Oregon Historical Quarterly/Volume 12/Number 4

FulinTHE QUARTERLY of the Oregon Historical Society VOLUME XII DECEMBER 191! NUMBER 4 Copyright, 1 911 , by Oregon HUtorical Society The Quarterly disavows responsibility for the positions taken by contributors to its pages THE RISE AND EARLY HISTORY OF POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON V By Walter Carleton Woodward Chapter X THE POLITICAL REVOLUTION OF I860 While now increasing rapidly in numbers and influence, as strikingly demonstrated in the election of 1859, Oregon Re- publicans felt the need of a capable leader to champion their cause. They had several men of much ability, but few if any of them were fluent, convincing speakers who could contend creditably with such a masterful orator as Delazon Smith or even with such effective speakers as Judge Willams, Lane and a number of other Democrats. And in a day when political oratory was so important a factor in moulding public senti- ment, the handicap suffered by the Republicans was very serious, indeed. Logan ranked with these men, but he was not sound morally, and he was not able to inspire confidence in his sincerity in, and devotion to, the principles for which he was supposed to stand. Years of association together of the prominent Republicans in Oregon politics, breeding the in- evitable rivalries and jealousies, made, it well nigh impossible that any Oregon Republican of ordinary ability should be ac- corded that generous allegiance so necessary to success. As early as in the spring of 1858 it had been suggested at an informal conference of Republican leaders, that an invitation be sent to Col. E. D. Baker, of California, to come to Ore302 W. C. WOODWARD gon and take a part in the approaching campaign. 1 Such vigorous objection was made to the idea of an interloper being made so prolminent in Oregon affairs, that the matter was quietly but quickly dropped. But Baker was kept informed on the trend of political affairs in Oregon and received encour- agement from his northern political friends to remove and cast his political fortunes with Oregon Republicans. 2 He had made a great name for himself in California as an orator and occupied a prominent place, in the political activities of that state. But he was a man of the highest political ambition, and having failed of election to the United States Senate from California, looked with favor upon the overtures from Oregon. In the first weeks of the year I860 3 he took up his residence with his family at Salem and entered at once, upon the political activities of his newly-adopted home. His position was a dif- ficult one. The reason for his removal to Oregon was under- stood by all. It was natural for those Republicans who had been fighting the battles of the party in days oif adversity to look with some jealousy and suspicion upon an outsider who now came in with the ostensible purpose of claiming the first great reward of the party success which now seemed possible. The old spirit of "Oregon offices for Oregonians" was still prevalent. But Baker was a past master in the arts of a politician. He had all the physical endowments that go to make a successful public man the handsome appearance of a fine physique, dignified, courtly bearing, an incomparable voice. At the same time he had those winning graces of mind and heart which gave him a personal magnetism that was irre- sistible. He was a politician, but he was more. He gave an impression of a kindly, sincere interest in those about him which the mere affectations of a political demagogue would not inspire. The richness and power of his eloquence was 1 Davenport in Oregon Historical Quarterly for December, 1908, whose ac- count of the appearance of Baker in Oregon has been followed by the writer. 2 Dryer stated publicly in October, 1860, that both he and Logan had re- quested Baker to come to Oregon and run for United States Senator. See Argus, Oct. 27, 1860. 3 Col. Baker arrived at Portland, Feb. 21, 1860. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 303 unquestioned. 1 He delivered a great oration on the succeed- ing fourth of July to which even Bush referred as "eloquent and soul-stirring." 2 His surpassing gift as an orator, com- bined with his personal charm of manner, disarmed political friends of lurking jealousy and softened the opposition of political enemies. "A great change came over the country with the advent of the Colonel." Oregon Republicans now had a distinguished leader who inspired them with confidence and enthusiasm for coming political struggles. The State Democratic Convention met April 17 at Eugene, and was controlled by the Lane Democrats. Six of the eight counties which had withdrawn from the convention the pre- ceding November, were not represented. Delazon Smith was chairman of the committee on platform and resolutions, among the other members being the Democratic editors, James O'Meara and J. H. Slater, and Governor Whiteaker.3 The resolutions merely declared the Cincinnati platform of 1856 to be a true and satisfactory enunciation of the principles of the party. J. W. Drew, of Coos, moved to amend by adding, "as advocated and enunciated by Stephen A. Douglas." The motion was voted down, 60 to 4, which shows clearly the fac- tional status of the Convention. Geo. K. Shell, of Marion county, was nominated for Congressman. Stout was not con- sidered for renomination because, said the Statesman, he had been more faithful to the interests of the state than to those of Lane. The Republicans met in convention April 19. The platform of the preceding year was adopted, with the omission of the Seward instructions.* T. J. Dryer, B. J. Pengra and W, H. Watkins were named for presidential electors. Col. Baker ad- dressed the convention on invitation and was unanimously invited to stump the state in the coming canvass. 1 The incident is recorded by Davenport that during one of Col. Baker's greatest speeches in San Francisco, one of the reporters threw down his pencil, rushed bare-headed into the streets and gesticulating wildly, cried at the top of his voice, "Come in! Come in! The Old Man is talking like a God." 2 Statesman, July 10. 3 Proceedings, Union, April 24 and Statesman, April 24. 4 Proceedings, Argus, April 28. 304 W. C. WOODWARD In 1857 and 1858 the differences between the Oregon Demo- crats had been largely local and factional. But by this time, while the personal element was not altogether obliterated, the schism in the party was a logical one; it was based on a prin- ciple and was national. On the one hand were the Douglas Democrats, led by Bush, stoutly maintaining the doctrine of popular sovereignty. On the qther, the Administration Demo- crats, led by Lane, who held that slavery was protected in the Territories by the Constitution. The strife, occasioned by their differences, tended to increase the distance between them, and to lead each side to emphasize and exaggerate its own tenets. The result was that the Douglas men were becoming more conservative in their interpretation of the Dred Scott decision, approaching that held by the Republicans. The Administra- tion Democrats had, on the other hand, taken a further step in the opposite direction and had now practically become in- terventionists of the Southern hue. In an editorial in April on "New Doctrine," Bush showed that, despite the fact that it was the settled law of the civilized world that human slavery was the creation of municipal law, by positive, enactment, dur- ing the Buchanan administration, the doctrine had been ad- vanced in the United States, stealthily, step by step, that slavery was a federal instead of a local institution. "It is as- sumed," he said, "that it had been so decided by the United States Supreme Court in the Dred Scott Decision. That that court may not so decide, when such question comes before it, no one is authorized to say. But it has not yet so decided. The only decision made by the Court was that a Negro could not bring a suit in a United States Court. The several opin- ions in addition comprised certain dicta, not possessed of the binding force of law." 1 One is inclined to question his eyes in reading from this source such a statement of the case which would have been considered adequate in any Republican news- paper in 1857. But nothing like this appeared in the States- man in 1857 or 1858. It indicated the widening breach be- i Statesman, April 10. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 305 tween the two Democratic wings. The bitter feeling between them was far more intense than between either of them and the Republicans. The legislature which was to be chosen at the June election, would be called upon to elect two United States senators at its regular session in September. This fact gave direction to the political activities in the spring. Lane and Smith were the avowed and determined candidates of the radical Democrats and both the Douglas Democrats and the Republicans were stern in the resolution to defeat them. The two latter political divisions thus found themselves in more or less of an alliance. It was unconfessed for the most part and even often openly repudiated, especially by the Douglas men, who because of the alliance were called Mulattoes by the Lane forces. But where principles were similar and purposes the same, some unity of action was inevitable. It was all the more so because Col. Baker was an avowed popular sovereignty man, which ren- dered him at least inoffensive to the conservative Democrats. The Republicans were now recognized as at least holding the balance of power between the warring Democratic factions and were in fact accused of alliance with each by the other. As early as November, 1859, Adams made light of the sug- gestion made by the Portland correspondent of the Statesman that the Lane forces and the Republicans would unite in the election of senators. 1 The Portland Advertiser predicted such fusion and called on Democrats to defeat such an "unholy al- liance." 2 Such a suggestion was an implication against the honesty of purpose of the Republicans. Two years previous they had been in alliance with that faction of Oregon Democ- racy, the "Nationals" or "softs," which now for the most part comprised the Lane party. But no lines were drawn on na- tional principles in that campaign as there were now in 1860. Indeed, a letter appeared in the Argus, March 31, 1860, dated at Yoncalla, signed "A" and evidently written by the old Ro- man, Jesse Applegate, strongly opposing the idea of coalition i Argus, Nov. 12, 1859. in Statesman, July 10, 1860. 306 W. C. WOODWAKD with either Democratic wing". "I cannot see how it is possible the Republicans can with any consistency or without doing violence to their principles and forfeiting their self-respect, lend themselves to the base and dirty purposes of one faction of this corrupt party to help the other." He maintained that the Republican party was a party of principle, not price. Nevertheless, there was a logical basis for an alliance be- tween Republicans and Douglas men, and despite all protesta- tions to the contrary, there was a certain unity of procedure between them. For example, in Marion county, the Douglas men or "Bushites" as they were termed by their Democratic opponents, nominated a legislative ticket and the Lane men did likewise. When the Republicans met in convention, they were advised by Baker not to nominate candidates but to sup- port the Bush ticket. On arriving at a private understanding with the Douglas legislative nominees that they would sup- port Baker for senator, Baker's advice was followed. 1 And this in the face of the fact that the Republicans were probably strong enough in Marion county to have elected their ticket. On the other hand in Washington and Yamhill counties, the anti-Lane Democrats did not nominate candidates, but sup- ported for the most part those of the Republicans. A similar understanding, for the most part unconfessed, seemed to exist over the state. But the most difficult and cleverly managed compromise be- tween the Republicans and Douglas Democrats, and one which had the most far-reaching influence on the political events of the near future, was effected in Linn county, the home of the radical Democratic champion, "Delusion" Smith. In fact it proved the key to the situation. The facts were given the writer by a leading participant in the intrigue. 2 In March, Judge Williams, who was one of the Douglas candidates for senator, went to the Linn county residence of Smith and said to him: "Delazon, I have come here to beard the lion in his den. I am going to canvass Linn county and my object is to 1 Davenport, pp. 347-351- 2 Personal interview with W. R. Bishop. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 307 beat you and General Lane for the Senate. Come on and make your fight." 1 Smith accepted the challenge and the two made a joint canvass of the county, fighting each other by day and generally sleeping in the same bed at night. 2 While in the county Williams cautiously broached the subject to his fellow Democrats of an alliance with the Republicans as the only means of defeating their pro-slavery opponents. Two efforts were made in this direction at mass meetings held at Albany, attended by both parties. But on both occasions, the Demo- crats avowed their Democracy and the Republicans their Re- publicanism so strenuously, the meetings ended in confusion and united action was despaired of. The abhorrence which many Democrats still cherished at any connection with Black Republicans, was hard to overcome. Finally an absolutely secret caucus of seventeen men was held for the purpose of making out a fusion ticket. Active Democrats in the caucus were Anderson Cox, W. R. Bishop, M. D. Byland and Harri- son Johnson. John Conner was the leading Republican present, and was made chairman. In making up the legislative, ticket, Bishop demanded that a rather illiterate Democrat named Barton Curl, from his part of the county, be named. Curl was a rabid Democrat and "offensively partisan" and was strenuously objected to by the, Republicans. Bishop was in- sistent in his demand. He knew that Curl alone could carry the Democratic vote of the "Santiam forks," the hotbed of Democracy in that part of the state, and that vote would be essential for carrying the county. The Republicans yielded reluctantly. The conditions of alliance were clearly stated to be that the members of the legislative ticket, if elected, were to vote for Col. Baker and some Douglas Democrat for United States senators. The ticket was issued the public knew not by whom nor whence. Four members of the legislature were to be chosen and three of the nominees on the fusion ticket were elected. One Lane-Smith nominee was successful by a 1 Williams' address before the legislature of 1899, in Oregon Historical Quar- for March, 1907, p. 22. 2 Conversation with Judge Williams. 308 W. C. WOODWARD majority of four votes, so close was the election. Barton Curl led the ticket. The judgment of Bishop was vindicated. Linn county had always been counted a Democratic stronghold and this revolution in his own county so weakened and discredited Smith that he was practically eliminated as a serious candidate for the United States senate. 1 The hopes of both Lane and Smith were dashed by the general result of the election, by which the political complexion of the ensuing assembly was determined as follows : Lane Dem- ocrats, 19; Douglas Democrats, 18; Republicans, 13. Clacka- mas, Yamhill, Washington and Umpqua counties went solidly Republican. The Douglas ticket won in Marion; the Lane tickets for the most part in Lane, Polk, Benton, Jackson and Josephine. In other counties the results were divided. Sheil, the regular Democratic nominee for Congressman, was victor- ious over Logan by a majority of 103 votes. The Statesman took no notice of this part of the contest. There was no pro- vision in the State Constitution for the choice of a Congress- man at this time, and Bush maintained that the election was illegal and void a mere political trick of the Lane Democrats. In fact it was electing a representative in Congress eighteen months before his term would begin. While engrossed in the excitement of state politics, the Ore- gon politicians were at the same time keeping in close touch with national political affairs and were following the fortunes of the various aspirants for presidential nominations at the approaching national conventions. It is interesting to note who were some of the pre-convention favorites in Oregon. Among the Democrats, while Lane had received the official sanction as the candidate of the Oregon Democracy, it has been shown i Smith refused to consider himself eliminated, as indicated in the following, reprinted from his own paper the Democrat, of Albany, in the Argus, July 21, 1860. This quotation likewise furnishes an example, though somewhat an exaggerated one, of the license indulged in by the Oregon press during this factious period: "Asohell Bush who runs the Salem smut machine, the club-footed loafer Beggs and Nesmith, the vilest and most loathsome creature that wears the human form on the Pacific Coast, are asserting that We are politically dead! Dead!! Never! Never!! No, Never!!! Let these cut-throats, assassins, murderers and their bastard vagabond allies in this county, put that in their pipes and smoke it!!!!" POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 309 that he was not really the choice of the Democrats of the state generally. Bush had early pronounced strongly for Douglas. 1 He said he was not of that number that believed or affected to believe that the dissolution of the Union would necessarily follow the election of a Black Republican as president, even were he W. H. Seward. But he did contend that the election of such a "violent sectionalist" would widen the breach be- tween the North and South which might finally result in dis- union. This led up to a fervid appeal for Douglas as the one man suitable to meet the crisis. 2 Adams stated that from his observations he had no doubt but that a large majority of Ore- gon Democrats favored the nomination of Douglas.3 Even the Union, the Lane, anti-Clique organ, had admitted that, setting aside General Lane, Oregon would most likely favor Douglas and added, "And we are not prepared to say that he would not be the safest and most available candidate/' 4 Daniel S. Dickinson was championed by Yamhill Democrats. Among the Republicans, also, there were some decided views as to desirable candidates. In October, 1859, Adams declared his preference in a leader "Edward Bates for President," 5 and in following issues strongly supported the claims of the Missouri man. This drew out Editor Pengra of the Free Press, who had been responsible for the Seward resolution at the preceding state convention. In answer to Pengra, Adams said that if the editor of the Press had observed his own rule, "not to set up and defend the claims of any particular indi- vidual in preference to any others," he would not have intro- duced, particularly in the manner and at the time it was done, the Seward resolution of which a large majority of the 1 Statesman, Dec. 20, 1859- 2 "What can be done to stay the destroying tide of blind fanaticism and in- sure beyond peradventure the perpetuity of our national institutions? Who can and will lead the hosts of Democracy to certain triumph in the approaching strife? Who but the gallant Democratic statesman and leader of the Northwest the champion of popular sovereignty the uncompromising advocate of the rights of all the states and the foe to sectionalism in any guise and in evwy quarter Stephen A. Douglas I 3 Argus, Nov. 5, 1859. 4 Union, Nov. 12, 1859. 5 Argus, Oct. i, 1859. 310 W. C. WOODWARD delegates disapproved. 1 He said in effect that it gave their candidate, Logan, more trouble than anything else in the can- vass and resulted in his defeat. "There are always some peo- ple," he added, "who can never 'let well enough alone/ and our party in Oregon has a few of that stamp." Adams main- tained that no man in Oregon exceeded him in admiration of Seward as a statesman and patriot, but that he saw how dif- ficult it would be, to bring to the support of such a man, the masses with their varied and sectional ideas and interests. Dryer of the Oregonian expressed no choice of a presidential nominee. The first expression for Lincoln was made in February, 1860. It was in a contributed article of some length, in the Argus, by Simeon Francis, a recent arrival from Illinois. He was the founder of the Springfield "Illinois State Journal" and had for twenty-five years been its editor. His approach to the subject was diplomatic "Your views in regard to Ed- ward Bates and your high appreciation of the man are my own. . . . The same facts I may say in regard to Abra- ham Lincoln." 2 There followed a sketch of Lincoln's life and career of his long and consistent maintenance of Republican principles, the article closing with this tribute: "All these circumstances have placed Mr. Lincoln before his country and will place him before the convention as one of the men worthy of their high behest as a candidate for the first position in the world. He may attain that position. He may not. In either case, Abraham Lincoln will remain one of God's noblemen noble in his nature, noble in his aims a pure and great man." Shortly after this Francis succeeded Dryer as editor of the Oregonian and had the satisfaction of engaging actively in the campaign for the election of his candidate. 3 1 Ibid., Oct. 29. "If Mr. Pengra had confined the expression of his preference to the sheet he edits it would have been all right; but when, after a convention had made arrangements to adjourn and half its members had left, supposing that nothing more would be done till the next session, he undertook to saddle his views upon the whole party, he did in our judgment a foolish, and as it proved, an in- judicious thing." 2 Ibid., Feb. n, 1860. 3 H. L. Pittock became owner of the Oregonian in December, 1860, and in an editorial note announcing his departure for San Francisco to buy new materials, he said: "Mr. Francis will remain in charge of the paper as he has been for the last eight months."

The National Democratic Convention assembled April 23 at Charleston. The Oregon delegation as selected, consisted of Jos. Lane. Lansing Stout and M. P. Deady, with J. F. Miller. Indian agent. Gen. John Adair, collector at Astoria, and Gen. John K. Lamerick, as alternates. Not all of these attended and the Oregon delegates as present at Charleston, were Stout. Lamerick. Gov. I. I. Stevens of Washington Territory. R. B. Metcalf of Texas, a late Indian agent in Oregon, Justus Steinberger, former agent of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company in Oregon and A. P. Dennison. Indian agent.^[1]

When the split occurred in the convention on the adoption of the Douglas platform, the Oregon delegation did not withdraw with the pro-slavery seceders, though it had acted in harmony with them in the convention. However, it appears that they remained with the understanding that if Chairman Cushing's decision to the effect that a two-thirds majority of all the delegates, including the bolters, was necessary to nominate was revised, making possible the nomination of Douglas, they too would then withdraw. Lane was in Washington at this time and in answer to a telegram from Stout at Charleston asking for instructions, had sent word to withdraw with the seceding delegates by all means and stand by them.^[2] In the same issue of the Statesman in which Bush published Lane's dispatch to Stout, 'in an editorial on "Lane and Disunion", he accused Lane of being a party to a preconcerted disunion movement. As evidence of the political company Lane associated with, he reproduced the famous "scarlet letter" of W. L. Yancey of Alabama to Jos. S. Sloughter, in which Yancey openly declared for a revolution on the part of the cotton states. Editorial correspondence was also quoted by Bush relative to a projected independent republic on the Pacific 312 W. C. WOODWARD Coast, to further which, the Coast Democrats were to aid the South in dissolving the Union. Not having actually withdrawn from the Charleston Con- vention, the Oregon delegation, headed by I. I. Stevens, ap- peared at the adjourned convention at Baltimore. Soon, how- ever, according to the reported proceedings, 1 "Mr. Stevens of Washington Territory, in appropriate remarks, announced the withdrawal of the delegation from Oregon from the conven- tion." The Oregon delegates entered the seceders' convention, which had likewise adjourned to Baltimore, and took part in the nomination of Breckinridge. An Oregon man was made one of the secretaries of the convention. 2 Little information is to be had as to the strength of the sentiment for Lane either at Charleston or Baltimore, or as to the motives of the Demo- cratic politicians in putting him forward at all. Amid the excitement and confusion arising from the great schism in the party, for once interest in men was overshadowed by interest in issues, and even the public press contained comparatively little of political gossip or comment of a personal nature. About all that the papers had to say of the vice presidential nominee with Breckinridge, as reported in the Oregon press, was found in the following paragraph of the proceedings : 3 "Mr. Greene of North Carolina nominated Joseph Lane of Oregon for vice president. Mr. Scott of California seconded the nomination with appropriate remarks. Mr. Adkins of Tennessee moved that Mr. Lane be nominated by acclamation. (Cries of No, No, No!) The roll was called on the first ballot the whole 105 votes were cast for Joe Lane and he was declared nominated for vice president amidst deafening ap- plause." It is interesting to note that the head of the Oregon delega- tion at Baltimore, Gov. Stevens, was made chairman of the 1 In Statesman, July 24 and Union, July 30. 2 H. R. Crosbie, whose name appeared as Crotsney in the dispatches. Crosbie had taken Metcalf's place on the delegation. According to the Statesman, Sept. it, he never was a resident of Oregon. Bush said he came out as a hanger-on to Gov. Davis, went to Wash. Ty. and then back to Washington. D. C., where Lane picked him up, put him on his "Oregon Delegation" ana sent him "out to stand." 3 Union, July 30, POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 313 National Democratic Central Committee, of the Southern wing, and managed the campaign for Breckinridge and Lane. 1 Of Oregon's representatives at Charleston and Baltimore, Gen. Stevens and Steinberger joined the Union cause, the former being killed in battle in 1862. Miller was the secession Demo- cratic candidate for governor of Oregon in 1862. Lamerick became commissary of the Louisiana Confederate regiment and Metcalf a lieutenant in the Southern army. In the meantime, the National Republican Convention had been held at Chicago. The delegates from Oregon, neither of whom were in attendance, had been authorized to appoint their own alternates. The Argus of March 31 spoke of the change of time of the Convention to May 16, one month earlier than it had been announced, saying it would cause inconvenience to the Oregon delegates, adding, "We learn that Leander Holmes, in consequence of his inability to attend, has empowered Horace Greeley to act in his stead and cast his vote for Ed- ward Bates." As to the other alternates and whom they repre- sented there is a little confusion. Frank Johnson of Oregon City, who was then studying theology in New York, was in attendance representing Oregon. It is generally understood that Joel Burlingame, father of Anson Burlingame and who had just returned East from Oregon, held a proxy at Chicago. This accounts for the number and yet Eli Thayer of Massa- chusetts, was credited with being a proxy delegate from Ore- gon. 2 Through Greeley, Oregon wielded a very potent and far-reaching influence at the Chicago Convention. This is clearly brought out in a very interesting letter from Johnson to the Argus, extracts of which follow : 3 "The first hearty outburst of enthusiasm was on the an- nouncement of Horace Greeley as member of the com- 1 Statesman, July 24. "The Governor undertook the herculean task. In a single night he wrote th party address to the country an address covering a whole page of a large metro- politan newspaper, a feat for which Gen. Lane years afterward expressed un- bounded admiration and astonishment, both for its ability and for its ease and rapidity with which it was dashed off. During the next four months GOT. Stevens drove on the canvas with his accustomed energy and ability." Hazard Stevens, "Life of Gen. Isaac I. Stevens", Vol. II., p. 305. 2 Statesman, July 24. 3 Argus, July 14. 314 W. C. WOODWARD mittee on platform and resolutions, from Oregon. It was received with universal applause, and cries of 'When did you move?' It was felt that the greatest difficulty of the Convention would be to create a platform acceptable to all the classes represented. . . The result is the most perfect and unequivocal statement of Republican faith ever written, the wisest and most diplomatic points of which, I think I am safe in saying, Oregon had the honor to contribute. During the third ballot there was tolerable order until Oregon declared for Lincoln, rendering his nomination certain. 1 At this point the enthusiasm became irrepres- sible; the Wigwam was shaken with cheers from 23,000 Republicans, which were renewed as state after state de- clared its unanimous vote for 'the man who could split rails and maul Democrats.' ' ; Adams announced that Lincoln's nomination had been re- ceived all over Oregon with probably more enthusiasm than would have been that of any other man. 2 He held that the great mass of Oregon Republicans had favored Bates, as be- ing the most available candidate, but that the enthusiasm of the convention for Lincoln had shown them their mistake. He paid a high tribute to Lincoln for his nobility of character, his purity of purpose and his lack of demagogism, asserting that "Abraham Lincoln stands up to-day as the best known representative of Republicanism in the Union." The pugna- cious "Parson" closed with the aggressive prediction "If he is elected, he will take his seat, unless assassinated, and rule this government, in spite of all the Union-threatening Demo- cratic traitors this side of the lake of fire, and brimstone." When the result of the National Democratic Conventions be- came known in Oregon, Bush promptly entered the name of Douglas in the Statesman as the regular Democratic nominee and at the same time renewed the attack on Republicanism which he had for some time ignored while waging war against 1 Not absolutely certain. Oregon's change to Lincoln pave him 231 1-2 votes, within i i-2 votes of the nomination. Another state then corrected the vote, giv- ing Lincoln 4 more and nominating him by a margin of 2 1-2 votes. Previous to its switch to Lincoln, the Oregon delegation had been voting for Bates. 2 Argus, July 14. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 315 the pro-slavery Democrats. 1 He did not cease his attacks on the latter. He now made a double attack. He pleaded eloquently with all Democrats to come up to the support of "Douglas and the Union" and referred to the speeches of the Southern agi- tators as containing "as damnable treason as ever fell from the lips of the wildest abolition fanatic that disgraces the North." 2 In commenting upon the assertion made by the Portland Advertiser that the Republicans were shouting "Hur- rah for Joe Lane," Bush said, "We have noticed this somewhat remarkable sympathy with the Yancey bolters on the part of the Republicans. We account for it on the score of sympathy with kindred sectionalism." He could not find language too vituperative to apply to Buchanan for deserting Douglas,3 which language reads strangely when compared with the lauda- tory words Bush had for Buchanan only two short years before. The Democratic State Central committee, met at Eugene, August 18. R. E Stratton, declaring that a division and sep- aration of the committee was inevitable and that the issue might just as well be drawn at once, introduced a resolution declar- ing for Douglas and Johnson as the regular Democratic nomi- nees. 4 Delazon Smith moved to amend by substituting the names of Breckinridge and Lane. A full discussion followed. Smith favored leaving the question open until the meeting of the state convention, which the committee was to call for the purpose of nominating presidential electors, and in the mean- time having the Democrats of the state in their primary meet- ings determine upon the action to be taken. He further sug- gested that the committee recommend that the convention name one ticket, made up from both divisions of the party. Stratton, maintaining that there was no hope of concerted action, pressed his resolution, with the amendment of Smith, 1 Statesman, July 24, 2 Ibid., July 31. 3 In an editorial, Aug. 21, on "The Blackest of Treason", the following ex- pressions are found: "Buchanan will be remembered with ineffable hate and scorn. . The black hearted and infamous treason of Jas. B. . . . His corrupt heart has hatched this egg of treason. . . Jas. B., reeking with corruption and treason and rankling with malice and hate . . The name of Jas. B., will like Arnold and Iscariot, be the synonym of treachery and infamy." 4 Proceedings in Union, Aug. 21. 316 W. C. WOODWARD . to a vote. The amendment was sustained by a vote of 9 to 6, whereupon the Douglas men withdrew. The committee then issued a call for a state convention to be held at Eugene, September 18, to nominate three presidential electors and to ratify the platform adopted by the Breckinridge Convention at Baltimore. The Douglas members of the central committee also issued a call for a state convention to be held at Eugene on September 19. 1 . The Breckinridge convention, after endorsing Breckin- ridge and Lane and the platform they stood upon, reiterated allegiance to the National platform of 1856 as interpreted by that of 1860, as the only proper solution of the question of slavery in the Territories ; deprecated the "blatant, unprincipled calumniations of the present national administration ;" declared undiminished confidence in "our esteemed Hero-Citizen", Lane, the true hero of Buena Vista. The sixth and seventh planks expressed the attitude and spirit of the convention toward the other two parties. The sixth "That we are unalterably op- posed to the unconstitutional 'irrepressible conflict' doctrines of the sectional, Black Republican, abolitionized party, which placed the Negro-equality Lincoln in nomination for the Presi- dency." The seventh declared want of confidence in the Doug- las Democratic leaders of the state and declared themselves to "heartily despise and loathe the vile treason, the gross person- alities and the hypocritical teachings of the Oregon Statesman and those who furnish the Judas material for its weekly is- sues." For presidential electors, Delazon Smith, James O'Meara and D. W. Douthitt, were named. Before adjourn- ing, the convention empowered the central committee to act as a conference committee to confer with any committee that might be appointed by the Douglas convention for the purpose of effecting conciliation. But the Douglas Democrats, who met on the following day i Statesman, Aug. 28. Proceedings in Union, Sep. 22. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 317 in convention, manifested no desire for reconciliation. 1 Their uncompromising attitude was expressed in the resolution which endorsed the principle of non-intervention, "as the same was understood in 1848 when Gen. Cass was the Democratic nomi- nee for the Presidency; as the same was understood in 1852 when Gen. Pierce was the Democratic nominee ; as it was un- derstood in 1856 when James Buchanan was the Democratic nominee ; and as affirmed, re-affirmed, endorsed and re-endorsed by every state and national convention and every Democratic leader and statesman for the past twelve years." Douglas and Johnson were endorsed and their platform cordially approved. The following were nominated for electors: W. H. Farrar, Benj . Hayden, Wm. Hoffman : 2 The legislature had met September 10, with all attention centered on the election of United States senators. In an edi- torial upon the subject the week before, Bush argued that the next United States Senate would contain about an equal num- ber, 30, of intervention Democrats for slavery and interven- tion Republicans against, and that the safety of the Union in restricting the conflict between them lay in the small band of non-intervention Democrats who held the balance of power. Therefore, he maintained that it was important to send two non-intervention senators from Oregon, especially as Oregon had always occupied that ground. Note that Bush did not expressly demand that both senators should be Democrats. In fact he tacitly admitted that they would not be when he express- ed the hope that no overtures for a compromise would be enter- tained which looked to the election of anyone not pledged strictly to non-intervention.3 This drew the fire of the Union, which de- clared that "Never was treason more foul." It asserted that the Statesman proprietor had grown immensely rich by favors bestowed on him by the party and that now, "in the hour of its peril, he spurns it away and flippantly talks of electing two 1 "The Convention manifested no disposition to compromise present divisions for the sake of carrying the state against the Republicans beyond peradventure, but persisted in a spirit of blind infatuation known only to those who are goaded to desperation." Union, Sep. 22. 2 Proceedings in Statesman, Sep. 25. 3 Statesman, Sept. 4. 318 W. C. WOODWARD United States senators without reference to political complex- ion. The mask has fallen and behold, men of Oregon, the loathsome mess it concealed." The anti-Lane faction was victorious in the organization of the Assembly, B. F. Harding of Marion being elected speaker of the house and Luther Elkins of Linn, president of the senate. To prevent a quorum in the latter, six of the Lane- Smith members withdrew and went into hiding, their purpose being to make impossible the election of senators unsatisfactory to their faction. In fact it was asserted by the Breckinridge Democrats that no legislation should take place until Delazon Smith was elected senator, his term having expired before Lane's. Warrants were issued for the arrest of the absconding senators but they could not be found. The two Democratic conventions were in session at Eugene at this time. The Breck- inridge convention heartily endorsed the action of the six sena- tors as "preventing the consummation of a gross and infamous fraud upon the Democratic masses of this state by the accom- plishment of the election of a Black Republican to the Senate of the United States, as the fruit of a corrupt and infamous secret coalition." The Douglas convention referred to the abscondence as "part and parcel of that great revolutionary scheme initiated by those who seceded from the National Democratic convention/' After unsuccessful balloting for United States senators, the legislature adjourned. Gov. Whiteaker, though a strong parti- san of the Breckinridge faction, issued an appeal to the absent senators to return to their aeats, which they did on Septem- ber 24. They were censured by the senate, in a vote of 8 to 7. The result of the first ballot after the re-assembling of the legislature, taken October 1, was: For the long term Nesmith 16, Smith 19, Baker 12, Williams 2, Curry 1. For the short term Grover 17, Willams 11, Holbrook 11, Curry 7, Drew 2. After ten ineffective ballots, adjournment was made until the following day. On the fourth ballot of the next day, the vote stood : Long term Deady 22, Nesmith 27 ; short POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 319 term Baker 26, Williams 20. Twenty-six votes were neces- sary to elect. Oregon had chosen as her United States sena- tors, J. W. Nesmith, a Douglas Democrat, and Col. E. D. Baker, a Republican. The first step in the political revolution of 1860 had been taken. The contest had been a long and complicated one. The Douglas Democrats were reluctant to vote for even so conserv- ative a Republican as Baker, and held out in the hope of effecting some satisfactory compromise with their factional opponents. But they refused absolutely to vote for Smith of the other side and were as insistent on the election of their own candidate, Nesmith. But the Breckinridge party stead- fastly refused to support Nesmith unless Smith were made the other senator. Compromise was thus impossible. These conditions were set forth in an address issued by the fifteen Democrats who voted for Baker, explaining their action. 1 They contended that it was better to combine with the Repub- licans than have no senators at all, especially as Baker was a non-interventionist who really differed but little from them in his views and would make Oregon a worthy senator. 2 The Democratic press was practically a unit in denouncing the coalition, but the Statesman defended it, hurling defiance at "the Yanceyites," upon whom it threw the burden of respon- sibility because of their determination to elect disunionists to the Senate.3 The Republican press was jubilant. "Glorious Result," was the caption of the article in the Argus, October 6, announcing the "glorious news." Adams made the first open, unreserved public reference to the means by which it was accomplished when he said "The combination by which it was effected was made by the people in June and has been honorably and fairly carried out by their representatives." He had a good word for Nesmith the first ever seen in the Argus 1 Statesman, Oct. 8. 2 In his correspondence dated Nov. i, 1863, to the San Francisco Bulletin, M. P. Deady maintained that Baker owed more to the existence of the Oregon Indian war debt for his election, than had ever been told; that those who held war scrip, concluding that it would be necessary to have an advocate on the Re- publican side of Congress before an appropriation would be made for the payment of the debt, lent a potent influence in favor of Baker. 3 Statesman, Oct. 5. 320 W. C. WOODWARD for a Democrat and which was eloquent of the spiritual exalta- tion of the combative "Parson" over the result. In speaking of "Our Republican Senator, Col. Baker," he was effervescent. Salem correspondence in the Argus, signed "A. H." deprecated the action of the Oregonian and the Statesman in "toning down" Baker's Republicanism and imputing to him some of the heresies of Douglas in order to justify the actions of the Democrats who voted for him. 1 But this correspondent was evidently one Amory Holbrook, who, having political aspira- tions of his own, was jealous of Baker. As a member of the legislature he had refused to vote for the Colonel, and his de- fection had almost been fatal to the Republican cause he pro- fessed to support. A few weeks later Adams noted that "a sudden anguish has seized hold of a speckled herd of politicians that expresses itself in groanings that evince the most extreme agony." 2 He took such from the disunion Democrats as a matter of course. But in reference to "a weak echo" from a few Douglas organs, he stated plainly that the fusion in June had been made with the distinct purpose which had been embodied in the election ; that some coalition was absolutely necessary to election and the one which took place was the only logical and honorable one. In reply to the charge made against Baker that he was a new comer, Adams answered that he came voluntarily to locate permanently and already had a national reputation, which "isn't like electing a newcomer that nobody knows anything about a second-rate, jack-leg lawyer, that may turn out to be a tool of some disunion scoundrel as your man Stout has done." The Oregonian, now edited by Francis, had taken the same position, but expressed it in more temperate language. 3 Great satisfaction was expressed at the removal of the Lane incubus and honor was done, to the men who achieved it. 4 The People's Press, the other Republican paper in the state, 1 Argus, Oct. 13. 2 Ibid., Oct. 20. 3 Oregonian, Sep. 29. 4 Oregonian, Sep. 29. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 321 joined the Argus and Oregonian in the jubilant expression of satisfaction over the result. Reports appeared in the press that the joyous Republicans of the state held celebrations of the victory that in some cases one hundred guns were fired in "glorification" on receipt of the news of Baker's election. But even then they could not know the significance of what had taken place. This sena- torial election takes a highly important place in the political his- tory of this very critical period, both locally and nationally. Locally, it marked the complete disruption of the Oregon De- mocracy and paved the way for the Union movement in Ore- gon which was effected in 1862. Nationally, it sent a man in E. D. Baker to the United States Senate, who, by his impas- sioned oratory and inspiring personal example, strengthened the whole country with an answering thrill of loyalty and a determination to meet bravely the crisis of the nation. With the senatorial question settled, renewed attention was given the approaching presidential election. The Statesman labored aggressively for Douglas, and as the campaign ad- vanced, had much more to say against Breckinridge than against Lincoln, though by no means countenancing Republi- canism. Bush addressed a special appeal to the supporters of Bell and Everett, to be true to their name of "Constitutional Union party" by voting for Douglas and by not throwing away their votes and helping to give Oregon to one of the sectional parties. 1 To the "Southern Men" he urged that Douglas maintained the old Democratic doctrine that the people of the Territories should regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, while Lincoln and Breckinridge, "twin brothers on intervention," declared that Congress should regulate for them. 2 The Union was equally energetic and violent in behalf of Breckinridge and Lane, begging Democrats not to throw away votes on Douglas, but to vote for Breckinridge to defeat Lin- coln and save the Union. A greater number of the Democratic 1 Statesman, Oct 29. 2 Statesman, Nor. 5. 322 W. C. WOODWARD papers of the state supported the Breckinridge than the Doug- las ticket. 1 In the East, as the campaign advanced, it seemed at least entirely possible that no candidate would have a ma- jority of the electoral votes, which, according to the Constitu- tion, would throw the election of President into the lower house of Congress. But according to the political complexion of that body, an election would apparently still be impossible. The election of vice president would be in the hands of the Senate, where it was thought the Southern Democrats would be strong enough to elect their candidate Lane, who would thus become President of the United States, the house having failed to choose a chief executive. In view of the fact that the hope for such a denouement became prevalent among Eastern Democrats, as a last resort for defeating Lincoln, it is rather surprising that no reflection of this purpose is seen during the campaign in Lane's own state. The Republican press hewed to the line for Lincoln, attack- ing with equal vigor the pretensions of the two Democratic parties. As usual, "Parson" Adams furnished the most striking and picturesque illustrations of the Republican attitude. "Fight on, ye mercenary hounds," was his encouraging word to the Democratic factions. They were cheerfully informed that while they were telling the truth about each other and proving their unfitness for future trusts, the people were looking upon their discomfiture with indifference as to who might prove the vic- tor. "Have at you then, ye bullying Disunionists and ye time- serving Dough-faces! We need not the cowardly threats of one or the servile whinings of the other." 2 In an editorial on "Disunionism", he said : "The Douglas organs are making a terrible hulla-baloo about the Disunionism of the Breckin- ridge party. This is all very well as their charges are true, and being true, it ought to damn every Disunion tool in the country. But then we can see no great difference in the two 1 Among the papers supporting Breckinridge, were the Union, Oregon Demo- crat, Jacksonville Sentinel, Eugene Herald, Roseburg Express and Portland Daily News; supporting Douglas, were the Statesman, Portland Times, Portland Adver- tiser and The Dalles Mountaineer. 2 Argus editorial, Sept. 29 "When Thieves Fall Out, Honest Men Get Their Dues." POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 323 factions on this score. While Douglas is a professed friend of the Union, his colleague Johnson is as rabid a Disunionist as Yancey." 1 This attitude seems rather strange, considering the success- ful coalition which had just taken place between the Douglas Democrats and the Republicans in the election of United States senators. The Argus was evidently determined to im- press those wavering voters, who were loyal to the Union, with the necessity of supporting Lincoln. To make it easy for such to support the Republican ticket, an attempt had been made during the recent session of the legislature to re- peal the Viva Voce ballot law, passed during the troublous times of the Know Nothings, and to substitute the secret bal- lot. A bill to this effect was carried in the house by a vote of 18 to 12, the Republicans and the Bush, or old organization Democrats, supporting it, the Breckinridge Democrats oppos- ing. 2 The Salem correspondent to the Union made this com- ment: "There, is, however, this gratification that this meas- ure, intended to cover up the tracks of the Bushites in voting, as they intend to do for Lincoln, cannot pass the senate. Not- withstanding the impotent howling of the Clique organ, there is Democracy enough here to kill it, so that after all, the coalitionists only show their cloven feet, without realizing any advantage." The prophecy proved correct, as the measure was lost in a tie vote in the senate. It is diverting to see the old organization Democrats attempting to withdraw from their own noose which they had tied to catch Know Nothings with, while those members who as National Democrats had so vehemently denounced the Viva Voce law, now upheld it just as strenuously. 3 On November 6, Oregon gave Lincoln a plurality of 270 votes over the Democratic candidates and the political revolu- tion of 1860 was complete. The candidates were voted for as i Union, Oct. 13. 3 Two '"notables" remained consistent one on each side. Col. J. K. Kelly of Clackamas, an old National, and now a Lan Democrat, voted for the repeal, while Bush, who had championed the Viva Voce law, was, according to his own statement (Statesman, Nov. 5) opposed to ita repeal. 324 W. C. WOODWARD follows: Lincoln, 5344; Breckinridge, 5074; Douglas, 4131; Bell, 212. 1 The relative strength of the Democratic candidates was a surprise, and in this connection it is significant that Ore- gon was the only northern state which gave a larger vote for Breckinridge than for Douglas. 2 i Official returns in Statesman, Dec. 3. For vote by counties, see Appendix II. A. J. Thayer, who had been nominated by the Douglas State central com- mittee, October 17, for Congressman, received 4099 votes. He had no opposition, as the Breckinridge Democrats agreed to ignore the election, claiming it to be as illegal as that of Sheil in June. Thayer was seated as a member of Congress, July 4, 1861 (Congressional proceedings in Argus, July 27) but the matter was taken up and reconsidered July 26, when Thayer was removed and Sheil seated. (Congressional proceedings in Union, Sep. 9, 1861). 2judson, Fiftieth Ann' Chapter XI TREASON, STRATEGEMS AND SPOILS (1860-1861) Governor Whiteaker, in his message to the legislature in September, 1860, referred to the "mental war" being waged all over the Union, "probably with as much virulence in Oregon as in any other of the States." Deprecating the charges and counter charges of disunion and treasonable sentiments, he doubted there being two men in the state who would not prefer the integrity of the Union with the certainty that their peculiar political views would never be adopted, to disunion with cer- tain success in the division within which they might chance to fall. He therefore held it unnecessary and inadvisable for con- servative men to enter into this war of words. This was the view of the situation, at least professed, as held by an irrec- oncilable, pro-slavery Democrat of the Southern school. 1 In reply, Bush said: "We don't see how Governor Whiteaker can arrive at such conclusions with his eyes and ears open. We believe that two-fifths of all the men in Oregon who are supporting Breckinridge would prefer disunion, on such con- ditions ; and that full one fifth would look with complacency on disunion in any event." 2 Judging merely from the expression of the Democratic press immediately after the election of Lincoln, in regard to the current threats of secession, Whiteaker was nearer right than Bush. The Oregon Weekly Union, the staunch Breckin- ridge and Lane organ, while lamenting sorely the result of the election, and denouncing both Republicans and Douglas Dem- ocrats as blameworthy for the troublous times which were threatened, came out strongly against secession at once. In a two-column editorial on "Nullification," November 24, it stated emphatically that there was no way whereby a state might 1 "Old Whit" is a good specimen of a sturdy, frontier farmer man, formed of a cross between Illinois and Missouri, with a remote dash of something farther Down East. Although wrong in the head in politics, he is honest and right in the heart. Deady, Oct. 13, 1862, to San Francisco Bulletin. 2 Statesman, Oct. i, 1860, 326 *W. C. WOODWARD resume the power relinquished to the Federal Government in the bond of Union, or prevent the enforcement of the laws passed by Congress, but by open, undisguised revolution. It might be called nullification, secession or an "irrepressible con- flict," yet it was none the less revolution. It might be peaceable and without bloodshed, but still it would be revolution. It might come from resistance to laws providing for raising a revenue or for the return of fugitive slaves from resistance in South Carolina or in Massachusetts, it would be revolution and if carried so far as to result in armed resistance it might truthfully be, denominated as treason. At the same time, the Union could not forbear taking the North to task for incon- sistency, pointing out that it was treason to nullify the laws of Congress in South Carolina, but in Massachusetts it was quite a different thing. In the one place it suggested a halter and a gallows while in the other it was commended and gloried in. In the next issue, December 1, the Union expressed itself still mo.re strongly. It declared that resistance to Lincoln as a candidate was one thing and resistance to him as President was quite another. "Therefore, while in common with North- ern Democracy we resisted, and still resist the aggressions of Republicanism on the South, we have no sympathy with any scheme of disloyalty to the Union. And while we will not de- sist from exposing the causes which have led to these unhappy results and will continue to place the responsibility where it belongs, we disclaim for ourselves and the Democracy of Ore- gon, any sympathy or affiliation with the secession of any of the states; and warn them, that, if carried so far as to result in resistance to the laws of the Federal Union, It must be put down with all the power of the government. And in this, they will find the North united as one man in support of the gov- ernment, no matter who is President." The Union has been quoted at some length to show clearly the uncompromising at- titude of the Southern press in Oregon before secession became an accomplished fact. But during the next few months the Union receded from its high ground, devoting most of its space to "exposing the causes which have led to these unhappy results",—the most pleasureable part of the mission to which it had committed itself. Northern fanatics were denounced and the South tacitly exonerated. A kind of bogie man was made of "Coercion," which was declared to be a very different thing from executing the federal laws against the individual citizens of a state.^[3] The Oregon Democrat, assuming even more advanced ground, made a distinction between nullification and secession, holding that while the former was wrong and monstrous, secession was eminently right and proper.^[4] While very few Democratic papers in Oregon made so free and open confession of faith as this, the attitude which they for the most part generally assumed was expressive of such conviction.

By May, Slater of the Union was advising Oregon to assume a neutral ground in the struggle. In an editorial, "What Will the Pacific States Do?" he went no farther than to "presume" that Oregon and California were loyal, and he would not favor any scheme looking to their severance from the Union, "unless, in the progress of the general conflagration, some such step should become absolutely necessary for self-preservation." He maintained that as the war was not against a foreign nation, the people of the Pacific Coast should assume neutral ground and refuse to be involved in "this general melee which politicians have kicked up over the mountains."^[5] "There is high blood in Oregon as well as elsewhere, and it will be well for all concerned to keep quiet and cool," admonished Slater. He continued to make perfunctory professions of loyalty, but took no position in favor of maintaining the Union. In an editorial on "Where We Stand," he failed to give the information indicated. While protesting that he acknowledged no flag but that of the Union, he avowed unalterable opposition to any policy which looked toward waging a war of subjugation on the South.^[6] This harmonizes not at all with his fulsome declaration of December first.

328 W. C. WOODWARD There was a notable exception to this general negative atti- tude of the Democratic press. As the movement toward seces- sion developed, after Lincoln's election, the Statesman was far more vigorous and radical in demanding that the government put down the rebellion promptly by force of arms and hang the rebels, than was either the Argus or Oregonian. The lat- ter, as Administration organs, were cautious, desiring rather to follow and support Lincoln's policy, when it should become known, than to take the initiative by advocating those of their own which might prove embarrassing in being out of har- mony with that adopted at Washington. This attitude of the Republican press is well exemplified in an Oregonian editorial "The Union Can it be Preserved?" 1 "We are not dis- posed," said Francis, "to discuss at this time, the right of secession. Nor are we prepared to express an opinion as to the propriety of a resort to force to compel seceding states to remain in the Union, against their will and consent." Greeley of the Tribune was quoted with approval to the effect that he was opposed to a Union "which had to be pinned together with the bayonet/' and that "if they were determined to go, let them go in peace." Bush was prepared to express an opinion and as usual expressed it with unfailing vigor, urging the new Administration to adopt prompt and heroic measures for ruthlessly crushing out the rebellion and dealing summarily with the traitors. He wasted no time on fine distinctions be- tween nullification and secession, between enforcing United States laws and coercion. His term as senator having expired, Lane arrived in Ore- gon once more, the last of April. But he had never before ex- perienced such a home coming. It was an unfortunate coinci- dence for him that at the very time of his arrival, came the news of the firing upon Fort Sumpter. There was no longer any doubt that the man whom Oregon had long delighted to honor was a secessionist. Not only had his public actions so declared him, but personal letters written to Southern friends i Oregonian, Jan. 12. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 329 commending secession had appeared in the Southern press and had found their way into Oregon papers. 1 His reception was sullen and ominous. On his arrival at Dallas on his way home to the southern part of the state, the people raised the Stars and Stripes, fired a salute of thirty-four guns for the Union and hung Lane in effigy. 2 It was pretty generally ad- mitted by this time that a movement, more or less tangible, was on foot for establishing a Pacific Coast Republic and it was believed by very many, as had been charged, that Lane had come home for the purpose of aiding in the conspiracy to that end.3 There was nothing new in the idea suggested of an inde- pendent government on the Pacific Coast. In 1855, the Stand- ard had seriously questioned whether Oregon would not be better off under such a government than under that of the United States. It held that the Rocky Mountains presented an unmistakable boundary, and that such boundaries, laid by an over-ruling Providence, ought to be more strictly regarded.^ Positive assertions concerning schemes of disunion and the set- ting up of a new Western republic, appeared in the press the same year.s l n July, 1860, Bush declared it to be stated on authority, considered reliable that the Pacific Delegation in Congress had held a caucus and resolved to favor disunion and the formation of three separate republics the North, South and Pacific. That this insane project was entertained by some ambitious and designing politicians, he declared there could be no doubt, and indicated that Lane was implicated. 6 The Ore- gonian, January 26, 1861, had published a letter written by 1 "I am glad a majority of the people of Oregon have determined to leave a Union that refuses you equality and protection. You are right: and I am sure that you will take no step backwards". Lane, Jan. 6, 1861, to a Southern friend, printed in Georgia Constitutionalist and reprinted in Statesman, Feb. 25. "You are right and I am with you heart and soul. . . I, with thousands of good Northern men, will be by their [the Southern States] side". Lane, Dec. 14, 1860, to a Georgia relative, printed in Columbus, Ga., Times, and reprinted in Oregonian, March 2, 1861. 2 Argus, May u. 3 "It is said here that 'J ose Pli' goes to Oregon early in next month for the purpose of inaugurating the Pacific Republic and I am inclined to think that that is his object." Senator Nesmith, Washington, D. C., Feb. 26, 1861, to Harvey Gordon, Salem. 4 Standard editorial "Our Future", quoted in Oregonian, July 28, 1855. 5 Statesman, Sep. 8, 1855. 6 Ibid., July 24, 1860. 330 W. C. WOODWARD Burch, a California Congressman, which had been made pub- lic, in which was argued the wisdom of a Pacific Republic. There could be no doubt that such a project was considered and it was a very reasonable assumption, to say the least, that Lane was connected with it. But whatever his plans were for procedure in Oregon, 1 he found it necessary on arrival to pla- cate the public sentiment, unmistakable evidence of which greeted him on every hand. He began to extol the "Union and the Constitution" as he mingled with the people with his fa- miliar and effusive "God bless you" greeting. He made a short speech at Corvallis on the national situation and the Union said that many were surprised to find that instead of being a disunionist and a secessionist, Gen. Lane was a strong Union man and unequivocally opposed to any move towards the sepa- rate independence of the Pacific. 2 It had been noticeable in the weeks previous, the Union had been very silent as to Lane's attitude as exhibited in the East. This drew forth the retort from Adams that Lane hoped by blarney and a great show of patriotism to reunite the Democracy and get himself elected as governor and a disunion representative in Congress. "That being done, his Union garments will be thrown off, and, like the wardrobe of a circus-rider, his old dirty rags of treason will be discovered to have grown fast to his hide." 3 The Union soon gave color to the above charge when in a long editorial it pleaded, almost agonizingly, for a union of the Democracy. Let by-gones be by-gones with the two wings get together and stop the inroads which the Republicans are making in the Democratic ranks was the burden of its exhortation. Within a month after the fall of Sumpter, Union Clubs were being organized in Oregon. Immediately on receipt of the news from South Carolina a large and enthusiastic Union mass i On the way south by wagon, Lane accidentally shot himself. About Novem- ber first the Oregon Democrat reported with regret that he was recovering but slowly from the effect of the unfortunate accident. This prompted the Statesman, Nov. ii, to say: "He received this shot in lifting a box containing arms which he brought home with him in considerable quantity, it is generally believed, with the design of arming a company of men to secede the state, and many persons do not regard that shot so unfortunate as it might have been." 3 Argus, May 18. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 331 meeting was held at Portland in the Willamette theater. 1 Stir- ring speeches were made by Dr. A. G. Henry of Yamhill, and by J. H. Mitchell and Geo. B. Currey of Portland- The Port- land Times said that as the last speaker left the stand, a sud- den removal or change of the scenery at the rear of the stage exposed to view the unfurled banner of the Union and, as if by electricity, the audience arose to their feet in enthusiastic cheers for the flag. It is significant that one of the very first Union Clubs to be started in Oregon was organized in a settle- ment of foreign citizens, at Aurora, May 17. Dr. Wm. Keil, a native Prussian, had established a German settlement in this section of Marion county in 1855. 2 Dr. Keil addressed the meeting along with others. Ringing resolutions were passed pledging heartiest support of the Government "against all foes from without or traitors within."3 A strong club was or- ganized and Union sentiment ran high. "The German brass band enlivened the exercises by playing national airs in their best style." What took place at Aurora was soon taking place over the state. This general manifestation of Union sentiment brought to light the real animus of the majority of the Democratic papers and the Southern Democrats generally, most of whom had been protesting their loyalty in a negative sort of way. Slater belittled and scoffed at the Union meetings, branding them as a mere scheme of designing politicians to deceive the people into the embrace of Republicanism under the cloak of an effort to save the Union. 4 "As mght be expected/' said the Oregon- ian, "the Advertisers opposes the formation of Union Clubs. While secessionists are plotting treason everywhere, while the Knights of the Golden Circle are carrying on their murderous and cowardly schemes, while bloody treason stalks red-handed 1 Argus, May u. 2 Dr. Keil made the settlement as a practical test of his communistic theories. Aurora became the Republican stronghold of Marion county and a center of Union sentiment. 3 Argus, May 25. 4 Union, May 25. 5 The Portland Advertiser, edited by Ex-Governor Curry, had pronounced most emphatically for the integrity of the Union, but like the Corvallis Union, had suffered a relapse. 332 W. C. WOODWARD through the land, are the friends of the Union to take advice from its enemies and forbear to use a harmless precaution?" Flag raisings were opposed by the Southern sympathizers as tending to fan animosities and incite sectional enmities. Vio- lence was threatened in some cases if the determination to raise the Stars and Stripes were persisted in. Adams claimed to believe that nine- tenths of those opposing Union meetings and flag raisings, did so, not from disloyalty to the government, but from a silly belief that they were Republican demonstra- tions; that in this belief they were encouraged by the leaders of secession in Oregon. He stated that in passing through the country he found that all the Douglas Democrats and nine- tenths of the Breckinridge Democrats were loyal and opposed the efforts of secession organs to make party capital out of na- tional troubles, while they lauded the patriotic position of the Statesman and Portland Times. But Adams' estimate was evi- dently like election forecasts given for a purpose. On May 28, Gov. Whiteaker issued a long address to the people of Oregon on the situation, in which, while professing loyalty to the Union, he took strong grounds against Union meetings and disapproved the war. 1 The following sentences from the message are of no little significance, coming as they did with the official sanction of the state government : "These are not Union meetings, but are creating disunion directly in our midst. . . I suspect that there is about as much patriot- ism to be, found among those who have no anathemas for any portion of the country even if they do not think the Union can be preserved by the sword, as in the hearts of those who cry havoc and blood at every breath. ... In God's name what good is this war to bring the country ? None ; positively none." The weight of the official sanction, however, was not sufficient to deter the militant "Parson" from branding "poor fiddling Whiteaker or 'Old Cat-Gut' " as "the biggest ass in the state" and "at heart as rotten a traitor as Jeff Davis." 2 The attitude of Oregon's Southern Democracy is exemplified 1 Union, Tune 8. 2 Argus, June 8. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 333 in the resolutions passed at a mass meeting of the Democracy of Linn county, June 5. "Loyalty to the Union the whole Union," was avowed. Association with secessionists and trait- ors was disavowed, and sectionalists or violators of the Consti- tution were discountenanced. The idea of a Pacific Republic was opposed as visionary and dangerous. At the same time it was asserted that the Government could be maintained only by a spirit of conciliation and compromise; that coercion was but another name for war and was disunion. Therefore, opposition to the war and the war policy of the Administra- tion, was announced. 1 Slater heralded this meeting as a great success in every way, while casting slurs on the numerous Union meetings. The Democratic organs referred to the war as "Lincoln's war" and denounced him as a usurper, revolution- ist, monarchist and tyrant. The Union was replete with such expressions as "Lincoln's rump Congress," "Greeley's abolition war," "The banquet of blood" (Bull Run) and "Lincoln I." It could not conceal its exultation over the defeat at Bull Run, saying that the rout was complete and total and the victory on the part of the South one that they might well be proud of. In the issue of August 26 appeared the message of Jef- ferson Davis. By this time the secession odor of "The Onion," as Bush called it, was sufficiently strong to discount its loudest protestations of loyalty. Senator Baker, having eloquently championed the Union cause on the floor of the United States senate, volunteered his services on the outbreak of the rebellion and was given a command. On October 21 he was killed at the head of his men at the battle of Balls Bluff. In appointing a successor to Oregon's Republican senator, Gov. Whiteaker further re- vealed his animus in the choice of Benjamin Stark. The ap- pointment was received with disappointment, disgust and an- ger. The Statesman declared Stark to be "a secessionist of the rankest dye and the craziest professions a traitor as infamous as any that disgraces Northern soil. He has enjoyed the credit i Union, June 8. 334 W. C. WOODWARD of a letter written several years ago, raising the idea of a Pacific Republic and has ever since claimed to be the repre- sentative of this scheme." 1 The Oregonian asserted that the citizens of Oregon had been wronged beyond measure, but thanked God the state would have to submit but a few months to the degradation. 2 Actual extracts were published of vituper- ative and treasonable utterances of Stark. 3 In announcing his departure the Argus said :* "It is indeed a humiliating posi- tion occupied by our state, three-fourths 5 of which are loyal, to be represented in the United States senate by a blatant little peppery sympathizer with treason." A mass meeting was held at Salem at which Whiteaker's appointment was denounced 6 and the appointee charged with treason. The leaders in the meeting were loyal Democrats of prominence, such as R. P. Boise, Lucien Heath, J. C. Peebles, C. N. Terry and Harvey Gordon. Sufficient opposition was aroused to delay Stark's being seated by the Senate until in February, 1862.7 Encouraged by Southern victories, as time passed on, the Oregon secessionists became bolder in expression and more active in demonstrations against the Government. Before the end of 1861, the Oregonian announced the existence of the Knights of the Golden Circle in Oregon. 8 After sketching the movement in the Eastern States and its purposes, the edi- tor declared that many of the leaders among those ^n Oregon opposing and denouncing the Government, were Knights of the Golden Circle. The opposition press made light of this and similar charges, but the denials failed to carry conviction, espe- cially in the light of later disclosures. The secession papers be- 1 Statesman, Nov. n. 2 Oregonian, Nov. 9. 3 Oregonian, Nov. 30. 4 Argus, Nov. 23. 5 Nine-tenths were loyal in May, according to Adams! 6 A thrust, evidently at Judge Deady, was given in the statement "We hold Gov. Whiteaker less responsible than the judicial functionary in whose hands the Executive is as clay in the hands of the potter." 7 When Stark's credentials were presented to the Senate, papers from Ore- gon citizens protesting his disloyalty were also submitted. All were referred to the Judiciary Committee, which on Feb. 7, reported in favor of seating him, Senator Lyman Trumbull presenting a minority report. The majority report was adopted. At the same time, Stark asked for a full investigation of the charges made. The committee appointed reported the charges substantiated and action was brought for a recommital of the case, but failed. 8 Oregonian, Nov. 9, 1861. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 335 came so offensively treasonable in expression, that early in 1862 the Government began the suppression of the worst of them. The Albany Democrat, the first to be suppressed, re- ferred to Confederate leaders as "the glory of the land" and to the Union soldiers as "the enemy." The Corvallis Union called the Northern soldiers "white niggers," and continually referred to Lincoln as a usurper and perjured tyrant. It re- produced a long article from the London Times, arguing in favor of a separation of the Union. The Portland Advertiser, "the poor, sniveling, secession sheet," according to Parson Adams, reprinted approvingly an article from the London Herald ridiculing President Lincoln and lauding President Davis. 1 A much quoted expression from the Advertiser was this : "We have every reason to invoke the Divine interposi- tion to stay the hand of Lincoln, paralyze his efforts and thus put a stop to the unnatural, intestine war that he has inaugu- rated and carried on." There appeared in the Oregonian of October 19, 1861, a long letter from Jesse Applegate on the situation in Oregon. He stated that after having traveled extensively through the state during the summer and fall he was forced to the conclusion that there were many disunionists in "this young Oregon, which, scarcely out of the shell of Territorial pupilage, stinks with an element foul and corrupt, bordering, I may at least safely say, on actual treason, whose rankness 'smells to heaven'." He asserted that almost anywhere, toryism was dis- gustingly common ; that inquiry among a certain class would bring protestation that they were all Union men the kind that got their Union from the Corvallis printing office." He pointed out that the old school, party hidebound Democrats, would read only that to which they had been schooled and ac- customed. The Democratic party had so long been dominated by the pro-slavery element that they had learned to feed on what reeked with slavery and secession. Hence they naturally clung to the Corvallis Union, Albany Democrat and Portland Ad- i See Argus, March i, March 22. 336 W. C. WOODWARD vertiser, in preference to the Salem Statesman, Portland Times and Jacksonville Sentinel, and their ideas of the national crisis were shaped accordingly. Applegate gave a striking pic- ture of conditions as he observed them. Demonstrating as it does so forcibly what an influence was exerted by these uncon- fessed secession papers, extracts of this letter, written by a man of such standing and influence, are here reproduced at some length : "If you would obtain a correct idea of the universal in- fluence of the press, go among the people at large and be- hold the thirst for newspaper reading. As you pass along the road in hot summer weather, when the, farmer has re- turned from his work and the doors are thrown open to invite the precious breeze, on the porch or just within you will see the man of the house with his paper, swallowing down the editorial as a more delicious morsel than the viands preparing for his dinner. If he is a Democrat of the Jo Lane school, it is the Corvallis Union, the Adver- tiser or some paper of that character, upon which he feeds ; and whatever he finds in its sound columns, if not there condemned, whether murder, rebellion or treason, it is Democratic and good enough for him. Go into his house, and upon a table, packed away in a shelf or per- haps spread upon the wall, you will find the source of his political information and faith in a formidable array of Advertisers, Oregon Democrats or something of that kind. Possibly a stray number of the Oregonian or Statesman may be found containing the President's message; if so, probably the conversation will turn upon the message and you will find in nine cases in ten that he has not read it, but merely what his paper said about it. 'I commenced to read it but got disgusted with the Hell-fired thing. I haven't got time to read such d d abolition stuff and I thought if God would forgive me for commencin' to read sich trash, I'd not do so no more. I'm a Union man, but I don't go nothing on coercion. I think Lincoln's done more to destroy the Union than any other man. I think the abolitionists better mind their own business; and if they don't, I tell you the Southerners will larn um a lesson. Talk about Lincoln whippin' the South! the Northern men is all cowards/ " POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 337 During these early months of the great struggle a period of uncertainty and confusion throughout the Union the Statesman, more than any other Oregon paper, displayed the rare gift of the interpretation of events and of the character of the men intimately connected with them. Indeed the keenness of political insight displayed, in the light of the history of after years, seems almost to have approached the prophetic. In a long editorial, October 21, 1861, on "President Lincoln," it de- clared that he, almost alone of the great actors in the drama, was without any incentive to ordinary ambition; that he was President for four years embracing a period weightier with events than the seventy years of all his predecessors. "If he can pass through that period with respectable success, he will have laid up in the storehouse of history greater fame than either Jackson or Washington derived from the Presidential office. If he fails, the future will attribute it to his incapacity rather than the power of his adversaries and he will never be forgiven the crime of being born. Believing the perpetuation of the Union to be the sole object of the President, we desire to foster no sentiment adverse to the design." More striking examples of the political prescience of the Statesman were to follow as the struggle progressed. Such sentiments as these, coming from a source from which had formerly emanated the most violent strictures of the Black Republicans, tended toward making the Statesman the recognized champion of the Union cause in Oregon. Chapter XII THE UNION MOVEMENT IN 1862 Writing in the summer of 1861 upon the general political effects of the death of Stephen A. Douglas, Bush advised the followers of the fallen leader in Oregon as to the proper course of action to be pursued by them. 1 He referred to the fact that many Republicans and Democrats had pledged themselves in good faith to ignore party aspirations in the presence of the rebellion, but gave it as his opinion that as long as there were offices to be filled, party affiliations would not become extinct. Considering the fact that Bush had been in office steadily for a decade, he spoke as one having authority. Therefore, while acknowledging the general manifestation of a disposition to ignore, the past and organize upon the basis of Union against disunion, he advised the Douglas men of Oregon to maintain their identity, holding it to be safer for them to hold them- selves aloof as a reserve force in case disunion should be about to carry the day. He admitted that the plan of three adverse parties was a somewhat novel feature in politics and a rather difficult one to maintain, but he held it to be an eminently safe one against conspiracy and sudden revolution such as seceders meditated for Oregon and California. Bush then made this striking prediction a further illustration of his political pre- science : "When this contest, be it long or short, is closed, the men who have trained under the great political captain (Doug- las) will find themselves the nucleus of a radical party, op- posed to the federal element grown strong in the centralizing work of crushing out rebellion." Awaiting that time, he ad- vised his fellow Democrats that they could serve the country better by independent action. But within a few short months, the editor of the Statesman saw things very differently. As has been indicated, the radical Democrats were fervently appealing for party reorganization in the hope of gaining control of the state. Bush evidently became somewhat uneasy at the effect their overtures might j Statesman, June 24, 1861. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 339 have. In September he wrote the Statesman from the East, whither he had gone: "I notice the secessionists of Oregon are anxious to 'reorganize the Democratic party'. I hope no honest man will put his foot into that pitfall. . . What more occasion have we in Oregon for defunct political parties than they have in Kentucky or Missouri? Do you hear of Democrats, Republicans or Whigs there? They have two parties and but two Union and disunion. Let us so divide in Oregon while this dreadful danger hangs over our common country." In its issue of December 2 the Statesman declared expressly for the formation of a Union party, uniting all the Union men of the state, as the only way to defeat treason. Oregon was declared to be, stronger proportionately for seces- sion than was Missouri. The need of united action on the part of Union men was therefore evident. In September the Oregonian had expressed the conviction that party lines and party triumphs should be forgotten in the one great cause of saving the Union. 1 No suggestions were offered as to how the Union movement should be effected. The first definite suggestions made public for such are to be, found in an unsigned article appearing in the Weekly Oregonian 2 of November 23, contributed by a resident of the southern part of the state. Immediate organization was urged in order to check the disloyal plans of the enemy. The plan of proce- dure suggested as the most practicable was the immediate for- mation of state central Union committees, with correspondence committees in and for every county. These committees were to ignore party lines absolutely. There should be no indecision in this respect, no matter who demurred or what his party prominence. It should be clearly understood that the integ- rity of the Union was not to be immolated at the shrine of any party. The committees were to distribute among the voters the speeches of such men as Holt, Dickinson and Everett and 1 Oregonian, Sep. 21, editorial, "The Duty of Patriots." 2 The publication of the Oregonian as a daily paper began in February, 1861. Hereafter, however, as heretofore, the weekly edition is the one referred to unless otherwise specified. 340 W. C. WOODWARD other Union documents; also to labor with honest men likely to be controlled by old party associations, to get them to realize the enormity of the situation, with the disgrace which would result if they adhered to the false advice of pretended "Union but peace" men. The Argus spoke, December 21 in a leader on the "Next June Election." That there should be united action on the part of those supporting the Administration, was freely ad- mitted. It disapproved the idea held, as it said, by some Re- publicans that a full Republican ticket should be nominated without taking any steps toward securing the co-operation of the loyal portion of other political parties. However, it strong- ly objected to the plan of attempting to blend two parties, hitherto antagonistic and unrelentingly hostile on vital issues, into one party, upon a common platform. It declared that no bond of union would be strong enough to hold them together ; that it would be building a structure that sooner or later must be torn down. It favored one of two plans : first, the nomina- tion of a Union ticket by a state Republican convention ; or, second, the holding of separate conventions by the Republicans and Union Democrats these two conventions to confer to- gether and agree upon a ticket satisfactory to all parties. The partisan Republican attitude was clearly expressed in a letter to the Argus written by C. Hoel of Salem, dated Decem- ber 20. It was directly in answer to the Statesman, which had said that it would willingly accord the Republicans a monopoly of the renown if it thought they they, single-handed, could best conserve the Union's existence. But it was not to be as- sumed, added the Statesman, that the Republican party would be able to do all the fighting, furnish all the means and do all the voting necessary to putting down the rebellion. Hoel replied that if the proposition to be inferred from this were true, the portion of the people carrying the elections would have to pay all the taxes. He aptly reminded the Statesman that when, during the last Indian War it had insisted that all military appointments should be confined to the Democrats, it POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 341 did not claim that the Democrats should furnish all the means for the war or even do all the fighting. It was bluntly inti- mated to the Statesman that the proposition that the minority is free from obligation to support the Government except upon the condition that it should rule the majority, was the doctrine of the secessionists. Hoel then addressed himself to his fellow Republicans. He told them that they had elected a President and that he himself intended to remain a Republican until traitors should learn that the success of an opposition party was not an excuse for rebellion. The Republicans, he said, had done nothing to make themselves odious. They were loyal, they were in the ascendency in Oregon if any party was, and a due regard to their principles, their past labors for the good of the country, made without pay while others were growing fat in office, demanded that they have something to say as to the way and manner of forming a new Union party. The Republican party was declared already to be a Union party and Hoel asserted that if a new one was to be organized for the purpose of accommodating the prejudices of other Union men, and to divide the offices, he claimed as much right as the Statesman to say how it should be formed. He was for a Union arrangement, through the Republican convention, by conference or otherwise, but not for a direct Union party, in which politicians who had all to gain and nothing to lose, would come up as leaders. Many Republicans had learned from past experience to be suspicious of overtures from Democratic sources looking to- ward coalition. They remembered that their party organiza- tion had long been obstructed and delayed in Oregon because of unnatural alliances with opposing factions. At last they had achieved that distinct party organization and it had proved its power. And now, just when the time had come to enjoy the spoils of victory so long hoped for, they were asked by their old opponents to cast off their political affiliations for the good of the country. It is hardly to be wondered at that the motives of those insisting on the scheme of a Union party were ques342 W. C. WOODWARD tioned by some. Since the death of Baker, the Republicans were again without a commanding leader and their fear was not unwarranted that Bush would make himself the power in the new organization that he had been in the old Democratic regime. This apprehension was clearly manifested in a private letter 1 from Dr. James McBride to D. W. Craig, now editor of the Argus. 2 McBride expressed his fear that the Statesman would secure the nomination on the Union ticket for state printer, in preference to Craig. "You are our dependence among the Republicans" wrote McBride, "and if you fail, all is lost. Tis not only a temporary loss, but a loss of principle indeed all those valuable principles for which we have con- tended for years. And the Statesman, under the conduct of the 'Clique' as in days of yore, will merge the Union party into that shapeless thing called Douglas Democracy; will cringe and manage and fish for some modified Democratic and pro- slavery humbug, and finally, when Republicans won't bear it any longer, it will call for a 'reunion of the Democracy.' And so all the factions will unite again and leave us to reorganize and fight the battles over again. Ten years will not elapse before all this will be done if the Statesman is elected printer ; perhaps not five. . . Stir up your friends with a red hot pitchfork. Write to W. L. [Adams] to be up and doing to save himself and Republicanism." In view of the grave crisis confronting the country, the majority of the Republicans were inclined to allow the future of their party to take care of itself. They wanted united action now, and if it could be best secured in a Union party, they would acquiesce. The Oregonian indicated that the manner or plan of union was in the hands of Republican State Central Committee and promised to abide by the judgment and action of its members. 3 In January a formal call was issued for the, holding of a Union State Convention. 4 It was addressed to those who were 1 February 16, 1862. 2 Adams had been appointed collector of customs at Astoria by the new Administration. 3 Oregonian, Jan. 14, 1862, Editorial, "The Demands of the Hour." 4 See Argus, Jan. 18. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 343 in favor of a vigorous prosecution of the war for the suppres- sion of rebellion, who thought more of country than of party prejudice and who were willing to unite for the election of a ticket upon such a basis without reference to former po- litical associations. All such voters were requested to meet in the several precincts of the various counties on March 22 to choose delegates to county conventions to be held March 29, which in turn would select delegates to a state convention to be held April 9 at Eugene, for the purpose of nominating a Union ticket for state officers and member of Congress. The apportionment of delegates for the various counties was given. The call was signed, first, by H. W. Corbett, E. D. Shattuck and W. C. Johnson, as the Republican State Central Com- mittee; second, by Samuel Hanna, as chairman of the Demo- cratic State Central Committee; third by forty-three more or less prominent members of the two parties, among whom were A. C. Gibbs, Alonzo Leland, John McCraken, W. S. Ladd, R. J. Ladd, S. G. Reed, David Powell, S. J. McCormick, A. L. Lovejoy, D. P. Thompson, R. P. Boise, C. N. Terry, Lucien Heath, B. F. Harding, J. R. McBride, Benj. Simpson, Jos. Magone, R. C. Geer, B. J. Pengra, E. N. Cooke, I. R. Moores. There appeared, following the call, a statement to the Re- publicans of Oregon made by the state committee, explaining and defending its action in not calling a regular Republican convention as it had been instructed to do. The members of the committee disavowed the right or desire to dissolve the Republican organization or to recant any Republican principles. But being unwilling to do anything to distract the Union sen- timent in the approaching canvass, they deemed it unwise to call a party convention with a view to the support of a dis- tinctively Republican ticket. An appeal was made to the loyal people of the state, to Republicans especially, to support zeal- ously the Union movement. In the same issue, the Argus, despite its objections to such a plan, came out in earnest sup- port of the proposed action. In accordance with the call, notices of county Union conventions began to appear. They 344 W. C. WOODWARD were signed after the manner of the general call for the state by the county central committees of both parties and then by a number of representative Republicans and Democrats. The representation between the two parties at the Union state convention seemed to be pretty evenly distributed, but the Democrats figured rather more prominently in the choice of officials and in the various proceedings than the Republicans. 1 The ticket was nominated as follows : for Congressman, JohnR. McBride of Yamhill, a Republican ; governor, Addison C. Gibbs of Multnomah, Democrat ; secretary, Samuel E. May of Jackson, Republican; printer, Harvey Gordon of Marion, Democrat; and connected with the Statesman ; treasurer, E. N. Cooke of Marion, Republican. The platform adopted consisted of a short series of ringing resolutions in support of a vigorous prosecu- tion of the war and opposing any peace other than the honor- able one sure to come "when rebels and their sympathizers submit to the constitutionally elected authorities of the Re- public." As was to be expected, the nominations made by the conven- tion were not wholly satisfactory. It was charged that Mc- Bride, a Republican, was nominated by Democratic votes and that Gibbs, Democrat, was placed on the ticket by Republicans in direct opposition to the wish of three-fourths of the Demo- crats. 2 Jesse, Applegate, ultra-loyal, but irreconcilable as usual, wrote to a friend "In obedience to a 'higher law' than that of conventions, I shall certainly strike the name of Mr. Gibbs from my ticket."^ The securing of the office of state printer by the Statesman was indicative of the fact that the Democratic side of the partnership was able to enforce its wishes in the division of the offices.^ The Oregonian stated that it was sorry 1 Proceedings, in Oregonian, April 19. 2 Private letter: Jesse Applegate to M. P. Deady, April 13, 1862. "McBride is the representative of the Baker or rather office holders' interests in the Re- publican party. He is an amiable man of fair character, but his talents, acquire- ments and force of character are not equal to the position. . . But to him the objections are neither loud nor deep. . . and the vote that will be given to him will fairly represent the strength of the fusion. Not so with the candidate for governor", etc. 3 Private letter: Jesse Applegate to M. P. Deady, April 13, 1862. 4 In private conversation, Judge Williams said the Democrats got the best offices. He attributed the generosity of the Republicans to the fact that they wished to tempt the Democrats to stay in the Union organization and thus prevent the re-organization of the Oregon Democracy. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 345 to observe a manifest disposition on the part of some who had professed themselves Union men, to discourage the Union ticket. It was intimated that a movement was on foot to put a People's Union ticket in the field, which was stigmatized as a covert attack on the loyal spirit of the state and designed alone to render assistance to the secession party, falsely styling themselves Democrats. 1 Editor J. H. Slater of the Corvallis Union issued a call to the Democracy of the state to meet in convention at Corvallis, April 15. The invitation to participate was made to include all "who are opposed to the political policy of the present Admin- istration and who are in favor of the establishment of the Union as it was and the supremacy of the Constitution as made by the Fathers of the Republic." The Argus charged that the use of the past tense of the verb in "was," was an acknowledgment that the Union had ceased to exist and was a recognition of secession. 2 The keynote of the whole ob- struction policy of the Oregon Democracy as now constituted was given in the reference to the supremacy of the Constitu- tion. That the Democratic call was largely signed and by many former Douglas Democrats who had refused to join the Union movement, is indicated in the following paragraph from the Argus of March 1 : "Some are expressing surprise at the large number of names attached to the rebel call for a seces- sion convention at Corvallis that were formerly of what were called the Douglas Democrats." The following was the ticket nominated at Corvallis: for Congressman, A. E. Wait; governor, John F. Miller; printer, A. Noltner; secretary, Geo. T. Vining; treasurer, J. B. Greer. Of these men, Wait was the only one who had been considered as a Douglas Democrat and he was not distinctively so. The editor of the Dalles Mountaineer was a delegate to the con- vention and a participant in its proceedings. The characteri- zation of the situation by him, which may be credited with 1 Oregonian, May 10. 2 Argus, Feb. 15. 346 W. C. WOODWARD being comparatively unprejudiced, is enlightening. 1 He noted that, as in all such assemblages, two elements were at work the one actuated by patriotic impulses, the other knowing no higher motive than a greedy thirst for the spoils. There was a third element, he continued, which was steadily kept in the background, but yet, such was its irrepressible character, that it would occasionally make itself manifest. "We will be un- derstood as alluding to the Secessionists, the number of whom was decidedly large. This was shown in the vote for governor, state printer and in fact for every office outside of Con- gressman. . . . From the first it was apparent that the name of Judge Wait was to be used as a make-weight for the balance of the ticket." The platform adopted was a good illustration of how clever- ly and plausibly a bad cause can be presented and of how real motives and animus may be sugar-coated. The sentiment of the immortal Jackson "The Union must be preserved" was declared to be the watchword that the Democracy of Oregon sent forth to animate the masses in the hour of their country's peril, to rally for the, supremacy of the Constitution, the per- petuity of the Union and the preservation of the rights of the States and of the people. All "Constitutional efforts" were advocated for the suppression of rebellion and restoration of the Union. In nearly every resolution, the sacred name of the Constitution was invoked as a rallying cry. Peaceable adjust- ment along "Constitutional and legal lines" was the demand made by the Democrats. In this platform, in 1862, the Re- publican Administration was charged not only with conducting the war for the emancipation of the Negroes, but also for their enfranchisement. The corrupt coalitions of "so-called Demo- crats and abolitionists," which had resulted in placing sec- tional men in the councils of the Nation, were condemned. The Union ticket was overwhelmingly successful in the June election, the majorities ranging from 3177, for McBride for Congressman to 4155 for Cooke for treasurer, these two Re- i Account reprinted in Oregonian, May 3. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 347 publican members of the ticket receiving the lowest and highest vote, respectively. The Union candidates carried every county in the state with the exception of Josephine, which gave Miller a majority of 10 over Gibbs for governor. The Union legis- lative tickets were elected almost entire. As an illustration of how even the political extremists put away personal and politi- cal prejudices of the past and joined hands in support of the Union in 1862, the private correspondence between Jesse Ap- plegate and Judge Deady presents striking evidence. Deady, so recently a radical, pro-slavery Democrat and a delegate to the Charleston Convention, voted for McBride and the state Union ticket. Applegate, uncompromising and radical Repub- lican, relented 1 and voted the whole Union ticket. 2 The paean of victory sung by the Oregonian, June 7, is suggestive of the high tension of the campaign and is all the more significant, in that the language of the paper had been noticeably tempered after Dryer laid down the editorial pen. The fierce exultation of victory gave as full expression to the elemental passions as would have been displayed by the ancestral tribesmen of the writer in the forests of Germany.3 The somewhat tortuous history of the many edged Viva Voce ballot law was further indicated in this election. After the election of 1858, the Argus in denouncing the evils of the old British and Oregon Democratic method of voting, declared that owing to the length of the ticket, the polls were kept open in Oregon City until 12 o'clock at night and were then closed without recording the votes of numbers who had been wait- ing for hours for an opportunity to vote. The crowding, squeezing and jamming around the polls was declared to be excessive all day long.* For a radical change of view, note the 1 Supra, p. 305. 2 Applegate to Deady, June 8, 1862: "You are right, I did relent and voted the Union ticket straight. I did it upon neighbor Estes' principle. He said 'I do not like some of the Union candidates in fact I hate some of them, but I hate the secessionists worse.' " 3 "Rejoice ye sons of freedom. Let the Heavens resound. . . Let the imps of secession hide their deformed heads in everlasting shame and disgrace. . . Run and hide, ye diminutive emmets of disunion. . . ^The day of your judgment has come. . . In a word, you are 'dead and d d.' " 4 Argus, June 12, 1858. 348 W. C. WOODWARD following from the same source, following the Union ticket victory: 1 "The Viva Voce system, in spite of manifest imper- fections, has once for all proved itself a good institution, and some in this state who helped forge the bolt, gnashed their teeth to see it so successfully turned against them, now that they are, in a weak minority and an evil cause." It was the business of the legislature which met in Septem- ber to elect a United States senator to complete the term to which Col. Baker had been elected and in which Stark was temporarily serving by appointment. In the organization of the session, Dr. Wilson Bowlby, Republican, was elected presi- dent of the senate, and Joel Palmer, Union Democrat, speaker of the house. J. R. McBride at once introduced a set of strong resolutions proclaiming loyalty to the Union and defiance to traitors, which were unanimously adopted in both houses. One resolution denounced "the weak and wicked scheme of a Pa- cific Confederacy." Another asserted that the issues of the times demanded that patriots eschew partisan questions of the past and unite in support of the Government. There were but three members of the legislature who "bore the stain of seces- sion or marks treasonable proclivities." 2 And of these, two were holdovers in the senate. The inaugural address of Gibbs, Oregon's "war governor," was virile and to the point, breathing aggressive loyalty and a firm determination to support the National Executive in every way. In contrast to this was the expiring message of White- aker, extended, and marked by a doleful wail anent the wicked war, justifying the South in its point of view. 3 Balloting for senator began September 11. The recognized leading candidates from the first were, B. F. Harding, member of the old Salem Clique, Judge Williams and Rev. Thos. H. Pearne, editor of the Pacific Christian Advocate. The first ballot stood : Harding, 7 ; Pearne, 9 ; Williams, 7 ; E. L. Applegate, 8 ; Orange Jacobs, 5 ; Whiteaker, 3 ( representing 1 Ibid., June 7, 1862. 2 Oregonian, Sep. 13. 3 Statesman, Sep. 15. POLITICAL PARTIES IN OREGON 349 the above mentioned secession members,) with a few scatter- ing votes. 1 The tenth ballot Harding 12, Williams 12, Pearne 10, Jesse Applegate 10, scattering 5 ; the sixteenth Harding 15, Jacobs 23, Williams 5, Whiteaker 3. This put Jacobs, a radical Republican, within three votes of the required major- ity. A motion to adjourn till the following day was carried by a majority of one, amid "considerable excitement." On the thirtieth ballot Harding was elected, receiving 28 votes. H. W. Corbett was his principal opponent at the last, representing the Republican element of the legislature. However, Harding received some Republican votes, including that of J. R. Mc- Bride. In commenting upon the result, the Oregonian, 2 while claim- ing that Harding was not the choice of a large, portion of the citizens, acknowledged that he was a good Union man, which was the only qualification necessary. In view of the fact that many Republicans claimed, that as a matter of courtesy the vacancy occasioned by Senator Baker's death should have been filled by a man of the same party, the Oregonian held that the election of Harding fully demonstrated the sincerity of the Republican members in their professions of love for the Union party, especially as they could have elected a radical member of their own party had they united for that purpose. The election was cheerfully acquiesced in by the Argus, without ifs or ands. 3 Deady summed up the situation publicly as follows : "Between them (Harding, Williams and Pearne) there is not much political difference, each running as an unconditional Union man. Harding is of Salem and the other two from Portland and much of the real rivalry was between those places; and Salem, with the aid of her reliable friends, the surrounding 'cow counties,' as usual, triumphed. "4 Privately, Deady said the election was a "steady-going, quiet affair," ex- plaining that there were no wits nor wags in the assembly and 1 Statesman, Sep. 22. 2 Oregonian, Sep. 20. 3 Argus, Sep. 20. 4 Correspondence, Sep. 15, to San Francisco Bulletin. 350 W. C. WOODWARD many of them were "God-fearing and prosy." 1 With two mem- bers of the Salem Clique now representing Oregon in the United States senate, the election tended to show further how the old organization Democrats were able to make patriotism profitable politically, while they were demanding that party lines be wholly obliterated for the purpose of saving the Union. At the Union State Convention held in April, an executive committee of five consisting of Henry Failing, B. F. Harding, Hiram Smith, Geo. H. Williams and S. Heulat, had been ap- pointed to manage the campaign, but no permanent party or- ganization had been effected. On October 11 a meeting was held at the state house, attended by members of the legislature and other citizens for the purpose of effecting such organi- zation. 2 A state central committee was appointed and a regular party organization known as the "Union Party" formally launched. Speeches were made by Senator-elect Harding, Gov. Gibbs, E. L. Applegate, R. P. Boise and J. R. McBride. Resolutions were passed strongly endorsing Lincoln's Admin- istration. As will presently be shown, it was at just this time that Bush was beginning mildly to criticize the Administration he had so aggressively supported. In harmony with the critical attitude which he was preparing to assume, he deprecated and belittled this meeting, maintaining that permanent organization was ill-advised as no one could tell what new issues would arise by 1864, necessitating a realignment of parties. To those who knew Bush, the mere suggestion was a tacit announcement of a policy of opposition on the part of the Statesman. 1 Deady to Nesmith, Washington, D. C., Nov. 22. Nesmith, College Hill, Ohio, to Deady, October i: "The Telegraph has informed me of the election of Harding as my colleague. I would have pre- ferred Bush but am perfectly satisfied with a result which I feared at one time would make me the colleague of the 'Holy Cobbler'." (Pearne.) 2 Statesman, Oct. 20. AN ECHO OF THE CAMPAIGN OF SIXTY &y Lester Burrell Shippee When, in July of 1861, the first and special session of the Thirty-seventh Congress assembled, pursuant to the call of President Lincoln, an eddy in the tumultuous current of na- tional affairs formed about a contested seat in the lower House. Altho this episode was one of the minor incidents of that exciting period, the ripple in Washington, D. C, marked a raging whirlpool in political events on the Pacific Coast, and gave rise to an interesting constitutional question for the National House of Representatives to solve. When the name of the Honorable A. J. Thayer was called, 1 as the Representative of Oregon, John A. McClernand, of Illinois stated that the name of Mr. Thayer had been improp- erly inserted in the roll, and that the name of the Honorable Geo. K. Sheil ought to be in its place. It appeared that Mr. Thayer had been elected in November of 1860, and that Mr. Sheil had been chosen in June of the same year ; moreover, each appeared to be armed with a proper certificate. A resolution, denying to each of the contestants the right to the seat until the matter should have been passed on by the Committee on Elections, about to be appointed, was tabled and Mr. Thayer was seated. The story, or at least the chapter immediately concerning the, issue, has its location in Oregon, partly, and, in addition, is closely bound up with pregnant Presidential campaign of the year '60. Local politics and bossism, national aspira- tions and secessionism were elements of the situation that lay before the House for decision. In the young Commonwealth across the Rockies, party politics had been one of the first prod- ucts of the fertile soil of the Willamette Valley. In fact, the political game as played here reminds one strongly of the bit- ter strife that marked the campaigns east of the Alleghanies i Cong. Globe, ist. Sess., 37th. Cong., 9-10. 352 L. B. SHIPPER at the close of the eighteenth and the opening of the nineteenth centuries. The little weekly newspapers of Salem, Portland, Corvallis and The Dalles showed a virulence, a gall-steeped vehemence, that needed no Freneau as master in the art. At the storm center of this particular event were found General Joseph Lane, candidate, in 1860, for the vice-presidency on the ticket of the Southern wing of Democracy, together with his faction in Oregon, and, on the other hand, the "Salem Clique", a dictatorial political ring, the moving spirit of which was Asahel Bush, editor and owner of the Oregon Statesman. For a decade, Asahel Bush had been the political arbiter of Oregon; he made and unmade fortunes; his approbation must be secured before a future of public life might be dreamed of ; his opposition hounded a man to civic oblivion. During the Territorial period even Federal appointees were made to yield obedience or were practically forced to seek some more salu- brious clime. With this power Joseph Lane had worked and won until the national convention of 1856; at that time a growing coolness had resulted in a dissolution of the alliance, and henceforth Bush and Lane were bitterest opponents. Never- theless, so great had been Lane's personal popularity that when Oregon was admitted as a state he continued his already long career in Congress as Territorial Delegate by having the honor of being the first Senator selected. His choice for the lower House was also victorious, altho Lane was charged with "bribery and treachery the most foul and disgraceful" 3 in controlling the convention which nominated candidates. This was in 1859. Less than a year later, while the term of Lansing Stout, Member of Congress from Oregon, had still a year to run, the question of his successor was uppermost. It was evident that an election must take place sometime in the year 1860, in order that, when March 4, 1861, should end the 36th Congress, Oregon might be duly represented. Early in February the Oregon Weekly Union, 3 of Corvallis, 2 Statesman, 5 June, 1860. 3 Feb. 4, 1860. AN ECHO OF CAMPAIGN OF SIXTY 353 the organ of Lane, entered upon a consideration of the legal date for the election. The Constitution of the State provided for biennial elections of state officials, to be held on the first Monday of June in the even numbered years. The schedule also stipulated that the first Representative to Congress should be selected at this time, in 1858. The Union held that, in the absence of any act by the Legislature making further pro- vision, the contention advanced, to the effect that the Constitu- tion of the United States precluded the fixing of the time by a state constitution, was purely captious. It therefore advised that the Democratic Convention nominate not only candidates for state offices but also a candidate to succeed Mr. Stout. The Convention, held at Eugene City on the 17th of April, was dominated by the Lane faction, and a Lane man, Mr. Sheil, was accordingly nominated.* Such domination and such action had been foreseen by the astute editor of the Statesman, and accordingly the proper moral sentiment against the, legality of an election of a mem- ber of Congress in June had been assiduously cultivated. In the issue of this sheet, next after the action of the convention, an editorial leader came out flatly on the topic :* "The democracy here regard this project of electing a Con- gressman in June, without law or authority, as unwarranted and worse than unnecessary ; as having been devised to further distract and debauch the democratic party, and defy the popu- lar will. We have no doubt that in November an election of a Congressman will be held by authority of law, and then the democratic vote of Marion, Polk, Washington and other coun- ties will be polled for a Democrat. And the man then elected will get the seat." On election day, 5 June, the Statesman rounded out its cam- paign by a long leader 6 in which the downward course of democracy under the Lane blight was traced in detail. This series of perfidious acts culminated in the selection, at a con- 4 Union, 24 Apr., 1860. 5 Apr., 1860. 65 June, 1860, 354 L. B. SHIPPEE vention composed of little over one half of the counties and many delegates sanctioned by less than one half the demo- cratic voters in the counties, of a candidate for Congress with neither intellectual endowments nor ordinary attainments to fit the position. Moreover, this man was "known to be odious on account of past political tergiversations to the de- mocracy of the county where he resides, and almost unknown to any one outside of that county ;" he was the tool of a cor- rupt and dishonest personal faction. Nevertheless this gentle- man, after a heated campaign, and by close vote, managed to secure a majority of 76,7 in a total poll of 12,909 over the Re- publican candidate, David Logan, altho the latter was supported not only by his own party, but by Know-nothings, Old Line Whigs, and many Democrats who were of the Douglas variety. It was charged, 8 before the election, that there was a well or- ganized coalition of the republicans and the Bush (Douglas) democrats ; in some counties an "Independent" ticket was put in the field, in others the republicans were so well satisfied with that of the Douglas democrats that they formed no slate of their own. These "strenuous, not to say unscrupulous efforts to ... elect a speckled"? delegation to the State Legislature hinged more particularly about the impending choice of two United States Senators, for Joseph Lane, not yet the partner of Breckinridge on the Southern ticket, was using all his influence to secure the return both of himself and Delazon Smith. Apparently the Bush and "Salem Clique" democracy could look with equanimity on the choice of a Re- publican Representative in the lower House of Congress, if only the scalps of Joseph "Humbug" Lane and "Delusion" Smith might grace the walls of the sanctum of the Statesman. Whether a reversal of a few votes on that June day would have changed the legal aspect of the matter can only be left to surmise. Standing as it did, however, Asahel Bush had a mission to teach, through the columns of his paper, some fun- 7 Statesman, 10 July, 1860. 8 Union, 22 May, 1860. 9 Ibid., 12 June, 1860. AN ECHO OF CAMPAIGN OF SIXTY 355 damental facts about the times and circumstances of Con- gressional elections. Moreover, he who looks will probably find, for, early in July, I0 we learn that "the sentiment for an election of Congressman in November is more general than we supposed. In every part of the State the people appear to be in favor of it. Even some members of the Lane society admit that there was no authority for an election in June, and that a Representative ought to be elected in November by virtue of law." Mr. Bush had not voted, 11 as some evil minded men had stated, for there was no election in June. New light appears on the subject and it seems that the republicans made a blun- der. The "Lane wire-pullers" counted and correctly on the usual lack of judgment on the part of the Republican leaders; they gave a color of legality to the election by putting a candi- date in the field. 12 Besides, the main reason was not to secure a Congressman, but to gain strength to pull through the re- quisite number of legislators to secure the return to the Senate of Lane and Smith. Already one of the chief hopes of the "Salem Clique" was fading, and right must win without the assistance of law. It had been expected that the State Legislature, controlled as it was by Republicans and Bush men, would enact a statute fixing the legal date for the election in November, at the time of the Presidential election. While a measure to this effect passed the lower House, in the September session of the legislature, it failed in the senate. 1 ^ In spite of the fact that the desired law was not in existence after the adjournment of the June session of the legislature, and hoping for better results at the September session, what purported to be the Democratic State Central Committee met in the Statesman office and nominated Mr. A. J. Thayer 1 * as candidate for Member of Congress from Oregon. This occurred in October just after the legislature had adjourned sine die without having made the desired pro- 10 Statesman, 3 July, 1860. 11 Statesman, 10 July, 860. 12 Ibid., 14 Aug., 860. 13 Ibid., 15 Oct., 1860. 14 Ibid., 22 Oct., 1860. 356 L. B. SHIPPEE vision by law. The next summer, while he made his contest for the seat in the House of Representatives, Mr. Sheil could point out that there had been no specific authority to this effect given the Central Committee by the extraordinary convention held in Eugene City in September. '5. Moreover, had there been authority to act, on the part of the committee, those who met in Salem, at Bush's office, assumed the right to speak for eleven members who were absent. As the time for the Presidential election drew near it ap- pears that the scheme for a new Congressional election had not taken especially well. The Union, 16 now vigorously campaign- ing for Breckinridge and Lane, together with the platform on which they were nominated, intimated in broad terms that the Statesman was the only newspaper of the state that had anything to do with this "bantling of no parentage." Since there was no authority by which the judges and clerks, at the coming election, might receive votes for Representative, it was quite proper that polls, independent of the constituted election machinery, should be opened in every town and village. Why even this formality? Why not let a certificate state that Mr. Thayer had been elected by a majority of one ? Since the gov- ernor might be lacking in the sagacity requisite for him to see it his duty to certify to this election, why not save all the trouble and get a certificate from Bush? In the poll, a weapon, devised by the Bush faction and used by it with deadly effect in rooting out Know-nothingism from its lair, some four years before, was now turned against the hand that shaped it. This was the viva voce voting law, whereby each elector must either state his choice aloud, or hand to the judges a paper from which the choice was read and checked up. Bitterly the Statesman 1 ? complained that, in many portions of the state, election officials refused to receive votes for Thayer, altho scores and hundreds were anxious to cast a vote against a disunion and secessionist candidate. "What do 15 Cong. Globe, ist. Sess., 37th. Cong., 355. 16 3 Nov., 1860. 17 12 Nov., 1860. AN ECHO OF CAMPAIGN OF SIXTY 357 the Lane desperadoes expect to accomplish by that high handed proceeding? If O'Sheil is weak enough to contest Thayer's seat (and he is weak enough to do nearly any foolish thing) Thayer can and will show the facts, and the unlawful things resorted to to prevent the people from voting for him." There would have been 8000 votes cast had not unprincipled and tyrannical officials barred them out. As it was, Thayer received 4,099 votes. 18 That only the faction controlled from Salem considered that this was a real election, is shown by the fact that for Sheil there were but 131 votes, and all of these, with the exception of seven, were cast in one county. Logan had eight votes and Lane, five, probably from some deep sympathizers who were not satisfied merely by doing their best to have their favorite preside over the Senate of the United States. "O'Sheil" was weak enough to contest Thayer's seat when the Thirty-seventh Congress organized ; but, as has been noted above, Thayer was seated, and retained his seat till near the end of the extraordinary session. It was not until the 30th of July that Mr. H. L. Dawes reported, for the commit- tee on elections, in regard to the case. It was a peculiar situation for a committee composed of Republicans in over- whelming majority of the nine members of the committee, only one was from a slave-holding state, and four were from New England. The choice, providing either of the contestants should be seated, lay between a Lane man, in sympathy with secession principles, and a Douglas democrat who had scarce- ly a suspicion of legality in his claim to a seat. The commit- tee, however, reported unanimously in favor of putting Mr. Sheil in place of the sitting contestant. Mr. Thayer was, na- turally/ 9 accorded the privilege of justifying his presence; and his defense smacked strongly of the doctrine that the Statesman had been impressing upon the electorate of Oregon the previous summer. He held that the Constitution of the 1 8 Statesman, 3 Dec., 1860. 19 Cong. Globe, ist. Sesa., 37th. Cong., 353 seq. 358 L. B. SHIPPEE United States directed that times, manner, and places of hold- ing elections for Representatives should be fixed by the State Legislatures, unless Congress should act in the matter; no provision allowed these details to be fixed by a constitutional convention ; besides, the section of the schedule of the Oregon constitution, on which the election of Sheil was predicated, was special and terminated with the first election. Again, the idea that a member of Congress should be elected eighteen months prior to the date of the opening of his term was ridicu- lous; political issues might have changed much in the mean- time. If the contestant relied upon a section in the body of the state constitution, he could not find here authority for other than the general election of state officers, to be held bi- ennially on the first Monday of June. If this section did pro- vide for an election of Representative, then the legislature of Oregon clearly exceeded the constitutional bounds when it appointed an election for the 27th of June, 1859, at which time Lansing Stout had been elected. (Note: This election had been set in order that Oregon might not be unrepresented at the first session of the Thirty- sixth Congress; had the election been allowed to wait till the first Monday in June of 1860, the long session would have ended before the succesful candidate could have gotten well on his way to Washington. La Fayette Grover, elected to Congress in June of 1858, sat for Oregon from the 14th of February, 1859, when the state was admitted, till the 4th of March.) It was further claimed by the contestant that, under the Ter- ritorial statutes, which had not been modified, and which had been declared in force till repealed or changed, a delegate to Congress was elected in June, consequently a Representative should be chosen at this time. But, Mr. Thayer pointed out, the Territorial Legislature had modified the original law, and the election came in the odd numbered years ; hence this was not consistent with the, state constitution which fixed the gen- eral election for the even numbered years. The forms, pro- vided for in the Territonallaw, had not been conformed to in AN ECHO OF CAMPAIGN OF SIXTY 359 connection with the issuance of Shell's certificate. Finally, if the House should adopt the report of the committee, the people of Oregon would be as much at a loss as before regarding the interpretation of their fundamental law. Mr. Sheil, in presenting his side of the case, held that these arguments were mere words ; that the constitution of Oregon fixed the day for the election, and he had been duly elected on that day. Moreover, the method of the poll, by which the sitting member claimed to be elected, was of such a nature that it was ridiculous to consider him properly elected; 4,099 votes cast, when the vote for president totaled some 14,500, exposed the slightness of the claim. Again, the character of the certificate received by Thayer was such as to show that the civil authorities of the state did not look upon the election as legal ; there was merely the statement that the sitting member had received so many votes as a candidate for Representative to Congress. Thaddeus Stevens offered an amendment to the report of the Committee on Elections to the effect that neither of the gentlemen was entitled to the seat, and that it should be de- clared vacant. He held that the constitution of a state might fix the time for the Congressional election first held, but that all subsequent elections should be regulated by a legislative enactment; the United States Constitution fixes this, and no other power can change. Stevens was not so liberal in his in- terpretation of the word "legislature" as was the Corvallis Union, which held that the Constitution used this word in its broadest sense, that a constitutional convention was the legis- lative authority next in power to a direct vote of the people. Stevens' amendment was rejected, nevertheless, and the report of the committee adopted ; thereupon Mr. Sheil took oath and was seated. In the meantime out in Oregon, the "Salem Clique's" pre- mature jubilation was equalled only by the scorn and invective which the Sheil adherents poured upon the heads of the leaders 360 L. B. SHIPPER in the National House. 20 When the news of the final disposi- tion came, the Union? 1 could adopt a tone of complaisant su- periority; even "Lincoln's Rump Congress" could not retain Thayer. It was a bitter pill for the "Salem League", but it was "foiled at last," and the only consolation it would receive would be the sharing of the $7,000 odd, out of which the United States Treasury would be cheated for salary and mileage for the defeated candidate. The question finally arises after it is admitted that Con- gress dodged the issue on the Constitutional point as to why a Republican House should seat a disunionist rather than de- clare the seat vacant and allow a new election. It will be re- membered that this was the critical period when it was felt that, altho the war might be a short one, it was safe to try to keep the wavering states still in the fold. The state in which Joseph Lane had been such an idol was one to be handled carefully, until it could be seen whether the would-be vice- president represented the true sentiment of his state, or whether Senator Baker was right when he said : 22 "There may be there some disaffected; there, may be some few men there who would 'rather rule in hell than serve in heaven/ There are a few men there who have left the South for the good of the South; who are perverse, violent, destructive, revolution- ary, and opposed to social order. A few, but a very few, thus formed and thus nurtured, in California and in Oregon, both persistently endeavor to create and maintain mischief ; but the great portion of our population are loyal to the cause and in every chord of their hearts." That Senator Baker was right was shown amply before the war was over, but in the summer of 1861 the Republican leaders were, as a body, not willing to take chances. 20 Union, 5 Aug., 1861. 21 Ibid., 12 Aug., 1 86 1. 22 Cong. Globe, ist. Sess. 37th. Cong., 379. PRESERVATION OF INDIAN NAMES ' y Walter H. Abbott The purpose of this Society as I understand it is the preser- vation of a record of past events. Such records in Oregon should cover a history of its discovery, exploration, settlement, and development. Due to the newspapers and various other publications this record is very fully kept as to present day happenings; hence a society such as this will find its chief field in the period before such means of daily records were established, and along the lines of happenings or enterprises which are not chronicled in the above mediums. In every Western state the period, open to historical record, is very short. One or two generations measure the beginning of real settlement even though the discovery may have reached back a century or more. What is usually regarded as history, is, therefore, within the memory of many now living, and the collection of much of the historical material is easy and more valuable because of the fullness of information obtainable. It is to be hoped that this Society will take advantage of the present decade to leave the fullest possible records for succeed- ing generations so that the future may have full information from which it can draw its deductions from the experience of the past. When, however, the Oregon historian reaches the limit of white occupation, exploration or discovery, he does not have to step off into botany, natural history or geology for all further information. Oregon was already teeming with human life. Man had been here for centuries. Who will tell us how long? The record which we now have is but the dust on the surface as compared with the events which have happened, and which possibly cry out at us in signs and marks yet to be deciphered. i Paper read before the Linn County Historical Society. 362 W. H. ABBOTT We know there were many tribes, several races, curious customs, innumerable traditions and many languages, all of which have received scant attention from the conqueror who disdained learning anything from the Indian. The records left seem to civilized man meager, indeed. The white race, with its instinct for building, cannot comprehend a race that has no desire for permanent habitations or occupa- tions. We are so delighted with our new found mastery of some of the natural powers that we cannot excuse the absence of them and have forgotten how to read the records of any other events than those commemorated by an exercise of these new powers. When we remember that nature leaves a complete record of her march onward, without recourse to any of these artificial helps, we then realize that the immense book of history of pre- ceding ages is only closed because we do not know how to read, rather than because no record is left. Of. the records left, the mounds with their various skulls, implements, and structures have given an inkling of how to start the deciphering. The camping grounds, the oyster shell piles and the arrow heads and tomahawks give another point of departure. The traditions are of course actual history much distorted, but surely of great value and especially so for re- cent events. The most valuable record left and the one which can prob- ably be made the stepping stone for any extensive research is the various Indian languages. A complete study of all the dialects will probably give a thousand years of history and may point the way to that larger study of traces and markings which the future historian will be able to decipher as the geolo- gist now deciphers the story of the rocks. For the above purpose alone, possibly a record of books open to the philologist and the historian would be sufficient. We certainly cannot hope to use the Indian languages to form any considerable, part of the language of the present day. It is, however, advantageous to have the Indian words enter into our daily life in some capacity, so that they may be PRESERVATION OF INDIAN NAMES 363 a living force and a sign board to all future generations point- ing to the period in the development of the race, of which all that remains of a thousand years of human life, is words and a problem for students to decipher. The above is the more necessary since there is a great need of extending our vocabulary to furnish words for the naming of towns. Of the many defects of modern man, his poverty of words for geographical names seems to me one of the most pitiable. Of the three nations which have taken the lead in colonization and therefore in the giving of names to new territory, the English and Spanish seem to have suffered most from this lack. The Spanish took their list of saints and went through it again and again, repeating the same names over and over. The English never got beyond the limit of originality, result- ing from the prefixing of the word new, to some worn out English name. The colonists themselves could not mount to even these heights of fancy. For them and for ourselves, their worthy descendants, the wildest flights of imagination do not get above the stage of finding out some name used in Massachu- setts, Connecticut or Virginia and then using it over and over again in each state and each territory. Think of 49 Albanys, 49 Salems, 49 Lebanons, 49 Brownsvilles. In fact only a strin- gent post office law prevented there being many towns in the same state with the same name. For the geographical names, where there is no regulation and the genius of the race for repeating itself can find free rein, we have a remarkable condition. In the State of Oregon alone, reading from a small scale map, there was found 3 Bald Mts., 2 Silver Lakes, 2 Antelope Creeks, 3 Badger Creeks, 2 Burnt Rivers, 4 Camp Creeks, 2 Cottonwood Creeks, 2 Cow Creeks, 2 Deep Creeks, 3 Elk Creeks, 2 John Day Rivers, 2 Long Creeks, 2 Salmon Rivers, 5 Silver Creeks, and 3 Wolf Creeks. And this with most of the branches of the rivers not named. The state is still young, surely in a few 364 W. H. ABBOTT years it ought to be possible to have at least 10 Silver Creeks, that seeming to be the favorite. Can any greater prostitution of an opportunity occur than to deliberately saddle a town or a river with a name already worn threadbare in dozens of other localities, when a vast store house of words rich in historical association and the growth of that particular section lies open for use ? It is like choosing a corn tassel as the state emblem for Oregon, or a sunflower for Ire- land in place of the shamrock. Surely the spirit which slaugh- tered millions of buffalo just to see them dead, and burned up half of the timber of the Northwest just to get pasture for cows, is abroad in other fields. The disease then, is lack of imagination ; lack of reverence of the past; ignorance; mental laziness. What is the remedy? None of the past methods such as the study of local history, the organization of historical societies, or the collecting and distributing of historical books will suffice. Clearly anything that will combat the above causes will help, but in the meantime the, cities and villages will be named. We will have forty Lovers Leaps instead of only fifteen. Little Silver Creeks will come winding out of dozens and dozens of canyons. Wolf Creeks will run over the country in such numbers as to make it possibly unsafe to go out. Of all of the above causes I believe the one which weighs heaviest with the present generation is lack of knowledge. The present generation is not prejudiced against the Indian as were their forefathers. Neither are they ashamed to hear their towns called by Indian names. We do not glory in the fact that we have not enough originality to make up a new name or in being the forty-ninth imitation of a poor original. But lacking it, we also lack the knowledge of what is available and appropriate. If Indian words and therefore the Indian languages are to be preserved and at the same time the towns and rivers yet to be named are to have some originality, something of the spirit of the region in which they are situated, show in their PRESERVATION OF INDIAN NAMES * 365 names, some concerted effort will have to be made by the his- torical societies while the country is still young. The purpose of this article is to point out a method by which this may be done without exciting too much opposition. It certainly cannot be done by any public meetings or by try- ing to stir up the feelings of imagination of any community. The effort put forth by the Oregon Agricultural College to have Mt. Chintimini called by its right name and the small results show the futility of agitation in effecting this. Names are not made that way. They are made by some one arbitrarily putting a name on a signboard, or map, or rock. More names have been made, by just putting them on a map than in any other way. How utterly different they would be if they were the result of the evolution of a community. In any public meeting the Indian word even though it may have been the very name of that spot for 500 years will seem to Anglo-Saxon ears, impossible. Suppose some one should propose the word Massachusetts or Mississippi for the first time. They would be laughed to scorn. The words of any new language must first be written and must be read many times (before they are spoken) to be accepted. The greatest makers of names are the map-makers. Not, however, because they want to be such, but because they cannot help it. The map-maker will grasp at a good name, if you just suggest it to him, that is, of course for a new place not yet named. There are thousands of names yet to be given in Oregon. Why not preserve the glory of that which was instead of steeping our- selves in the imitation of an imitation. As a practical plan for the introduction of new names, I would suggest the following: Every county engineer has a tracing on a moderately large scale of the county map; or if he has none one can be made up for a few dollars. Most of the high schools boys now learn to make such tracings. The historical society of each county should take up the map of its county and note the places where the names are either absent or not firmly fixed in the public mind. For instance many 366 W. H. ABBOTT rivers are still called, North Fork, South Fork, Middle Fork, South Fork of Middle Fork, and etc. These are excellent opportunities to change all but the name of the main stream. Most of the branch creeks have no very fixed names. They are known by the names given them in the map having the largest circulation. This condition, however, continues only so long as the population is scant. The names eventually be- come fixed. From a list of the words of the language of the tribe which inhabited that particular region such words could be selected as seem most worthy of preservation and as having some as- sociation with the particular locality. In many cases the origi- nal name of a stream can be found ; if this cannot be attached to the main stream it frequently can be to the branch. Sometimes, if it is uncertain whether a name can be changed, both names are advisable, the Indian name to follow the common English name. A name like an idea, once let loose on a map, may find a use that was least expected. In addition to the streams there are many cross roads where it is pretty certain that a village will spring up. In fact, every cross roads, if in a fertile section with a couple of houses near should have a name. The historical society will have more prestige in giving it a name than any other body in the coun- try. A particularly good opportunity occurs when a new line of railway is built. The railway nearly always names the new towns and the writer's experience indicates that they are fre- quently at a loss for appropriate, names. In no case would a list of names presented by a historical society be rejected with- out serious consideration and the adoption of some of them. Most of the lesser mountain peaks have names that are not firmly fixed. If by a foot note it can be explained that the name used up to that time has already been appropriated in another part of the state, the new name will have a strong reason for soon gaining currency. All knobs and buttes should PRESERVATION OF INDIAN NAMES 367 be named even though they may not be high. Eventually they will be named so it behooves the Society to get there first. After settling on as many names as possible the Society should arrange to blue print as many maps as possible and dis- tribute them gratis to as many different people in the county as practicable and above all get them on sale at cost in all the localities where they could possibly be needed or where, there is any likelihood of a sale of a map. Make good maps and sell them cheaper than anybody. All of the county societies should of course, co-operate with the State Society, whose office should be to get out a state map introducing all the suggestions that seem feasible of the various county societies. The passenger departments of the railway companies get out great numbers of state maps. They are also interested in pre- serving anything that will attract tourist travels. Indian names with the legends which go with many of them certainly appeal to the tourist. The adoption by the railway map makers oi even a portion of the names suggested by the historical society would fix them definitely. The automobile clubs are putting up signs in many places over the country. It would be wise to operate in conjunction with them. They will furnish the cost of the sign and fre- quently are only too glad to have some one interested locally who can give them information and cooperate with them in the protection of signs. A simple sign will frequently change the name of a cross road that has another name for years. In a rocky county a man in an automobile with a can of paint can do much to fixing the names on the map as sent out by the society. Mountain peaks and buttes should have the names cut into some rock wall near the summit. The carving of such name can often be made the excuse of delightful excursions which not only result in the name being cut into the rock but also newspaper attention, which furthers the fixing of the new name. If the county engineer happens to be an enthusiastic member of the historical society the plan of campaign as mapped out is 368 W. H. ABBOTT much easier of realization due to his detail knowledge of the various localities. In many counties it is difficult to obtain a map. This should be the opportunity of the Historical Society. The maps which find the greatest sale or any form of distribution will deter- mine the names in that section. Frequently some business house if solicited will print great numbers of county maps with their advertisement on the back and distribute them' free. The Society should print copious notes on the back of the map giving as many historical references as possible so as to excite the interest of each community in the Indian name if it is desired to change the name already partially fixed. The maps should, of course, be the latest that have been gotten out and new editions should be gotten out from time to time bringing them up to date if any changes have been made. The Society should also keep in touch with the great map printing houses furnishing them maps free. It is very easy in this way to be- come the authority for new names in the county and the oppor- tunity frequently arises for changing a name that was re- garded as fixed. In o/ther words the gist of this article is, that if we wiHl make it easier for everybody to find out an Indian name for a locality than some other name, they will use the Indian name. THE GUN POWDER STORY Editorial Notes by T. C. Elliott There have appeared in various contributions romantic and otherwise to the literature of the Pacific Coast accounts of an occurrence at the mouth of the Walla Walla river partici- pated in by the officer in charge of the Hudson's Bay Company trading post there, Fort Walla Walla, and the Indians, and termed the Gunpowder Story. Recently a narration of that story by the officer himself has become available in the form of a let- ter written to the late Elwood Evans in March, 1882, when Mr. Evans was gathering data for his contributions to the History of the Pacific Northwest, published 1889. The narrative shows a tendency to elaboration quite natural forty years after an event, but specifies names and family connections among In- dians who were prominent in the first Indian War of Oregon and illustrates the high level of the relationship maintained between the traders of the Hudson's Bay Company and the Indians. It also contains a direct reference to the name "The White Head" as applied to Doctor McLoughlin. The letter is drawn from the letter-book of its author, the late Mr. Archibald McKinlay, who was, in 1882, residing at Lac La Hache in British Columbia. Mr. McKinlay was a chief trader of the Hudson's Bay Company and afterward be- came a citizen of Oregon, residing at Oregon City from 1846 until about 1862. His certificate of marriage with the daugh- ter of Peter Skene Ogden has been reproduced in fac simile in the Oregon Historical Quarterly (Vol. 10, p. 325, et seq.), but it was omitted there to state that the certificate was writ- ten in the hand of Mr. Ogden himself. This gunpowder inci- den must have taken place in the summer of 1843, for it was later than the promulgation of Dr. Elijah White's laws in De- cember, 1842, and it was prior to the departure of Mr. Ogden on leave in the spring of 1844. The original Fort Walla Walla was burned in the fall of 1841. This same story as told on pp. 370 ARCHIBALD McKiNLAY 690-91 of Vol. 2 of History of Northwest Coast from MSS. dictated to Mr. Bancroft himself at Victoria in 1878, illustrates the Bancroft method of popularizing his text ; for this volume of the series of Bancroft histories was written by Mr. Bancroft himself (see p. 52, Vol. 4, of this Quarterly). Mr. Elwood Evans, Tacoma, Wash. Dear Sir: I will now send you the gunpowder story in detail : At Walla Walla it was the duty of the officer in charge to furnish horses, pack saddles and other equipment to all and every party requiring the same. All over the country from Utah to British Columbia: I had a man especially employed to make pack saddles. The only hard wood we could find for the purpose was Birch; this we got from the Blue Mountains at least fifty miles away. My saddles for the season were fin- ished ; however there was a quantity of saddle wood in the saddle maker's house. I happened to go in one day and found the saddle wood diminished in bulk. I remarked the same to the saddle maker; his reply was that both Indians and whites helped themselves to the wood & that he thought the wood was not required. I told him that if the wood was not required then it would be re- quired in another year, to allow no person to take a stick of it. A few days after while busily employed writing the saddle maker opened my door and told me an Indian was taking a piece of the wood, that he had remonstrated with him & that he would not give it up. I asked my clerk Mr. Wm. Todd to go and see about it. In a few minutes after I heard some noise which induced me to go to the window ; I saw an Indian rush out of the saddle maker's house, pick up a stone & before you could say Jack Robertson Todd was out grappling with him and happening to have two other Indians standing by they also got hold of Todd. I drove the two off, to give Todd fair play. The consequence was that altho. Todd's opponent was a stronger man than himself, he had thrown him down and THE GUN POWDER STORY 371 kicked him unmercifully. On separating them I inquired of them who his opponent was; he told me he was the son of Pio Pio Mox-Mox, the big chief of the Walla Walla (tribe). I blamed Todd for being so hasty and told him we would have some trouble. All the men except Todd, the saddle-maker and myself, were out in the fields about two miles away. However, I expected a big talk, but did not anticipate anything worse. About an hour after the old chief accompanied by some forty or sixty men came in by the, back gate of the Fort through the kitchen into my room. On seeing him wishing to be polite I offered him a chair, instead of accepting the same he & his men flew by me to Todd and took hold of him ; as soon as I could get among them I was in time, to take hold of the chief's arm who had a tomahawk in his hand & was about bringing it down on Todd's head. I managed to draw him toward my desk where I had three pistols (not revolvers) hanging prob- ably not loaded. As the chief and I were scuffeling the men who had hold of Todd let go apparently to see what we were about to do. I handed one pistol to Todd, kept two for my- self with the order not to fire till I give the word. The chief then presented his naked breast & asked me whether I was going to shoot him. "Shoot me. You shoot a man," said he. I replied such was by no means my wish, but if he again at- tempted to use his tomahawk on Todd's head I would certainly use my pistol. Then ensued a long conversation about Dr. White's laws, wherein if an Indian struck a white man he would be flogged & if a white man struck an Indian that he also would be flogged. I told the chief that I would not sub- mit to anything of the kind, that if his son had thrashed my young man, I would have thought nothing more of it. He still insisted of having Todd flogged. I told him that they would have to kill me first. While thus talking the young man who had been thrashed by Todd gave me a severe blow from be- hind hitting me under the fifth rib. I took him by the hair of the head intending first to strike him, but knowing to do so would be sure death, I let him go & thinking of a keg of 372 ARCHIBALD McKiNLAY powder in the adjoining room I sprung to the door, took hold of a flint & steel and defied them to touch Todd. Before I could think of what I was about there was not an Indian in the house, except the old chief and his son; the former after sitting moodily for a few minutes addressed me thus, "Don't you think you are very smart to frighten my young men so? You can't frighten me. I have heard that you white people are in the habit of taking guns and challenging one another; let's you & I do the same." My reply was : there are only six whites of us here and there are as many hundreds of you. Should you kill me there is no one to take my place as chief of the whites. Should I kill you there are plenty in your tribe as good if not better men than yourself." At this he went off in 'high dudgeon ; sent messengers to the Cayuses & Nez Perces that his son was killed by the whites, & for two days Indians gathered round the Fort but none came inside the gate; something unusual. On the evening of the second day the Five Crows, a Cayuse Chief, an uncle of the young man who got the thrashing, a very old friend of the whites & a man who had a very great regard for me, came, from a distance and entered the Fort without ever knowing anything of what occurred. I must here digress a little and mention that a few days previously Mr. Ogden had passed down taking my wife to Vancouver, so when the Five Crows came in I enquired whether he had heard the news, referring to my trouble with the Indians ; his answer was that he had. "I have heard," he said, "that your father-in-law (Mr. Ogden) has lost two men by the upseting of the boat at the Dalles." I told him that I had also heard of that accident but that I did not mean that, but my trouble with his brother-in-law, the Walla Walla chief. He wished to know the particulars. I told him that he would find out the trouble from the Indians as Indians considered the white men liars. On this he said: "did you ever know me to doubt your word or to go among Indians listening to their idle tattle ?" I answered : "now as you have spoken, I will tell you," and of course repeated what had happened. He exTHE GUN POWDER STORY 373 pressed himself sorry for what had happened, saying that it was a great disgrace for a chief's son to be thrashed. I ex- plained to him that if my young man had got the worst of the fight I would think nothing of it & that they were both of > them to blame; to this he said nothing but remained in the Fort all night alone attended by an Indian boy. Next morn- ing he said he would send for the father, sent his boy accord- ingly. To my surprise he came to me saying, "My brother- in-law knows I am a peace maker & he will not come" (at this time they were not in speaking terms). Shortly the Five Crows went off saying that he might see his brother Tawato, head chief of the Cayuses, & would give my version of the story. At noon the same day, Tawato came to the Fort accom- panied by Elijah, an elder Brother of the young man who got a thrashing, & a young man who had received a considerable smattering of English, reading & writing at the Methodist In- stitute at the Willamette. They were both cleanly dressed fully armed with guns, pistols & swords. This was in my opinion carried more for show than for violence. After being seated for some time without saying a word Tawato made known the object of his visit; it was if there was not a pos- sibility of our coming to some arrangement of settling the difficulty. After explaining my case, he proposed to send for the father. The father accordingly came, accompanied at last by five or six hundred Indians, if I remember rightly they were not all armed. They filled the house, every nook & crany of the fort yard crowded outside of the windows. Every avail- able space was occupied by them. After Peo Peo Mox-Mox came in he & I agreed to explain our case to Tawato and to cut a long yarn short, Peo-Peo Mox-Mox told me he had noth- ing particular against me personally, but that I must send Mr. Todd out of the country immediately. I replied I would do nothing of the kind, that Todd had been sent to me by The White Head (McLoughlin) as my assistant, that he had not committed a fault, that I would not discharge him, that they had strength enough to kill us but our lives would be re374 ARCHIBALD McKiNLAY venged, if his heart was not good toward Todd it could not be good toward me. Then he sprung from his seat beating his breast, saying "my heart will never be good," & rushing out of the door ; a few minutes of a dead silence ensued. You might hear a pin drop. When Towato arose to his feet stern- ly addressing me, telling me that I was a fool, that I wanted blood & that I would get enough of it. Another term of silence ensued as impressive as the last lasting a few minutes ; it was a critical time. Giving myself time to think I asked Tawato whether he was chief or not ; he sneeringly answered, "ask my young men." I told him I knew that he was the son of a great chief, that his father was known among the early whites as a great and a good man, that no number of white men would make him through fear do wrong, that I was a chief, that not- withstanding the number that were standing around me would not make me change one iota of what I said. Then followed a murmuring sound as of a consultation in low tones which lasted for sometime. I observed the chief give an order that caused a young man to leave, the room. Shortly after Peo Peo Mox-Mox entered the room and without any preface or cere- mony came forward and offered me his hand in token of friendship. I looked with an expression of surprise and took his hand; then asked him whether his heart was good. He answered "yes," striking his breast. I then asked him whether his heart was good towards Todd ; his reply was "yes & to prove it & wipe out all ill feeling for ever my son is coming with a horse as a present for Todd." To seal the compact I made the son a present of a suit of clothes and smoked the pipe of peace, a peace which lasted the whole time I remained with him. I have been more proud of the termination of this incident than the gunpowder plot for I believe I ought to give myself the credit (for it was so conceded by my Brother Officers) I had secured a lasting peace "with honor" to all concerned without any bloodshed, whereas if I had acted in anyways hasty or without forethought or firmness it would be hard for me to say what the consequences might have been. You might think that I was devoid of forethought & ask why did I not shut the gates. In answer I had no gates; the

old Fort was burnt down & I was building a new one,"

REVIEW

ACQUISITION OF OREGON AND THE LONG SUPPRESSED EVIDENCE ABOUT MARCUS WHITMAN

By William I. Marshall, of Chicago

(Seattle: Lowman and Hanford Company, 1911. Volume I, pp. 450; Volume II, pp. 366)

Though many writers have essayed history of the acquisition period of Oregon, none has quite filled the need. More or less common is lack of scrutiny of "original sources" and of keen discernment of materials. Frequently, writers have based chronicles and conclusions on "facts" remembered long afterwards, not recorded at the event often tinted with imagination or biased opinion of a later time.

Many "original sources" must yet be studied before a satisfactory history can be written of the large movements in discovery, exploration, settlements and acquisition of Oregon. Records of Hudson's Bay Company are yet to be opened and of the British Government; those of the United States Government are. to be examined for fuller data and writings of its statesmen and diplomats; also of missionary organizations that contributed to early settlement. Much knowledge is to be gleaned from letters, diaries and journals of contemporary periods.

A book just published, "Acquisition of Oregon," written by the late William I. Marshall of Chicago (2 Vols., Lowman & Hanford Co., Seattle), delves farthest into first-hand materials of any history yet published of the pioneer period. The labor expended on this book by Professor Marshall was immense. His search into the issues of diplomacy over Oregon, through government archives and through diaries and letters of American diplomatists for the period 1814-46; his inquiry into records of the executive department and of Congress for that period; his study of letters and diaries of missionaries and pioneer immigrants between 1832 and 1846 all this makes the completest and most illuminating story of pioneer Oregon yet compiled.

There is opportunity for best literary skill in the tale of Oregon. World-wide currents affected discovery, exploration, settlement and title of this region. The story turns on the most important episodes of western progress. There is abundant room, too, for exercise of "philosophy of history."

The Marshall history possesses very high excellence. Its vigor betokens the energy and vigilance wherewith Marshall busied himself at the task during twenty-eight years. Its central purpose is to explode the Whitman myth. It succeeds admirably and fully. No reader of Marshall, no unbiased reader, hereafter can believe that myth. Few close investigators ever believed it. Every writer of Oregon history must go henceforth to Marshall, as he must go to Greenhow, else must undertake himself the vast labor of examining first-hand materials. The facts that Marshall cites are full and true. He distorts nothing.

Yet the Marshall work has faults. In demolishing the Whitman myth the author detracts unduly from the heroic character of the Wailatpu missionary, and from his very valuable participation in pioneer immigration and settlement. Marshall's continuous effort to reduce the importance of Whitman in the "saving" of Oregon leaves too little in the book for admiration of Whitman. Then, too, Marshall injects repeated doses of Whitman myth acrimony; he quarrels with authors of the myth after the manner of the half-century dispute over the question; he shows not enough of the even tenor of the true historian.

Also, Marshall asserts, as corollary of his argument, that Oregon would have been saved had the pioneer Whitman never been born, that Oregon would have been won to the United States from Great Britain without the advent of any of the pioneer parties. This broad assertion—that of occupation of Oregon by American pioneers played no part whatever in establishing the United States title—cannot be reconciled with the political spirit of the nation between 1840 and 1846, which drove thousands of American citizens to this region and demanded its possession even to the line of "fifty-four-forty-or-fight."

However, this criticism is of Marshall's conclusions, not of his facts. There they are for the reader to judge. Marshall asks no person to accept his conclusions.

But for Marshall's untimely death in 1906, undoubtedly he would have improved this crowning work of his life; perhaps revised some of his conclusions; probably given his book finer literary arrangement; certainly fixed himself more firmly as a foremost authority on Oregon history, as he is the very first authority on the Whitman legend. It will not be necessary for anybody else to disprove that legend.

Only 200 copies of the book have been printed. This has been accomplished through contribution of money by some twelve residents of Oregon and Washington, who saw the need of bringing to fruition the life work of Professor Marshall. This effort, headed by C. B. Bagley of Seattle, has been entirely successful.

Whitman Needs No False Glory.

Dr. Marcus Whitman needs no false glory; nor does the missionary cause which did great things for Oregon; neither does Whitman College—an ever growing monument to this patriot hero. Dr. Whitman will be an everlasting figure in Oregon annals; always will be honored by the gratitude of our people. But he was but one character among many, though indeed a foremost one, in occupation of Oregon. He did his duty as missionary, pioneer, citizen, and died a martyr's death at the hand of the savage. He did not "save Oregon," that is, he alone did not.

In company with other Americans, Whitman carried the claims of his country to this region, and with them won Oregon from the British. Occupation of Oregon and consequent possession by the United States belongs to no one man, but to many. Jason Lee and his associates, who settled in the Willamette Valley in the critical time are equal in honor to Whitman. Before these pioneers, and contemporaneous with them, our diplomatists and statesmen did their part in saving Oregon: Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, Richard Rush, Daniel Webster. And before them were others deserving of honor, American explorers—Captain Gray, Lewis and Clark, the Astors, Wyeth. And the thousands of Whitman's contemporary pioneers, who settled in Oregon up to 1846 played a vital part in the acquisition of Oregon.

The journey of Whitman from his mission, near Walla Walla, to Boston, much of it in the dead of winter, 1842-43, is a fact of history. But much fiction has fastened to the story. Details of the fiction came into existence many years after Whitman's death in 1847. Imagination supplied adornments to the tale one after another. Marshall disproves them all.

The legend tells of two Flathead Indians, who had made their way to St. Louis about 1831, and had been refused the "Book of Heaven" by Governor William Clark, after having been offered unsatisfying forms of Catholic worship. It narrates that Whitman, responding to this Indian call, and spending six years (1836-42) as missionary near these Indians in what is now Eastern Washington, discovered the British and the Hudson's Bay Company, with Catholic aid, taking possession of Oregon. It represents V'/hitman finally determining (1842) to make for Washington, D. C., press upon President Tyler and Secretary of State Webster, who were then treating with Britain concerning the Canadian boundary, the claims of the United States and the value of Oregon, and lead back a large immigration to possess Oregon. The legend pictures Whitman spurred to this feat by a party of British traders holding feast at Walla Walla in the autumn of 1842 and exulting that Britain had won the country. It takes Whitman before President Tyler and Secretary Webster, whom he found ready to trade Oregon for a cod fishery on" Newfoundland. It puts into the mouth of Webster that Oregon was a "worthless area."

It portrays Whitman exacting a promise from the President and his Secretary to delay negotiations with Great Britain until he should lead to Oregon the large pioneer train of 1843. It pictures Whitman making speeches and publishing pamphlets on Oregon, endeavoring in every way to electrify the country and to induce immigrants to Oregon in 1843. It details him as a Moses leading the party of pioneers to Oregon that year, and as being its indispensable overseer. It tells of the officers of the British Hudson's Bay Company at Fort Hall barring the way to the pioneer train, and trying to stop its wagons, and of Whitman's resolution in taking the party by the British, wagons and all, to the Columbia River. It represents the success of the wagon immigration and the opening of the mission; none in the archives of the missionary board in Boswagon route as achievements of Whitman. It avers that this wagon road thus opened was the means of saving Oregon by American pioneers.

Wonder grows, in analyzing this romance, that in these days of enlightenment, of writing and printing, this story could grow to such absurd proportions and to so many fiction details; that it could gain such wide credence.

Corroboration Is Lacking.

No corroboration of any of these foregoing details of the myth can be found in contemporaneous writings, none in letters of Whitman or of Mrs. Whitman or of any member of his ton that sent Whitman to Oregon in 1836; none in the archives of the Government or in the letters of Tyler or Webster; none in religious publications of newspapers of the time; none in letters and diaries of leaders of the 1843 immigration, among them P. H. Burnett, Jesse and Lindsay Applegate, J. M. Shively, J. W. Nesmith, Almoran Hill—well known Oregon pioneers, all of whom have denied the Whitman myth.

All this disproof is fully detailed by Professor Marshall in manner completely convincing. And every person to whom Professor Marshall submitted his manuscript was convinced by what he says, except Dr. W. A. Mowry, one of the Whitman myth authors.

Several score persons read Marshall's manuscript, including historians of national and international reputation, professors of history in universities and colleges, teachers of history in normal schools, high schools and academies, principals of schools, judges, clergymen, lawyers, editors and public officers of various kinds—most of whom had been believers in the Whitman-saved-Oregon story and had indorsed it in lectures or sermons or in newspapers and magazine articles, or in their school and other histories, and therefore very naturally would have preferred not to have it proved false and who subjected all criticism of such evidence adverse to it to the most careful, and some of them to the most hostile scrutiny.

Among these critics Professor Marshall names: George Bancroft, John Fiske, Horace E. Scudder (who was editor of Barrow's "Oregon"), Professors John B. McMaster, of the University of Pennsylvania, Francis N. Thorpe, Harry Pratt Judson, of the University of Chicago; Andrew McLaughlin, formerly of the University of Michigan; Edward Channing, of Harvard University; Allen C. Thomas, of Haverford College; William P. Cordy, superintendent of schools, Springfield, Mass., and "many others."

Just What Whitman Did.

Then what truth lies behind the legend and why did Whitman make his famous midwinter "ride?"

Quarrels and dissensions and failure to make progress on the part of Whitman and his associates had caused the American board of foreign missions (Congregational, Presbyterian and Dutch Reformed) to order discontinuance of three of the four mission stations, including Whitman's, and return home of two of the missionaries. Whitman and his associates deemed this order fatal to their mission work, and they decided it expedient for Whitman to return to Boston to secure annulment of the order and a reinforcement of clergymen and laymen for whom they had been importuning the board. Whitman was successful in securing annulment of the order at Boston, where he arrived on March 30, 1843, having left Wailatpu October 3, 1842.

This midwinter journey was a feat of rare courage and hardihood. But it had no political influence in affairs of Oregon. It had no political purpose. There is no evidence that Whitman interviewed President Tyler or Secretary Webster. Congress adjourned March 4, 1843, when Whitman was at or near St. Louis, eastbound, just emerging from the frontier, and he did not reach Washington for more than a month afterwards. There was no disposition to sacrifice Oregon either on the part of the President or of Congress then adjourned.

Congress at its session recently ended had received the report of Lieutenant Wilkes, more fully describing Oregon than Whitman could do, and was fully alive to the Oregon situation. Secretary Webster, through Senator Choate, had announced January 18, 1843, in the Senate that the Secretary of State never had made or entertained a proposition to admit of any boundary line south of the forty-ninth parallel (the present boundary fixed in 1846) in negotiations with Ashburton, British plenipotentiary, in 1842, with whom it was alleged Webster was negotiating to trade Oregon north of the Columbia River for a cod fishery.

Nor did Whitman make any speeches nor publish pamphlets to arouse the spirit of immigration to Oregon. That spirit was already fully aroused, and the 1843 party assembled near Independence, Mo., May 20, 1843, with little or no knowledge of Whitman's presence in the East, nor did Whitman join them until several days later. On the journey his counsel and services as physician were valuable, yet not indispensable, and his utility as guide was small.

At Fort Hall the Hudson's Bay Company men made no effort to stay the wagons nor, if its men had tried, would they have succeeded, since the party was fully equipped to go through. Besides, three wagons had gone through in 1840, those of J. L. Meek, Robert Newell, Caleb Wilkins and Frederic Ermatinger, British chief trader at Fort Hall. This party was outfitted at the British post and one of its wagons was owned by Ermatinger.

This, remarks Marshall, "reduces to senseless drivel all the scores of pages in Barrows, Nixon, Craighead, Mowry, and the other advocates of the 'Whitman-Saved-Oregon' story, which accuses the Hudson's Bay Company of opposing the passage of wagons beyond Fort Hall."

After leaving Fort Boise, Whitman, together with a number of the younger men put off ahead and were of no service whatever to the wagon party in crossing the Blue Mountains.

All this and much more is substantiated, by testimony that is conclusive. Scores of American explorers and pioneers are quoted to show that Hudson's Bay Company did not oppose their going to Oregon, nor their hauling wagons thither. The evidence of Whitman's own writings and those of his wife and his associates shows plainly that his "ride" had no political purpose bearing on Oregon. This and similar evidence from original sources, never before published, is contained throughout the book.

Marshall shows the first animus of the legend to have been a desire to obtain from the Government $30,000 or $40,000 indemnity for Indian destruction of the mission, through representations that the missionary work, especially Whitman's, had won Oregon from the British and that the Government had failed to protect Whitman's station. When these representations were made in the '60s, there was keen hostility towards Britain in the United States on account of Civil War matters.

Much new information is presented by Marshall of diplomacy on Oregon between the restoration of Astoria after the war of 1812 and the final boundary treaty of 1846. This information shows that the United States from the very first held out for the forty-ninth parallel, never wavered from that line, never would accept south of that parallel, and finally secured it through President Polk and Secretary of State Buchanan.

This line was proposed in 1818 by President Monroe and Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, when the treaty of joint occupation was negotiated, as an offset to the British offer of the Columbia River as a boundary. Monroe, as Secretary of State under Madison, and Adams, as one of the peace commissioners, had secured restoration of Astoria in the treaty of 1814 with Britain.

In 1823-24 Secretary Adams renewed the proposal of the forty-ninth parallel to the British Government but the latter again declined. In the negotiations Secretary Adams announced the Monroe doctrine through Henry Middleton, then American Minister to Russia, and Richard Rush, then Minister to Great Britain.

Monroe Doctrine First Applied.

It is interesting to note that the Monroe doctrine—now an axiom of American diplomacy—was first announced in negotiations with Britain and Russia concerning Oregon. It was intended as a warning to Russia colonization schemes in America and was supported by Britain. Also it was a warning, backed by Britain, to the holy alliance—France, Prussia, Austria, Russia—which planned to restore to Spain its lost American colonies.

The British then declined, however, the forty-ninth parallel, but in 1824 offered the forty-ninth parallel to the Columbia and thence that river to the Pacific. This Mr. Rush declined and again proposed the forty-ninth parallel to the ocean. Thus the British virtually conceded south of the Columbia. In 1826, Adams, then President, instructed Albert Gallatin, plenipotentiary negotiating with Britain the renewal of the 1818 joint treaty, that the forty-ninth parallel was our "ultimatum." From this "ultimatum" of Adams the American Government never receded. Webster's refusal to accept the Columbia River as boundary in 1842 in negotiations with Ashburton caused delay in the settlement until 1846.

These negotiations, not before fully examined as to their bearing on the Oregon boundary, convinced Professor Marshall that the Oregon question between the United States and Great Britain was one of diplomacy and not one of settlement and occupation. It is not probable, however, that Professor Marshall will be sustained in this view. Large influx of American settlers into Oregon, prior to 1846, undoubtedly alarmed Great Britain and finally induced its Government to accede to the American "ultimatum" of John Quincy Adams of 1826. But Marshall clearly shows that Whitman could have had no influence on the diplomacy of the question.

Important also is Professor Marshall's proof that the wagon road to Oregon was not Whitman's opening. Three wagons reached the Columbia River from Fort Hall in 1840—three years before the large wagon party which he is alleged to have guided through in 1843.

Besides, the route to the Columbia was really laid out by fur traders. Marshall finds that certainly 1000 Americans had crossed the Rocky Mountains before Whitman in 1836, probably 2000. On Whitman's first journey across in 1836 he was guided by American traders to Green River, and by Hudson's Bay men, thence to Fort Hall, and the. Columbia River. All the passes through the mountains to the Columbia, and the river routes, had been explored before Whitman's advent, and he followed the beaten path of the fur traders. The wagons of traders, explorers and settlers followed these trails of the fur traders. It was well known that wagons could go through to the Columbia before Whitman's journeys of 1836 and 1843, and that the only requisites were sufficient equipment and men for the enterprise. The wagons that did go through to the Columbia in 1840 and 1843 owed nothing to Whitman for the feat.

This review and criticism of the Marshall work, though somewhat extended, touches only briefly the main features of the book. The investigation is one long needed. The Whitman myth has distorted the truth during half a century, and it is time now to accord Dr. Whitman his due as patriot and hero of Oregon, but not as savior of this region.

Leslie M. Scott.

NOTES

Through the exercise of fine historic sense and activity Baker is preparing for a fitting observance of the centennial anniversary of the passing of the main division of the Hunt overland expedition through that section in the winter of 1811-1812. It will be remembered that Wilson Price Hunt was the leader of that part of the Astor expedition to the mouth of the Columbia that proceeded across the continent. The, suggestion of Mr. Walter H. Abbott for the preserva- tion of Indian names of natural features and of localities should elicit some response. Many undesirable geographical names should be discarded. Important natural features and developing population centers are still to receive their designa- tions. Mr. Abbott reveals a fine opening for the activity of historical societies and suggests effective modes of procedure. An analysis of the census bulletin on population of Oregon discloses some interesting facts. The growth of the State during the last decade amounted to an increase of 62.7 per cent, a nearly two-thirds addition in numbers. During the same period the United States as a whole added 21 per cent. Oregon grew nearly twice as rapidly in the decade from 1900 to 1910 as it did from 1890 to 1900. The gain was 259,229, making a total population in 1910 of 672,765. The largest growth in any preceding decade was from 1880 to 1890, when 142,936 comprised the gain. The increase during the last de- cade was as great, very nearly, as one and a half times the entire population of the State in 1880. Portland with its 207,214 people lacked about 20,000 of having one-third of the population of the state as a whole. Salem was the second city with 14,094 ; Astoria was third with 9,599; Eugene with 9,009 was a close fourth. Medford had the highest percentage .of increase, 393.6 per cent; Salem's was 231 ; Eugene's, 178.4. The urban population as a whole that of the cities and in- corporated towns of 2,500 inhabitants or more numbered 386 NOTES 307,060, or 45.6 per cent of the total population of the State; while 365,705 people, or 54.4 per cent, lived in rural territory on the farms or in villages, towns and cities of less than 2,500. In 1900 only 32.2 per cent of the Oregon population was urban, while 67.8 per cent lived in rural territory. There had thus during the decade from 1900 to 1910 been a large increase in the proportion of urban population. The urban population of the nation at large was 46.3 per cent. During the last decade the urban population of Oregon grew 115 per cent; the rural population during the same period increased but 35.1 per cent. In other words, the population of the urban areas in Oregon increased more than three times as fast as did that of the rural territory. The City of Portland grew somewhat more than twice as rapidly as did the State as a whole. The average density of the population in Oregon was seven persons to the square mile. The average number for the nation as a whole was 30.9. Three counties, Harney, Lake and Malheur, each averaged less than one person per square mile. The rural population in Union County, and the population as a whole of Grant County, decreased during the decade. Maps indicating density of population show a great south- eastern block of the area of the State that was virtually empty. This wilderness region comprised nearly half of the extent of the State. A tier, in some places two, of counties along the northern and western sides of the State were a little more fully occupied. So far that section of the State which first drew the pioneer across the continental wilderness of the forties and fifties still leads in inhabitants. But the conquering forces in irrigation and railway building are at work. The maps of the returns of the next national count promise to be different at least the vast vacant area will have vanished.

1. Statesman. July 17.
2. Lane's telegram was reprinted in the Statesman. July 3, from the Washington Star: "Hon. Lansing Stout: Your dispatch is received. Stand by the equality of the states and stand by those states that stand by the constitutional rights of all. By all means go with them go out and stand by them. Joe Lane." The frequent use of the word "stand" in this message made it and Lane the butt of a great deal of fun and ridicule.
3. Union, Feb. 2, 1861.
4. Argus, Jan. 5.
5. Union, May 4.
6. Ibid., May 18.