USA > Oregon > History of Oregon, Vol. I, 1834-1848 > Part 36
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78
3 Annals of Congress, 1821-2, 1034.
4 See Hist. Northwest Coast, and Hist. Alaska, this series.
353
BAYLIES OF MASSACHUSETTS.
especially interesting.5 But from the remarks of Wright of Maryland it evidently awakened no enthu- siasm in the minds of his listeners; and it is shown by Floyd's admissions that he had been called fanci- ful and a bold projector, that few persons either in or out of congress were as yet much agitated over the United States claim to the Oregon Territory.
The second speech of importance was by Mr Baylies of Massachusetts, who began by saying that all the objections to the bill which he had heard had been outside of the house; and of these he was willing to admit that some were weighty, and all plausible. The first, that of the expense of the territorial estab- lishment with no immediate prospect of a revenue, was, he thought, not valid: to prove which position he offered a correspondence with the collector of cus- toms at New Bedford, showing the profits of the whale-fishery, and estimating its annual value in the Pacific, with the vessels already employed, at $500,000, while the profits of the same business to Nantucket were not short of $1,000,000 annually. "A settle- ment on the Columbia," said this correspondent, "if properly conducted, would insure to our nation an immense source of wealth," not only on account of the whale-fisheries, but of the lumber trade, it being known that a vessel loaded with spars from the Columbia River had recently arrived at Val- paraiso.6
The objections that by extending the territory of the United States too far it would be exposed to dis- memberment, and that by occupying the Columbia the chances of war would be increased, were met by Baylies with arguments not necessary to be repro- duced here. He supported the position taken by Floyd of the value of the fur trade on the North- west Coast, and advanced many proofs of the advan- tage of colonies to an empire; the arguments in favor
5 December 17, 1822. See Hist. Northwest Coast, this series.
6 Annals of Congress, 1822-3, 415. HIST. OR., VOL. I. 23
354
OREGON BEFORE CONGRESS.
of a settlement on the Columbia being chiefly of a commercial nature.
Tucker. of Virginia expressed surprise that "three long and eloquent speeches" should have been made in support of a measure to which he had intended to give a silent negative. He did not object to the occu- pation of the Columbia River because it was visionary, but because he thought it too practicable, and likely to draw off population and capital to a point where they would be less useful than where they then were; and because the people of the Pacific coast would, by their local position, carry on their trade with China and the Orient rather than with the Atlantic states. He could not see what interest the Pacific and Atlan- tic states would have in common, and mentioned the appalling fact that the mouths of the Mississippi and the Columbia, by any route then known, were four thousand miles asunder ! Colonies he declared were of no advantage to the parent country, unless that country enjoyed a monopoly of the colonial trade, which in this instance the United States could not hope to do.
The 13th of January, 1823, Colden of New York spoke, giving facts concerning seal-fishing designed to favor the bill; and also an interesting history of the trade with China, showing that although that country was said to be the sink of coin, the cargoes brought from there were sold in Europe at a profit of more than twice the cost in China, and for coin. He cited also the treasury report for 1821, which gave infor- mation of seventeen vessels from the United States sailing for the Northwest Coast, which he took to mean the vicinity of the Columbia River, carrying goods to the value of $400,000; and although he was not informed who were the purchasers, he thought under such circumstances the mouth of the Columbia must be a point of importance to commerce. Unlike his predecessors in the debate, Colden referred to the subject of title, and gave his views of the security of
355
MALLARY OF VERMONT.
the United States claim, which were entirely favor able to it.
Mallary of Vermont did not wish for the establish ment of a civil government on the Columbia, before there were people in that territory over whom it might be exercised; but approved of occupation by a military force only, with encouragement to settlers. As to the rest, he was decidedly in favor of occupying the coun- try, and entertained no fear of consequences. The smallest nation of Europe would not hesitate to plant her colonies in any part of the world; and yet Amer- ican enterprise, so often vaunted, dared not venture beyond the Rocky Mountains. The subject, he de- clared, occupied a large share of the public attention, and the action of congress was anxiously looked for. The only objection he found to the argument which had preceded him was the advocacy of the colonial system by Baylies, to which he could not agree, as being foreign to the principles of the American re- public.
Then followed Tracy of New York, and overturned all the specious reasoning of his colleague, Mr Col- den, by giving information of the real nature of the country which would be embraced in the thirty square miles of territory over which the United States, it was proposed, should extend its laws and protec- tion. Tracy chanced to have made the acquaintance of several gentlemen who had been at the mouth of the Columbia, from whom he had learned that the imaginary Eden of the gentleman who had spoken in favor of the bill was an inhospitable wilderness, con- fined within a rugged and iron-bound coast. The entrance to the Columbia was dangerous, and only with a fair and free wind could be undertaken; the climate was bleak and inhospitable; so humid and with so feeble a sun that the grains could hardly be raised, though the soil was deep and good. For a long distance from the ocean the country was so broken and rugged that no place could be found for a
356
OREGON BEFORE CONGRESS.
settlement of more than a few families. Only the Willamette Valley afforded any prospects of an agri- cultural nature, and these were not alluring. And as for the country east of the Cascade Mountains, it was nothing but a waste of sand and gravel.7
Mr Wood, another member from New York, argued against the passage of the bill, because, first of all, there was no necessity for such a measure. No one had denied the jurisdiction of the United States gov- ernment. None of the commercial portion of the public had petitioned for it; not a single memorial from any quarter could be found upon the table. No public interest demanded it; and it was not to the benefit of the country at large to force the settlement of the Columbia River. Such a settlement must result either in a colony, which would be of no advan- tage to the government, or an independent state, which would take to itself the commerce of the Pacific, to the permanent loss of the United States, both in citizens and trade. To these considerations must be added the expense attending the establishing of so remote a territory, and the danger of provoking Indian wars, which would retard the growth of the new states on the border. To effect a settlement, communication by land would be indispensable; and a chain of military posts must be extended from St Louis to the Columbia, where a strong fortification must be erected, and a considerable naval force main- tained for its protection; all of which would more than exhaust the profits of the trade in that quarter. Wood's plan was to permit a company to occupy that region, to extinguish the Indian title, to form a settle- ment, and when they were able, to form an indepen- dent government; 8 but in his opinion the longer this was delayed the better.
This account of the Columbia was probably given by some of the members of the Pacific fur company. Franchere mentions that they could raise nothing but roots at Astoria. It is not surprising that as the fur companies confined their explorations to the rivers, which were bordered by heavy forests, such opinions of the country prevailed.
៛ Precisely what happened, with this difference: The company occupying
· 357
GENERAL DISCUSSION.
At the close of this day's arguments some amend- ments were offered to the bill, Mallary moving to make the occupation merely military, over the ter- ritory north of the 42d parallel, and west of the Rocky Mountains, which section should be known as the Territory of Oregon; a fort was to be erected at the mouth of the Columbia River; as soon as ex- pedient the Indian title to a tract of country not exceeding thirty miles square, including the place selected for the fort, should be extinguished. To every head of a family settling in the territory should be granted three hundred and twenty acres of land; to an unmarried settler, farmer, or mechanic, two hundred acres; this to apply only to citizens of the United States, and for six years only after the extin- guishment of the Indian title. The president was authorized to open a port of entry for the territory, and to appoint officers for the revenue service, the revenue laws of the United States being extended to the territory. An appropriation of $60,000 was also made by the amendments, to carry into effect the provisions of the bill.
The consideration of Floyd's bill being resumed on the 24th, Walker of North Carolina made a motion to amend by inserting Columbia in place of Oregon as the name of the territory to be erected, which did not prevail; and Floyd amended Mallary's amendment, so as to call the tract of country over which the Indian title should be extinguished, and where the fort should be erected, the District of Astoria, the object of which was to restore the original name of the establishment at the mouth of the Columbia made under the auspices of Astor. This amendment was accepted. Smith of Virginia and others then spoke for and against the bill. Baylies replied at some length to the objections of the opponents of the bill that the Rocky Moun- tains were the natural boundary of the United States.
was British; the Indians, rather than their title, became extinguished; and the settlers (American) came in, and formed an independent government.
358
OREGON BEFORE CONGRESS.
"As we reach the Rocky Mountains," said the advo- cate of the occupation of Oregon, "we should be unwise did we not pass that narrow space which separates the mountains from the ocean, to secure advantages far greater than the existing advantages of all the country between the Mississippi and the mountains. Gentle- men are talking of natural boundaries. Sir, our natural boundary is the Pacific Ocean. The swelling tide of our population must and will roll on until that mighty ocean interposes its waters, and limits our territorial empire. Then, with two oceans washing our shores, the commercial wealth of the world is ours, and imagi- nation can hardly conceive the greatness, the grandeur, and the power that await us."
Baylies then reviewed the statements of his oppo- nents that the country was sterile and the climate inhospitable; that the mouth of the Columbia was a bad entrance and worse departure, and the harbor indifferent, quoting from the official reports of Prevost, Lewis and Clarke, Cook, and Vancouver. He again presented the facts, as they appeared to him, con- nected with the commerce of the Pacific, present and to come. He reverted to remarks made in debate that there was nothing to fear from Russia, because the autocrat of that country had himself fixed the southern limit of his territory at 51°, and to other remarks that if Russia chose to enforce the limits set the United States could not successfully encounter that power; to both of which conclusions he took ex- ceptions, and also to the prediction that the proposed settlement could not sustain itself against the savages, instancing the early New England settlers, who for fifty years maintained peace with the savages, and when at last they were compelled to fight, vanquished them.
On the following day, being the last of the dis- cussion, Breckenridge of Kentucky made a speech in which he opposed the bill, because as it now stood it provided neither legislation nor courts; all the power
359
A NEW BILL.
and authority being confided to a military chieftain, in whose hands were placed the legislative, judicial, and executive functions of the country, subject only to the control of the president; and this he denounced as unconstitutional, also denying the right of congress to colonize. Or if it was pretended that the step con- templated was preparatory to admission into the union within any short period, had the promoters of this scheme thought of the probable consequences? Were they prepared to go to war to protect the territorial or commercial rights of Oregon, and to extend to that state equal laws, and afford it equal rights and privi- leges, when there could not be any community of interest with the rest of the confederacy? He looked upon the proposition as impolitic and dangerous; upon the appropriation to carry it out as entirely inadequate ; upon the troops who should be stationed on the Co- lumbia as the prisoners in their own fort of the beleaguering Indians, unless, indeed, a naval force should be stationed there for their protection. He doubted if the possession of the country would add anything to the validity of the claim of the United States; or that if it should fall into the hands of a foreign power, that would weaken the title of the United States. He was opposed to emigration while the population of the states and territories was not yet sufficient to occupy the public lands within their boundaries. Not until their posterity, he said, should occupy the seats in congress which the supporters of the bill under discussion now filled would the measure proposed be justifiable.
On the 27th the yeas and nays were taken to decide whether the house were really determined to act upon the subject at that session, when it was found that the vote stood sixty-one for, to one hundred against, taking up the bill. The influence of the discussion was ob- servable, however, when on the 22d of February Little of Maryland presented a memorial from eighty farm- ers and mechanics within his district, praying congress
360
OREGON BEFORE CONGRESS.
to pass the bill, and intimating their desire to emigrate to, and for the improvement of, that country.9
At the next session of congress, in December, on motion of Mr Floyd, a committee on the expediency of occupying the Columbia was again appointed, con- sisting of Floyd, Gurley of Louisiana, Scott of Mis- souri, Hayden of New York, Bassett of Virginia, Frost of New York, and Baylies of the former com- mittee, with leave to report a bill; and on the 19th of January, 1824, Floyd presented a bill to authorize the occupation of the Columbia or Oregon River, which was twice read, and referred to a committee of the whole house on the state of the union. This bill, unlike that immediately preceding it, authorized the president not only to establish a military colony, but to erect a territorial government whenever he might deem it expedient to do so-Floyd's first proposition, but one which was opposed by a majority of the friends of military occupation. The bill also granted a section of land to actual settlers, instead of the former amount.
On the 26th a resolution, of which Floyd was the author, was agreed to by the house, requesting the president to cause to be laid before the house an esti- mate of the expense which would be incurred by trans- porting two hundred troops from Council Bluffs to the mouth of the Columbia. The reply by the war department was that the transportation of the troops by the Missouri and Columbia rivers, with boats, horses, and equipments, would be $30,000; and the transportation by sea of the heavy baggage, ordnance, and supplies would amount to not more than $14,000 more; the report being referred to the committee on the occupation of the Columbia or Oregon River, and by them laid before the house. The estimates con- tained in this report were made by Thomas S. Jessup, quartermaster-general. He recommended a post to be established at the Mandan villages, to control the
9 Annals of Congress, 1822-3, 355, 396, 411, 583, 602, 678, 691, 696, 700.
361
THE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE.
natives in that quarter, and hold in check the British fur companies; another at the head of navigation on the Missouri, to control the Blackfoot, and remove the British companies from that part of the territory, as well as to serve as an intermediate supply post, and a depot of trade for the Indian department. To keep open communication through the mountains, he ad- vised the establishment of a small post between the Missouri and the Columbia; and on the Columbia and its tributaries three other posts. These were to give protection to American traders for the time being, and when the convention with Great Britain should have expired, to remove the traders of that nation from the territory. As to the expense, it would be trifling. Once established, in a few years the cost would be greatly diminished by farms, mills, and the good grazing of the country in the interior; and the posts on the Columbia could be cheaply supplied with beef and wheat from California, and salt from an island on the Lower California coast.
Floyd's bill did not come up for discussion till the following December. In the mean time much infor- mation had been gained concerning new routes to the Columbia by passes recently discovered by American fur-traders, and other matters of interest in debate. The speech with which Floyd opened the discussion was not only in answer to former arguments, but was loaded with accumulations of facts concerning the geography and topography of the country; but more than anything else, concerning the commerce of the United States between 1804 and 1822, interesting even at this day, and intended to exhibit the existing necessity for a port upon the Pacific coast to serve as the American mart for the precious goods of the Asi- atic continent and islands of the oriental seas.
The message of President Monroe had contained a recommendation of the propriety of establishing a mil- itary post at the mouth of the Columbia, or at some other point within the acknowledged limits of the
362
OREGON BEFORE CONGRESS.
United States territory,10 for the protection of the increasing commerce of the Pacific; and of making an appropriation for employing a frigate, with an officer of the corps of engineers, to explore the mouth of the Columbia and the adjacent coasts, with a view to selecting the site for such a military station But Floyd contended that a territorial establishment was quite as necessary as a military one, it being evidently unjust to the settlers who should go there to place them under military law, or subject them to the ca- price of the commander of a force of two hundred men, which it was proposed to station on the Columbia.
Considerable opposition was made by members to the proposed land grants, and by others that clause was defended half in derision. "After all," said Trimble of Kentucky, "what is the value of the land proposed to be given as a bounty to the first settlers ? In that remote region the land as yet is worth noth- ing, it has no value ... But, in the mean while, give your people the bounty land and let them go and inake a settlement, and form a nucleus around which other emigrants may collect, and time will gradually consolidate them into a powerful community, and your treasury will be relieved from the annual expense of maintaining the proposed military post." Smyth of Virginia was opposed to the territorial establish- ment and grants of land, on the ground that too rapid an increase of the states, and bringing too much land into market, was already severely felt by the older communities, which were perpetually drained of the flower of their population-an evil which would in- crease the further the limits of the United States were extended. In his judgment, it would be well if the ultimate limit were fixed by a line far enough west of the Mississippi to include two tiers of states.
In reply to these and other objections, Floyd con- tended that, admitting them, and that the future state of Oregon should separate from the confederacy,
13 Congressional Debatex, 1824-5, i., app. 7.
363
BENTON'S RESOLUTION.
it would still be better that the region embraced by it should be peopled from the United States than from other nations, with whom we might-nay, must -have to go to war; and peopled by other nations it would be unless the American people took measures to prevent it.
In none of the arguments was the question of title touched upon, except to suggest caution in coming in conflict with the terms of the existing treaty. No doubt was ever expressed of the validity of the claim of the United States. When Buchanan of Penn- sylvania objected that the establishment of a port of entry would interfere with the treaty, Floyd ex- plained that the section objected to directed the president to open a port of entry only whenever he should "deem the public good may require it;" and that it was intended to put the citizens of the United States as early as possible on an advantageous footing for prosecuting commercial enterprises. When it was feared that Great Britain might look upon the found- ing of a military establishment as an act of bad faith, Smyth replied that Great Britain at that moment had a military post on the Columbia, and that the rights of the two governments under the treaty were at least equal.
At length, after four years of constant effort, on the 23d of December, 1824, Mr Floyd had the satis- faction of seeing his bill for the occupation of the Columbia River and the establishment of the territory of Oregon passed in the house by a vote of one hundred and thirteen to fifty-seven, and sent to the senate. 11.
So far discussion had been confined to the house, except in February 1823, when Benton introduced a resolution in the senate that the committee on military affairs be instructed to inquire into the expediency of
11 Congressional Debates, 1824-5, i. 13-26, 28, 36, 38, 39-42, 44, 59.
364
OREGON BEFORE CONGRESS.
appropriating money to enable the president to take and retain possession of the territory of the United States on the north-west coast of America. Benton explained that his motive in offering the resolution was to prevent the territory in question from falling into the hands of another power.
When Floyd's bill was brought up in the senate, in February 1825, it found an advocate in Barbour of Virginia, who believed both in the right and the policy of the United States in forming an establishment on the Oregon River,12 the arguments used being in essence the same as presented by the friends of the bill in the house. Dickerson of New Jersey took opposite grounds. He not only contended that the military occupation of the Oregon would justly lead to war with Great Britain, but that the territory would never, in any event, become a state of the federal union. He ridiculed the idea of a senator from Oregon to Washington City going and coming in less than a year, whether he travelled overland, or by sea around Cape Horn, or through Bering's Straits round the north coast of the continent. "It is true," he said, "this passage is not yet discovered, except upon our maps; but it will be as soon as Oregon shall be a state." 13 When Dickerson came to talk of cost, he had reason and common sense on his side. The appropriation of $50,000, he said, was a mere baga- telle. A sum ten times larger would be required to carry into effect the provisions of the bill; to prove which he cited the expense of the Yellowstone expe- dition, $255,000, besides other expenses which swelled the amount to $300,000. At that rate it would require a million of money to establish a post on the Oregon, and other posts at proper intervals across the conti- nent. Besides the wrong to the natives of despoiling them of their territory, Oregon could never be of any
12 The bill as it passed the house was amended so as to drop the words 'Columbia or' and to read 'the Oregon River.
13 Congressional Debates, 1824-5, i. 692.
365
AN INTERVAL.
advantage to the United States, and the best use that could be made of it was to leave it as a retreat for the red men. From Council Bluffs to the Rocky Moun- tains the country was sterile, without wood or water, and could never be cultivated.14 The mountains were inhospitable, and altogether the only purpose to which this region could be devoted was a range for buffaloes, and to serve as a frontier to prevent the too great expansion of the settlements.
To this Benton replied by giving a résumé of the arguments for the United States title, with which the reader of my Northwest Coast is familiar; and thus closed the debates on the subject of the occupation of the Oregon Territory for a term of years, the bill being laid on the table, from which it was never taken to be voted upon in the senate,
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.