Dr. John McLoughlin, the Father of Oregon Part 14

There are scores of persons in this valley of the early emigrants, who testify to the kindness received at the hands of Dr. McLoughlin. And many there are who would doubtless have perished had it not been for his humane attention. He helped them to descend the Columbia--fed them, clothed them; and now he is accused of 'working diligently to break down the settlements!'

"I shall notice but one more of Mr. Thurston's a.s.sertions in regard to this claim. Mr. Thurston says: 'The Methodist Mission first took this claim.' Now this is an a.s.sertion which any one who knows anything about the history of Oregon City, knows to be utterly without foundation.--On the contrary the said Methodist Mission never had a right to any part of said claim, unless jumping const.i.tutes right.

"In what I have said about Dr. McLoughlin, I have not spoken from interested motives. I never received any favor at his hands, nor do I expect to. But I am ashamed of the course of our Delegate; I think it is unbecoming the Representative of a magnanimous people.

"What must be the feelings of Dr. McLoughlin? A man whose head is whitened by the frosts of perhaps eighty winters! Who, during that long period has been living subject to the nation under whose flag he was born. And who, at that advanced age declares his intention of becoming a citizen of our great Republic.--I say what must be his feelings? and what must be the feelings of all candid men--of all men of honor and magnanimity, who have read Mr. Thurston's letter. And yet this same Honorable (?) Delegate in his address to his const.i.tuents lectures us upon Religion and Morality.

"Very respectfully, yours, "WM. J. BERRY."

DOc.u.mENT N

_Excerpts from speech of Samuel R. Thurston in Congress, December 26, 1850._

December 26, 1850, Thurston attempted to answer, by a speech in Congress, Dr. McLoughlin's letter, published in the _Oregon Spectator_, September 12, 1850. It is a scurrilous speech. Most of its a.s.serted statements of fact are untrue. It is too long to be set forth here in full. It will be found at pages 36 to 45 of the Appendix to volume 23 of the _Congressional Globe_. The italics in this Doc.u.ment N are those appearing in the _Congressional Globe_.

He first discussed the pet.i.tion of the fifty-six persons who signed the pet.i.tion at Oregon City, September 19, 1850, against the pa.s.sage of the eleventh section of the Donation Land Bill, and attempted to show that the pet.i.tion was against Dr. McLoughlin instead of being in his favor.

This was pettifogging. Thurston set forth that he had not been in favor of recognizing in the bill transfers of land by Dr. McLoughlin after March 3, 1849, for the reason that "If such transfers were confirmed in general terms, up to the pa.s.sage of the bill, the whole of what the Doctor claimed would be covered by fict.i.tious transfers for his benefit." Thurston attacked J. Quinn Thornton and Aaron E. Wait, the attorneys of Dr. McLoughlin, and called them names too vile to be inserted in this address.

Referring to Dr. McLoughlin's statement in his letter that the Hudson's Bay Company's business was so managed "in all respects subservient to the best interests of the country, and the duties of religion and humanity," Thurston said: "If to make the settler pay _with his life_ the penalty of settling where they did not want him to, or to oppress him until he was compelled to yield; if tearing down houses over families' heads, and burning them up, and leaving a poor woman in the rain, houseless and homeless; if attempting to break down all American enterprises, and to prevent the settlement of the country--if, sir, to do all these things, and many more, which are hereafter proved, then is the quotation true. If this is their religion, then have they adorned, for the last ten years, the religion they profess." These charges are maliciously false.

Thurston charged that Dr. McLoughlin was "for all practical purposes, as much in, of, and connected with the [Hudson's Bay] Company as he ever was ... yet he comes up here with a hypocritical face and pleads poverty! and says that he has picked up my people out of ditches, mud-puddles, from under the ice, and warmed them into life; which Wait and Thornton virtually testify to.... Who ever heard a Jew or a Gypsy making up a more pitiful face than this." Thurston further said that Dr.

McLoughlin persuaded some of the immigrants of 1842 to go to California; that he provided outfits for them "and took notes, payable in California. And this was done for the purpose of ridding the country of these unwelcome visitors.... That the Doctor was determined to do all he could to prevent the country from finally settling up, and with this object in view, undertook to persuade our early settlers to leave." This is absolutely untrue, except the part that Dr. McLoughlin furnished said immigrants with outfits and took their notes payable in California. Most of these notes were never paid.

Thurston then proceeds to pettifog about his injunction to keep his letter to Congress about the Donation Land Bill "dark till next mail."

He had to pettifog or say it was a forgery. He said he wrote this as he feared the bill "never would pa.s.s, and I dreaded the effect the news of its failure, on the first day, would have on business of the territory.... It was to avoid the general panic that I adopted this course and this is why I requested to have nothing said till the time of trial might come."[67] Thurston was compelled to admit that he knew that Dr. McLoughlin had taken the oath of allegiance to the United States prior to the election in June, 1849, but Thurston said he did not know that Dr. McLoughlin had filed his intentions to become a citizen.

Thurston endeavored to justify himself by technicalities. He knew that the Circuit Courts of the Provisional Government had ceased to exist May 13, 1849, or prior thereto. It was on that day that Governor Lane a.s.signed the Territorial judges, appointed by the President, to their respective districts. Yet Thurston a.s.serted that "The court, or the tribunal, in which Dr. McLoughlin took his oaths was not such a court as the law requires, but was a creature of the Provisional Government." He a.s.serted that George L. Curry, the Clerk of the court, before whom Dr.

McLoughlin took the oath of allegiance and filed his intentions to become an American citizen, did it in his capacity as a clerk of a court of the Provisional Government (which was no longer in existence), instead of in the capacity of a clerk of the new Territorial court, and said that Judge Bryant informed him that this was the case.

May 30, 1849, George L. Curry, if not the _de jure_ clerk, was the _de facto_ and acting clerk of the Territorial District Court, before whom it was lawful and proper to take the oath of allegiance under the United States naturalization law. If, for any reason, Dr. McLoughlin did not comply technically with the law, it was nevertheless his intention to do so. He subscribed and filed two oaths on May 30, 1849. In these he swore it was his intention to become an American citizen and that "I renounce all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign Prince, Potentate, State and Sovereignty, whatsoever and particularly to Victoria, Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and that I will support the Const.i.tution of the United States, and the provisions of 'An Act to establish the Territorial Government of Oregon.'" Under these oaths, or one of them, Dr. McLoughlin became a citizen of the United States September 5, 1851. In admitting him to citizenship the Judge must have found that Dr. McLoughlin's original declaration was sufficient and was filed in a court of competent jurisdiction. And yet Thurston had said in his letter to the House of Representatives and in his speech of May 28, 1850, that Dr. McLoughlin "refuses to become an American citizen."

In this speech of December 26, 1850, Thurston said that if any persons in Oregon owed money to Dr. McLoughlin, he could proceed in the Courts.

This is true. The difficulty was to enforce judgments. Judgments could not then or prior to that time and until long afterwards be enforced against land. An execution could only reach personal property. If a debtor did not wish to pay a debt, he could sell his crops privately in advance, or he could cover them and other personal property by chattel mortgages. Thurston as a lawyer knew the law. The law establishing the Territorial Government of Oregon provided that "all laws heretofore pa.s.sed in said Territory [_i.e._, by the Provisional Government] making grants of land, or otherwise affecting or inc.u.mbering the t.i.tle to lands, shall be, and are hereby declared to be, null and void."

Under the Donation Land Law a settler on public land had merely a possessory right which did not ripen into a t.i.tle to the land until he had "resided upon and cultivated the same for four consecutive years."

It was an estate upon condition. It was not subject to execution sale.

If such a sale could have been made, under a law of the Territory of Oregon, a purchaser would take nothing--not even the possessory right of a settler.[68] The settler was the only one who could complete the four years' residence and cultivation. In fact, it was a long time after the pa.s.sage of the law before a land claim could be lawfully taken up. The settlers really held a kind of squatter's t.i.tle until the Surveyor-General was ready to proceed or to receive applications for surveys. The first notifications were not filed until 1852. Besides, the statute of limitations, for bringing suit on these debts, did not exceed six years.

The case of McLoughlin v. Hoover, 1 _Oregon Reports_, 32, was decided at the December term, 1853, of the Supreme Court of the Territory of Oregon. This case shows that Dr. McLoughlin did bring a suit shortly after September 29, 1852, the exact date not being given in the decision, against John Hoover to recover from Hoover a promissory note for $560 dated October 2, 1845, and payable one year after date. Hoover pleaded the Statute of Limitations. It was held by the Supreme Court of Oregon Territory that at no time under the Provisional or Territorial governments of Oregon was the statute of limitations to recover on notes and accounts for a longer period than six years. But by reason of amendments of the law, that the statute of limitations did not run a longer period than three years succeeding the act of September 29, 1849.

The full six years from the time said note became due would end October 5, 1853, counting three days of grace, but under this decision the statute of limitations had run September 29, 1852, being less than five years from the time said note became due. The statute of limitations does not extinguish a debt. It merely stops the collection of it by law.

In this speech Thurston was compelled to admit that he had no proper foundation for the statement in his letter to Congress that Dr.

McLoughlin had sent word to Fort Hall to turn the immigration to California. He said in this speech that the immigrants to Oregon "at a very early period, perhaps as early as 1842 or 1843, were met with the tale that the Indians were hostile to the immigrants; that they would be cut off if they proceeded further on the Oregon trail; and that this story was told by the officer in charge of Fort Hall, as having been received from Vancouver, [the headquarters of Dr. McLoughlin] and that this same officer advised the emigrants to go to California." This statement is not borne out by the facts. That there was danger to the immigrants in coming to Oregon is shown by the intended ma.s.sacre of the immigrants of 1843, as set forth in this address and in the McLoughlin Doc.u.ment.

Thurston, in this speech, took up the Shortess pet.i.tion and read numerous parts of it. He said in reference to the phrase that the pet.i.tioners hoped that Dr. McLoughlin never would own his land claim, that that is "just what the land bill provides for." Referring to the a.s.sertion in the Shortess pet.i.tion that Dr. McLoughlin "says the land is his, and every person building without his permission is held as a trespa.s.ser," Thurston said: "What do you think of this, Mr. Speaker? An Englishman holding an _American citizen_ a trespa.s.ser for settling on American soil, where the American Government had invited him! This, sir, was before the treaty [of 1846] and before the Provisional Government was formed, and when one American citizen had as good a right to settle there as another, and all a better right than Dr. McLoughlin. Yet this barefaced Jesuit has the effrontery to pretend he did not hold that claim by dint of threats." Thurston does not explain how the American Government invited the immigrants prior to 1847 to settle in Oregon. The truth is that the American settlers who left the East prior to 1849 went on their own initiative. They were neither invited nor helped nor protected by the Government, until after the establishment of the Territorial Government in 1849. Under the Conventions of joint-occupancy Dr. McLoughlin had the same rights, up to the Treaty of 1846, as a British subject, that any citizen of the United States had--no more, no less. This, Thurston as a lawyer, knew.

After quoting further from the Shortess pet.i.tion, Thurston said: "Now, Mr. Speaker, all this was before the Provisional Government was in operation--before the treaty, when no man had any right to meddle with the soil. Who can contemplate the helpless condition of these few and feeble American citizens, at that time and place, struggling for life, and for subsistence, thus kicked and buffeted round at the mercy of one of the most powerful corporations on earth, headed by a man whose intrigues must have furnished Eugene Sue with a clue to his 'Wandering Jew,'--who, I say, sir, can thus contemplate our flesh, and blood, and kindred, with their land, their houses, their all, thus posted up, and declared subject to _any_ disposition this unfeeling man might make of them without shedding tears of pity for their distress.... Now, sir, just turn to my correspondence in letters one and two, where he tells you, if a man settled where the company did not allow him to, he paid the _forfeiture with his life_, or from _necessity_ was compelled to yield. And here, again, the names of Wait and Thornton rise up before me, and while reading their laudations of McLoughlin, I can think of nothing but two Jews lauding Judas Iscariot....

"This pet.i.tion is signed by many persons, many of whom I know, who are now living in Oregon. I can bear unqualified testimony to their character in society, to their honor and to their veracity. I undertake to say, that not a word is uttered in it but the truth, and it is susceptible of any reasonable proof. I know the gentleman who wrote the original, whom to know is to respect, to listen to, to believe. He is a gentleman of the highest standing in Oregon, of some twelve or fourteen years' residence, and who would be universally believed on any subject on which he would presume to speak. That gentleman informs me that every word of it is true to the letter.... If in the mouth of two or three witnesses all things are established, then surely sixty-five men are good evidence of the facts stated in the pet.i.tion to which their names were attached, and, then, you and the country can judge whether this man McLoughlin, by whom all the abuses here complained of were dictated, is ent.i.tled to receive gratuities of the American Government for such rascalities, or whether the people of Oregon owe him a debt of grat.i.tude which they refuse to pay."

Thurston set forth the letter of Dr. McLoughlin to Robert Shortess, dated at Vancouver, April 13, 1843, in which Dr. McLoughlin wrote: "I am informed that you have circulated a pet.i.tion for signatures, complaining of me, and of the Hudson's Bay Company. I hope you will, in common fairness, give me a copy of the pet.i.tion, with the names of those who signed it, that I may know what is said against us, and who those _are_ who think they have cause of complaint against us." Thurston said: "The _names_ must be given, and for what? I will not say whether as a sure guide to the tomahawk of the Indian, or as a precursor to death by combined and grinding oppression--I leave this to the witnesses who have already spoken. But could you read in the records of heaven the deeds of this power in Oregon, while you would admire the consummate skill with which they were conducted, your whole moral nature would be shocked by the baseness of the design, and the means for their accomplishment."

Thurston in this speech, without giving names, gave excerpts from a number of letters he had received, sustaining his actions against Dr.

McLoughlin in the Donation Land Bill. Shameful as Thurston's actions were against Dr. McLoughlin, Thurston had reason to believe that his actions were sustained and approved by leaders and members of the party which had elected him. Those who thus abetted Thurston in his misstatements and actions against Dr. McLoughlin were as culpable as Thurston was--they became his accessories. Some of these afterwards were ashamed of their actions against Dr. McLoughlin. Their repentances, although late, are commendable.

DOc.u.mENT O

_Correspondence of S. R. Thurston, Nathaniel J. Wyeth, Robert C.

Winthrop and Dr. John McLoughlin, published in the "Oregon Spectator,"

April 3, 1851._

"Chicopee, Ma.s.s., Nov. 16, 1850."

"Capt. Nath. J. Wyeth:

"My Dear Sir--You will excuse me, I am sure, when I a.s.sure you I am from Oregon, and her delegate to the Congress of the United States, for addressing you for a purpose of interest to the country to which I belong.

"I desire you to give me as correct a description as you can at this late period, of the manner in which you and your party, and your enterprise in Oregon, were treated by the Hudson's Bay Company, and particularly by Doc. John McLoughlin, then its Chief Factor. This Dr. McLoughlin has, since you left the country, rendered his name odious among the people of Oregon, by his endeavors to prevent the settlement of the country, and to cripple its growth.

"Now that he wants a few favors of our Government, he pretends that he has been the long tried friend of Americans and American enterprise west of the mountains. Your early reply will be highly appreciated, both for its information, and your relation to my country.

"I am, sir, yours very truly, "S. R. THURSTON."

"Cambridge, Nov. 21, 1850."

"Hon. Sam'l R. Thurston:

"Dear Sir--Your favor of the 16th inst., was received on the 19th. The first time I visited the Columbia, in the autumn of 1832, I reached Vancouver with a disorganized party of ten persons, the remnant of twenty-four who left the States. Wholly worn out and disheartened, we were received cordially, and liberally supplied, and there the party broke up. I returned to the States in the Spring of 1833 with one man. One of the party, Mr. John Ball, remained and planted wheat on the Willamette, a little above Camp du Sable, having been supplied with seed and implements from Vancouver, then under the charge of John McLoughlin, Esq., and this gentleman I believe to have been the first American who planted wheat in Oregon. I returned to the country in the autumn of 1834, with a large party and more means, having on the way built Fort Hall, and there met a brig which I sent around the Horn. In the winter and spring of 1835, I planted wheat on the Willamette and on Wappatoo Island.

"The suffering and distressed of the early American visitors and settlers on the Columbia were always treated by Hudson's Bay Company's agents, and particularly so by John McLoughlin, Esq., with consideration and kindness, more particularly the Methodist Missionaries, whom I brought out in the autumn of 1834. He supplied them with the means of transportation, seeds, implements of agriculture and building, cattle and food for a long time.

"I sincerely regret that the gentleman, as you state, has become odious to his neighbors in his old age.

"I am your ob't serv't, "NATH. J. WYETH."

"Cambridge, Nov. 28, 1850."

"Hon. Robert C. Winthrop:

"Dear Sir--I have received a letter from Sam'l R. Thurston, of which the following is a portion: