Page:The Whitman Controversy.pdf/60



, Feb. 2.

To the Editor of the Oregonian:

My apology for not having written sooner is that by reason of the obstruction of the mail service, and the general bottled-up condition of the country, it has been impossible, in some instances, to get replies to letters of inquiry from persons whose testimony I wished to use in this article. My communication in The Oregonian of December 12 was written more for the purpose of repelling unjust charges, as I believed them to be, made by Mrs. Victor against the lamented Dr. Whitman, than with a view of establishing a historical fact. The Hon. Elwood Evans has replied, and had he not, in so doing, seen fit to question the veracity of the honorable living and the honored dead, I would not carry the controversy further. In so doing he exculpates Dr. Whitman from the blame that Mrs. Victor would lay him under, and then attacks the veracity of the late Rev. H. H. Spalding and other gentlemen, among whom is the Rev. Cushing Eells.

In what I shall say in reference to Mr. Evans' article, it will be my aim to avoid falling into one of the errors that he has committed, viz.: that of misrepresenting what my opponent has said. For instance—Mr. Evans says that I assume that Daniel Webster underrated Oregon and "might be able to trade it off for codfish," while my article as printed in The Oregonian makes no mention of any kind of trade or any kind of fish. Again, Mr. Evans represents me as saying—"Dr. Whitman was inspired at once with a thought of 'saving Oregon to the United States,' and angered by glorious Daniel Webster being the AmerisanAmerican [sic] Secretary of State." Again the print fails to show any mention by me of Dr. Whitman being "inspired at once," neither does it show any mention of his having been "angered by Daniel Webster." I have known lawyers