J.M. Fulkerson, Legislator | Fulkerson Family His

Introduction

Oregon's Territorial Legislature was a bicameral legislative body created by the United States Congress in 1848 as the legislative branch of the government of the Oregon Territory. The upper chamber Council and lower chamber House of Representatives first met in July 1849; they served as the region's legislative body until Oregon became a state in February 1859, when they were replaced by the bicameral Oregon State Legislature.

Most sessions were begun in December and ended in February. During the sessions the capital of the territory was moved from Oregon City to Salem, then briefly to Corvallis, and back to Salem. Legislation included the creation of new counties, the renaming of old counties, and the authorization to hold the Oregon Constitutional Convention, among other acts. Membership in the Council remained at nine throughout the history of the body, while the House of Representatives membership increased from 17 to as high as 30 due to increases in population.

James Monroe Fulkerson was first elected to serve in the State Assembly in 1852. He served that first year as a representative of Polk County in the House of Representatives. Beginning in 1853 and ending in 1856, he served as a member of the Assembly Council.

Throughout this period, the newspaper, Weekly Oregon Statesman, located in Salem, published a full account of the minutes of both the House and the Council. Given below are accounts of the political activity of James Fulkerson in the legislature minutes as reported by the Oregon Statesman. Of particular interest to the reader is the Assembly debates given on December 15- 20, 1852, December 20, 1853 and December 5, 1855.

All of the Assembly minutes for this period may be reviewed online at www.newspapers.com

Part I. The Legislative Assembly met from December 6, 1852 until February 3, 1853.

Members of the 1852-53 Oregon Territory Council

FIRST NAME, LAST NAME, POLITICAL AFFILIATION, COUNTY

Matthew Deady, D-Yamhill. President

Joseph M. Garrison, D-Marion

Lawrence Hall, W-Washington

Augustus L. Humphrey, D-Benton & Lane

Asa L. Lovejoy, W-Clackamas

Lucius W. Phelps, W-Linn

Levi Scott, W-Umpqua, Douglas & Jackson

Fredrick Waymire, D-Polk[8]

Members of the 1852-53 Oregon Territory House

LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, COUNTY, POLITICAL AFFILIATION, DISTRICT

Anderson, John A. Clatsop D 6

Aubrey, Thomas N. Lane W 10

Avery, J. C. Benton W 1

Carey, John Yamhill F 22

Chenoweth, F. A. Clark & Lewis D 7

Cole, G. E. Benton D 2

Conser, Jacob Marion D 15

Cottle, Royal Linn D 12

Curl, James Linn W 11

Curtis, Mr. Douglas W 8

Eby, Isaac N. Thurston D 19

Fulkerson, J. M. Polk D 16

Gibbs, A. C. Umpqua D 18

Hardin, J. R. Jackson D 9

Harding, B. F. Marion D 13, Speaker

Holmes, H. N. V. Polk D 17

Martin, F. B. Yamhill F 21

Matlock, W. T. Clackamas F 3

Mitchell, Israel Washington W 25

Richardson, John Yamhill D 2

Simpson, Benjamin Marion D 14

Stark, Benjamin Washington W 23

Tuttle, Milton Washington W 24

Wait, A. E. Clackamas F 4

Whitcomb, Lot Clackamas F 5

Minutes of the 1852-53 House as Reported by the Weekly Oregon Statesman

Weekly Oregon Statesman December 18, 1852

Motion to authorize appropriations to finance a geological survey of Oregon. J.M. Fulkerson was one of the yea votes. Motion passes.

Weekly Oregon Statesman, December 25, 1852

December 15, 1852 Legislative Assembly

Present were Messrs, Anderson, Avery, Awbrey, Carey, Chenoweth, Consor, Cole, Conser, Cottle, Curl, Curtis, Ebey, Fulkerson, Gibbs, Hardin, Holmes, Matlock, Mitchell, Richardson, Simpson, Stark, Tuttle, Waite and Whitcomb.

“The resolution praying Congress to amend the donation law, was taken up. Mr. Consor moved to amend so as to include widows in the donation provisions, without the requisite of residence.

Mr. Fulkerson wanted widows who became such on their way to this country, also after arriving here, but before settling upon land, to be included. Mr. Conner said he understood his amendment to include them. Mr. Conner moved that the resolution and amendments be referred to a select committee of five, consisting of Messrs. Conner, Fulkerson, Ebey, Cole and Curl.

The bill from the Council relating to limitation of personal actions, was read. Mr. Fulkerson moved to strike out all after the word “distress” and insert in lieu thereof a provision exempting $250 or personal property, to be selected by the party.

Mr. Fulkerson said that in this country there was little need of getting in debt, and no one need to remain in debt long if able-bodied. He hoped our laws would not be so framed to encourage getting into debt.

The question was then taken up on Mr. Fulkerson’s amendment and decided in the negative.

Mr. Fulkerson supported the minority report; he thought the fence law and the law against trespassing animals had better be embodied in one act. He moved to lay the matter on the table for the present-- Carried

Mr. Fulkerson moved that the money derived from sale of the animals be applied to school purposes. Adopted.

Later in the same meeting:

Mr. Harding [Benjamin F. Harding, Speaker of the House] moved to take up the bill for the relief of George Washington (colored.)

Mr. Ebey [Isaac N. Ebey, Thurston County] made some remarks in support of the bill. He said he considered the law prohibiting negroes from coming into Oregon a good law.

Mr. Matlock [William Tyndall Matlock, Clackamas County] said it was his opinion that the general law was already repealed. That the clause in the last crime and misdemeanor law repealing all other laws upon these subjects, repealed this. He had voted against this law excluding negroes when it passed, and he considered it a scandal upon the country.

Mr. Harding said he was not aware that the law made the coming of a negro to this Territory a crime. It was unlawful for them to come to or reside here, but not a crime.

Mr. Stark [Benjamin Stark, Washington County] called Mr. Harding’s attention to the 8th section of the law. Mr. Matlock, addressing himself to Mr. Harding, said you will find I am not so far wrong when you trace the question through. He still doubted its being in force.

Mr. Harding said that section referred only to negroes who had been once sent out of the Territory and were found here a second time.

Mr. Anderson [John A. Anderson, Clatsop & Pacific Counties] said he presumed that after hearing the law read by Mr. Harding, every member of this House was satisfied that the act referred to had not been repealed and that it was not necessary to say anything on that point.

Mr. Matlock said he would inform the gentleman that he was not satisfied.

Mr. Stark said he had last year signed a petition to have the law prohibiting negoes from coming to or residing in Oregon repealed, and he was now willing to go for a repeal or amendment of that law. He thought the law might be used to gratify personal pique, and he regarded it as a scandal upon the country. He was in favor of extending the relief to all persons of color who could produce certificates of good character.

There were some negro women in the country who were engaged in callings perhaps white women would not engage in, and they were useful to the country while earning a living for themselves. He said there were also negro men employed as servants, etc. in situations white men could not be found to fill.

Mr. Anderson said he did not know what offices negro women might perform here; they might be as useful to some gentleman as Mr. Stark represented; he knew nothing about their services. He was willing to go for some modification of the general law, although he hailed from the extreme southern portion of the Union. He had at the last session introduced and supported a bill permitting negroes to reside here upon their giving bonds for their good behavior and not to become a public charge, and he was now willing to support such a bill.

Mr. Mitchell [Israel Mitchell, Washington County] moved to amend the bill so as to extend the relief to all negroes who should give bonds to conduct themselves properly and not become a county charge.

Mr. Simpson [Benjamin Simpson, Marion County] said he was willing to go for this bill because the evidence satisfied him that the negro, George Washington, was a meritorious person. But he would go against the repeal of the law prohibiting negroes from coming here. He believed that was a wise law.

Mr. Mitchell withdrew his amendment.

Mr. Whitcomb [Lot Whitcomb, Clackamas County, 1847 Oregon Trail] said he had known this negro, George Washington, for a number of years, and he knew him to be a worthy man, and he should vote for the bill granting him relief.

The Clerk read a law enacted by the legislature of Missouri granting relief to this negro, George Washington, while a resident of that state.

Mr. Cole [George Edward Cole, Democrat, Benton County] said if it was a crime to have a black skin, it made no difference with him what the State of Missouri might have done which would recommend George Washington to our favorable consideration, or what other evidence of character he might be able to obtain. But he believed some persons of color were orderly citizens, and their color could not be imparted to them as a crime, and that class of persons he would provide for by modifying the present law so as to permit them to remain in the country. He was opposed to special enactments. He last winter supported a general bill modifying the present law, which he believed occupied medium ground. He was ready to support such a bill now, believing that there were other persons of color equally deserving, and if we enacted this law, we should be flooded with their application. He preferred to provide for all by a general law.

Mr. Avery [Joseph C. Avery, Democrat, Benton County] said he was satisfied from the petition of the neighbors of this negro and other evidence that he was worthy if the relief he prayed for, and he would want to grant it.

Mr. Anderson moved that the committee rise and report the bill to the House unamended. The motion was adopted and the House adjourned.

December 16, 1852 Legislative Assembly

The bill for the relief of George Washington was taken up.

Mr. Waite [Aaron E. Waite, Clackamas County] moved to amend so as to include all persons of color and suspend the prohibitory law till 1854.

Mr. Gibbs [Addison Crandall Gibbs, Whig, Umpqua County; second governor of Oregon, 1862-66] was opposed to the amendment. It opened Oregon to the immigration of a class of persons who were not desirable citizens. Let us go to the Eastern States and see what is the condition of persons of color there. Go within the gloomy walls of their prisons and you will find them liberally represented. As a general rule they were degraded and depraved. Was it desirable to encourage such persons to emigrate here? We had proof that George Washington was a meritorious citizen and he was willing to permit him to reside here.

Mr. Waite said the law concerning negroes was passed under peculiar circumstances. Most of the inhabitants were in the mines, and negroes were here – Indians were here – and liquor could be obtained. And the Legislature deemed it wise to enact this law; he was not prepared to say it was not a good one; he was not prepared to say he would vote for its repeal; but he thought we had better suspend it. We wanted laborers here; we had money and we had land, but there was a scarcity of laborers.

Mr. Conser [Jacob S. Conser, Marion County] said he took a different view of the matter; he was opposed to suspending the law. Mr. Waite had said we wanted laborers; that was true; but we ought to encourage laborers to come here by keeping up wages. It was a notorious fact that negroes always reduced the price of labor. He wanted the law to stand upon our statue book to deter negroes from coming here. He wanted to keep up the price of labor; he was a laboring man himself.

Mr. Chenoweth [Francis A. Chenoweth, Whig, Lewis & Clark County] was opposed to the amendment, for he thought it impossible to so amend this law as to answer the purpose; he was in favor of passing this bill as it was, and then introducing a separate bill to amend the negro law. He understood Mr. Stark was preparing such a bill. He was in favor of allowing colored persons who were good citizens to come into the Territory. We wanted laborers, and though it might reduce the price of labor—though the laborer might not get rich, yet it would add to the wealth of the country.

Mr. Matlock was opposed to distinctions on the ground of color.

Mr. Holmes [H.N.V. Holmes, Polk County] said he hoped this bill would pass; the proof showed that George Washington merited relief. But he hoped the law prohibiting negroes from coming here would not be repealed; he wanted that law to stand as a warning to negroes not to come here. If a few were here without knowing what the law was, he was in favor of letting them remain if they behaved themselves. But they were a vicious race and we did not want them.

Mr. Simpson said he should not vote against the amendment for the purpose of making a distinction on the ground of color, but because nature had made a distinction between the white and black races.

The question being put, the amendment was lost, 19 yeas, 4 nays. The nays were Messrs. Waite, Whitcomb, Matlock and Curtis.

The question then recurred upon the passage of the bill. It was carried, yeas 17, nays 6.

December 20, 1852 Legislative Assembly

The bill for the relief of George Washington was taken up, and, on motion of Mr. Lovejoy laid on the table.

The bill for the relief of George Washington was taken up two more times on successive days and tabled each time.

The question being put, the amendment was lost, 19 yeas, 4 nays. The nays were Messrs. Waite, Whitcomb, Matlock and Curtis.

Mr. Whitcomb said he had known this negro, George Washington, for a number of years, and he knew him to be a worthy man, and he should vote for the bill granting him relief.

Mr. Matlock said it was his opinion that the general law was already repealed. That the clause in the last crime and misdemeanor law repealing all other laws upon these subjects, repealed this. He had voted against this law excluding negroes when it passed, and he considered it a scandal upon the country.

Mr. Curtis apparently did not speak during the debate.

Mr. Fulkerson apparently did not speak during the debate.

December 21, 1852 Legislative Assembly

Mr. Fulkerson said he was partly in favor of Mr. Holm’s amendment. He was in favor of a road from St. Helens through the Willamette valley. We had a great many roads upon our statute book, but they had not been worked, could not be traveled and were not roads at all. He preferred one territorial road through the county seats, instead of numerous county roads that were never worked. Mr. Fulkerson moved to amend so as to require the road to pass through the county seat of Polk County. He supported his amendment. Mr. Fulkerson said the people of Washington County knew whether they wanted this road or not; if they did it was in their power to make it; we had no petitions asking the legislature to locate a road there. The bill was passed

Oregon Statesman on January 22, 1853

January 10, 1853 Legislative Assembly

The legislature took up a bill known as an act supplementary to an act to provide for the location and erection of the public buildings of the Territory.” During the debate, James Fulkerson is reported to have made these comments: “Mr. Fulkerson wanted all of the counties to have a voice in the matter.” Also, later in the debate “Mr. Fulkerson was in favor of the vote upon the question being upon a separate piece of paper, that it might stand upon its own merits, as some individuals did not examine their ballots if they happened to discover the names of one or two favorites upon them.”

On a bill to move the office of Oregon Surveyor General from Oregon City to a location further south, Mr. Fulkerson believed that before Congress made appropriations for the surveys north of the Columbia, that portion would become a separate territory. Mr. Chenoweth said that a change so fundamental and radical as the gentlemen (Mr. Fulkerson) had made allusion to, could hardly be made at the present session of Congress. The memorial asking for the division would hardly reach Washington before the adjournment of Congress.

January 11, 1853 Legislative Assembly

On a discussion regarding the number of land claims made in Oregon Territory and the location of the surveyor general’s office, James spoke about his belief that “before Congress made appropriations for the surveys north of the Columbia, that portion would become a separate territory.” The Oregon Statesman reported further: “Mr. Chenowith said that a change so fundamental and radical as the gentleman, Mr. Fulkerson, had made allusion to, could hardly be made at the present session of Congress. The memorial asking for the division would hardly reach Washington before the adjournment of Congress.”

On a motion to create a state government that included both Oregon and Washington territories was taken up. James Fulkerson was one of the nine nays; motion carried 17-9.

January 15, 1853 Legislative Assembly

On a proposal to recommend to the Congress to create two territories (Washington and Oregon) of the present Oregon Territory. “Mr. Fulkerson said he could not answer for his constituents on this question, as it had not been discussed in his county; but he was in favor of it himself and should vote for it.” Yeas- 20; Nays-3.

Oregon Statesman, February 5, 1853

January 20, 1853 Legislative Assembly

Mr. Fulkerson presented a bill relative to common school fund. Mr. Fulkerson moved the postponement of a bill relating to estrays [stray livestock].

January 21, 1853 Legislative Assembly

Regarding the debate on where to construct a penitentiary, Mr. Fulkerson said it might be that two more walls would make a penitentiary at Oregon City, but he thought it might include some persons who would not like to go to the penitentiary. He said there were some reasons in favor of Oregon City as the place, but he thought there were more against it. Land enough to put it on would cost a large sum. He thought with Mr. Matlock, that Portland was not a fit place for the penitentiary and he thought this was the proper time to change it, also, but it should go to some other place than Oregon City.

January 24, 1853 Legislative Assembly

On motion of Mr. Fulkerson, the bill concerning education was taken up; several amendments were adopted and the bill ordered to be read a third time tomorrow.

Part II- The Legislative Assembly met from December 5, 1853 until February 2, 1854.

Members of the 1853-54 Oregon Territory Council

Fulkerson, Jas. M. Polk D 6

Humphrey, A. L. Benton, Lane D 1

Kelly, James K. Clackamas D 2

Phelps, Lucius W. Linn D 4

Powers, T. P. Clatsop D 3

Richardson, John Yamhill D 9

Scott, Levi Douglas, Jackson, W 7 Umpqua

Simpson, Benjamin Marion D 5

Wilcox, Ralph Washington D 8, President

Members of the 1853-54 Oregon Territory House

Ambrose, George H. Jackson D 13

Bennett, James A. Benton D 14
Bishop, Z. C. Washington D 22, Speaker

Boise, R. P. Polk, Tillamook D 22

Cartee, L. F. Clackamas D 2

Cason, F. C. Clackamas D 1

Chapman, B. F. Benton D 15

Colby, E. F. Marion D 6

Durham, A. A. Washington W 21

Elkins, Luther Linn D 7

Gilliam, W. S. Polk D 17

Goff, Stephen Lane W 9

Grover, L. F. Marion D 4

Hadley, H. B. Lane D 10

Humason, Orlando Yamhill D 20

Jackson, B. B. Clackamas D 3

Martin, E. B. Yamhill D 26

Miller, John F. Jackson D 11

Moffitt, J. W. Clatsop D 24

Nye, Chauncey Jackson W 12

Peebles, John C. Marion D

Shuck, Andrew Yamhill D 18

Smith, I. N. Linn D

Thompson, L. S. Douglas W 25

Thompson, Robert Washington D 23

Westerfield, A. B. Yamhill D 19

Minutes of the 1853-54 Council as reported by the Weekly Oregon Statesman

Oregon Statesman, December 13, 1853

December 7, 1853 Council Meeting

In the Council, James Fulkerson was named to four standing committees: education, counties, elections and roads. H.J.R. No 4, in relation to reporting a memorial to Congress for the payment of the Rouge River troops was _____ in and Powers, Kelly and Fulkerson appointed committee on the part of the Council.

December 8, 1853 Council Meeting

On motion of Mr. Fulkerson, the committee on education were requested to report as early as practicable in regard to the amendment to the land law in relation to school lands.

Oregon Statesman, December 20, 1853

December 15, 1853 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill in the Council to provide for the filling of vacancies in the office of Judge of Probate in Polk County.

Later, “Mr. Fulkerson moved that the council concur in-house amendment in regard to illegitimate children; lost.

December 17, 1853 Council Meeting

On motion of Mr. Fulkerson the council went into committee of the whole on the Tillamook Road bill, the same was amended and passed.

Oregon Statesman, December 27, 1853

December 19, 1853 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill in the Council to charter the Rickreall Academy; read twice and referred to committee on education.

December 20, 1853 Council Meeting

The council went into committee of the whole on the bill (from the code) relating to witnesses. Mr. Simpson moved to amend so as to exclude negroes, mulattoes and half-breed Indians from testifying against white persons, adopted.

Mr. Fulkerson moved to strike out the provision requiring belief in a supreme being, and making persons witnesses who did not believe in such being, or in future rewards and punishments. Mr. Fulkerson said he wished not to be misunderstood; he believed in a supreme being, and in future rewards and punishments. But he had known honest, upright and truthful men who did not; men he would as soon believe as any other. He would not disqualify a man on account of his religious beliefs.

Mr. Kelly said he was for opening wide the doors to testimony, but letting everything go to the jury for what it was worth, and leave them to judge of credibility. He was in was in favor of the amendment, though he did not want to be understood as encouraging disbelief in a God.

Mr. Simpson said he would rather that provision had never been placed in the code, than to strike it out now; that would subject the opinions of this body to misconstruction. He hoped this amendment would not prevail.

Mr. Humphrey said there were in the community men who disbelieved in a God, who were as honest and credible as any other; they should not be excluded from the witness stand; the section might be modified to include them.

Mr. Powers said he could hardly consider a man sane who disbelieved in a God; he could have no religious belief; he did not believe in the accountability of man. He hoped the original provision would pass. It might be because he had always lived where they had such laws.

Mr. Fulkerson said he was not certain that the amendment went too far. It could not be denied that many honest and worthy men disbelieved in a God. In Indians were found distinguished and able statesmen who disbelieved. The amendment was lost.

Mr. Simpson moved to strike out the words “who will punish false swearing,” and simply require belief in a supreme being: adopted.

The above and several other amendments were concurred in, and the bill referred to judiciary committee.

Oregon Statesman, January 10, 1854

January 3, 1854 Council Meeting

“Dr. Wilcox the president not being present, Mr. Fulkerson was elected President Pro Tem.”

January 5, 1854 Council Meeting

“Mr. Fulkerson moved to change the name of Grave Creek to Leland Creek, in honor of Miss Leland Crowly, a lady who died and was buried on the said creek from the first emigration that ever camped upon it. It originally took its name from this circumstance, bill was passed.”

January 7, 1854 Council Meeting

“Bill relating to marriage and divorce was read second time and referred to Simpson, Kelly and Fulkerson.”

Oregon Statesman, January 17, 1854

January 10, 1854 Council Meeting

The bill relating to estrays [stray livestock] and to property lost, etc., was read a second time and referred to a select committee—Fulkerson, Richardson and Powers.

On motion of Mr. Fulkerson, the bill relating to fences and fence viewers [?], was referred to committee of the whole.

The bill concerning the granting of licenses to sell liquor and for billiard tables, ten pin alleys, shows, etc. was taken up. Mr. Richardson moved to strike out fourteen sections. Mr. Fulkerson moved to amend the amendment by striking out five sections. Lost, 4 to 5. On motion the bill was referred to Richardson, Fulkerson and Simpson.

On motion of Mr. Phelps the bill relating to schools was referred to committee--Phelps, Fulkerson and Scott.

January 11, 1854 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill to prevent sabbath breaking; read twice and referred to select committee—Simpson, Powers and Fulkerson.

January 12, 1854 Council Meeting

The bill to prevent sabbath breaking was unanimously passed.

January 13, 1854 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson, from select committee, reported back, amended, the bill relative to estrays; amendments concurred in.

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill for a territorial road from Clackamas Bridge to intersect the Des Shutes Road; read a first and second time.

A Notice of a newly passed law of Oregon

“An act to change the name of Grave Creek, in Jackson County, Oregon Territory.

Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Oregon. That the creek commonly called Grave Creek, be changed to the name of Leland Creek, in memory of Miss Leland Crowley.

Section2. This act to take effect from and after its passage.

Z.C. Bishop, Speaker of the House of Representatives

Ralph Wilcox, President of the Council

I certify the foregoing is a true copy of the original act. S.H. Garrett, clerk.”

January 16th Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill to prevent the sale of liquor to Indians.

Oregon Statesman, January 24, 1854

January 17, 1854 Council Meeting

The bill to prevent the sale of liquor to Indians was amended and passed.

A Notice of a newly passed law of Oregon

An act to prevent Sabbath breaking

Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Oregon,

That no person shall keep open his or her store, shop, grocery, ball alley, billiard saloon, tipling house, or any place of gaming or amusement, or do any secular business other than works of necessity and mercy, on the first day of the week commonly called the Lord’s day or Sunday; provided, however, that this act shall not be so construed as to have effect where the circumstances of the case render it necessary that the above provision be not observed.

Section 2. Any person offending against the provision of this act, shall upon conviction before any justice of the peace of the proper county, be fined in any sum not exceeding ten dollars, and such fine when collected shall be paid into the county treasury for the common school fund.

Z.C. Bishop, Speaker of the House of Representatives

Ralph Wilcox, President of the Council

I certify the foregoing is a true copy of the original act. S.H. Garrett, clerk.”

Oregon Statesman, January 31, 1854

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill concerning roads and highways; read twice and referred.

Mr. Richardson introduced a bill to relocate the public buildings of the Territory; the rules were suspended and the bill read twice. Mr. Simpson moved to indefinite postpone, carried; yeas: Fulkerson, Phelps, Powers, Simpson and Mr. President; 5 nays, Humphrey, Kelly Richardson and Scott. This bill proposed to locate the Penitentiary at Linn City, the capital of Corvallis and the University at Winchester. Messrs. Kelly and Richardson advocated and Messrs. Simpson and Fulkerson opposed the passage of the bill.

Oregon Statesman, February 7, 1854

January 20, 1854 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill to change the name of Josiah W. Lingenfelter to Josiah W. Linn; read three times and passed.

January 31, 1854 House Meeting

Mr. Peebles introduced a bill to prevent negroes and mulattoes from coming in or residing in the Territory; rules suspended and the bill passed; yeas, 19, nays, 3. [Without debate? H.M.]

February 1, 1854 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson moved to take from the table the bill to prevent negroes and mulattoes from coming to or residing in the Territory. Mr. Kelly opposed the motion, and Mr. Fulkerson supported it; lost. Yeas, 4, nays, 4.

Part III. The Legislative Assembly met from December 4, 1854 until February 1, 1855.

Members of the 1854-55 Oregon Territory Council

Cleaveland, E. H. Jackson W 3

Fulkerson, Jas. M. Polk D 5

Greer, G. E. Columbia, Washington D 6

Humphrey, A. L. Benton, Lane D 1

Kelly, James K. Clackamas, Wasco D 2, President

Peebles, John C. Marion D 5

Phelps, L. W. Linn D 4

Richardson, John Yamhill D 7

Scott, Levi Douglas, Umpqua W 8

Members of the 1854-55 Oregon Territory House

Belknap, D. H. Washington D 21

Brown, Hugh L. Linn D 14

Butler, Ira F. M. Polk D 1

Cartee, L. F. Clackamas D 3, Speaker

Coffinberry, G. W. Clatsop D 6

Condon, J. B. Columbia D 26

Crandall, C. P. Marion D 15

Drew, C. S. Jackson W 27

Dunn, Patrick Jackson D 8

Elkins, Luther Linn D 12

Ford, N. Marion D 17

Gazley, James F. Douglas D 7

Geer, R. C. Marion D 16

Gillespie, Jacob Lane D 11

Hembree, A. J. Yamhill D 23

Henry, A. G. Yamhill W 24

Hinton, R. B. Benton D 2

Holmes, H. N. V. Polk D 18

Humason, Orlando Wasco D 22

Ladd, Robert Umpqua D 25

Logan, David Multnomah W 29

Lovejoy, A. L. Clackamas D 5

McIntire, Alex Jackson W 9

Patterson, A. W. Lane D 10

Smith, Delazon Linn D 13

Starkweather, W. A. Clackamas D 4

St. Clair, Wayman Benton W 1

Tanner, E. S. Washington W 20

Walker, Jesse Jackson D 28

Minutes of the 1854-55 Council as reported by the Weekly Oregon Statesman

Oregon Statesman, December 12, 1854

December 6, 1854 Council Meeting

The Council president announced the standing committees: Fulkerson- Judiciary, Ways & Means, and Counties. Also, announced was that Mr. Peebles and Mr. Fulkerson were members of a committee to “wait on the acting Governor.”

Mr. Fulkerson offered a resolution calling for information from the Governor.

Note: The Oregon Statesman did not report the debate of the Council “for the want of room” in the newspaper at that time. As a result, the meetings of December 7 through the 18th do not mention any Council member.

Oregon Statesman, December 26, 1854

December 19, 1854 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson from the committee on ways and means, to which was referred a bill to provide for the assessment and collections of taxes in Jackson County reported back the same without amendments. The bill was considered engrossed and ordered to a third reading tomorrow.

December 20, 1854 Council Meeting

The Council went into committee of the whole, Mr. Fulkerson in the chair. [He remained the chair for the following meetings: January 4, 5, 6, 9 & 10 - H.M]. A bill to create the office of county surveyors was taken up, and on motion, further action on it was postponed until tomorrow. On motion, of Mr. Fulkerson, the rules were suspended, and the Council took up a bill to enlarge the powers of District and Supreme Courts and referred to the judiciary committee. Adjourned.

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill to prevent sabbath-breaking; read twice and referred to select committee—Simpson, Powers & Fulkerson. This bill passed unanimously in the House.

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill for a territorial road from Clackamas Bridge to intersect the Des Schutes Road; read a first and second time.

Mr. Fulkerson from the committee on counties, prepared amendments to the bill to define the boundary line of Clatsop County—which were adopted.

Oregon Statesman, January 23, 1855

January 5, 1855 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill to levy a road tax in ordinary cases, which was read.

January 15, 1855 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson from the select committee, in which was referred a bill for the relief of L.F. Grover and Robt. Thompson, reported same back without amendment.

Mr. Fulkerson from the committee on counties, reported back the bill to define the western boundary line of Columbia County, which was passed.

Oregon Statesman, January 30, 1855

January 16, 1855 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson presented the petition of M.B. Burke, for the enactment of a law amendatory of an act for the assessment and collection of taxes, passed January 27, 1854, which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.

Oregon Statesman, February 6, 1855

Friday, January 26, 1855 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson requested a leave of absence until Monday.

January 27, 1854 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson presented a petition from A.R.C. Shaw and others for the incorporation of the Cincinnati railroad company and a bill for the purpose which was read for the first time.

The President appointed Messrs Kelly, Simpson and Fulkerson the committee on part of council to report what bill shall not be repealed.

Monday, January 29, 1855 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson from the Committee on Ways and Means reported a bill, supplemental to an act providing for the printing and distribution of the laws and journals which was read and passed.

January 30, 1855 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson introduced a bill to define the northern boundary of Polk County which was read.

Part IV. The Legislative Assembly met from December 3, 1855 until January 31, 1856.

Members of the 1855-56 Oregon Territory Council

Dennison, A. P. Multnomah D 6, President

Drain, Charles Linn D 4

Fulkerson, James M. Polk, Tillamook D 7, President Pro Tem

Huber, N. Yamhill D 9

Kelly, James K. Clackamas, Wasco D 2

O’Bryant, Hugh D. Douglas, Coos, D 8 Umpqua

Peebles, John C. Marion D 5

Ross, John E. Jackson W 3

Smith, A. A. Benton, Lane W 1

Members of the 1855-56 Oregon Territory House

Barkwell, M. C. Jackson D 10

Boise, R. P. Polk, Tillamook D 25

Briggs, George Jackson W 13

Brown, George W. Multnomah D 22

Brown, Hugh L. Linn D 17

Buckingham, H. C. Benton D 1

Burbank, A. R. Yamhill D 29

Callender, Philo Clatsop D 6

Cozad, J. M. Umpqua D 26

Gates, N. H. Wasco D 27

Grant, B. P. Linn D 18

Grover, L. F. Marion D 19

Hale, John E. Jackson D 11

Harpole, William P. Marion D 20

Harris, John Columbia D 7

Harrison, John M. Marion D 21

Hutson, William Douglas D 9

Jackson, Hyer Multnomah, D 23 Washington

Johnson, H. V. V. Washington W 28

McAlexander, A. Lane D 1

Moores, Isaac R. Lane D 14

Officer, James Clackamas D 4

Risley, Orville Clackamas D 5

Robinson, John Benton D 2

Shuck, Andrew Yamhill W 30

Smith, Delazon Linn D 16, Speaker

Smith, Thomas Jackson D 12

Straight, Hiram Clackamas D 3

Tichenor, William Coos D 8

Waymire, Fred Polk D 24

Minutes of the 1855-56 Council as reported by the Weekly Oregon Statesman

Oregon Statesman, December 8, 1855

December 5, 1855 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson is named to the following committees: Ways and Means, Claims, Engrossed Bills. “Mr. Smith offered a resolution directing the clerk of the Council to inform the Government that the Assembly was organized. Mr. Peebles moved to amend so as to appoint a joint committee—adopted, and Messrs. Peebles and Fulkerson appointed.”

December 6, 1855 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson offered an amendment to rule 37 of Council, making it the duty of the President to demand the yeas and nays upon the final passage of every bill, until otherwise ordered—adopted.

Oregon Statesman, December 18, 1855

December 7, 1855 Council Meeting

Mr. Fulkerson offered an amendment providing to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert provisions for submitting the question of location to the people at the next election. Mr. Fulkerson declared it his duty to state his reasons for offering the amendment, which he pronounced to do at considerable length. Much had been said of bargain and sale, would be said again if this bill was passed. His amendment would put the “vexed question” at rest and send it home to the people where it belonged. He desired to stand on a broad platform—the same platform he occupied in the former location war. It was then Whig and Democratic, and he was then on good Democratic ground. He did not wish to assail any officer, but wanted only stated facts. He said and did nothing here on this floor which his constituents would not say and do were they in his place. Economy was suggested. But they were not here to legislate for towns or town proprietors; rather for the whole people. It is not pretended that Salem would be the choice of the whole people. Why not then let all the people have a voice in the matter. Personally, he was friendly to Salem, as he lived near there, but he believed four-fifths of his constituents were opposed to the policy of expending the last cent of an appropriation at a place which they do not desire as a permanent seat of government. He then adverted to the incomplete representation in the Council and the pressing urgency of other business; preferred to offer his resignation rather than be forced to a final vote on this bill; related the history of legislation on this subject. Mr. F. gave a very fair and explicit argument in support of his amendment.

Mr. Peebles had but a few words to offer on the amendment; simply wished to define his position. The people of the territory demanded that the action of the last Legislature on this subject should be repudiated; they have so instructed their representatives. He desired to carry out those instructions. They desired the subject to be placed back where it was before the act of last winter. The House has passed upon the bill, showing a clear majority in its favor. The newly elected members of this body have come here fresh from the people. A majority of them support the bill. Again, the proposed amendment is unconstitutional, and I shall vote against it on that ground. The people have no authority to locate the seat of government. The principle I am in favor of. I proposed a similar measure last winter, but it was opposed and voted down by the friends of removal from Salem. We are willing still, if this bill is passed, to submit the question to the people. But we require first that the act of last winter be repealed.

Mr. Fulkerson replied: The gentleman from Marion seems to imagine that all Oregon lies immediately about Salem. He assumes to speak for all the people in the territory and his great _____ is repudiation; his main object to bring the last Legislature into disrepute. He, for one, having been in the last Legislature, disclaimed all charges of bargaining, Let gentlemen beware if they repudiate others; the people may repudiate them.

Mr. Drain—Mr. Fulkerson gave his reasons for supporting the amendment in preference to the bill. The seat of government seems to have been subject to change. One man at Washington City seems however to have control of it. For one, he did not wish to be controlled. Nor to run back to Salem, because it was so ordered; should vote for the amendment.

The question being on the amendment, it was lost. Ayes, 3; Noes, 4.

Mr. Huber offered an amendment, providing to strike out Salem and insert Portland.

Mr. Fulkerson—I shall vote for this amendment. Salem can hardly be said to be the center of population, and so far as convenience is concerned, Portland has a decided preference, Mails are delivered there regularly, while at Salem, there is frequently delay—news from all directions concentrates there. It appearing now inevitable that the capital must be moved, let us go to Portland--not to remain permanently—but for the present, that policy is dictated. I dislike above all, to be driven back to Salem by one man’s dictation. If Portland had no preference over Salem, I should go for it on that ground.

Mr. Huber—If this amendment prevails, it does not prevent Portland remaining the seat of government, that is a question for the future.

Mr. Fulkerson referred at more length to the alleged bargain which had been spoke of. I have repelled and do repel all such charges as to myself. If the seat of government is offered to my county (Polk) I am under no obligation or arrangement which obliges me to decline it; I have made no alliance which prevents my voting for it. I do not say that other gentlemen have, I only speak for myself. Insert Dallas, Independence or Cincinnati and see how I record my vote.

Mr. Fulkerson—I am not in favor of this location, but repeat that I have such a dislike to be driven back to Salem, that I am ready to vote the capitol anywhere, even to the outskirts of the territory, and shall support the amendment.

Mr. Peebles admired the liberality of the opposition in tendering the seat of government to each member on the floor, hoped when all other projects failed; he should himself be the recipient of their courtesy and the original bill receive their support.

Mr. Fulkerson assured the gentleman he would discover his mistake. I oppose Salem for the reasons already stated; I do not admit the authority by which we are ordered to go there. And if that gentleman stood in the place some of us do, I know him too well to suppose that he would refuse a similar offer unless he was under some obligation to do so.

December 10, 1855 Council Morning Meeting

Only five members of the Council were present. Three members were absent: A.A. Smith, Neah Haler and James M. Fulkerson. A message from the House announced the passage through that body of the bill relocating the seat of government [from Corvallis to Salem) and transmitted that bill.

Mr. Huber said the reasons urged [by the Council president to proceed without a quorum] did not satisfy him—the bill was to pass without a full council, and by the vote of a minority. We could as well enter upon the legitimate business of the Assembly here as at Salem. We wanted nothing but a little wood and stationery. He would enter his protest against action upon the bill at this time, and he would not give the proceeding his countenance of presence. [Here Mr. Huber left the council chamber.]

Mr. Peebles—I see a disposition on the part of members to clog the business of this house. I do not accuse them of being absent for the purpose of dodging a vote upon the question before the council, but it looks very much like it. I see no good reason for why they should be absent; they have had notice that this question was being acted upon in the lower house and if they felt sufficient interest in it, they should be here. But as they are not, I think the business of the territory should not be delayed on their account. Now, I will admit that the effect of my motion, if carried, will preclude amendment, Mr. Peebles moved that the sergeant-at-arms be instructed to compel the attendance of absent members. The sergeant-at-arms having been sent after the absent members returned and reported having seen Mr. Haber, who said that he would be on hand at the earliest convenience.

Mr. Peebles—I see the absence of those members is undoubtedly for the purpose of retarding business. I therefore move that the sergeant-of-arms be instructed to bring, forthwith, the bodies of absent members, at their own expense, if any is incurred—adopted.

Sergeant-of-arms—Mr. President, I am unacquainted with such business here; in the States it was necessary to have written authority.

President—You shall have it. The president then wrote the following warrant and handed it to the sergeant-of-arms. “To the Sergeant-of-arms: . . . You are hereby required forthwith to bring the bodies (if found) of A.A. Smith, Noah Huber and James M. Fulkerson into the Council room of the Legislative Assembly of Oregon”.

Signed A.P. Dennison, President

[After about half an hour’s delay out, the sergeant-of-arms returned and delivered a secret message, verbally, to the President. We understand it was to the effect that Mr. Huber would not obey the summons of the Council without being forced, which force was not at the command of the sergeant-at-arms—Rep.] After further waiting, on motion, the council adjourned.

Council—afternoon—A communication from Mr. Huber was read, stating in substance his objection to action on the relocation bill, enumerated in his remarks above, and affirming that his physical presence in the Council chamber as a prisoner, would not legalize any proceedings under existing circumstances.

The President then directed the sergeant-at-arms to continue the search for the absent members, and if aid was required to arrest them, to summon aid, arrest, and compel their attendance upon the sitting of the Council. If he had reason to believe that they were concealed in any building, to exercise the same power, and use such force as a sheriff was authorized to use in making arrests. The sergeant-at-arms returned with the message that they could not be found, and the council adjourned.

December 10, 1855 Council Afternoon Meeting

The Council was called to order by the President and the roll called, when the following members answered to their names: Messrs. Drain, Fulkerson, Haber, O’Bryant, Pebbles, Smith and Mr. President.

Mr. Peebles—At the time of adjournment a motion was pending that the bill be ordered to a third reading tomorrow. As the effect of that motion, if carried, would be to preclude amendment, I will, if gentlemen have amendments to offer, withdraw my motion.

Mr. Fulkerson offered an amendment to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert—submitting the location to the people, meanwhile allowing the seat of government to remain at Corvalis, until an expression of the popular will could be so had.

Mr. Fulkerson—I deem it my duty to offer at least some reason why I advocate the amendment. As there has been a popular sentiment through the country generally, that there has been bargaining and sale of those public buildings. Be that as it may, I have nothing to say to it. I have not been a party to any such.

The amendment sets at rest the vexed question which has occupied so much of the time of former legislatures, and promises to be still more troublesome in the future, if we do not submit it to the people. When this question goes out as we have it here in the amendment, before the people, then they will have the log rolling to do, and if there is any bargaining and sale done, they do it themselves. I want to say nothing here that the people who sent me here would not say if they were here themselves in person. I do not say that any other gentlemen wishes to misrepresent their constituents—it is for me to put myself right and I suppose they will do the same. If we move this capital by our action, we will be accused of legislating for town and for individual interests. I believe the people would locate the seat of government perhaps, where there are no towns. I do not legislate for towns but for the people of Oregon.

The friends of the bill say that it is on the score of economy that it should go back to Salem. Well, if we go back to Salem, the appropriation will be expended there and will be lost to the territory, if the people decide to remove it from there. If we remain here the appropriation will be squandered—it will be saved to build where the people decide to build. I did not come here to oppose Salem. As a citizen of Oregon Territory, I am nearer to that point than any other member on the floor. But I did not come here to obey my own wish but the wishes of my constituents, four-fifths of whom are against Salem and in favor of this place. What does this amendment propose? It does not propose to spend a dollar of the money appropriated until the people shall have decided where the seat of government will be. Thus, it is that whatever money we shall have will be expended at that point. There are other points that I had intended to allude to, and I will perhaps at another time.

I do not intend to plague the Council with a speech at this time. I will only make one more remark. I believe the gentlemen elected to this Council have a principle that they want to speak the wishes of their constituents. Now there are seven members in this Council—properly there should be nine if they were all here. Now let one other member arrive here, either from the north or the south (I do not care whether he is for or against this place,) and I am willing to abide by any action that the Council shall adopt after. But I would rather resign my seat in this body than go into action upon it now.

Last session the representatives of the people did not act hastily upon it. They deferred it over till almost the close of the session, and why shall we be in such a hurry now. It is said that some men—some of the federal officers—have taken sides that they ought not to have done. I do not pretend to say—it’s for them to settle that in their own breast. But that we are in the same predicament that the territory was, in relation to the location question a few years ago, is plain enough. I do not prefer any charge of corruption against any man until it is proved. But, I think the history of Oregon will place the responsibility where it belongs.

The question being on the amendment, Messrs. Drain, O’Bryant, Peebles and Mr. President voted against—Haber, Smith and Fulkerson—for the amendment.

Mr. Fulkerson moved to amend by inserting Roseburg, Douglas County, in place of Salem, in Marion County, and that the act shall take effect on the 3rd of January, 1856. The question being on the adoption of this amendment, Mr. Peebles called for a division, and the amendment was put in two distinct divisions as above.

Mr. Peebles—Now as my friend from Polk, with whom I have always maintained most amicable relations, has offered the seat of government all round, I think he will not treat me any worse than the rest, and that as they have all declined, he will now vote for my having it. [laughter]

Mr. Fulkerson—I would vote to send it anywhere before I would vote to send it to Salem.

Mr. Smith—I have another amendment to offer. I move to strike out Salem and insert Albany, in Linn County.

Mr. Drain—The people of Linn County are the happiest people in the territory, and as this is a stirrer up of feuds, we do not wish to throw it amongst them. We had a few know-nothings there, but they have all died out, and we do not wish to disturb them again. On the part of Linn County, therefore, we most respectfully beg leave to decline your good intentions towards her.

The bill was amended to go into effect on the 15th instead of the 12th, when on motion of Mr. Fulkerson, the Council adjourned.

Oregon Statesman, December 25, 1855

December 20, 1855 Council Morning Meeting

Mr. Peebles advocated the provision of the bill requiring a levy of two mills for territorial purposes.

Mr. Fulkerson opposed the motion; he said it was his experience that the more revenue we raised the greater were our expenses; that if we levied the tax, we should be likely to think that some improvement was necessary in the country which would absorb it. He thought our expenses had been too much; he did not wish to reflect upon any gentleman in this respect; he might have been heretofore culpable. But he now went for retrenchment, and his plan was to reduce our expenses, until the debt of the territory was paid; we might not be able to pay it all at once, but we could do it gradually. He thought the present mill and one half was sufficient.

Mr. Fulkerson said reference had been made to the fact that Jackson County, by law, was required to pay but one mill territorial tax, and the other counties a mill and a half. That was a fact, but he believed it was an oversight on the part of the last legislature; he did not believe the distinction was intended. He might have voted for the bill himself, but he did not intend any favoritism; he was for equal taxation. He still thought that two mills was too high a tax.

[James Fulkerson was often the President Pro Tem during the 1855-56 Council, which probably why he is seldom mentioned by the newspaper as in debate or advancing legislation--H.M.].

The last meeting of the assembly was Saturday, January 26th and was reported by the February 5, 1856 Weekly Oregon Statesman.

Miscellaneous News Articles

Weekly Oregon Statesman March 5, 1853 Letter to the Editor

A long and sarcastic letter to the editor complaining about “Mr. G.E Cole” (Democrat from Benton County)

“Would not the man who offered or voted for such a resolution been called a Whig as you were called by Messrs. Fulkerson, Richardson and others who have no rivalries and no ambition, and whose democracy is as unassailable as divine revelation!

Signed, “A Looker On”

Weekly Oregon Statesman March 6, 1853 News Article

The Vote for a Printer

After the election of a public printer at the late joint convention of the Legislative Assembly, some persons who kept tally, claimed that there was one more ballot thrown than there were members in the convention. Upon the assembling of the House the next morning, several of our opponents, disappointed and angry on account of this result of the balloting, expended a great deal of virtuous indignation in support of the charge that one more vote had been than there were persons intitled to vote. And it was freely hinted that such vote might have been purposely cast and that by it perhaps our election was affected. After several of them had uncorked their rage and hatred, Messrs. Anderson, Gibbs, Fulkerson and others quietly showed them up and asserted that there were seventeen members of the convention (a majority), who were willing to be qualified that they voted for the candidate declared elected, and if, as was the insinuation, fraud had been committed, it had been done by some of the opposition; though they repelled the inference even admitting the fact, that anyone had been guilty of intentional fraud.

Weekly Oregon Statesman April 16, 1853 Political Advertisement

Democratic Nominations for Delegate to Congress: Joseph Lane

Polk County for Councilman, J.M. Fulkerson

For Representatives to the House: R.P. Boise & W.S. Gilliam