There are also some stories of the dark history of Oregon’s statehood. Apparently (and this fact is not covered in schools) the state constitution included a clause that prohibited the immigration of non-whites into the new state. It had some weird effects. When the Klan recruited up a chapter in Oregon in the 1920s, the effort fizzled because the members looked around at the dearth of dark-skinned people and ended up saying, “meh”.
An anecdote: When I lived on the east coast I kept complaining that I kept moving north when I didn’t intend to. When I moved back from California I started out in Scarborough (south of Portland, ME), then to South Portland, then to Portland, then to Brunswick (30 miles north of Portland). And my job moved from Brunswick to Lewiston (another 10 miles north of Brunswick). So I decided I needed to make a move and move south for once and for all. I hit the road, I visited the whole eastern seaboard; I drove across the Great Plains to the southwest states; I made it to the Pacific Ocean at San Diego and worked my way up the coast. Now I’ve settle (temporarily) in Portland, Oregon.
Portland Oregon is further north than Brunswick, Maine.
Well…not exactly. They did fizzle a bit after initial great success, but not so much through a dearth of people to persecute (the “second Klan” was quite ecumenical in their persecutions - they hated almost everybody not white and Protestant and even some of their own), but more through infighting, corruption and incompetence.
I grew up in Tacoma, so I never had any trouble distinguishing Oregon and Washington; but there were other states that I used to get mixed up. Vermont/New Hampshire, and Mississippi/Alabama. Both pairs are right next to each other, roughly the same size, and similar shapes. I guess I can see someone having the same confusion over Washington/Oregon.
I don’t have a copy where I’m at now (house sitting for a friend), but my go-to will be “How the States Got Their Shapes” by Mark Stein (and there’s also a DVD series for it, which I don’t have); I’ll look it up when I can if no one responds sooner.
I didn’t notice this question when the thread was active. I must have still been flabbergasted about a state not where it should be.
The border was resolved by the Treaty of 1818. The British and the US governments agreed that the border from the Lake of the Woods to the Rocky Mountains would be along the 49th parallel north. Each country gave up a bit of land.
The British had claimed that bit south of the 49th, because it was part of the Hudson’s Bay watershed that defined Rupert’s Land.
Not shown on the map, there was a bit of land north of the 49th that the US claimed, as part of the Missouri watershed,* which was part of the Missouri Territory.
Each gave up their claims to those bits of land, to make the 49th the boundary.
There was one difficulty, and that was the start point of the boundary, which was vaguely defined as being the Lake of the Woods. Unfortunately, the Lake of the Woods inconveniently insisted on not matching the outline on the maps used by the Americans and the British, which resulted in the exclave of the North-west Angle, which is a bit of US territory north of the 49th.
* which is why I once was standing on a creekbed in Saskatchewan which was part of the Missouri watershed.
I remember in an early episode of Grey’s Anatomy that a character was going to go “up” to see relatives in New Hampshire. GA is in Seattle which is further north than New Hampshire.
Don’t forget Connecticut’s western reserve which included the northeast of Ohio. It is why there was a Western Reserve College (now merged with Case Institute of Technology to make CWRU). Later on Ohio fought the Toledo “war” (really a minor skirmish) that Ohio lost. In recompense, Michigan was given (or stolen from Wisconsin) the upper peninsula. Lots of territorial changes in those days.