-
“Consecrate!!!” Oregon for Whites
- Oregon State University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
The Great Slavery Non-Debate d D 137 members of the secretive Know Nothing party, which at the time was an emerging threat to the Democratic Party.19 But public voting was also a way to enforce party discipline. The requirement to vote publicly on the constitution and the slavery and exclusion clauses, rather than by secret ballot, was opposed by Dryer and some others, but it stood. “Consecrate!!!” Oregon for Whites To this point in the debate, little had been said about the moral implications of slavery; whether slavery would be good for Oregon; or why blacks should be excluded from the new state. The silence on these issues reflected the earlier agreement among Democrats to avoid meaningful debate, and simply submit the issues to voters. But in a session late on September 15, the convention’s attention turned to Chinese immigrants, and the lid came off the restrained debate like an exploding teapot. It elicited the seemingly most improbable—and ugly— statement from Judge Williams, whose judicial decisions and Free State Letter had so far helped steer Oregon away from slavery. Williams said he would “consecrate Oregon to the use of the white man,’’ excluding all other races.1 William Watkins of Josephine County ignited the debate on Chinese immigrants when he proposed asking voters to exclude Chinese from Oregon. By 1857, there had been a significant movement of Chinese immigrants from California into Oregon to mine gold and later to help build the new railroads. Chinese gold miners in southern Oregon were the initial target. Again, it was the Salem newspaper, not the official record that provided details of the debate: Watkins: Chinamen in his county were practically slaves. They were bought and sold to one another, and to white men, as much as negroes were in the South. If Chinese continued to come into that county, he predicted that in five years no white man would inhabit it. White men could not compete with them—they would work for $1.50 or $2.00 per day. Peebles: . . . thought it was quite possible that the people of the territory might vote to exclude Chinamen, but he thought it had better not be coupled with free negroes, but submitted separately. 138 d D Breaking Chains Grover: . . . the people did not want this question separately submitted; two-thirds of them know nothing about it. Reuben P. Boise, Polk County: . . . the people of the whole territory were not prepared to pass upon this question now, and he thought the most we should do was to give the legislature power over it . . . If their [Chinese] increase became an evil in the future, the legislature could prohibit such immigration. Waymire: . . . could not vote to exclude Chinamen; so far as his constituents were concerned, he believed they would like to have a lot of them come among them. They made good washers, good cooks, and good servants. Prim: . . . Chinamen were an evil in the mines, and were growing to be a greater one. Deady: . . . should vote to couple Chinamen with negroes and should vote for submitting the question of excluding both, though he believed it would be impotent—that it would not amount to anything. But he saw no reason for making a difference between Chinamen and negroes. The negro was superior to the Chinaman, and would be more useful. Marple: . . . in favor of the exclusion of Chinamen, though he agreed with Mr. Deady that such legislation would be impotent. Watkins: . . . thought that the negroes far surpassed, morally and physically, the Chinamen; if there were any class of thieves who understood their profession so thoroughly it was the Chinamen. Williams: He was in favor of excluding both Chinamen and negroes. And he did not agree with Mr. Deady that such attempted exclusion would prove inoperative and impotent. . . . It was at this point in the debate that Williams said he would “consecrate Oregon to the use of the white man.’’ Blacks, Chinese, and “every race of that character’’ would be excluded, he said. Dryer: . . . should vote for the amendment, but would separate the clause from the negro one. In this portion of the country Chinamen had not become an evil, and people might desire to vote to exclude negroes and not Chinamen. He would vote to exclude negroes, Chinamen, Kanakas [Hawaiians] and even Indians. The association of these races with the white was the demoralization of the latter. William H. Packwood, Curry County: Chinamen . . . were an evil in this country. They spent very little...