Page:Oregon Historical Quarterly volume 23.djvu/255



THE OREGON QUESTION 1818-1828 207

the Columbia as it is ; therefore, there is no need for a settlement.

This ended the debate for a time. The struggle was more fairly joined, and Floyd moved the postponement of the bill until the second Monday in January, 1823. The factors in the problem both of defense and attack are (1) commercial, and (2) diverging political theories. To the men of the 'twenties the first was framed in terms of Oriental trading, whaleries, fisheries, furs, Indian trade, and to a minor degree, grain and lumber, while the second meant a colony or no-colony system. So much for man's prevoyance; the relative importance of these half a century and a century later are sufficient comment, yet Oregon did become a territory of the Union, and her people came like the swarming of a hive, ignored by their government, yet they stayed loyal.

On the day appointed, a member from New York, Mr. Golden, after proposing that the occupation should depend upon the opinion of the president as to when "it may be consistent with public interest," makes a long and cogent speech for the bill. 26 His main argument is that standby of the measure's supporters, the Asiatic trade. He shows how fallacious it is to estimate the prosperity of the country on customs house receipts of exports and imports. Like others of the expansionists, Golden suggests the possibility of steamboats established "on all the waters between this [the Capital] and the mouth of the Columbia." This speech shows a very care- ful and accurate study of conditions particularly geo- graphical on the Columbia. It finishes with a warning that it will be better to take possession now than after the English or Russians or Spanish have seized the Co- lumbia mouth and then be obliged to do so.

The rest of the debate requires only a summary. With a certain faction no occupation other than by a military force was desired. Some among them did not object to

26 Op. cit., p. 583.