Page:Centennial History of Oregon 1811-1912, Volume 1.djvu/419



The first great name naturally associated with the Oregon country is that of Thomas Jefferson. His place in the history of the United States, in the estimation of the great mass of the people, is next to that of Washington. But had it not been for his far-seeing statesmanship which added the Louisiana Territory to that of the thirteen original states, his position would have taken rank after that of Franklin, Hamilton and Madison. His fortunate connection with the Declaration of Independence, while no special evidence of statesmanship, secured for him early recognition, and kept his name to the front at the annual celebration of the great event throughout the length and breadth of the whole country. His part in the actual struggle with the foreign king for national independence, amounts to very little. In the making of the Constitution, where Washingtoii, Hamilton and Madison each towered above all the statesmen of their day, Jefferson took no part. And while recognized as a man of versatile talents, of genius and ability, he barely held the place he achieved in the Continental convention by his persistent advocacy of popular rights. He became early known as the advocate of a democratic as distinguished from constitutional government. And it is a sharp commentary on the weakness of his original propositions of government, that almost the very first of his acts as president of the United States, was admitted by himself to be an infraction of the letter of the Constitution he had sworn to support, and of his own ideas of the proper mission of the Republic. In a letter to John Breckenridge, August 12, 1803, speaking of the purchase of Louisiana, Jefferson says:

"The treaty, of course, must be laid before both houses. They, I presume, will see their duty to their country in ratifying and paying for it (Louisiana), so as to secure a good which would otherwise probably be never again in their power. The Constitution has made no provision for our holding foreign terri-. tory, still less for incorporating foreign nations into our Union. The Executive, in seizing the fugitive occurrence which so much advances the good of their country, has done an act beyond the Constitution. The Legislature in casting behind metaphysical subleties, and risking themselves like faithful servants, must ratify and pay for it, and throw themselves on their country for doing for them unauthorized, what we know they would have done for themselves, had they been in a situation to do it."

And to show further the hazy ideas of this remarkable statesman, when it