Fort Clatsop Suggested Historic Area Report

C. Identification of the site

Summary of conclusions. The identification of the exact site of Fort Clatsop is not based upon documentary evidence contemporaneous with Lewis and Clark's visit to the region nor is it based upon physical remains of the original Fort Clatsop. To date, no physical remains which can be linked definitely with the Lewis and Clark Expedition have been found at the site . Rather, the identification is based upon tradition and upon reminiscences of persons who years earlier had the traditional site pointed out to them.

Nevertheless, the property owned by the Oregon Historical Society in all probability does contain the actual site of Fort Clatsop. This conclusion is based upon the general "tone of credibility" of the reminiscences and their general correspondence with known historical facts, and also upon the fact that certain details of the reminiscences correspond with details given in the Lewis and Clark manuscripts which were unknown to any historians at the time the reminiscences were recorded.

The Lewis and Clark records. The journals and maps made by members of the Lewis and Clark Expedition contain much information which enables one to determine fairly easily the general location of Fort Clatsop. Without any difficulty whatsoever, one learns from the surviving journals that the winter encampment was situated on the west bank of the Netul River (now the Lewis and Clark River) about 2 or 3 miles above its mouth. The site was on the first high ground encountered as the party ascended the river. It was about 30 feet above high tide level and was about 200 yards back from the river near a spring and in a dense stand of "pine" and "balsam fir." The Netul River was about 100 yards wide opposite the camp, and "just above" the spot where the party landed was a "small branch." There were "extensive marshes" at the place of encampment. [1]

Fort Clatsop is indicated on three of the excellent maps drawn by William Clark (see Maps 4, 5 and 6); and the general vicinity of the fort is pictured in considerable detail on a fourth (Map 7) . As do the journals, these maps give a clear idea of the general location of the winter camp, but analyze them as one will, one cannot bring them into exact conformity with present-day topographic maps or, for that matter, with each other. About all one can safely conclude from these maps is that Fort Clatsop was located on the west bank of the Netul River, about 2 or 3 miles above its mouth.

The latitude of Fort Clatsop was estimated by the explorers to be 46° 4' 31.3". [2] Evidently they did not record an estimate of the longitude. This calculation obviously was in error, since the correct figure for the present site is about 46° 8' 40". With such a wide margin of error, it is clear that even if a correction factor were determined for the explorers' observations, their figure could not be of real assistance in pinpointing the exact location of the original fort.

When the information contained in the Lewis and Clark records is compared with conditions in the field, it is not too difficult to identify the general area in which Fort Clatsop was located. As one ascends the Lewis and Clark River, which from Clark's maps can be none other than the stream called the Netul River by the explorers, the first land 30 feet high and within 200 yards of the west bank is encountered about 1.7 miles above the mouth. Here a broad low ridge-- a spur projecting slightly eastward from the hills which are nowhere far to the west--terminates roughly 100 yards from the river's edge. The land between the ridge and the stream is swamp . Near the eastern edge of the ridge are at least two springs, both of which would have been running at the time of year Lewis and Clark were at Fort Clatsop. Present-day, second-growth forest on the land and the historical record both show that this ridge was originally covered with a dense stand of Douglas fir. A small stream enters the river directly south of the ridge.

The points of correspondence are obvious. The identification becomes even more likely when one examines the land farther upstream, or south. Immediately south of the ridge, the high land retreats about a quarter of a mile westward from the river and does not re-approach the stream for nearly half a mile . There the hills approach the river quite closely, but their faces are steep, and they are generally higher than 30 feet. In short, they do not appear inviting as a place for a winter encampment. Therefore, the low ridge which approaches the river between about 1.7 and 1.9 miles from its mouth seems to be the most logical site for the fort.

It must be admitted, however, that there is some evidence in the original records which does not agree with this identification. First, both Clark and Sergeant Ordway say in their journals that Fort Clatsop was 3 miles above the mouth of the river; Sergeant Gass says the distance was "about" 2 miles. The ridge is closer to the Columbia than either of these estimates.

Second, the ridge does not seem to correspond with the location of the fort as shown on any of the Lewis and Clark maps. On at least one of these maps (see Map 6), Clark evidently made an attempt to show the position of the camp in some detail and with care. He pictured it as lying between 2 creeks along a straight section of the river, between 2 bends. The ridge today is directly opposite a conspicuous bend in the river. Also, the creek shown north of the fort by Clark does not particularly resemble in drain age pattern any stream now north of the ridge. On the other hand, the two creeks on the Clark map could be imagined to resemble the two creeks which today are the next two south of the ridge; these two creeks also empty into a fairly straight section of the river, between 2 bends. But, as we have seen, the high ground between these creeks is too far from the river. Therefore, one is forced back to the conclusion that the ridge is the most logical point for the site of Fort Clatsop. After all, streams do change their courses, and it is difficult t to estimate distances when traveling by canoe.

Assuming that Fort Clatsop stood on the top of the ridge about 200 yards from the river, there still remains the problem of pinpointing the exact location. Here the Lewis and Clark records are of practically no help. The crest of the ridge is bisected by a very small and shallow drainage basin, running west to east, in which is a spring which runs during the winter months. South and southwest, between this spring and the south edge of the ridge top, there are two or three acres of almost level ground, anywhere on which the winter encampment conceivably could have been located. If the Lewis and Clark records point to any particular section of the ridge top, it is probably to the area south of the spring, since a "small branch" empties into the river directly south of the ridge, and it is known that such a stream was situated "just above" the fort landing place. Surely the landing place would be as close to the fort as the topography permitted. It is this area south of the spring which is covered by the present historic monument tracts.

But even if it is accepted that the Lewis and Clark records point to the south half of the ridge top as the location, there still is considerable room for speculation as to the exact site. For the solution to this problem one must turn from the written records of the expedition to the realm of tradition and reminiscence.

The site becomes fixed in local tradition. In pinpointing the location of Fort Clatsop, the important fact to bear in mind is that the site was never lost sight of. The place has been an object of interest to travelers, sight-seers, and nearby residents almost from the time Lewis and Clark left it until the present day. As far as is known, none of the persons who visited the site while traces of the fort were still to be seen ever bothered to note the exact location on a large-scale map; nor are the descriptions of the site left by such persons of much value in fixing the location. After all, they were writing of a place whose location was common knowledge. And this knowledge lived on in the minds of the people who had seen the ruins and was transmitted by word of mouth to succeeding generations, until at last it was committed to writing, or at least captured on photographic plates, in 1899 and 1900.

True, tradition sometimes is in error, and word transmitted by mouth over a long period of time has a way of getting warped. In the present case, however, certain internal evidence in the traditional tales gives them a ring of truth which cannot be ignored.

Visitors to Fort Clatsop, 1811-1899. The fact that knowledge of the fort's location remained alive by tradition has not been documented in detail. It comes out only through the accounts left by visitors and in certain reminiscences of pioneer settlers. Therefore, these accounts must be noted at some length.

Maritime traders of both the United States and Great Britain visited the lower Columbia River after the sojourn of Lewis and Clark, as they had before it, but the first permanent settlement was by John Jacob Astor's Pacific Fur Company in 1811. By that year the Lewis and Clark Expedition was definitely linked in the minds of the Astorians with the Netul River, which was known to them as "Lewis River." [3] On October 2, 1811, Gabriel Franchere, one of Astor's men, visited Youngs Bay and saw "the ruins of the quarters erected by Captains Lewis and Clarke." He later wrote that the remains "were but piles of rough, unhewn logs, overgrown with parasite creepers." [4]

Another Astorian, Ross Cox, made a trip to Lewis and Clark's wintering place during May or June, 1812, and noted that the "logs of the house were still standing, and marked with the names of several of their party." [5] That the encampment was an object of general interest for the Astorians may be noted from the journal of another of their number, who wrote that on June 29, 1812, that the fort was then "in ruins" and "very disagreeably situated, being surrounded with swamps and quagmires." [6]

Local interest in the site continued even after Astoria was taken over by the British. On December 14, 1813, Alexander Henry, of the North West Company, and Captain Black, of the Royal Navy, made a trip by canoe to the Fort Clatsop landing place, where they found two houses of Clatsop Indians. Henry recorded in his journal: "We walked up to see the old American winter quarters of Captains Lewis and Clark in 1805-06, which are in total ruins, the wood having been cut down and destroyed by the Indians; but the remains are still visible. In the fort are already grown up shoots of willows 25 feet high." [7]

A Congressional committee, reporting on the occupation of the Oregon Country in 1821, noted that according to information then avail able in Washington, the remains of Fort Clatsop were "yet to be seen." [8]

By the 1830's, American settlers were beginning to trickle into the Oregon Country, and a number of them took the time and trouble to visit the place where Lewis and Clark had wintered. The ornithologist, John K. Townsend, while not strictly a settler, was among the visitors who recorded his impressions of the "house" at Fort Clatsop. "The logs of which it is composed," he wrote, "are still perfect, but the roof of bark has disappeared, and the whole vicinity is overgrown with thorn and wild currant bushes." [9] An American missionary who saw the site in 1842 reported that Lewis and Clark's "hut had entirely disappeared," but Indians pointed out to him the trail used by the explorers during their journeys from the fort to the seacoast. [10]

Another settler, James Harrell, who visited the scene of the encampment in 1848 later recalled that he saw the foundations of a single building, about 16 feet by 16 feet and 4 logs high. [11]

The prevailing attitude of visitors toward the site is well reflected by a letter written by George Gibbs, a temporary resident of Astoria, to his mother on April 13, 1853. Speaking of Fort Clatsop, Gibbs wrote: "I took a run the other day up the Lewis & Clark's river as it is called to the place of the w[inter] encampment, which long as I have been here I never visited before. The site of their log hut is still visible, the foundation logs rotting where they lay. Their old trail to the coast is just visible being much overgrown with brush . . . Indians are still living who knew them." [12]

Several years later Gibbs again described his visit to Fort Clatsop. He wrote that the remains were "about" 2 miles from the mouth of the Lewis and Clark River. This remark by a trained and accurate observer tends to confirm the conclusion that the site was at or very near the present historic monument property. [13]

As shall be seen in some detail in a later section of this report, settlers began to move into the Fort Clatsop region during the early 1850's, and the ruins which tradition said were those of the winter encampment were obliterated by agricultural operations. Yet the site continued to be marked, if only in the minds of nearby residents and of persons who had earlier visited it; and travelers continued to make pilgrimages to the spot, although records of such visits seem to become fewer and fewer as the years passed.

For instance, on August 18, 1869, Charles M. Scammon, an officer in the United States Revenue Marine Service and one of the remarkable men of his time on the Pacific Coast, the site and thought it worthwhile to make a sketch of it. [14] A year or two later Mrs. Francis Fuller Victor, making observations for a book of description of the Northwest, believed her readers would be interested in the Lewis and Clark wintering site. "Not only have sixty years effaced all traces of their encampment," she reported, "but a house, which stood on the same site in 1853, has quite disappeared, the site being overgrown with trees now twenty feet in height." [15]

By 1885, however, knowledge of the site was beginning to fade. The traditional location of Fort Clatsop had by that date become the eastern terminus of a stage line leading to the popular resort at Seaside. Here passengers by boat from Portland and Astoria debarked and transferred to land conveyance. The Portland Oregonian felt it necessary to point out that the transfer point was historic ground. "It will be news to many readers of THE OREGONIAN, including pioneers," said an editorial in the issue of June 27, 1885, "to know that this landing is the first spot in Oregon where white men camped." The paper went on to say that the site of Fort Clatsop could "still be distinguished by trenches," an observation which probably was not in accord with fact. [16]

These examples will amply serve to demonstrate that certain remains of log structures located on the west bank of the Lewis and Clark River were early identified by pioneer residents of the area, evidently through testimony of the Indians and from what little had appeared in print about the Lewis and Clark Expedition, as the ruins of Fort Clatsop. These remains continued to be pointed out as those of the winter encampment until all trace of them disappeared; and thereafter knowledge of their location was kept alive in the minds of the who had seen the ruins and was transmitted to others, largely by word of mouth.

It was not without some reason, therefore, that the great editor and historian, those Coues, wrote in about 1892 that the site of Fort Clatsop "was fixed with absolute precision" at an early date, "of course became historical, and has been marked on most maps ever since." He even went so far as to say that "the present aspect of the place is better known than what might be discovered by digging in the right spot." [17] Subsequent events were to prove that the matter was not quite as simple to everyone else as it was to Mr. Coues.

Identification by O. D. Wheeler, 1899. Such was the state of knowledge concerning the location of the Fort Clatsop site toward the end of the last century, when Olin D. Wheeler, a writer and publicity man for the Northern Pacific Railway, began his monumental task of retracing the routes of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. In due course his searches brought him face to face with the problem of fixing the location of the winter encampment on the Netul River. Wheeler does not state what research he performed or what evidence he marshaled to lead him to the exact spot, but the inference to be drawn from his narratives is that his method of identification was simple and direct: he organized a party of local historians and old-time residents of the vicinity and went where they told him to go. They guided him to the traditional site known since the days of the Astorians.

Wheeler's visit was made during 1899. Evidently the exact date was August 30. [18] The composition of his party is of interest. Included were William Chance, Judge J. Q. A. Bowlby, George W. Lounsberry, and George Noland, all of Astoria and vicinity; Silas B. Smith, of Warrenton; George H. Himes, representing the Oregon Historical Society of Portland; and, by no means least, George M. Weister, a "landscape photographer" of Portland. "Several of these were old residents," said Wheeler "and thoroughly familiar with the early history of the region." [19]

When the party reached the spot which was pointed out as the site of Fort Clatsop, Wheeler noted that there was "nothing to indicate it except Lewis and Clark's own description as to its location." Nevertheless, he felt there was, "evidently, no question as to the point we visited being the identical spot where the fort stood," since "the opinion of those among the party who were old residents and familiar with the subject and with the locality, was unanimous upon this point." [20]

In accepting this identification, Wheeler seemingly was much impressed by the testimony of Silas B. Smith, a well-educated, middle-aged, practicing attorney from the nearby town of Warrenton. Smith was the grandson of Coboway, or Comowoll, as the name appears in the Lewis and Clark Journals, the chief of the Clatsop Indians at the time of the expedition's stay on the Netul. Coboway's second daughter, Celiast, or Helen, married Solomon M. Smith, and together the played an honorable part in Oregon history. Silas B. Smith was their son. [21]

Silas Smith told Wheeler a traditional family story to the effect that when Lewis and Clark abandoned Fort Clatsop on March 23, 1806, they gave the structure and its furniture to Chief Coboway. Apparently there is nowhere in the original records of the expedition any direct corroboration of this story, but it is certainly a probable one, since the explorers were very fond of Coboway, calling him "the most friendly and decent Indian that we have met with in this neighborhood." [22] And the story is an old one in the history of the lower Columbia, having appeared in print at least as early as 1884. [23] Smith's account has every appearance of an accurate one told by an honorable man.

According to Smith, his mother, who lived until 1891 frequently maintained that she remembered the time of Lewis and Clark's arrival and that Fort Clatsop was occupied by Coboway and his family during the hunting season for 10 or 15 years after 1806. "Mother said," added Smith, "that in one of the houses they used was a large stump of a tree, which had been cut smooth and which was used as a table." Smith disclaimed having seen any of the fort structures personally, but he professed knowledge of their location from the accounts of his mother and from statements made by other Indians. [24]

Rather strangely, having once established the site of Fort Clatsop to the satisfaction of all assembled, Wheeler did not bother to write down a sufficiently detailed description of it so that it could be identified by other persons coming later. Evidently he, too, saw no necessity of recording a fact which was so generally known. Thus, if it had not been for the presence of Mr. Weister, the "landscape photographer," no more would be known today about the location established by Wheeler than is known about the site of the traditional ruins visited by so many early travelers.

Fortunately, Weister made a series of photographs of the site. Three of the best of these are reproduced in the present report (see Photographs C1, C2, C3). A comparison of these views with the scene today at the tract owned by the Oregon Historical Society, clearly reveals that the site identified by Wheeler is within the present historic monument property (compare Photographs C1 and B4, C2 and B11, C3 and A8) . The general configuration of the land, the views seen from the site, and in particular, two cherry trees shown in the 1899 photographs which still stand today, permit no doubt of this fact.

However, the Weister views fail to reveal the exact spot which the Wheeler party identified as the location of the former ruins. In two of the photographs (Photographs C1 and C2), members of the party are shown standing in positions which obviously are meant to convey some information, but exactly what information is not clear. In one of these views (Photograph C2) particularly, the figures evidently are outlining the position of the supposed stockade, but seemingly the fort thus depicted is quite a bit larger than the known 50 feet by 50 feet dimensions of Fort Clatsop. As a matter of fact, in 1899 the exact size of the winter quarters was not known by historians, and thus the Wheeler party was guessing. Where, within the quadrangle outlined by the members, the ruins traditionally stood is not apparent from the available records of the Wheeler visit.

Identification by Oregon Historical Society, 1900. Late in 1899 the Oregon Historical Society resolved to identify the site of Fort Clatsop for the purpose of erecting a monument thereon. As a result, two members of the Society's Committee on Memorials, L. B. Cox and William Galloway, visited the traditional locations on June 8, 1900. With them was a small group of early settlers who knew the vicinity well. They were Silas B. Smith of Warrenton, who had assisted Wheeler the previous year; Preston W. Gillette, a "well-known pioneer," formerly of Clatsop County; and Carlos W. Shane of Vancouver, who once had lived on the fort site. [25] Reaching the old Seaside landing by boat, the party, guided by Shane and Gillette, climbed up to the benchland above--where Wheeler had marked out his conjectural fort outline--and began to look for familiar landmarks.

Shane's testimony. Although Gillette later claimed the larger the credit for identifying the site, Carlos W. Shane probably gave the most telling evidence. In a deposition made a week later, Shane recounted the facts he must have presented on the ground:

I came to Oregon in 1846, and in 1850 I located a donation land claim on a tract of land which included the site of Fort Clatsop; I built a house on the land in 1851 and occupied it until 1853. A few feet from where I built my house there were at that time the remains of two of the Lewis and Clark cabins . They lay east and west, parallel with each other; and ten or fifteen feet apart. Each cabin was sixteen by thirty feet; Three rounds of the south cabin and two rounds of the north cabin were then standing. In the south cabin stood the remains of a large stump. The location of the old stockade was indicated by second growth timber, while all around it was the original growth, or the stumps of trees which had been cut. In clearing away for my house I set fire to the remains of the old cabins and endeavored to burn them.

My house has long since disappeared but I identify its site from the topography of the ground, from the sloping bank to the river toward the east, and especially from the circumstance of my having cut a large tree at the top of the bank which narrowly missed falling on the house and just reached its rear. I remember approximately the height of this tree and the spot on which it stood.

I assisted Gillette in locating the south-west corner of the tract which was staked off on this visit, and believe that the stake driven there represents very closely, if not absolutely, the southwest corner of the south cabin, and this appeared to be the southwest corner of the stockade. [26]

This deposition has a ring of truth. As will be seen in another section of this report, Shane did locate a land claim covering the present historical monument property in or about 1850, and he held it until August or October, 1852, when he transferred it to his brother.

The most remarkable part of the testimony, however, is Shane's description of the ruins of the Lewis and Clark cabins. As far as the present investigator has been able to determine, there were available in 1900 no printed descriptions which would indicate that Fort Clatsop was made up of two parallel cabins, each about 50 feet long and 16 to 14 feet wide, containing a total of 7 rooms, and separated by a parade ground 20 feet wide. The accounts then known to the public spoke only of 7 huts or houses and of pickets and gates, permitting historians to gain the impression that Fort Clatsop consisted of a group of cabins surrounded by a stockade.

The two rough plans of the fort drawn by William Clark, which provide the only known information concerning the actual dimensions and arrangement of the post, are included in one of Clark's pocket fieldbooks which was not examined by any scholar until Reuben Cold Thwaites saw it in the possession of Mrs. Julia Clark Voorhis of New York in 1903. Evidently the first printing of one of these plans was in the June, 1904 issue of Scribner's Magazine. [27]

Therefore, Shane's description of the Lewis and Clark cabins as being parallel structures, 16 by 30 feet, and 15 feet apart, must have been based upon independent observation, and keen observation also, to have been remembered so well after about 49 years. In the opinion of the present writer, Shane's testimony upon this point constitutes practically clinching evidence that the ruins which had been identified by tradition since 1811 as those of Fort Clatsop were indeed correctly designated.

It is also to be noted that Shane's mention of a large stump being in the south cabin corroborates the information which Silas B. Smith had received from his Indian mother. Since Shane and Smith had a chance to compare notes before the making of the deposition, however, this part of the testimony may not represent a strictly independent observation. The fact that Shane joined with other members of the party in believing that the cabins had been surrounded by a larger palisaded enclosure only seems to reinforce the view that he and his companions had no knowledge of the Clark ground plans.

Gillette's testimony. On June 16, 1900, Preston W. Gillette made a deposition which contained the information he was able to contribute during the process of identifying the site. Gillette was a pioneer of 1852, and in 1853 he had located a donation land claim about 1-1/2 miles upstream from the traditional Fort Clatsop site. He continued to live in Clatsop County until 1867 and visited the fort site many times . The most important part of Gillette's testimony is as follows:

In October, 1853, . . . I visited the site of Fort Clatsop and saw a section of two logs, each eight or ten feet long, crossed at right angles, which had manifestly been the foundation logs of one of the Lewis and Clark cabins. The ends of the logs were charred, showing that they had been burned. The extent of the stockade was shown by the fact that its site was covered with second growth timber, while all around it stood the trees of the original growth, or the stumps of such as had been cut. Carlos W. Shane sold his place to his brother, Frankland Shane, in 1853, and the latter was occupying it at the time of my visit. I sold Frank Shane some fruit trees, which he planted in the rear of his house. Three of those trees are now standing. Richard M. Moore had in the year 1852 located a donation land claim just south of Carlos W. Shane's and built a house a few feet south of the division line, almost on a line with and but a short distance from the Shane house. This house has since disappeared, but it stood immediately at the head of a little draw in the hill leading down to the river, which draw is now plainly to be seen . . . . When I first knew this spot the trail cut by Lewis and Clark through the timber to the ocean was plainly visible, it having been kept open by the Indians and elk, and it continued as a traveled passage for some fifteen years after my arrival in the county. [28]

The manner in which Gillette's testimony supports that of Shane, particularly in regard to the latter's statement that he "endeavored" to burn the remains of the old cabins, is obvious. In fact, one might almost suspect that these two old neighbors collaborated in their accounts were it not for the fact that Gillette's story has some remarkable and independent confirmation.

In the first place, as has been seen above, the fort site was also visited in 1853 by George Gibbs. The striking similarity between Gibbs's description of the spot, from the logs "rotting where they lay" to the mention of the explorers' trail to the coast, and Shane's is apparent. Also, as will be detailed in a later section of this report, Carlos Shane did transfer his claim to his brother Franklin, evidently late in 1852; and Richard M. Moore did have a claim south of Shane's. Furthermore, the field notes of a survey made in 1856 conclusively prove that both "Shane" and "Moore," in 1856 at least, had residences at the edge of the benchland overlooking the river. [29] It must be concluded, therefore, that Gillette was a reliable, and independent, witness. [30]

Incidentally, Gillette's mention of R. M. Moore calls to mind another bit of evidence which tends to confirm the conclusion that the present historic monument property does contain the site of Fort Clatsop. According to a rather well-known tradition which appeared in print at least as early as 1872, a sawmill occupied the fort site or its vicinity in 1853. One account of the mill is more specific, saying that it was built by R. M. Moore about 1852 and was located on the "old Lewis and Clark landing place." The 1856 surveyors' field notes mentioned above refer to "Moore's Mill" and permit the pinpointing of its location. It was situated on the west bank of the Lewis and Clark River, about 240 feet east-southeast of the southeastern corner of the present Oregon Historical Society property. About 65 feet south of the mill was a "slough," evidently the small "branch" of the Lewis and Clark journals. The confirmation thus given to the old tradition lends strength to the traditional identification of the site. [31]

Marking the site. Under the direction of Shane and Gillette-- who were guided by their memories of the location of the fort ruins and of the Shane and Moore houses, and by the relationships of these sites to each other, and by the topography--the Oregon Historical Society committee established what they believed to be the "southwest corner of the southern cabin." This point, testified Gillette, "very closely, if not exactly, marks the corner of the cabin whose remains I saw in 1853." [32] The committee marked this point by driving in a stake.

Shane and Gillette were convinced that this point not only marked the southwest corner of the Lewis and Clark cabins but also the southwest corner of an extensive stockade, enclosing more than 1/2 acre of ground. Their conclusion was based upon their remembrance of the extent of a patch of second-growth timber which existed at the fort site when they first saw it in the early 1850's. All around this cleared area stood the virgin forest or at least the stumps of a virgin forest which had been recently cut to feed the nearby lumber mill. [33]

The committee agreed with this conclusion and set out to locate the remaining three corners of the fort. L. B. Cox freely admitted at the time that the lines of the stockade were "established by conjecture only." [34]

About 200 feet north of the already established southwest corner was a "small spring branch," and the committee believed it "perfectly rational" to conclude that Lewis and Clark had taken this source of water within the stockade. "A point was consequently established just across this stream ," Cox later reported, "and the line was projected 120 feet, or thereabouts, towards the river, reaching the top of the incline." [35] If these words constitute a clear and comprehensible description of the procedure followed in establishing the other three corners, that fact is not apparent to the present investigator.

At any rate, four corners were fixed to the satisfaction of the committee. "It is quite certain," Cox said, "that no more definite delineation of the limits of the stockade is now obtainable." Stakes were placed at the supposed stockade corners, and an iron pipe was driven into the ground in the center of the area thus delimited. [36] The committee started homeward firmly convinced that the site of Fort Clatsop had been "fixed for all time" and so well marked as to "permit no future doubt" as to the exact location. [37] The next year the Oregon Historical Society purchased a 3-acre tract of land which contained most of the stockade site delimited by its committee.

Years of doubt. Unfortunately, the Oregon Historical Society did not send a surveyor along with its committee, and thus the exact locations of the stakes set in 1900 apparently were not recorded. As the years passed, knowledge of the positions of the stakes faded, until today no one can be found, evidently, who is able to point them out. Probably the entire marking project was somewhat discredited when the Clark ground plans became available in 1904, and it was discovered that Fort Clatsop had been only 50 feet square!

Yet, knowledge of the positions of any of those stakes would be helpful today, if only to assist in determining the location of the all-important one--the one which was placed at the southwest corner of the ruined cabins seen by Shane. The most definite information presently available, seemingly, is that the northeast corner stake was near "t he ragged trunk of a spruce tree, limbless, barkless and crownless." [38] Perhaps this is the dead tree which shows in two of the 1899 photographs (see Photographs C1 and C3). An analysis of these and other pictures of the site, including some taken during the committee's visit, reveals the general location as being about where Wheeler fixed it, but it does not permit the pinpointing of the site of the ruins.

The Oregon Historical Society first placed a historical marker at the Fort Clatsop Site in 1912. Although the records of this event conveniently available today are sketchy, the presumption is that this marker was placed on or near the location of the cabins as pointed out by Shane in 1900. Definite proof as to this point seems to be lacking, however. Likewise, the presumption is that the bronze marker at the site today is in the 1912 location, despite the fact that it has been stolen and re-erected more than once. Here again, positive, written testimony seems to be lacking.

Eventually, the Oregon Historical Society itself came to have doubts as to exactly where the fort was situated. Early in 1948, Mr. Lancaster Pollard, then Superintendent of the Society, announced that a motion picture company was "considering" the construction of a replica of Fort Clatsop on the original site and that the Society might eventually attempt to determine precisely where the encampment stood. [39]

A few months later the Astorian-Budget, in an editorial, went even farther, saying, at the present fort marker was located by guess, and that the actual site may be a quarter-mile or more away." [40] At about that same time the Clatsop County Historical Society made a determined, but unsuccessful attempt to fix the site through the use of a mine detector and the analysis of old surveyors' records and early photographs. [41]

Archeological explorations. Evidently as part of this same general search, Mr. Pollard requested the assistance of the National Park Service in making an archeological reconnaissance of the Oregon Historical Society's property at Fort Clatsop; Mr. Louis R. Caywood, Archeologist on the Service's Region Four staff, was given permission to cooperate with the Society in this project, and excavations were made during the period July 9-17, 1948. The objectives of the work are clearly stated by Mr. Caywood in his printed account of the project: "The site of the fort has been determined approximately for many years . . . . The problem was to definitely determine whether or not there was [physical] evidence of the old fort on the site." [42]

Due to the limited time and labor available, Mr. Caywood was able to excavate only a relatively small area, his trenches and test pits being concentrated in the benchland section east and north of the historical marker (see Map 9). [43] At that time it was rather generally believed by officers of the Society and by local historians that the most likely place to search for the fort remains was in this extreme northeast section of the plateau within the Oregon Historical Society property. Mr. Caywood was advised that this area probably was the fort site, and in fact it is so designated to this date by a sign which stands at his still unfilled excavations.

Mr. Caywood did not find any structural evidence of the fort, but at a depth of about 10 inches he came across such evidences of human occupation as fire pits, charcoal, a "barbecue" pit, pieces of wood showing marks made by metal tools, animal bones, and burnt stones. After analyzing this material, he stated: "evidence is positive that white men at one time occupied this site"; and "it can be safely stated that the excavations were done on the Lewis and Clark site of Fort Clatsop." [44]

Certainly one cannot quarrel with the first of these conclusions in view of the known long record of occupation of the property by white settlers from about 1850 to at least 1881; and the second conclusion is also probably true in a general way, since, as has been amply demonstrated from the historical record, there is little doubt but that Fort Clatsop was somewhere on the benchland where he dug. However, a re-analysis of the evidence uncovered by Mr. Caywood leads the present investigator to the conclusion that there is as yet no positive proof that the materials found had any association with the Lewis and Clark Expedition. It is not impossible, however, that further excavations will uncover evidence which will permit such an association to be demonstrated.

In connection with the present investigation as to the advisability of making the Fort Clatsop site a national monument, a second archeological exploration was made on the Oregon Historical Society property by the National Park Service. This work wad con ducted by Mr. Paul J. F. Schumacher, Archeologist in the Region Four Office, during the period December 2-8, 1956. The primary objective was to find physical remains which would settle all doubts as to whether or not Fort Clatsop stood on the site under investigation. Also, if found, such remains would be of inestimable value in planning any developments which might be recommended for the property.

Assisted by an efficient labor crew, Mr. Schumacher excavated an extensive area north and east of the historical marker (see Map 9). This section was chosen largely because of the tradition surviving from the period of Mr. Caywood's dig that it was the most logical location for the encampment. After considerable trenching here failed to produce positive results, operations were shifted to a location southwest of the marker. Although there was only a limited time available for work here, enough artifacts were recovered to indicate that this latter area was the site, or was very close to the site, of the farmhouse shown in the 1899 photographs. No evidence assignable to the Lewis and Clark Expedition was found at either locality. [45]

Conclusions concerning identification of site. An analysis of such clues to the location of Fort Clatsop as are given in the original records of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, a study of the long local tradition as to the location of the fort site, and an examination of the available reminiscences and testimony of pioneer settlers who saw the traditional ruins of the fort and pointed out their location--all these lead to the conclusion that in all probability Fort Clatsop stood somewhere within the 3-acre tract purchased by the Oregon Historical Society in 1901.

This conclusion is based upon the following factors:

a. There is substantial agreement--or at least no major disagreement--among all these classes of evidence as to the genera location of the fort site.

b. The accounts of Shane and Gillette, who pointed out the exact location of the ruins to the members of the Oregon Historical Society, show every evidence of being accurate and based on independent observation.

c. The Oregon Historical Society purchased the 3-acre tract specifically to include the site pointed out by Shane and Gillette, and there is no reason to believe that this objective was not accomplished.

However, since 1901 knowledge of the exact location pointed out by Shane and Gillette seems to have been lost. As far as anyone can prove today, the 50-foot square of the fort could have been located almost anywhere on the approximately 1-1/4 acres of benchland within the tract boundaries.

Apparently the only way that the exact site of Fort Clatsop will be determined is by finding some physical remains of the structure. Although the ground on the top of the bluff has been much disturbed by long years of land clearing, agriculture, and domestic habitation, experience at many other frontier post sites has proved that the buried ends of stockade pickets will nearly always survive such treatment. There is hope, therefore, that the actual remains of Fort Clatsop may yet be discovered. To this end, the National Park Service plans to make one additional archeological exploration at Fort Clatsop before concluding the present study.