Page 8 * The ST JOHNS REVIEW * #6 March 25, 2016 * Email: reviewnewspaper@gmail.com * Mail: PO Box 83068, Port. OR 97283 * Web: www.stjohnsreview.com * Phone: 503-283-5086
The Cut
Part I continued from Page 1
By Jim Speirs
for the residents of North Port-
land to stop and ponder certain
idiosyncrasies and anomalies that
have become such odd parts of our
landscape.
The genesis of the Cut may have
been born during the 1905 Lewis
and Clark Exposition. I say may
because political activities in 1905
were much easier to conceal than
they are in today’s world because
scrutiny of activities was much
less, and records often were con-
veniently lost.
During the hugely success-
ful world-class Lewis and Clark
Expo, all of Portland became a
stage that was visited by Amer-
icans and royalty from the four
corners of the globe. Vast numbers
of famous and wealthy dignitar-
ies were housed in the Portland
area. They traveled throughout the
community to enjoy the centen-
nial events, picturesque beauty of
the area, and to explore business
opportunities that might be avail-
able in proximity to the Lewis
and Clark celebrations. One of the
most fascinating and talked about
discoveries was the enormous vi-
brancy and potential of a city near
Portland. Its name was St. Johns.
St. Johns in the early 1900’s was
one of the most desirable places a
person could live. The community,
which was never clearly dei ned
geographically, kept expanding
and moving its borders east, as
neighborhoods like Portsmouth
and Kenton clamored to be in-
cluded in the burgeoning econom-
ic growth and spirit of St. Johns.
Its houses were beautiful and its
streets were lined in perfect order,
and it had a commerce center that
was very provincial and self-serv-
ing. The city of St. Johns was “the”
place to reside.
Travelers to the Lewis and Clark
Exposition had taken notice of
these attributes, and increasing-
ly so had the city of Portland. St.
Johns had its own College, rivers
that buttressed both sides of the
peninsula insuring robust com-
mercial expansion, and a local
leadership that was very protective
of the jewel that was their prosper-
ous and growing community.
The future of St. Johns was clear
and with its ever expanding suc-
cess and growth, the city of Port-
land began to cast its eyes on the
smaller neighbor to its north and
by the early 1900’s the ugly word
“annexation” had become the sin-
ister siren call from Portland to St.
Johns.
As the city of Portland saw (and
envied) the economic machine
that St. Johns was becoming, there
came a cacophony of voices from
Portland that would eventually
seal the fate of the proud and in-
dependent city of St. Johns. The
larger city was greedy and saw
some of the most talented and en-
trepreneurial people and industries
choosing to locate in St. Johns at
the expense of Portland.
Political in-i ghting, backstab-
bing and closed-door deal making
became the order of the day. One
of the enticements for St. Johns
was the suggestion that Portland
would use its much larger political
clout to bring money to St. Johns
for a bridge over the Willamette
River. At the time, there was only
the ferry to facilitate business
over the river, and the addition
of a bridge would greatly help
St. Johns livability. Many of the
newspapers of the day were i lled
with articles that addressed the an-
nexation issue.
An example comes from the St.
Johns Review – the newly formed
newspaper which was “the” paper
in North Portland and rivaled both
the Oregonian and the Oregon
Journal in infl uence and power.
In a September 4, 1908 Review,
the headline read: “ANNEX-
ATION FOLLY AGAIN.” The
subtitle saying, “Nothing to be
Gained and Much to be Lost by
Such a Move at this Stage of the
Game.” The article concluded
with: “St. Johns is the most de-
sirable suburb about Portland,
will be one of the biggest revenue
getters to the big city when she be-
comes a part of the big corpora-
tion, as she will someday perhaps.
But we do not want to go into the
big city now, when there is not a
single good thing to be gained and
a big lot of things that are very
undesirable that be fastened upon
us.” (The style of writing in those
days certainly was baroque.)
St. Johns feared annexation and
had a dire, yet clear idea of what
incorporation with Portland would
mean for the stubbornly indepen-
dent and successful St. Johns. An-
other statement from the St. Johns
Review said: “To go into Portland
Picture of the Week
This picture, taken by Marshall Snyder gives a unique perspective of the bridge through time lapse pho-
tography. Very unique.
The MASTHEAD in this issue was taken by Melissa Bartoszewski and of course makes us all long for
all the spring fl owers to be in full bloom.
Send your lovely and/or unique pictures of the bridge (that you’ve taken yourself,) today to perhaps see
them in the April 8, 2016 issue of the Review. See page 2 for full details.
SEND YOUR PHOTO OF THE ST. JOHNS BRIDGE TO: reviewnewspaper@gmail.com in high resolution jpeg.
marshall@magempdx.com
will set St. Johns back ten or fi f-
teen years, and the very ones who
are agitating the change will curse
bitterly the hour they ever put their
fi ngers into the matter. This is par-
ticularly true of those who have
property interests.”
So, the stage was set, the caul-
dron was agitated and St. Johns
and Portland continued on a col-
lision course with the wheels of
intrigue and manipulation spun at
a frantic pace. For Portland, one of
the ways to lessen the growing re-
sistance to annexation was to cre-
ate divisions within the city of St.
Johns – divide and conquer, as the
saying goes.
The i erce opposition to annex-
ation forced the city of Portland
to seek out partners that might be
able to assist in the dissection of
the prosperous, proud and inde-
pendent city of St. Johns, and that
“aiding and abetting” came from
a very powerful source - the U.S.
Railroad industry.
Part II continued in the
April 8, 2016 issue.
Like to write? Enjoy telling a story?
Want to share news about what is happening
in the community?
If so, you could be a contributing reporter for the Review.
Have questions? Contact the Review at
reviewnewspaper@gmail.com