5 A Resilient Black Voice In The Wilderness: A.H. Francis’ Resistance Against Legal Exclusion
Amit Kobrowski
Introduction
For many, present-day Oregon conjures a particular political image. A strong environmentalist movement, a vibrant hippie community, the legalization and decriminalization of drug laws, the first in the nation to vote for euthanasia and to elect an openly LGBTQ governor, Oregon checks many of the boxes of what is assumed by the notion of a “liberal West Coast.” Yet, on issues of race, Oregon’s past is marked by attempts at creating an exclusive white-only state (Madeo, 2023).
Oregon plays a limited role in most U.S. History textbooks. Typically, students outside of Oregon learn about the state for the first time as part of the Lewis and Clark exploration story. A once popular video game about adventures on the Oregon Trail introduced several generations of students to a narrow version of Oregon Territory history. However, a closer examination of the road to Oregon statehood provides an excellent opportunity to explore the ramifications of several key events in the years leading to the Civil War. The admission of Oregon into the Union as a “Free State” elides its racist past. While the white settlers forming the first provisional government in the territory prohibited slavery with the adoption of portions of the 1787 NW Ordinance Act, they soon amended the provision in 1844 (Millner, 2021) to require settler slave owners to relinquish their slaves within three years of settlement in Oregon. This effectively allowed slavery to extend to Oregon, even if for a limited time. However, an additional provision also required newly freed Black men (within two years) and Black women (within three years) to leave the state upon emancipation. Violators of this law were subject to physical punishment by lash. Sometimes called Burnett’s lash law, the requirement for physical punishment was removed without it ever being enforced, but subsequent Black exclusion laws remained.
In 1849 (MIllner, 2021), a new exclusion law prohibited any new Black settlement into Oregon territory but allowed Blacks already residing in Oregon to remain. This law was repealed in 1854, but the 1857 Oregon Constitution banned slavery and reintroduced legal Black exclusion. Although the Black Exclusion Clause in the Oregon Constitution was never legally enforced and became invalid with the passage of the 14th Amendment, Black emigration to Oregon remained low well into the 20th century.
The documents in this collection span the six years between the second exclusion law of 1849 and 1855, a year after its repeal. The focus here is on A.H. Francis, a Black shop owner who, along with his brother, was charged with violating the 1849 law. Although the court dismissed the charges, these letters reveal his impressions of Oregon, his frustration with the hypocrisy of a nation that proclaims liberty and freedom, and his thoughts on the best ways to pursue legal recognition and equality for Black people.
Oregon’s history includes at least one known case of expulsion based on the 1849 law. Jacob Vanderpool, a Black businessman, settled in Oregon City in 1850. Accused by a rival hotel owner of breaking the exclusion law, Vanderpool was found guilty of being a “mulatto” residing in Oregon Territory in violation of the 1849 law. Vanderpool was forced to leave the territory within thirty days. “The Place We Make,” a 2023 book by Sarah Sanderson, explores some of this history. However, we do not have records of Jacob Vanderpool’s own words beyond the advertisement for his Oregon City hotel.
The letters from Francis and his tenacious efforts in business from Buffalo to Portland to Victoria, despite the challenges of racism, display the resilience (“Black perseverance” King, 2020) necessary for Black business owners throughout our nation’s history. His letters to Douglass also outline a course of resistance against Oregon’s racial laws and the continuation and expansion of slavery through the 1850 compromise and popular sovereignty.
Historical Context
To establish the historical context of this chapter, it may be necessary to revisit the early settler history of the territory of Oregon. In the early 19th century, American and British traders found a lucrative business in the animal furs of the Pacific Northwest. By the 1830s, American missionaries settled in Oregon Country (modern-day Washington, Oregon, Idaho) with the hopes of converting the numerous tribes of the region.
An influx of settlers from Missouri and other U.S. states, the shifting economic priorities of Great Britain, and an expansionist mood in the United States helped elect James K. Polk to the presidency in 1844 on the promise of bringing Texas and Oregon Country into the United States. By 1845, some Americans were simply pursuing the logic of Manifest Destiny by calling for 54°40′ or fight, a claim, if realized, that would have drawn the northern border of the United States well into modern British Columbia (Lang, 2023).
The United States and Great Britain settled the dispute with the 1846 Oregon Treaty drawing the northern border at the 49th parallel. Before officially becoming a United States territory, American settlers already established a framework for government and established the Organic Laws of Oregon. From its origins, the provisional government of Oregon was concerned with the issue of slavery and white supremacy. By 1844, the Organic laws prohibited slavery in Oregon territory and any permanent Black settlement. This included a short-lived “lash law” that threatened physical harm to Blacks who did not leave the territory. Although never enforced and soon removed, the tone was set for Black settlers to Oregon. Nevertheless, there was always a small Black presence in Oregon of enslaved, newly emancipated, or free Blacks who made the journey overland or by steamship to Oregon Territory.
The U.S. victory over Mexico in 1848 and the expansion of the United States territory through the Southwest to California once again opened the issue of the expansion of slavery. The Compromise of 1850 attempted to address the national divisions on the slavery question by admitting California into the Union as a free state, banning the slave trade in Washington D.C., and in two provisions that arguably increased national divisions, allowed popular sovereignty to determine if either Utah or New Mexico would allow for slavery, and strengthened the Fugitive Slave Laws. The new law required Northern officials to actively participate in the return of the self-emancipated who had escaped to the North.
Abolitionists, both Black and White were outraged by the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act. In his letters to Frederick Douglass, A.H. Francis is well aware of the rift amongst abolitionists on the best way to pursue the end of slavery in the face of the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act. Francis referenced the division between the followers of William Llyod Garrison and Douglass in the debate around the 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act and the repeal of the Missouri Compromise (Source 3).
The documents in this chapter begin with A.H. Francis’ first impressions of Oregon (Source 1). Francis arrived by ship rather than the overland route experienced by most immigrants to the Oregon Territory. His first impressions of Oregon are of the geography along the Columbia and Willamette rivers. Although not included in this collection, Francis shares the American settler view of Indigenous people and culture referring to the natives of Oregon as “savage” and “degraded.” Black and other racialized settler groups were not immune to the dismissive attitudes towards Native Americans. These complex narratives are part of what Dr. LaGarrett King categorizes as “Black Historical Contention” in his framework for Black Historical Consciousness (King, 2020).
Source 1 continues with Francis briefly referencing the 1849 Black Exclusion Law. Here he laments the existence of the law but is assured by his white friends and neighbors of Portland that this law is of no consequence and will soon be repealed. Only two months later, Francis again writes to Douglass to inform him that Francis and his brother have been found guilty of violating Oregon’s Black Exclusion Law (Source 2).
In addition to the four letters from A.H. Francis to Frederick Douglass, this collection includes Oregon’s Black Exclusion Law of 1849 (Source 5) and the Oregon Donation Land Act of 1850 (Source 6). The 1849 Exclusion Law was enacted by the white settlers in Oregon Territory attempting to move toward statehood. The Oregon Donation Land Act (Source 6), is an example from the Federal Legislature demonstrating the racial policies of the antebellum federal government.
|
Standard |
Description |
|---|---|
|
8.C.PI.5 |
Evaluate how the persistence of racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice, affected laws, treaties, and Supreme Court decisions from 1787 to 1865 on sovereignty, status, rights, and liberties of historically underrepresented individuals and groups |
|
8.C.IR.9 |
Identify and understand how to apply the rights and responsibilities of individuals under the Constitution. |
|
8.C.DP.10 |
Analyze important political and ethical values for individual rights and their lasting effect on the status, rights, and liberties of historically underrepresented individuals and groups embodied in documents such as the Declaration of Independence, the United States and Oregon Constitutions, and the Bill of Rights. |
|
8.C.DP.11 |
Analyze issues involving liberty in conflict with equality or authority, individual rights in conflict with the common good, or majority rule in conflict with minority rights. |
|
8.C.CE.13 |
Identify the methods of individuals and movements responsible for the expansion of justice, equality, equity, rights, and responsibilities of citizenship from historically underrepresented groups at the local and national levels. |
|
8.C.CE.14 |
Evaluate the historical and contemporary means of attempting to create more inclusive societies, including the importance of advocacy and activism related to the expansion of justice, equality, and equity for historically underrepresented individuals and groups |
|
8.H.CH.1 |
Identify the significant political developments surrounding the territorial expansion of the United States in the early republic (1776-1865). |
|
8.H.CC.3 |
Discuss the ongoing debate on attempts at restorative justice to address historic and ongoing injustice. |
|
8.H.CE.6 |
Analyze how economic, religious, social, ideological, and political developments led to sectional and national tensions, inspiring reform movements and political and social divisions between 1800-1860. |
|
8.H.CE.7 |
Evaluate the growing political tensions between 1820-1861 over the institution of slavery within the United States, leading to the Civil War |
|
8.H.CP.9 |
Use primary and secondary sources to evaluate how intersecting identities including, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, race, ethnicity, religion, physical and mental ability, and class affect the living histories and experiences of peoples, groups, and events. |
|
8.H.CP.10 |
Identify and explain the contributions and experiences of individuals from traditionally underrepresented identities in Oregon and the United States. |
Essential Question: How do the stated values of American democracy inspire resilience and resistance to injustice?
Source 1: Letter from A.H. Francis Upon Arrival in Oregon Portland, Oregon Territory, after August 10, 1851
Dear Douglass:
…Pacific City is near the mouth of the Columbia. The entrance into the harbor is quite difficult, and not safe without an experienced pilot. Once Inside, you glide along on the beautiful waters of the harbor, (which is as smooth as glass,) until mountain fastnesses, on either side, hide all other objects from view, save the city in front, and the great sandbar in the rear, around which we had just been piloted. The land is well timbered with pine, cedar, and oak, showing already some proof, that American enterprise will yet mould this portion of the continent to rank, among her richest and certainly most pleasant (in regard to climate) of all her domain. After a short stay, to land some passengers, the steamer rounded to, and passed safely out. Rounding a point, we came suddenly in view of the mouth of the Columbia river. No doubt, in many respects, one of the finest rivers in the world. I think her length is thirteen hundred miles, and breadth varying from some three to four miles at its mouth, down to one-half mile, and were it not for some difficult falls to pass, would be navigable to its terminus.
…It was on a pleasant Sabbath, the 10th of August, I came in sight of St. Hellens, Mount Hood, and Mount Jefferson, the peaks of which, and for some distance down their sides, were covered with snow. As the rays of the sun sent back the reflection (although some eighty to a hundred miles distant.) the eyesight was dazzled. The former named of these mountains, stands elevated thirteen thousand feet above the level of the sea.
…I arrived in Portland on Sunday evening. It lies on the Whillhamet River, one of the branches of the Columbia, about one hundred miles from the mouth of the Columbia. The situation is a desirable one for a city, and must eventually become a city of considerable size. It is now the largest in Oregon.
I avow the fact, although the greater portion of the citizens are Southerners. From the desire to make money, or in consequence of no colored people living among them, they do not show out their principles as is their usual custom, God grant they never may.
I am informed that some Judas had introduced, and succeeded in getting it passed in the Territorial Legislature, a resolution that no colored person should settle in the Territory. I have conversed with some of the leading officials of this city, in relation thereto. They say it was passed by stratagem. Although in operation, it will be repealed. Portland is less than two years old, contains three to four thousand inhabitants, (whites,) beside a large number of Indians. It is the great trading depot for the Territory, and many of the mining districts trade at this place. Government lands are rapidly being taken up, and settled by industrious farmers, who are running the products of the soil into market, and receiving enormous prices…
I have more than filled up my sheet, and therefore bid you adieu, for the present, and subscribe myself,
Yours as ever, A.H. Francis.
* Published in Frederick Douglass’ Paper, November 20, 1851, p. 3
Source 2: “Free Territory” of Oregon October 1851
To Frederick Douglass — My Dear Friend: … I was brought to the knowledge of the fact, and experienced the result of an existing law in this “free territory” of Oregon, so unjust and devilish in all its features, that I waive other matter[s] that you may immediately give publicity to the facts relating to it.
…[m]y brother was arrested through the complaint of an Englishman (said, by some, not to be naturalized), on charge of violating one of the laws of the territory. And what do you suppose was the crime? That he was a negro, and that one of the laws of the “free” territory forbid any colored person who had a preponderance of African blood from settling in the territory. He was tried before a Justice of the Peace, and, I must say, very generously given six months to leave the territory. The law says thirty days. The second day after my return, Sept. 15th, the complainant, not being satisfied with the past decision, carried the case up to the Supreme Court, Judge Pratt presiding.
Before his Judgeship we were summoned. After a formal hearing, establishing the fact of negro identity, the court adjourned, to meet the next morning at 9 o’clock. At the hour appointed, the room was crowded, showing much feeling of indignation and wrath against the complainant. Judge Tilford, late of San Francisco (a Kentuckian), appeared as counsel for the defense. To be brief, he conducted the case with the ability and skill rarely seen by the legal profession, showing, by the constitution of the United States, the right of citizens of one state to enjoy the rights of citizens in another. [h]is argument rested that citizens of one state had a right to enjoy the same privileges that the same class of citizens enjoy in the state which they visit. This he contended was the understanding or meaning of that article in the constitution. He demanded for us, under this clause, all the rights which colored people enjoyed in the territory prior to the passage of this law. (Those in the territory at the time of the passage of this law are not affected by it). He then took the position, and clearly proved it, that the law was unconstitutional, on the ground that [it] made no provision for jury trial in these arrests, showing that any person, no matter how debased, had the power to enter complaint against any colored persons and have them brought before any petty Justice of the Peace and commanded to leave the territory.
At the close of it, the whole house appeared to feel that the triumph was complete on the part of the defendants, that unconstitutionality of the law must be conceded by Judge Pratt. But alas! self-interest or selfishness led him to attempt to override the whole argument, and prove the constitutionality of the law; and it is none the less true that we now stand condemned under his decision, which is to close up business and leave the territory within four months.
This decision produced considerable excitement. Some said the scoundrel (the complainant) ought to have a coat of tar, while the mass have agreed to withhold their patronage from him. . .
…The people declare we shall not leave at the expiration of the time, whether the Legislature repeal the law or not. Petitions are now being circulated for its repeal. The member from this district, Col. King, one of the most influential men in the house, declares, as far as his influence can go, it shall be repealed at the commencement of the session, which takes place on the first of December next. Thus you see, my dear sir, that even in the so-called free territory of Oregon, the colored American citizen, though he may possess all of the qualities and qualifications which make a man a good citizen, is driven out like a beast in the forest, made to sacrifice every interest dear to him, and forbidden the privilege to take the portion of the soil which the government says every citizen shall enjoy.
Ah! when I see and experience such treatment, the words of that departed patriot come before me. “I tremble for my country when I remember that God is just, and that his justice will not always sleep.” I find, upon examination, that more than half of the citizens of Portland were ignorant of any such law. The universal sentiment is, that it shall be repealed. God grant that this may be the case. If I have been one who, through suffering severely, has had the least agency in bringing about this repeal, I shall freely surrender, and be well pleased with the result. Yours for equal rights, equal laws and equal justice to all men.
A.H. Francis
* Published in Frederick Douglass’ Paper, November 13, 1851
Source 3: Letter from A.H. Francis, “Onward Be Your Motto” Portland, Oregon, June 1, 1854
Frederick Douglass, Esq: Esteemed Friend: —
The changes that have taken place, in relation to your views in carrying on the Anti Slavery movement, the violent attacks within which those views have been met by those who heretofore were professedly your dearest friends and co-adjutors in the branch of reformatory movement, has been a source of great grief to my mind.
It has established in my mind for you (if possible) an increased amount of confidence in your honest and untiring efforts to rid the American Government of that system of abominations that already places her on the brink of ruin, betraying in some degree the confidence I heretofore held in some of the most able defenders of human rights. Permit me to say that you have sustained your position against fearful odds. Draw not back. Onward be your motto. — No attacks from your opponents in a righteous cause can avail anything when professedly anti-slavery men stoop (falsely) so low, in order to give a semblance of truth to their vile calumny…
Stand firm to your position, my esteemed friend. The crisis imperiously demands that political anti-slavery should be brought to bear upon the rotten, false-hearted demagogues that now fill the State and National councils of the American Government. The drama that politicians are now playing is hastening to the last act. In the name of God and humanity, I call upon Abolitionists, and all honest men, to come to the rescue. Displace, and forever lay low the heartless, dishonest and ungrateful political wretches who have betrayed their trust, and sold themselves to a power through which naught is to be seen but blight and decease throughout the land. It is a mystery to me how anti-slavery men can look through moral suasion alone to the overthrow of such infamous time servers as those who supported the repeal of the Missouri Compromise…
…The first Legislative Council of Washington Territory (that portion that was taken in the division of Oregon) convened in February at Olympia. By the acts I notice they have drawn the line of distinction between the races. The colored man, and half-breeds of African descent, are disfranchised, while half-breeds of whites and Indians are not. The President of the Council, [Francis A.] Chenowith, representative from the Cascades, a man with whom I have some acquaintance, and who held the most liberal views three years ago in relation to my ejection from the territory on account of complexion, was the first to offer an amendment to the resolution which produced this result, at a time, too, when there was a prospect of its going through without this odious clause. Truly, the time has come when we know not what politicians to trust. He was one of the candidates for Congress. That hope buried all his amazing philanthropy. When will men learn true wisdom, and act for the right?
Before I close, I must congratulate you, and the projectors and supporters of the National Council. I consider it the great movement of the age among colored Americans. Let the objects in view of that body be carried out, and our increasing strength and influence will be permanently felt throughout the Union. I certainly deplore the unwise and unjustifiable position taken by some friends of Freedom in this Colonization Conventional movement, soon to take place in Cleveland, Ohio. Personally acquainted, and friendly as I feel towards the projectors of that scheme, I can but feel that the spirit of opposition and self-aggrandizement are higher motives with some, than real sympathy for the good they expect to accomplish.
I want no better evidence than the fact that the most tenacious supporters of that movement are the last to leave the country, and the first to deny those to meet with them who disagree with their views. A subject what will not bear thorough investigation by friends and foes, is a dangerous subject to meddle with. Condemnation is written on every move. Please accept these hasty thoughts not only from a friend personal but a friend of the oppressed throughout the world.
A.H. FRANCIS
* A.H. Francis to Frederick Douglass, June 1, 1854, Portland, published in Frederick Douglass’ Paper, September 22, 1854, p. 3
Source 4: Letter from A.H. Francis “Taxation without Representation” Portland, Oregon July 22, 1855
Dear Frederick: I have nothing important to relate since my last, except a flare-up this morning with the County Assessor.
The law of the Territory levys a tax on stock in trade, money, &c. of ½ per cent., which makes it very heavy on large mercantile houses. The Assessor newly appointed demands on oath the value of your effects.
The law of the Territory forbids my oath on account of complexion. In compliance with this outrageous law I refused to swear to my amount of capital. The Assessor has taken issue, and no doubt it will end in a law suit; the fine for refusing to swear is $20. I have concluded not to tamely submit to witnessing this outrage on my rights without testing the legality thereof.
Look for a moment to the detestable principle here involved. Outrages, insults, or abuse, may be practiced upon me, and I have no oath to defend myself. When taxation, without representation is levied upon me, then my oath is good in order that a heavier tax may not be collected from me.
Never, no never will I open my lips in solemn vows to such injustice, short of investigation before a higher tribunal than petty officers. I remain yours as ever,
A.H. FRANCIS
| Essential Question |
How do the stated values of American democracy inspire resilience and resistance to injustice? |
|---|---|
| Standards |
This lesson aligns best with Oregon’s 8th-grade history and civics standards. |
| Staging |
The lesson uses primary sources to explore the prevalence of racism in Oregon’s laws before statehood and the actions of resistance and resilience by A.H. Francis, a free Black businessman who lived and operated a business in Oregon for several years before escaping the legal racism of the state for Victoria, British Columbia. |
| Supporting Question 1 |
|
| Formative Performance Task |
Compare and contrast Francis’s initial impressions of Oregon with what we know about its racial laws from the historical context provided. How might these conflicting realities have affected Francis’s experience? |
| Featured Sources |
Letter from A.H. Francis Upon Arrival in Oregon Portland, Oregon Territory, after August 10, 1851 |
| Supporting Question 2 |
|
| Formative Performance Task |
How does the response of white business leaders to the case reflect the complexity of racial attitudes in Oregon Territory at the time? |
| Featured Sources |
Source 2: “Free Territory” of Oregon October 1851 |
| Supporting Question 3 |
|
| Formative Performance Task |
Compare Francis’s views on the National Council with his opinion on the Colonization Convention movement. What do these contrasting views suggest about different strategies within the African American community for achieving equality? |
| Featured Sources |
Source 3: Letter from A.H. Francis, “Onward Be Your Motto” Portland, Oregon, June 1, 1854 |
| Supporting Question 4 |
|
| Formative Performance Task |
How do such everyday experiences of discrimination shape individual and collective responses to injustice over time? |
| Featured Sources |
Source 4: Letter from A.H. Francis “Taxation without Representation” Portland, Oregon July 22, 1855 |
| Summative Performance Task |
Create a written response to the essential question using evidence from the primary documents and classroom discussion. |
| Potential Civic Engagement |
How should communities recognize acts of resistance and resilience in celebrating their history? |
Additional Questions for discussion or writing
Letter 1
- Develop a hypothesis about how racial attitudes in Oregon might evolve as the territory grows and becomes more diverse. Support your hypothesis with evidence from the letter and your understanding of historical patterns of racial dynamics in the United States.
- How does A.H. Francis’s letter reveal the complex relationship between economic opportunity and racial attitudes in early Oregon Territory?
Letter 2
- How does A.H. Francis’s letter illuminate the tension between democratic ideals and racial discrimination in mid-19th century Oregon Territory?
Letter 3
- How does A.H. Francis’s letter reflect the evolving strategies and internal debates within the abolitionist movement during the 1850s?
Letter 4
- How does A.H. Francis’s conflict with the County Assessor illustrate the contradictions and injustices in the legal treatment of African Americans in 19th-century America?
Primary Document Analysis Worksheet Exercise
Adapted from The National Archives Worksheet on How to Analyze a Written Document.pdf
Before You Read:
- Type of document?
- Who wrote it?
- When was it published?
- Who was the intended audience (specific person or group)?
- What was happening at the time in history this document was created (as it relates to the document)?
While You Read:
- What is it talking about?
- Why did the author write it?
- List evidence from the document that is relevant to the larger historical context (this will remind you what you learned about the topic or issue through this document).
Making Document into Historical Evidence:
- What did you find out from this document that you might not learn anywhere else?
- In one sentence, how did this document further your knowledge about the larger topic of study?
References
Hawkins, K. (2020). “A Proper Attitude of Resistance” The Oregon letters of A.H. Francis to Frederick Douglass, 1851–1860. Oregon Historical Quaterly, 121(4), 378-415. https://www.ohs.org/oregon-historical-quarterly/back-issues/upload/Hawkins_AH-Francis-Letters_OHQ-Winter-2020_121_4_web.pdf
King, G.L. (2020). Black history is not American history: Toward a framework of Black
Historical Consciousness. Social Education (84)6, 335-341
Lang, W. (2023). Oregon question. Oregon Encyclopedia. https://www.oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/oregon_question_54_40_or_fight/
Madeo. Jun. 26, 1844 | Oregon territory bans free Black people. https://calendar.eji.org/racial-injustice/jun/26
Milner, D. (2020). Blacks in Oregon. Black studies publications and presentations. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=black_studies_fac
Nokes, G. (n.d.) Black exclusion laws in Oregon.. https://www.oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/exclusion_laws/#.Y9a5VOzMI-Q
