Page:Oregon Historical Quarterly volume 25.djvu/286

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
248
John Tilson Ganoe

"6th. In all these advantages, this enterprise, from the nature of the country, Could Never Have a Rival Line Competing for Its Business."

To the objection that the country was too sparsely settled, he replied that it would remain so until a railroad was built to bring in emigrants. Every other road has been troubled with the same objections. The real source of opposition he said was from the citizens of Portland who were afraid some of the trade would be diverted to San Francisco. This he showed to be erroneous. All that was needed in his opinion was a grant from the government in order to interest capitalists in the project and since the road was of such great military importance and since Congress had not aided Oregon by any grants for railroads it was only just that it should do this.


The Land Grant Struggle:

The California and Oregon Company almost from the time of its organization attempted to gain aid from Congress. In 1863-4 Mr. Cole, Representative from California, introduced a bill embodying a grant but nothing came of it.[1] Gaston of the California and Columbia River Railroad Company informed Mr. Cole of the work he was doing gaining subscriptions and agitating for a railroad, and it was suggested by Mr. Cole that the company be mentioned in the bill. When Barry had his report of the survey printed in October, 1866, after the adjournment of the Oregon legislature, he immediately left for Washington where he tried to obtain a grant of land, but at that session of Congress the act was not passed.[2]

On July 13, 1865, the Oregon and California Railroad Company, the sister to the California and Oregon Com-

  1. Cong. Globe, 1863-4, p. 2063.
  2. The bill came from a select committee on Pacific Railroads and was introduced by Mr. Cole of California. It was read the first and second time and postponed for one week, H. R. 691—Cong. Globe, 1864-5, p. 337. On Feb. 27, 1865, it passed the house by a vote of 59-34; 89 not voting. Ibid p. 1161-2. In the Senate it was referred to the Committee on Pacific Railroads and reported from the Committee without amendment.