United States. District Court (Oregon)

Jacob Vanderpool was an African American owner of a saloon, restaurant, and boarding house living in Oregon City, Clackamas County, Oregon Territory at a time when the Oregon Territoral government enforced an exclusion law it had passed in 1844 preventing blacks from living in Oregon. In 1851, Vanderpool's neighbor brought suit against him, and Judge Thomas Nelson expelled him from the territory.

From the description of Theophilus Magruder v. Jacob Vanderpool case documents, 1851. (University of Oregon Libraries). WorldCat record id: 500879085

U.S. district and circuit courts were created by the Judiciary Act of 1789 under the authority of the constitutional provision that the judicial power of the United States be vested in a Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as the Congress may establish. The Judiciary Act provided that these courts were to have original jurisdiction in cases involving crimes, remedies of common law, and aliens suing for a tort. The district courts were to have exclusive original cognizance of civil cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, of seizures and all suits for penalties and forfeitures incurred, and of all suits against consuls or vice consuls. The circuit courts were to have jurisdiction over actions involving aliens or citizens of different States and, concurrent with the courts of theseveral States, equity suits where the matter in dispute exceeded $500. Provision was also made for appeals from the district to the circuit court.

Subsequent legislation and other factors caused the amount and type of work performed by the circuit and district courts to vary. The national bankruptcy acts, the first of which was passed in 1800, added a heavy burden to the district courts. In 1891 the appellate jurisdiction of the circuit courts was transferred to the newly created circuit courts of appeals, and the Judiciary Act of 1911 abolished the circuit courts and provided for the transfer of their records and remaining jurisdiction to the district courts.

Most States have had one district and one circuit court, with the State constituting a Federal judicial district. As the business of the courts increased the Congress authorized two or more district and circuit courts in some States. Some district and circuit courts were organized into two or more divisions, and court sessions were held at two or more locations. In 1838 the Northern District of New York became the first district to be divided into two divisions. Today at least 23 district courts are organized into divisions, and several courts have as many as six, seven, or eight divisions.

Naturalization Activities

The first naturalization act, passed in 1790, provided that an alien who desired to become a citizen of the United States should apply to "any common law court of record, in any one of the states wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least." Under this and later laws, and under varying requirements, aliens were naturalized in federal, state and local courts.

Records of naturalization proceedings in federal courts are usually among the records of the district court for the district in which proceedings took place. These records may still be in the custody of the court or may have been transferred to the National Archives,

A federal naturalization record usually consists of a declaration of intention, petitions, depositions, and a record of naturalization. For more information about the types of information included in these records, see various publications of the National Archives dealing with genealogical research, available from the Publications Division, National Archives (NEP), Washington, DC 20408.

Judicial Districts

The state of Oregon has one judicial district.

From the description of Agency history record. (National Archives Library). WorldCat record id: 145406921

After years of simmering tensions between white settlers and Indians, a small band of Cayuse warriors killed 14 whites and held 53 others captive in the Whitman Massacre of November 29, 1847 (so called because the targets were the Whitmans, a missionary couple living among the Cayuse). This event precipitated the Cayuse War. After the war, five tribal leaders, including Tiloukaikt (Telokite), were brought to trial and hanged for the crime.

Source: http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/50th/whitman/whitmanintro.html

From the guide to the U.S. District Court documents regarding the Whitman Massacre trial, 1850, (Special Collections and University Archives, University of Oregon Libraries)

Jacob Vanderpool was an African American owner of a saloon, restaurant, and boarding house living in Oregon City, Clackamas County, Oregon at a time when the Oregon Territoral government enforced an exclusion law (that had been passed by the Oregon Territorial government in 1844), preventing blacks from living in Oregon. In 1851, Vanderpool's neighbor, Theophilus Magruder, brought suit against him, and Judge Thomas Nelson expelled him from the territory.

Sources: Salem Online History website, "African Americans in Salem," http://www.salemhistory.net/people/african_americans.htm, January 11, 2010

McLagan, Elizabeth. A Peculiar Paradise: A History of Blacks in Oregon, 1788-1940 . Portland, Oregon: Georgian Press, 1980

From the guide to the Theophilus Magruder v. Jacob Vanderpool Case Documents, August 1851, (Special Collections and University Archives, University of Oregon Libraries)

On December 7, 1940, the clerks and warehousemen at Ward's Portland plant struck over the terms of settlement in a labor dispute. When the negotiations over the terms of settlement broke down on December 20, the Teamsters Union, representing the warehousemen, called for a general boycott of the goods being shipped to and from the plant.

A contract clause in the Agreement between the Teamsters and the Carriers servicing Wards stated that the Union was not in favor of sympathetic strikes and further provided that the Union would not interfere with interstate commerce or in the intrastate commerce moving over the lines of the operator. Despite the language in this provision, there were innumerable instances of direct coercion of employers and employees to restrict handling of Ward's merchandise. After a brief period of struggle with the boycott, the carriers abandoned all attempts to service Wards.

In addition to the general boycott, a secondary boycott was developed against the Company which exhibited equal strength. Major oil companies refused to sell or deliver fuel oil to the struck plant, longshoremen refused to handle Ward's merchandise, the Post Office refused to handle any more goods than had been customary before the strike, and railroads did not switch cars onto Ward's sidings.

Only after hearings before the Interstate Commerce Commission did the carriers resume service. Soon afterward, Ward's entered suit against the carriers involved in the District Court for recovery of damages as a result of the strike and boycott.

Since the case was finally ruled upon in 1951 (approximately nine years after the occurance of the strike), the decision was more concerned with carrier liability than with the actual award of damages. The judge, Honorable J. Alger Fee, ruled on the basis of common law that the "carriers were each responsible for the acts and defaults of their own servants...and that 'tertiary' boycotts to isolate a single business from the facilities of commerce...(is) against the labor policy of the United States." As the carriers had consciously withheld their services from use by Wards, they were in violation of the law and, as such, "they should pay for the natural and probable consequences of having failed their duty."

From the guide to the Montgomery Ward and Co. vs. Northern Pacific Terminal Co. of Oregon, et al. Files, 1940., (Kheel Center for Labor-Management Documentation and Archives, Martin P. Catherwood Library, Cornell University.)