OREGON.

Speech Of E.r. Wentworth of Illinois, in
the u. ,. House of Representatives,
Jan. 2r. lS45.
{"newspaper_name": "Indiana State sentinel.", "edition": "01", "page": "pNone", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 6784, "word_count": 1191, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9714999794960022], "ccnet_perplexity": [1252.199951171875], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}

the bill before the House. for the re-occupation Of Orc
gon, at this stage of the question a laugh.] Mr. w.
said gentlemen laughed at his word reoccupaon which
he used designedly, and he wanted gentlemen TO un-
derstand Its true meaning. If we ever did occupy
Oregon (as all gentlemen will grant, it is certain we
do not occupy it now. And hence he wanted to re-
occupy it, to drive the British and rghtfuly place
Americans in. He for tearing down the cross of
ST. George, and raising the stars and stripes in its
stead.
Mr. w. said the question before the House, lie
knew was measure preliminary TO action upon this
great measure of re-occupation He knew the bill
before the House introduced In good faith by his
colleague, Mr.. Douglass, believing it would be dis
posed of in few moments, and without serious op-
position. But long speeches. comprehending a var-
ETY. OF subjects. had alre5dy been made: and for fear
former times, the House would never be nearer
the subject than 1t was, he would submit few
remarks in relation to the bill itself For twenty
years. and upwards, this question of organizing
government In Oregon had been agtated but yet
there had never been any favorable action. Indeed
there had been direct taken, whereby the
nation could get at the of its representatives
The measure had always gone by false issues, or
been preceded by others of less importance in the end
though, perhaps, considered at the time of more i'm
mediate importance.


The Oregon question: somehow had always been
unlucky one. There always something ahead
of it. Hence what he had to say he should say now
lest legislative legerdeman should hinder the proper
bill from being called up, the at the last
session.


On Saturday, we annexed large tract, 50 far as
the action of this House concerned, to one ex-
tremity of our Union Here is now proposition to
add TO the other end, rather to keep from being IT.
retrevably lost, what rghtfuy belonged to it. Mem
bers denied that the annexation of Texas was a Sec
tona question, and contended that it national
cne, and such measure they supported it. If the
friends of Texas go for Oregon, they will show
conclusivey that they for reclaiming their own
territory at whatever extremity of Union it may
he, and thus prove conclusivey that they
for slave territories than they do for free The
opponents of Texas took ground that its annexation
would add to the slave power of this country and
thereby disturb its present equilibrium. Even the
venerable gentleman from Massachusetts Mr.. Adams
would be for annexation under certain conditions
were it not for slavery. Now Oregon is north Of the
Missouri compromise line, and slavery never ex-
list there. So, he looked at It, Texas and Anti
Texas would best preserve their character for
patriotism and consistency by advocating all measures
for re-possesSing Oregon.


Mr.. Nv. called upon wings and democrats, upon
this great national question: involving our interests
and our honor, to forget all party feuds, and give
consolidated vote against any further encroachmens
of tie British upon American soil.


In report made to this House upon the subject
now under discussion by Mr.. Baylies of Massachu-
sets, in 1896 there be found the following sen
tence;


"Ihe tHdHeTence or .dHeFcd stimulates the cupdLtg OF
Great Briiaia. Oar neglect dOubly eeakens 01cn
claim, and strengthens hers and the day tc Grrice
tceR her title to iS territory io be better than cars
less IS earnestly and speedily enforced"


This might then have seemed empty defamation,
but who will say that time has not verified it all


Great Britain never had settlement on the ColIm-
ba any of Its branches prior to 1910, the time
MIR. Astor's settlement commenced. And Mr.
Madison looked upon the settlement with such a IA
yorable eye that in 1873 he ordered the frigate Ad
ht,tf fho Ill.
consequence of the being needed on Lake Onta-
rio. This same year the fort fell into the hands Of
the British, where it remained until it surrender
ed to under the first article of the treaty of Ghen
Thus in 1918 were we put in full possession. And
these were the words


sWe, the undersigned do in conformity to the first ar
ticie Of the treaty Of GeRt restore 10 The government o.
the URited States the settlement Of Fort George the Co
lambda


Thus put in possession, how have we lost it Ger
tainy not by the treaty of 1918 for JOINT occupancy
for that treaty expressly declares that he ony o5ie
Of the high contracting parties to prerent dispute
and differences among themselves" And whilst treat
ing Of the title Lord Casereagh admitted our righ
to be the parry In possession And this bill proposes
nothing more than protection of the settlers il
that possession have had since 1918; nothing NOR
than Great Britain the party cat of possession ha
done for her citizens in Oregon long ago.


Since 1918, much has been said in relation to on
duty to the American citizens in Oregon, but nothing
has been done Able reports have beer made to thi
House, to two of which he would call the attention
of. members at their leasnre-that of Mr. Baylcs
Just alluded to, and that of Mr.. Cushing our recen
minister to China. Able speeches have also bee
made, but there the matter has stopped.


As early as 1920, Mr.. Floyd, of Virginia, as chair
of committee of this House, made an elabc
rate report on the proPrety of extending the urisdc
tion of this country the inhabitants of Orepor
which concluded with bill for that purpose Ths
bill, like all its successors, was suffered to lie ON h
table during the session. Next year the NAVY con
misslorers made estimate of the expense of tran:
porting cannon and ammunition to the Columbia an
this all that heard of the matter during h;
tie succeeding session.


In 1873, a select committee was appointed by III
House, with instructions inquire Tito the exped
ency of occupying the mouth of the Columbia Tn
committee conferred with General Jesup, who recon
mended manning a fort at the mouth of the Columbi
and establishing Gordon of posts between it ar
Council Bluffs. He gives, as a reason therefor, tn


present protection would be afforded to our trader
and, on the expiration of the privilege granted
British subjects to trade the waters of the Colun
ba, VIC should be enabled to REMOVE THEM fro
our territory and to secure the whole trade to OF
citizens" This suggestion made in 1924; al
il is valuable as showing 1t the received opinio
at that time, that the British only remained by OF
permission, and that, at the expiration of the trea
for joint occupancy, we could "REMOVE THE
from our territory" But nothing was done at tn
session.


In 1924. President Monroe. in his last annual me
sage, urged the establishment of military post
the mouth OF the Columbia. But no heed was giv'
TO him.