were really no vacant lands in the Willamette, Umpqua or Rogue River valleys, and the only available lands were east of the Cascades, which could not be had until after the Indian war was over and they were surveyed by the government. A state government would cost at least $60,000 per year, and this and the amount necessary for statehouse and penitentiary would require a nine-mill tax, since one mill at present raises but $13,000 revenue. The expense of the territorial government was about $50,000 per year, all paid by the United States, and this would be withdrawn. The inevitable increase of taxation would divert immigration from Oregon to California and stockraisers and farmers would remove. The state would have to assume a large war debt.[1]
The Oregonian was the only paper opposing the adoption of a state constitution. The Pacific Christian Advocate, a religious paper, in answer to requests to publish contributed articles on one side or the other, declined to do so, excusing itself on the ground that although not deemed to be a party question, a discussion of it would lead to the belief that the paper was taking part in politics.[2] The Statesman, on the other hand, pointed out that nine out of fifteen counties had voted favorably in 1854, and eleven out of seventeen in 1855. It claimed that the only real objection was expense of state government, but the population was already between 50,000 and 60,000, and as Oregon had been longer settled and was greater in number of population, and had more solid wealth than other territories that had become states, it could undertake to maintain and support an economical state government, and thus derive the obvious benefits, both political and pecuniary, that statehood would bring. Such benefits would greatly outweigh the disadvantages. 22 In the same issue, a letter from Delazon Smith was published making a strong appeal for a convention for state
