Dr. John McLoughlin, the Father of Oregon Part 6

Thurston attempted to reply to this letter of Dr. McLoughlin, published in the _Oregon Spectator_, in a speech made in Congress December 26, 1850.[46] With all its false statements this speech utterly failed to justify the actions of Thurston against Dr. McLoughlin.

Lieutenant Neil M. Howison, of the United States Navy, came to Oregon in 1846, in charge of the United States schooner "Shark." He made a report on Oregon to the Commander of the Pacific squadron. The report is dated at San Francisco, February 1, 1847. It was printed by order of the House of Representatives, at Was.h.i.+ngton, in 1848, more than two years prior to Thurston's speech. It is Miscellaneous Doc.u.ment No. 29 of the first session of the 30th Congress. In this report, after speaking in praise of Dr. McLoughlin, Howison said of him: "He resides now altogether at Oregon City ... and has, by his advice and a.s.sistance, done more than any other man towards the rapid development of the resources of this country." Lieutenant Howison also said, in this report, that Dr.

McLoughlin "has settled himself on the south side of the river [Columbia] with full expectation of becoming a citizen of the United States, and I hope the government at home will duly appreciate him."

In the report of Dr. Elijah White, dated Willamette Valley, Oregon, November 15, 1843, to J. M. Porter, Secretary of War, Dr. White said: "And here allow me to say, the seasonable service, in which hundreds of dollars were gratuitously expended in a.s.sisting such numbers of our poor emigrant citizens down the Columbia to the Willamette, ent.i.tles Gov.

McLoughlin, saying nothing of his previous fatherly and fostering care of this colony, to the honorable consideration of the members of this government. And I hope, as he is desirous to settle with his family in this country, and has made a claim at the falls of the Willamette, his claim will be honored in such a manner as to make him conscious that we, as a nation, are not insensible to his numerous acts of benevolence and hospitality towards our countrymen. Sir, in the midst of slander, envy, jealousy, and, in too many instances, of the blackest ingrat.i.tude, his unceasing, never tiring hospitality affects me, and makes him appear in a widely different light than too many would have him and his worthy a.s.sociates appear before the world."[47]

_Protests against Thurston's Actions._

As shown in Dr. McLoughlin's printed letter of September 12, 1850, Thurston had sent to a confidant in Oregon, with instructions for secrecy, a printed copy of his letter to the House of Representatives.

He also sent a printed copy of the bill for the Donation Land Law. These arrived in Oregon late in August or early in September, 1850. The eleventh section of the latter began to be noised about, and Thurston's friends, who were not in the conspiracy, met the charge with scornful denials. They said such a thing was not possible. But it was.[48] There were Oregon pioneers who protested. Before the law pa.s.sed, when the intended action of Thurston became known, in relation to said section eleven, on September 19, 1850, a public meeting was held in Oregon City.

Resolutions were pa.s.sed declaring that the selection of the Oregon City claim for an university reservation was uncalled for by any considerable portion of the citizens of the Territory, and was invidious and unjust to Dr. McLoughlin; and that he "merits the grat.i.tude of mult.i.tudes of persons in Oregon for the timely and long-continued a.s.sistance rendered by him in the settlement of this Territory." At the same time a memorial to Congress was signed by fifty-six persons, which set forth that Dr.

McLoughlin had taken up the Oregon City claim like other claims in the Territory, and it had been held by him in accordance with the Provisional and Territorial governments of Oregon; that the memorialists have ever regarded it as ent.i.tled to protection as fully as other claims, without an intimation to the contrary from any official source until that time; that under this impression, both before and especially since March 4, 1849, large portions of it in blocks and lots had been purchased in good faith by many citizens of Oregon, who had erected valuable buildings thereon, in many instances, in the expectation of having a complete and sufficient t.i.tle when Congress should grant a t.i.tle to Dr. McLoughlin, as was confidently expected; that since March 4, 1849, he had donated for county, educational, charitable, and religious purposes more than two hundred lots. They, therefore, remonstrated against the pa.s.sage of the bill in its present form, believing that it would work a "severe, inequitable, unnecessary, and irremediable injustice."[49] There were no telegraph lines in Oregon or California in those days. And the bill was a law eight days thereafter.

I am happy to say that among those who took part in these proceedings and signed this memorial were my father, James D. Holman, a pioneer of 1846, and my uncle, Woodford C. Holman, a pioneer of 1845. October 26, 1850, a public meeting was held at Salem, the stronghold of the Mission Party. At this meeting a committee on resolutions was appointed. The resolutions reported by the committee were adopted. They "highly approved all the actions of Samuel R. Thurston in Congress," and said "that facts well known in Oregon will sustain him in all he has said about Dr. McLoughlin and the H. B. Company." Another of these resolutions heartily approved the course taken by Thurston, in Congress upon the Donation Land Bill "especially that part which relates to the Oregon City claim," and "that if that claim should be secured to Dr.

McLoughlin it would, in effect, be donating land to the H. B. Company."

Another of these resolutions was, "That in the opinion of this meeting, the children of Oregon have a better right to the balance of that claim [Oregon City claim] than Dr. McLoughlin." Another of these resolutions was, "That the H. B. Company, with Dr. McLoughlin as their fugleman, have used every means that could be invented by avarice, duplicity, cunning, and deception to r.e.t.a.r.d American settlement, and cripple the growth of American interests in Oregon."[50]

There are certain qualities in some men which move them never to forgive a favor bestowed on them; to ruin those they have wronged or cheated; to endeavor to cover with obloquy those they have lied about; and to seek to hurt any one of better quality than they are. As a native son of Oregon I am ashamed of some of its pioneers and their actions. But in such a movement as the early settling of Oregon, there were, of necessity, some men of coa.r.s.e fiber, and of doubtful integrity and honor. But such men were rare exceptions. To the honor of the overwhelming majority of the Oregon pioneers, be it said that they took no part in these actions against Dr. McLoughlin, nor did they endorse or sympathize with Thurston's actions and those of his co-conspirators against Dr. McLoughlin.

It must be borne in mind that many thousands of people, men, women, and children, came to Oregon in the immigrations after 1846. There were probably in the immigrations of 1847 to 1850, inclusive, an aggregate of more than ten thousand people, the number of men being in the ratio of about one to four. The immigration of 1847 was composed of over four thousand persons. These later immigrants did not experience the difficulties which beset the earlier immigrants along the Columbia River and from there to the Willamette Valley. They did not need the a.s.sistance of Dr. McLoughlin which the immigrants of 1843, 1844, and 1845 did. They found Oregon City a small but thriving settlement. Some of them were easily led to believe that Dr. McLoughlin was not ent.i.tled to his land claim, which they thought was a valuable one, especially as he was technically a British subject. But most of them were friendly to him for his kindness to them, and for what he had done for the earlier immigrants. They appreciated that he was justly ent.i.tled to his land claim. The love of justice and fair play were predominant traits of most Oregon pioneers.

_The Oregon Donation Land Law._

The Donation Land Law pa.s.sed and was approved by the President September 27, 1850. Section 4 "granted to every white settler or occupant of the public lands, American half-breed Indians included, above the age of eighteen years, being a citizen of the United States, or having made a declaration, according to law, of his intention to become a citizen, or who shall make such declaration on or before the first day of December, eighteen hundred and fifty-one, now residing in such territory, or who shall become a resident thereof on or before the first day of December, 1850, and who shall have resided upon and cultivated the same for four consecutive years, and shall otherwise conform to the provisions of this act," 320 acres of land, if a single man, or if a married man, 640 acres, 320 acres being for his wife. The last sentence of Section 4 is as follows: "Provided further, however, that this section shall not be so construed as to allow those claiming rights under the treaty with Great Britain, relative to the Oregon territory, to claim both under this grant and the treaty, but merely to secure them the election and confine them to a single grant of land."

Section eleven of said Donation Law is as follows: "Sec. 11. And be it further enacted, That what is known as the 'Oregon City Claim,'

excepting the Abernethy Island, which is hereby confirmed to the legal a.s.signs of the Willamette Milling and Trading Companies, shall be set apart and be at the disposal, of the Legislative a.s.sembly, the proceeds thereof to be applied, by said Legislative a.s.sembly, to the establishment and endowment of a university, to be located at such place in the territory as the Legislative a.s.sembly may designate; Provided, however, That all lots and parts of lots in said claim, sold or granted by Doctor John McLoughlin, previous to the fourth of March, eighteen hundred and forty-nine, shall be confirmed to the purchaser or donee, or their a.s.signs, to be certified to the commissioner of the general land office by the surveyor-general, and patents to issue on said certificates, as in other cases: Provided, further, That nothing in this act contained shall be so construed and executed as in any way to destroy or affect any rights to land in said territory, holden or claimed under the provisions of the treaty or treaties existing between this country and Great Britain." By the "Oregon City claim" is meant Dr.

McLoughlin's land claim.

This section eleven is unjust in its treatment of Dr. McLoughlin. Not that Congress was to blame. It did not know the facts. Did not the first Delegate from Oregon advocate it? Did not the first Territorial Chief Justice of Oregon then in Was.h.i.+ngton, advise it? And did not the Delegate and the Chief Justice say that Dr. McLoughlin was so dangerous and unprincipled a man as not be ent.i.tled to his land claim? And that he refused to become an American citizen? There was not even a recognition of Dr. McLoughlin's right to the improvements which he had placed on his land claim. And there, in all its infamy, said section eleven stands on the statute books today. If the a.s.signs of the Milling Company were ent.i.tled to Abernethy Island, why should not the courts have settled the matter according to law and justice, as other contested land claims were settled?

_The Conspiracy Effective._

The motives and scheme of the conspirators to deprive Dr. McLoughlin of his land claim were very simple but effective. They desired to obtain Abernethy Island, which was a part of Dr. McLoughlin's land claim, for the a.s.signs of the Oregon Milling Company. They desired to deprive Dr.

McLoughlin of the rest of his land claim to wreak their malice against him, and at the same time, by statute pa.s.sed by Congress, to have their actions against him apparently justified. Theirs was an uneasy conscience. It was, therefore, necessary to make it appear to Congress that Dr. McLoughlin was not only not ent.i.tled to his land claim nor any part of it, but that he should not have it under any circ.u.mstances; that Dr. McLoughlin was a man dangerous to Oregon, its people, and their interests, and had unfairly tried to prevent its settlement by citizens of the United States; that he refused to become an American citizen; and that he was not really trying to get the land claim for himself, but for the Hudson's Bay Company, although they knew his resignation had become effective in 1846. Having so wronged Dr. McLoughlin, they still did not dare to try to get the whole claim. To keep Dr. McLoughlin, or his heirs, from ever getting it, they tried to bribe the people of Oregon by providing that his land claim, less Abernethy Island, should be used for the establishment of an university, which would be for the benefit of all the people of Oregon. It was a cunning scheme. Thurston's reward was to be a re-election as Delegate to Congress. He died before he could be re-elected.

There was great rejoicing in Oregon, at first, on the pa.s.sage of the Donation Land Law. Every settler, except Dr. McLoughlin, could now have his land claim, for the t.i.tle to which he had waited so long. A great university was to be built, without cost to anyone, except Dr.

McLoughlin and his heirs. This was long before the discussion about using "tainted money." But the reaction against Thurston soon began. The newspapers printed letters against Thurston's actions in vilifying Dr.

McLoughlin and in taking away his land claim. Thurston's party papers began to mention or to advocate other available men[51] for Thurston's position as delegate to Congress.[52]

_Career and Death of Thurston._

Even had the Mission Party, at the next election, been strong enough to have elected Thurston, had he lived, his political career would probably not have continued long. April 9, 1851, at the age of thirty-five years he died at sea off Acapulco, Mexico, while returning to Oregon.

Thurston's letter, speeches, and actions against Dr. McLoughlin are the one great blot on his career. Thurston was a man of ability, a fluent speaker, a profuse writer of letters, of untiring energy, but inclined to be vindictive, and was not careful about the truth of his statements concerning a person he opposed or disliked. He made quite a reputation during the short time he was in Congress. He was quite popular in Oregon until his actions against Dr. McLoughlin became known. But for his actions against Dr. McLoughlin his memory would even now be highly regarded in Oregon. The pa.s.sage of the Donation Land Law was largely due to his efforts. In spite of said section eleven that law gave great satisfaction to many people in Oregon. Up to that time no settler had more than a squatter's right. Man is naturally selfish. Notwithstanding the treatment of Dr. McLoughlin by this law, many settlers were pleased that they could now secure t.i.tles to their lands, and to that extent were grateful to Thurston.

Thurston secured appropriations for Oregon aggregating one hundred and ninety thousand dollars. Of this one hundred thousand dollars were for expenses of the Cayuse Indian War. He introduced and worked for many bills favorable to Oregon and busied himself in looking after the interests of Oregon and his const.i.tuents. He wrote a great number of letters, which were published in the _Oregon Spectator_, calling attention to what he was doing in Congress and thus kept his name continuously before the people, for he was a skillful politician. But his alliance with leaders of the Mission Party was a political error.

This address is about Dr. McLoughlin. I have not attempted to give the life of Thurston, nor a history of the Methodist Mission. To speak only of Thurston's actions against Dr. McLoughlin might be taken to mean that Thurston did nothing else while in Congress. In estimating Thurston's actions in Congress, those that are to his credit must be taken into account as well as those which are not. His actions in regard to Dr.

McLoughlin's land claim were an unfortunate bid for popularity, which reacted on him and his reputation. Thurston's untrue and unjust statements, his despicable actions, and his false and malicious charges against Dr. McLoughlin are indefensible. Thurston's untimely death probably prevented justice being done to Dr. McLoughlin and his devisees sooner than it was. Thurston was not a strong man physically and it was thought that he had shortened his life in working for Oregon and his const.i.tuents. To act justly to the living Dr. McLoughlin, in a certain sense, might be construed as reflecting on the dead Thurston.

_The Methodist Episcopal Church._

All my ancestors and relatives for many generations have been Protestants. I was brought up under the auspices of the Old School Presbyterian Church, of which my parents were members from my early childhood until their deaths at advanced ages. I have never been a member of any church, but my feelings and sympathies have always been that of a Protestant. I respect all true sects and denominations of the great Christian Church. I respect the religion of the Jews, of Buddha, and of Confucius, for the good that is in them. I respect every man's religious faith, as long as it is truly a religious faith. I uphold the right of every man to wors.h.i.+p G.o.d according to his liking. I respect, I admire, the man who against opposition and against his material and business interests follows the dictates of his conscience in religious and other matters of principle. While I may not agree with him, I defend his right. It is immaterial to me whether Dr. McLoughlin was a Protestant or a Roman Catholic. It is sufficient to me that he honestly acted according to his reason, his judgment, and what he considered was right. I condemn any persecution of him for being true to his conscience. I have great admiration for the Methodist missionaries who were true to their principles, who tried to lead blameless lives and to convert the Indians, and respected the rights of others. It is immaterial to me whether the missionaries were Methodists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, or Roman Catholics, so long as they were really missionaries and true to their G.o.d, according to their lights, true to their professions, to themselves, and to their fellow men. I have no attack to make on religion, nor on the Methodist Episcopal Church, nor on its true missionaries, clerical or lay.

The Methodist Episcopal Church has been one of the great civilizing agencies in the United States, particularly in the newer parts of the country. In its earlier days, and until the great growth of the country in the past forty or fifty years, it reached a cla.s.s of people, which no other denomination could reach or influence, and made better people of them. All churches and denominations are subject to conditions and to evolution. And the Methodist Episcopal Church is today one of the great and influential churches in the United States.

There always have been and there always will be men who make use of religion for sinister purposes. These unworthy missionaries who were parties to the unjust treatment of Dr. McLoughlin are not ent.i.tled to escape criticism, nor to have their wrongful acts pa.s.sed over because of their religious pretentions. They are subject all the more to severe condemnation. All good Methodists condemn those wrongful acts of the missionaries as all true, honest Oregon pioneers condemn the acts of the pioneers who abused or cheated Dr. McLoughlin. But these base actions were not sustained by, nor concurred in by all the Methodist missionaries. Some condemned these actions. Others of these missionaries, appreciating what Dr. McLoughlin had done for them, and his humanitarianism, spoke in his praise, but did not break with their fellows who were persecuting Dr. McLoughlin. Some of the signers of the Shortess pet.i.tion afterwards regretted, or were ashamed of their actions in so doing. Some timid persons may say that it would be better, in this address, merely to speak of the kind acts and high character of Dr.

McLoughlin and not of the wrongful and unjust ways in which he was treated by some of the early immigrants, by some of the Methodist missionaries, by Thurston, by Bryant, and others. But that would not show what he suffered for the upbuilding of Oregon, nor his martyrdom on account of his humanity, of his principles, and of his integrity. It would not be a true, nor an accurate account of his life and time.

Some persons in writing a life of Jesus would speak of his gentleness, his kindness, and his humanity, and say no more. They would not say anything against the Pharisees, nor of their condemnation by Jesus, because the Pharisees were people of some standing in their community, and did some kindly acts, and for fear of offending the descendants of the Pharisees. Such historians would not say anything against Caiaphas, the high priest, nor his actions against Jesus, because they might offend those religiously inclined. They would not say anything against those who cried "Crucify him," in their religious zeal. They would not say anything against Pontius Pilate, for fear of being thought to have attacked the Judiciary. They would either omit the crucifixion or merely say the last days of Jesus were pa.s.sed somewhat in sorrow and in pain.

But such a history would be trivial, and of no value. It would fail to show what Jesus did and suffered in his endeavors to help mankind. It would be a history in name only.

_Dr. McLoughlin's Memorial to Congress._

By the pa.s.sage of the Donation Land Law, and also by reason of the letter and of the speeches of Thurston in Congress, Dr. McLoughlin was put in the humiliating position of having to issue a printed circular letter to get expressions of opinions of others, as to the falsity of the charges made against him by Thurston, and to support a memorial to Congress which Dr. McLoughlin afterwards sent to Congress with all the evidence. But his memorial accomplished nothing. There was, too, the question that Congress had given away his land claim, which was then technically the property of Oregon, for an university, and that Congress could not, with dignity to itself, revoke its gift. And who was Dr.

McLoughlin to Congress? He was away out in Oregon nearly 4,000 miles from Was.h.i.+ngton. There were great and serious matters to be considered by Congress. The Oregon question was settled. What were the wrongs and misfortunes of one old man to Congress?

In answer to the printed circular issued by Dr. McLoughlin, after the pa.s.sage of the Donation Land Law, for the purposes of his memorial to Congress, he received many commendatory letters. I give merely excerpts from the letter of that n.o.ble old pioneer, Jesse Applegate, an immigrant of 1843. He wrote: "I have received your letter of inquiries, and take pleasure in replying to such of them as I personally know to be true. I came to this country in the fall of 1843, and, from that time forward, I can safely testify that your conduct has been the most generous and philanthropic, not only to immigrants from the United States, but to all requiring your a.s.sistance, whether natives or foreigners. I can also say that you have greatly encouraged and given much a.s.sistance in settling and developing the resources of the country, but I have by no means considered your motive for doing so political, or that your charitable acts were intended to advance the interests of any particular nation, but that you acted in the one case simply from a sense of Christian duty and humanity, and in the other from a natural desire to be useful in your day and generation.... But as the office of Chief Factor of the Hudson's Bay Company is in no way connected with politics, the discharge of its duties imposed no restrictions upon your private sentiments, and unless they led to a betrayal of your trust, which has never been charged against you, as an Irishman and a Catholic, you were free to feel and express your partiality for the free and tolerant inst.i.tutions of the United States. That you did entertain such partiality, from my first acquaintance with you, need not depend upon my a.s.sertion, for it is a fact well known, and one you did not pretend to conceal."

Jesse Applegate then says, in this letter, that he was present in 1845 when Dr. McLoughlin applied to Judge Peter H. Burnett, the Chief Justice of the Provisional Government, to take the oath of allegiance to the United States and to obtain first naturalization papers, but Judge Burnett declined to grant the request for he believed he did not have any jurisdiction to do so. Jesse Applegate further said in his letter: "That 'you pulled down houses and turned women and children out of them,' is a charge not only false, but too absurd to require refutation or notice. I can myself state, from experience, which accords with that of every other dest.i.tute immigrant who applied to you for a.s.sistance, either before or since my arrival in the country, that your conduct was entirely the reverse. My own company, of more than seventy persons, mostly women and children, who arrived at Vancouver in the storms of winter, in a condition the most dest.i.tute and miserable, were received by you, not as strangers, or foreigners, or as some would have it, enemies, but as brethren and fit subjects of hospitality and Christian charity, and our reception was not more kind and generous than was extended to every immigrant who sought your hospitality or a.s.sistance.... But however unjust the Oregon Land Law has been towards you, it may be said in excuse for the members of Congress who pa.s.sed it, that with the concurring and uncontradicted evidence of the Delegate and Chief Justice of Oregon before them, you neither _had_ nor _would_ become an American citizen, they are not chargeable with injustice."[53]