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
assistance 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 entitled
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 entitled 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 passed 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
assigns of the Willamette Milling and Trading Companies, shall be set
apart and be at the disposal, of the Legislative Assembly, the proceeds
thereof to be applied, by said Legislative Assembly, to the
establishment and endowment of a university, to be located at such place
in the territory as the Legislative Assembly 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 assigns, 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 Washington, 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 entitled 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 assigns of the Milling Company were
entitled 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 assigns 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 passed 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 entitled to his land claim nor any
part of it, but that he should not have it under any circumstances; 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 passage of the
Donation Land Law. Every settler, except Dr. McLoughlin, could now have
his land claim, for the title 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 passage 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 titles 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 constituents. 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
constituents. 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 worship God 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 God, 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 class 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 entitled to
escape criticism, nor to have their wrongful acts passed 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 petition 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 passed 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 passage 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 Washington. 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
passage 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 noble 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 assistance, whether natives or foreigners. I can also say
that you have greatly encouraged and given much assistance 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 institutions
of the United States. That you did entertain such partiality, from my
first acquaintance with you, need not depend upon my assertion, 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 destitute immigrant who applied to you for assistance,
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 destitute 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
assistance.... But however unjust the Oregon Land Law has been towards
you, it may be said in excuse for the members of Congress who passed 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]
_The Persecution Continued._
The conspirators and their friends did not cease their persecution of
Dr. McLoughlin. They were determined he should not have his land claim.
To protect the reputation of Thurston and the other conspirators, it was
necessary to defeat all actions of the Oregon Legislative Assembly in
favor of Dr. McLoughlin. If that body made any petitions to Congress or
passed any resolutions in favor of Dr. McLoughlin, it would show that he
was entitled to his land claim, the injustice of section eleven of the
Donation Land Law, and that Thurston was guilty of malicious untruths in
his letter to, and his speeches before Congress relating to Dr.
McLoughlin and his land claim. Oregon could not, with propriety, pretend
to act justly to Dr. McLoughlin and still retain his land claim. I
regret to say that the House of Representatives of the Oregon
Legislative Assembly, at its session in 1853-4, not only refused to help
Dr. McLoughlin, but by its actions did him harm. January 6, 1854,
several petitions were presented to the House asking that Congress be
memorialized in favor of Dr. McLoughlin's right to his land claim,
"excepting the Abernethy Island," but the petitions were immediately
laid on the table. January 28, 1854, Orlando Humason presented to the
House the following resolution: "Whereas, the acts of John McLoughlin in
regard to his treatment of the early settlers of Oregon, have, as we
believe, been misrepresented, therefore--RESOLVED, that the generous
conduct of Dr. John McLoughlin in assisting the early settlers of
Oregon, merits our warmest commendations, and that as evidence of the
high estimation in which his services are held by his fellow citizens,
the thanks of this Assembly be tendered to the said Dr. John
McLoughlin."[54] But by the vote of sixteen to seven, three being
absent, the resolution was indefinitely postponed, which was the
legislative way of defeating it. All honor to the seven who voted in
favor of the resolution. Their names are F. C. Cason, L. F. Cartee,
Orlando Humason, B. B. Jackson, J. W. Moffitt, Chauncey Nye, and L. S.
Thompson.
_The End of Dr. McLoughlin's Life._
All these troubles and tribulations naturally told on Dr. McLoughlin. He
was a man of fortitude, who brooded, almost silently, over his sorrows,
with an occasional outburst when his sufferings were too intense. He had
made expensive improvements on his land claim, including a flour-mill
and a saw-mill, and other buildings. No provisions were ever made by
Congress to pay for these improvements. Even his dwelling house at
Oregon City, which for several years had been the home of himself and
his family, was taken from him, with his other improvements, by section
eleven of the Oregon Donation Land Law. It is true he remained in
possession of these improvements, including his home, but by sufferance
only. Because the Territory of Oregon did not sell the land he was not
actually ousted. There was no way to acquire land in Oregon City, taken
from Dr. McLoughlin by said section eleven, except by a law passed by
the Oregon Legislature. And the legislature did nothing.
He could not move nor sell his improvements. They belonged to the land
on which they were erected. Even if he could have sold them they would
have brought but little as they would have to be moved. His mills were
erected to be run by water power and they were conveniently situated on
the bank of the river near the falls, for the economical handling of
wheat and logs and the shipping of products of these mills. They could
not, at that time, be successful financially if they were moved and
operated by steam. He hoped that Congress or the Legislature would
restore his land claim to him. But he hoped and waited in vain. The lion
was entangled in a net. He struggled but he could not escape. And so Dr.
McLoughlin became straitened financially. Had Dr. McLoughlin been
allowed to have his land, he could then have built up a large town at
Oregon City. As it was, investors went to places where titles to land
could be obtained and there built up enterprises. With the moneys from
the sale of land Dr. McLoughlin could have paid the Hudson's Bay Company
all the moneys due by settlers, who had failed or refused to pay. The
payment of this heavy indebtedness Dr. McLoughlin had assumed. It was a
matter of honor with him. He owed nothing else to the Hudson's Bay
Company. The settlers who would not pay their indebtedness caused Dr.
McLoughlin to feel keenly their ingratitude. If they had paid him, he
would have paid the Company in full.
And there, too, was the question of providing after his death for his
loving and faithful wife, to whom he was devoted, and his children. He
had always been generous to his family. He had provided for his mother
until her death at the age of eighty-three years. He had educated four
nieces. He had helped other of his relatives. Is it to be wondered at
that he sometimes felt bitter?