ional Government that were formally adopted by the Oregonians July 5, 1843, to have of set purpose adopted the laws of Iowa because their action would then commend itself to the friends of the Territory in the East.
The attention of Judge C. B. Bellinger was called to Dr. Herriott's paper and to the notes of Bancroft and Brown. The work of Judge Bellinger on the Oregon Codes, and his special interest in the period of the Provisional Government, make his statement on this matter valuable, if not conclusive. He submits the following:
"I attach no importance to the Bancroft footnote. It is a mere guess of the writer, and is not supported by any known fact. If there had been such a copy as Bancroft refers to, it is probable that the meeting of July 5, 1843, which adopted the laws recommended by the legislative committee appointed at the meeting of May 2nd preceding, would have adopted the New York instead of the Iowa laws. There is nothing to explain a change in the predeliction for the New York laws shown by the meeting of 1841, unless it is the fact that the legislative committee became possessed of the laws of the State of Iowa, and had no other. Brown is to be relied on rather than Bancroft. I knew Brown intimately. It is probable that Brown's authority is Gray, and Gray is the only person, so far as appears, who could speak from actual knowledge. Gray says, of the proceedings of the meeting of 1841, 'I query whether there was a single copy of the laws of that State (New York) in the country for ten years after the last resolution (the resolution of 1841) was passed. I know there was none at the time, and only a single copy of the laws of Iowa two years after.' Gray's History of Oregon, p. 201. Gray's statement ought to be conclusive of the matter. He was a member of the legislative committee of July, 1843. The members of that committee were evidently without legislative experience or legal knowledge. Some of the members of the committee were opposed to sitting with open
