Article XVIII, section 7, of the Oregon Constitution, adopted in 1859, provides:
"All laws in force in the Territory of Oregon when this constitution takes effect, and consistent therewith, shall continue in force until altered or repealed."
State v. Ford, 89 Or. 121, 172 Pac. 802 (1918) states:
It is not believed that Section 7093, L. O. L., abrogates the common-law principle announced by the foregoing authorities. This section of the Code empowers the County Court to hear and determine applications for the change of names. In 1852 Pennsylvania enacted a similar statute, found in the Session Laws for that year at page 301. It was held by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania that the act “was in affirmance and aid of the common law, to make a definite point of time at which a change shall take effect,” and that notwithstanding the statute a party can acquire by custom the right to use a certain name: Laflin & Rand Co. v. Steytler, 146 Pa. St. 434 (23 Atl. 215, 14 L. R. A. 690, 695). In any event we must assume in the absence of evidence on the subject that the common-law rule obtains in Illinois and the other states in which *126appellant and Elizabeth G. Frary had resided from 1908 to 1914. During all of that time the latter had been known as Elizabeth G. Ford. The deed in question therefore was executed by her under the name by which she was known.
Ouellette v. Ouellette 420 P. 2d 631, 245 Or. 138 - Or: Supreme Court, 1966 states:
The court recognized that at common law a person could change his name at will without legal proceedings and that such proceedings were merely an aid to the establishment of a name change.
Hale v. Port of Portland, 783 P. 2d 506 - Or: Supreme Court 1989 states:
The Oregon Territory adopted the English common law in two acts.
Statehood did not change the law.