Page:Oregon Historical Quarterly vol. 1.djvu/27

Rh were filled with many questions. What was it right to do, and what was expedient; could a military post be established in the country as the President and Secretary wanted; could lands be granted to settlers as prospective emigrants wanted; could settlements be made and a civil government established as Floyd and Benton wanted? If it was right to do these things, was it expedient to do them, with the possibility of jeopardizing other interests less remote; was the nation ready to commit itself to an expansion of territory which might bring about many changes, and perhaps many dangers?

It was the work of these men, by patient, persistent and continued effort to arouse a sentiment favorable to American interests, to gather and disseminate such information as would help to make a public opinion, and to keep the subject before congress and the people all the time. Confident themselves in the value of the country to the United States, and of the right of title to the country, they were anxious for a movement looking toward permanent occupation.

It was a memorable day in the history of civil government in Oregon, when, in December of 1820, Floyd initiated his policy in the house, by a motion for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the situation of the settlements on the Pacific, and the expediency of occupying the Columbia River. It did not attract much attention at the time, but was referred to a committee, of which Floyd was chairman. In a carefully prepared report, containing all the information that could be secured, the plan was pronounced expedient and a bill proposed to carry it into effect. This bill provided for the military occupation of the Oregon Territory, the extinguishment of the Indian title to the land, and the