then existing. This was the promise of promotion held out to the Oregon sub-agent already appointed.^[34]

The bill extended the civil and criminal jurisdiction of the supreme and district courts of the territory of Iowa over all the territory west of the Missouri River, south of latitude 49°, north of the boundary of Texas, and east of the Rocky Mountains; and also over all the country from the mountains to the ocean, between latitudes 42° and 54°, but provided for the delivery of such criminal subjects of Great Britain as might be arrested under the act, to the most convenient authorities having cognizance of the offence by the laws of that nation. Two associate justices of the supreme court of Iowa, in addition to those already authorized by law, were by the terms of the bill to be appointed for the duties of the two judicial districts to be organized out of the territory described, these district courts to possess all the powers and authority invested in the other district courts of Iowa, and in like manner to appoint their clerks. The bill also provided for justices of the peace and constables, with power to arrest offenders. By these means it was intended to furnish that protection which had so often been demanded by the Oregon colonists.

The bill was referred to a select committee, which instructed the chairman to report it back to the senate with a recommendation that it pass, and it was placed in its order on the calendar; but before it came up for consideration, Lord Ashburton, the British plenipotentiary, arrived in Washington, and out of delicacy as well as diplomacy, the senate refrained from any further discussion on the subject for the time. On the 9th of August, 1842, the treaty framed by Lord Ashburton and Mr Webster was concluded, and early in the following session Linn brought up his bill, pressing it with great ardor, and enlisting the best talent of the senate in the debate.^[35] After a heated discussion, it passed the senate by a vote of twentyfour to twenty-two, February 3, 1843, but failed in the house.^[36] Thus, like Floyd, after a struggle of years, he had the satisfaction of getting his measure through that branch of the national legislature of which he was a member, though it did not become a law. It was Floyd's last effort in congress; it was Linn's last effort in the senate, for he died October 3d of that year, and before the reassembling of congress.^[37]

The disappointment of the people of the western states was great when the results of the Ashburton-Webster treaty were made known, and it became certain that the Oregon boundary had not been touched upon, the interest in the title increasing rather than diminishing. President Tyler, in his message to congress December 1842, felt called upon to apologize for the failure. "It became manifest," he said, "at an early hour of the late negotiations, that any attempt for the time being satisfactorily to determine those rights would lead to a protracted discussion which might embrace in its failure other more pressing matters." He promised, however, not to delay urging a settlement.

The secretary of war in his annual report expressed himself favorable to a line of military posts, with the avowed object of making an exhibition of strength to influence the natives, and to show an intention to maintain the rights of the United States on the Pacific coast; and advised the extension of their jurisdiction over the Oregon Territory; and also giving armed protection to the citizens of the United States already there, as well as making an appropriation to send out a colony who were anxious to undertake the enterprise.^[38] Resolutions of the general assemblies of Illinois, Indiana, and Missouri were forwarded to congress, expressing their faith in the validity of the United States title to the right of domain and exclusive jurisdiction between latitude 42° and 49°, urging the immediate occupation of the territory;^[39] and instructing senators and representatives to vote for the measure. These resolutions were read in the senate August 31, 1843. Nine memorials were presented in December, from different parts of the western states, asking that steps be taken for the immediate occupation of Oregon. One memorial from Ohio, presented to the house, asked permission to occupy and settle "not over twenty thousand square miles of land in Oregon in one body;" the settlers not to number less than fifty men, one half of whom must have families.^[40] The request was referred to a special committee, who already had in hand a petition from Illinois asking that a section of land be granted to every man over twenty-one years of age who should settle in Oregon.

Petitions were received from Alabama, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, and Indiana, of a similar nature. Public meetings were held at Alton, Illinois, Cincinnati, Ohio, and at Washington City, demanding the occupation of Oregon.^[41] Hundreds of letters poured in on Senator Linn, and continued up to the time of his death to make large demands upon his time. Nor did these petitions and memorials cease with the loss of Oregon's able champion. In the first session of 1843–4 petitions of the same nature were sent in from Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, and Ohio.^[42] The citizens of Missouri desired that an appropriation be made for the survey and establishment of the boundary of Oregon Territory, and that the jurisdiction of the United States should be extended over it as soon as possible. Moore of Ohio presented in the lower house a declaration of the citizens of the Mississippi Valley in convention assembled at Cincinnati, on the 5th of July previous, and indeed, from this time forward till the final settlement of the Oregon boundary in 1846 the agitation increased, as I have already shown in the chapters on the Oregon title in the second volume on the Northwest Coast.^[43]

The president in his annual message to congress, December 5, 1843, in remarking on the subject of the Oregon boundary, announced the ultimate claim of the United States to be to all the territory north of 42° and south of 54° 40′ on the Northwest Coast. Great Britain, he said, controverted this claim, and the American minister at London, under instructions, had again brought the subject to the consideration of the British government. A happy termination of the negotiations was expected; but in the mean time many citizens of the United States were on their way to Oregon, many were there, and others were preparing to emigrate, and he recommended the establishing of military posts along the line of travel.

This was the first formal announcement of the intention of the United States to ignore any claim of Great Britain to territory on the Pacific; but it quickly became the watchword of a majority of the American people, and on this issue Polk was elected to the presidency the following year. Meanwhile congress was more than ever engaged in the discussion of the Oregon Question and Oregon measures, a bill for occupation being before both houses.

Early in the first session of the 28th congress, Atchison of Missouri introduced in the senate a bill "to facilitate and encourage the settlement of the territory of Oregon," by a line of stockade or block-house forts, not over five in number, extending to the Rocky Mountains; the erection of fortifications at the mouth of the Columbia; a grant of six hundred and forty acres of land to every white male inhabitant of eighteen years of age or upwards who should cultivate the same for five years; to every such cultivator who should be married, one hundred and sixty acres additional for having a wife; besides an equal amount for every child he might have under the age of eighteen years, or who might be born to him during the five years of occupancy and use of the land, which gave him title. The land should revert to heirs at law, though no sale of it would be valid before the patent issued. The territory of Oregon was declared to comprise all the country lying west of the Rocky Mountains, and within the parallels of 42° and 54° 40', and the sum of $100,000 was by the bill appropriated to carry these measures into effect. After a long discussion, during which all the old arguments, with sundry new ones arising out of the altered condition of the Oregon Territory through colonization, and the alleged oppressions of the Hudson's Bay Company, together with the attitude of England occasioned by the proceedings of the previous congress, were fully entered into, the final consideration of the bill was postponed on account of the arrival of a British minister to carry on negotiations on the Oregon Question, and in the hope that the settlement of the controversy would remove all obstacles to the extension of jurisdiction and protection.

Another bill was introduced by Atchison, for "establishing a government" in the territory of Oregon, which was not pressed to a third reading. A resolution of Allen of Ohio, requesting the president to lay before the senate a copy of his instructions to the American minister in England on the subject of the Oregon title, since the 4th of March, 1841, with a copy of the correspondence which had passed, elicited extended debate on the powers of the executive and the senate, and was rejected by a vote of thirty-one to fourteen. The president had already declined a similar request of the lower house as inexpedient, owing to the prospect of negotiation; but the senate, it was contended by some members, had certain rights in the matter, not to be set aside by the executive. Another resolution by Semple of Illinois, requesting the president to give to Great Britain the twelve months' notice required, of a desire to annul the convention of 1818, caused yet more discussion, presaging war as it did, and the resolution was negatived by a vote of twenty-eight to eighteen.

In the house of representatives the same topics were prominent throughout the session. Hughes of Missouri introduced a bill for the organization of a territorial government,^[44] which being referred to the committee on territories, Brown of Tennessee chair-man, reported a bill extending the civil and criminal jurisdiction of Iowa Territory over Oregon, as far north as 54° 40', giving land as in the senate bill; providing for the appointment of a judge and justice of the peace; and appropriating $100,000 to build forts on the road to Oregon, and within it.^[45] Ten thousand copies of the bill and report were ordered printed, and that was the end of it.

Semple of Illinois offered a resolution requesting the president to give notice to Great Britain of the intended abrogation of the treaty of 1818, at the end of twelve months. This was referred to the committee on foreign affairs, which reported adversely, not wishing to disturb the course of international discussions by such a step. This did not prevent members from expressing their views with freedom, offering resolutions laying claim to the whole of Oregon, and declining to adjourn till a territory was organized in that region.

The second session of the 28th congress, 1844-5, opened with the Oregon Question, in the form of a resolution by Allen of Ohio, requesting the president to lay before the senate any instructions which had been given the American minister in England on the subject, since a former correspondence, which resolution was passed by a vote of twenty-four to sixteen, showing the progress of public sentiment among the most conservative class. The president, however, thought fit to make no response; and the senate endeavored to act with circumspection; when a bill for establishing a government was presented by Mr Atchison of Missouri, and referred to a select committee, which made a feint of opposing the measure by proposing to refer to the committee on foreign affairs, the attempt being defeated by a vote of twenty-four to twenty. The president himself, in his annual message, after informing congress that a negotiation had been formally entered upon between the secretary of state, Mr Calhoun, and the minister of Great Britain residing at Washington, renewed the recommendations in his previous messages that congress should take measures to facilitate immigration, by establishing military posts, "and make the provision of the existing convention for joint occupancy of the territory by subjects of Great Britain and citizens of the United States more available than heretofore to the latter." As at the former session, there were a number of petitions to congress from the citizens and legislatures of several of the states, asking^[46] a territorial government for Oregon, and urging the government to give notice to Great Britain.^[47]

In the lower house the sentiment in favor of organizing a territorial government had also much increased during the summer vacation; and when Duncan of Ohio asked to introduce a bill for that purpose, the objections were overruled by a vote of one hundred and twenty-five to fifty-three. When the bill was reported back from its committee, it met little opposition, and was finally passed February 3, 1845, by a vote of one hundred and forty to fifty-nine. Then it was sent to the senate, and adopted by the select committee in place of the Atchison bill, but being postponed when on the point of a vote, failed for want of time.

The effect of the objections to the Oregon bills defeated at the previous session was apparent in the bills offered at this. Atchison's bills enacted that a temporary government,^[48] with a governor to remain in office five years, and other officers necessary to a proper administration of law should be provided for; with a legislative body consisting of the governor and judges, all of whose acts should be transmitted to the secretary of state of the United States by the secretary of Oregon every six months, to be annually laid before congress. The governor was made commander-in-chief of the militia, with power to appoint both military and civil officers, and lay off districts for civil and military purposes. As soon as there should be five thousand free white male inhabitants over twenty-one years of age citizens of the United States, they might elect a legislature, one representative for every five hundred voters, to serve for two years; the legislature to consist of a council and house of representatives, the council to consist of five members, elected by the whole legislative body, to serve five years; the president of the United States to have power to remove any member; the assembly to have power to make laws for the territory, not conflicting with the laws of the United States, the veto power being absolute in the governor. A delegate to congress with the right of debate only, should be elected immediately upon the appointment of a governor, the latter being also superintendent of Indian affairs. The bill provided also for a line of stockade forts and block-houses to the South Pass, and a fort at the mouth of the Columbia. The grant of land to settlers was promised 'hereafter;' six hundred and forty acres to every white male inhabitant over eighteen, one hundred and sixty acres to the wife of every married man, and the same quantity to the father for each child under eighteen already in existence, or who should be born within five years after his settlement on a land claim. The president was authorized and required to appoint two additional Indian agents besides the governor. The territory over which this form of government was to be extended was confined to the limit of 49°. I have given this abstract of Atchison's bill to show the gradual progress toward the idea of a government for Oregon in spite of the international question in the way.^[49]

The bill which passed in the house, while claiming the Oregon Territory to 54° 40', contained several clauses intended to guard it against the charge of ignoring the treaty obligations of the United States. British subjects arrested within the territory were to be delivered to the nearest British tribunal, up to a period twelve months after the United States should have served a notice on Great Britain of abrogation of the treaty. It was provided that the future grants of land contemplated by the act should be subject to the settlement of the title with Great Britain, and the extinguishment of the Indian title; also, that nothing in the act should be construed as closing or obstructing any of the navigable waters within the limits of the territory organized by the bill, or any part of the country claimed by either government on the Northwest Coast, against the vessels, citizens, or subjects of Great Britain.^[50] As an indication of the growing importance of another question which was to enter as a factor into the destiny of Oregon, Winthrop of Massachusetts proposed as an amendment a proviso "that there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted." But already the provisional government of the Oregon colony entertained the principle of a free state. And the people of Oregon were, for obvious reasons, better off with their simple organization than they would have been had either of these acts passed.

It is not necessary to the purposes of this history to pursue the action of congress through the 29th session. It was a period of great excitement and increased freedom of expression. President Polk in his message declared that "beyond all question, the protection of our laws, and our jurisdiction, civil and criminal, ought to be immediately extended over our citizens in Oregon." The legislative committee of Oregon for 1845 memorialized congress upon the subject of their temporary organization, reciting the grievances under which they labored, in terms very different from those heretofore employed in the memorials from Oregon.

A bill from the house committee on territories, of which Douglas of Illinois was chairman, "to protect the rights of American settlers in the territory of Oregon," was passed on the 18th of April, 1846, but after frequent postponements failed in the senate. At length, on the 6th of August, congress received official notification of the settlement of the Oregon boundary at the 49th parallel, together with a strong recommendation by the president that liberal land grants should be made to the Oregon settlers without delay. It might have been believed that the defining of a boundary was the only thing lacking to forward the establishment of a territory on the Columbia River, instead of which, however, it was made the excuse to avoid it by those senators who were dissatisfied with the relinquishment of the territory between latitudes 49° and 54° 40'.^[51] Hence little that should have been done for Oregon at this session was done; and here I leave congress, and return to the affairs of the country.

1. Benton's Thirty Years, i. 13. See Hist. Northwest Coast, this series.
2. Annals of Congress, 1820-1, 946-59.
3. Annals of Congress, 1821-2, 1034.
4. See Hist. Northwest Coast, and Hist. Alaska, this series.
5. December 17, 1822. See Hist. Northwest Coast, this series.
6. Annals of Congress, 1822-3, 415.
7. This account of the Columbia was probably given by some of the members of the Pacific fur company. Franchère mentions that they could raise nothing but roots at Astoria. It is not surprising that as the fur companies confined their explorations to the rivers, which were bordered by heavy forests, such opinions of the country prevailed.
8. Precisely what happened, with this difference: The company occupying was British; the Indians, rather than their title, "became extinguished; and the settlers (American) came in, and formed an independent government.
9. Annals of Congress, 1822-3, 355, 396, 411, 583, 602, 678, 691, 696, 700.
10. Congressional Debates, 1824-5, i., app. 7.
11. Congressional Debates, 1824-5, i. 13-26, 28, 36, 38, 39-42, 44, 59.
12. The bill as it passed the house was amended so as to drop the words 'Columbia or' and to read 'the Oregon River.
13. Congressional Debates, 1824-5, i. 692.
14. Long's Exped., ii. 350-61.
15. Congressional Debates, 1828-9, v. 193.
16. This difference operated in two ways against the American traders, as they found to their cost. Either they must sell inferior goods at the price asked by the English traders, or they must consent to sell without profit, either course being ruinous to their business, as the natives soon learned to know good articles, and to carry their furs where they brought the most.
17. This was the association formed by Hall J. Kelley. The others were a Louisiana company headed by John M. Bradford, and an Ohio company headed by Albert Town.
18. The Louisiana company petitioned for a tract of 40 miles square, which Gurley of Louisiana insisted upon their right to have granted to them; and suggested that the Massachusetts company be granted permission to erect a fort on certain conditions.
19. Everett of Massachusetts, Polk of Tennessee, Bates of Missouri, and other able men.
20. Congressional Debates, 1828-9, v. 125-53, 168-75, 187-92.
21. 25th Cong., 2d Sess., Sen. Doc., i. 39.
22. I believe the first resolution of this kind offered was by the legislature of Illinois, in 1838-9. See 26th Cong., 1st Sess., Sen. Doc., iii. 93.
23. See 25th Cong., 3d Sess., Sup. H. Rept. 101.
24. The word 'cut' comes well from inhabitants of a timbered country like Kentucky, but scarcely applies to the western prairies.
25. 26th Cong., 1st Sess., Sen. Doc. 172.
26. The memorial reads, 'the navigable branch of the Oregon River.'
27. 26th Cong., 1st Sess., Sen. Doc. 244.
28. 26th Cong., 1st Sess., Sen. Doc. 40.
29. 26th Cong., 1st Sess., Sen. Doc. 231.
30. The settlement of the Maine boundary, so long deferred, the right of search, the liberation of slaves, and the burning of the Caroline, besides others. Only a few of the affairs were settled by the treaty of 1842, known as the Ashburton treaty.
31. That part of the president's message relating to the establishment of a chain of posts from the Missouri to the Pacific was referred to the committee on military affairs, of which Pendleton of Ohio was chairman. His report, 27th Cong., 2d Sess., House Doc. 830, contains a review of the Oregon question of title, an estimate of the expense of erecting forts, a description of the country, a letter with information about the Methodist Mission, the Hudson's Bay Company, and other matters.
32. Niles' Reg., lxviii. 162. Niles' Weekly Register was started in September 1811, at Baltimore, Maryland, by H. Niles. It was a journal of sixteen pages octavo, devoted to the publication of 'political, historical, geographical, scientific, astronomical, statistical, and biographical documents, essays and facts, together with notices of the arts and manufactures, and a record of the events of the times.' It was subsequently enlarged and was removed to Philadelphia, where it was edited by George Beatty. As a record of current events, it sustains its character well, and was among the most zealous advocates of the United States interest in Oregon. Almost a complete history of the Oregon emigrations could be drawn from its pages.
33. Linn and Sargent's Life of Linn, 232.
34. White's Ten Years in Or., 324
35. Calhoun, Archer, McDuffie, Crittenden, Conrad, Choate, and Berrien were adverse to the passage of the bill. Benton, Young, Sevier, Buchanan, Walker, Phelps, and Linn were its advocates. Benton said: 'I now go for vindicating our rights on the Columbia, and as the first step toward it, passing this bill, and making these grants of land, which will soon place thirty or forty thousand rifles beyond the Rocky Mountains.' Thirty Years' View, ii. 470-82; Grover's Public Life in Or., MS., 99.
36. Cong. Globe, 1842-3, 297.
37. Lewis F. Linn was born near the site of the city of Louisville Kentucky, Nov. 5, 1795, being a grandson of William Linn of the revolutionary war, a son of whom emigrated from Pennsylvania to 'where wild Ohio's mighty flood rolled through Kentucky's twilight wood at a day when few white people lived on the banks of the Belle Rivière. Linn seems to have engaged the affections of those with whom he was associated, to a remarkable degree, and the eulogies pronounced at his death were numerous. See Linn and Sargent's Life of Linn, 341-441.
38. 27th Cong., 3d Sess., H. Ex. Doc. 2.
39. 27th Cong., 3d Sess., Sen. Doc., iii. 158; 27th Cong., 3d Sess., Sen. Doc., iv. 217; 27th Cong., 3d Sess., Sen. Doc., iii. 159; 27th Cong., 3d Sess., Sen. Doc., iii. 180.
40. 27th Cong., 3d Sess., H. Jour., 260.
41. 27th Cong., 3d Sess., Sen. Doc., 84; Semple's Occupation of Oregon, 8, 9, 18; Cong. Globe, 1842-3, 84, 88, 220, 267, 287, 340.
42. 28th Cong., 1st Sess., H. Jour., 80, 107, 276.
43. Petition of the citizens of Licking County, Ohio, urging the government to take immediate possession of Oregon. Cong. Globe, 1843-4, 82. Resolution of the legislative assembly of Ohio, to terminate the convention with Great Britain. 28th Cong., 2d Sess., Sen. Ex. Docs., ii. 56; with similar resolutions from New Hampshire, Missouri, Illinois, and Alabama. Resolution of the general assembly of Indiana to the same effect; 'peaceably if we can; forcibly if we must.' 28th Cong., 1st Sess., H. Jour., 423-4; Cong. Globe, 1843-4, 226. Petition of David Newkirk and 55 others of Seneca County, Ohio, asking congress to take measures to aid settlers in Oregon. Petition of citizens of Wayne County, Ohio, for the immediate occupation of Oregon Territory. The same from Carroll County and Medina County, that the ordinance of 1787 be extended over Oregon. Petition of the people of the state of Ohio, that the Oregon Territory be immediately occupied. Petition of the citizens of Ross and Pickaway counties, Ohio, praying for a territorial government in Oregon. Petition of the citizens of Oswego County, New York, for the settlement of the boundary and for the protection of emigrants to Oregon. Cong. Globe, 1843-4, 636; Id., 1844-5. 155; and probably others that have escaped my observation.
44. 28th Cong., 1st Sess., H. Jour., 1844, 168-9.
45. Cong. Globe, 1843-4, 366; 28th Cong., 1st Sess., H, Jour., 636.
46. Cong. Globe, 1844-5, 17, 155, 237, 277.
47. The legislature of Maine claimed the whole Oregon Territory up to 54° 40', and closed a long series of resolutions with this one: 'That our senators in congress be instructed, and our representatives be requested, to use their best exertions to secure the annexation of Texas to the United States, and the occupation of Oregon, in conformity with the foregoing resolutions.' Texas was at this juncture frequently in the 'resolutions' both in and out of congress, and was really one obstacle to the success of the Oregon measures; as the southern states cared more for its annexation than for the occupation of Oregon. As the annexation of Texas seemed more probable, it was endeavored by coupling to carry the Oregon measure. See resolution of the legislature of New Hampshire, Cong. Globe, 1844-5, p. 100; of Ohio, p. 175.
48. It is remarkable that no allusion is made in the debates to a temporary government already existing in Oregon, of which information must have been obtained, officially or otherwise. Elijah White certainly reported on the subject.
49. I have another object—to give the gradual growth of the donation land law, the chief new feature in this bill being that 160 acres were given to the wife, instead of to the husband.
50. Under this law McLoughlin's claim, at Oregon City would have been respected
51. Hannigan of Indiana said: 'If measures were to be passed relating to Oregon, as a matter of course they must expect a debate upon that convention [treaty of 1846], which he would take this occasion to say was neither more nor less than a convention for the joint occupation of Oregon south of the 49th degree of latitude—a convention which had ceded to the Hudson's Bay Company in perpetuity the navigation of the Columbia River. It was a convention for the joint occupation of Oregon south of 49°, while before we held as far north as 54° 40'. He repeated that those who were opposed to the convention desired to be heard in reference to it, in an appeal to their constituents and to the country.' Allen of Ohio trusted the law of Oregon Territory would be 'so framed as to prevent any man who held allegiance to the British crown from holding an acre of land in fee-simple in that territory. He wanted no British subject to possess any rights within our territory there. He wanted to legislate the Hudson's Bay Company out of the territory, and that as speedily as possible.' Cong. Globe, 1845-6, 1198-9.