Fort Vancouver Cultural Landscape Report

Site
(continued)

Fort Plain (continued)

Garden and Orchard

During this period Fort Vancouver's garden and orchard fell into disrepair and were partially dismantled. As noted earlier, all or part of the orchard west of the garden was burned in the 1844 fire. The 1846 Covington stockade area map labels the former garden site "orchard," and the former orchard site is entirely covered with the symbol Covington used for cultivated fields, and is labeled "cultivated." The map does not show the summerhouse in the garden.

The 1854 Bonneville map by Theodore Eckerson shows the Company's fence between the garden and orchard sites, and a small structure is located at the north end of the garden, in the approximately location of the summerhouse. The Mansfield map, prepared a little later that same year, shows approximately the same amount of space labeled "soldiers garden," although the fence or division between that and the former orchard site is shifted slightly further east than is depicted on the Bonneville map. A structure is still located at the north end of the garden. As noted earlier, the 1855 Hodges sketch definitely shows an open-sided hipped-roof structure in the general vicinity of the summerhouse. It does not appear on any of the 1859 army maps, one of which is fairly detailed regarding vegetation in the garden and orchard sites.

The orchard site on the Mansfield map is divided into three areas, either by fence or symbolically, and the northern division is labeled "N. Soldiers garden." In 1852, along with several other Company fields, Chief Factor John Ballenden leased--for one year--"3/4 of the Garden as marked out by me to Mr. Lewes--the upper half of the field immediately below the fort..." to Colonel Bonneville. [1032] As has been seen previously, none of the other fields ever appear to have reverted to the Company: the field west of St. James Mission remained in the mission's hands; the fields north of Upper Mill Road remained under the control of the army. The label, "Soldiers garden" indicates this area of the former orchard was operated by the U.S. Army at this time. The same map shows the field west of the Catholic church already enclosed, and the fields north of Upper Mill Road are not even noted on it. None of the sketches of 1854-5 indicate a fenced division of the orchard site. From the illustrations of this period, it does not appear the fencing pattern around the garden and orchard had changed, at least up to 1855.

The 1854-55 illustrations seem to agree that west of the garden fence, the northern half to third of the orchard site had only a few scattered trees; in Sohon and Hodges, the tree density increases south of the bastion corner. Covington, whose rendering of vegetation in general seems to be more precise, shows some open space, particularly in the northwest corner, and scattered smaller trees, with a few larger ones to just north of the bastion corner; some of the trees are rendered to appear similar to native vegetation in other parts of the drawing--they look like fir trees. [1033] Gibbs' July, 1851 sketch looking east towards the stockade and Mount Hood shows what appears to be a dense cluster of vegetation from the bastion corner north a very short distance, with open space and scattered trees to the north, and open field in which one large fir stands to the south. The Stanley painting shows a narrow band of trees extending west of the bastion, but not much further south, and open space in the north quarter or so of the orchard site. It seems quite possible the army could have planted vegetables or other low-growing crops in the upper quarter or third of the orchard site, given the apparent amount of large open space available there after the fire--the band of trees extending west from the bastion would have made a convenient dividing line between leased land and Company property.

Figure 14. Looking north towards U.S. Army's Officers' Row in 1860, with Hudson's Bay Company fruit trees in foreground. Original 1849 Camp Vancouver structures visible in mid-ground; soldiers barracks to left. North American Boundary Commission Survey, 1860-61, orignal at Royal Engineers Library, Kent.

In 1858, Archibald McKinlay, later testified, "I noticed that the fence round the Company's new or young orchard as it was called, was down, part of it on the ground, and part removed. There were men working about the orchard fence, but they were not the Company's men. I noticed some of the buildings had disappeared; there was a big blank." [1034] This action was also observed by Dr. Henry Tuzo, who said, "The orchard fence was partially removed by the military, and a road made over the site of a building of the Company's which had been recently removed, apparently for that purpose." [1035] Also in 1858, army recruits "devastated" the orchard and garden. [1036]

The site of the army activity described by McKinlay and Tuzo was probably the northwest corner of the orchard. On the 1859 maps, the northwest corner appears on a diagonal, rather than the right angles shown on earlier maps, and it appears the road installed by the army, which formerly ran from near the St. James Mission intersection --but slightly west of it--and "river road," very close to the east edge of the quartermaster's stables and around fenced enclosures in Kanaka Village to the water front, was realigned. The new road departed from the intersection and ran what appears to be a more direct line to the new quartermaster's and commissary store and new wharf at the river. This coincides with references to demolition activity in the northeast area of Kanaka Village, and the Company dwellings located at the northeast corner of the village, and most of those along "river road," which can be seen on the 1854 maps, have vanished from the 1859 maps. The absence of the structures towards the northeast corner of the village may have been the "big blank" referred to by McKinlay.

The circa 1860 photograph which may have been taken by the Boundary Commission, showing the artillery group in the foreground, is taken from the site of the orchard. The fence dividing the orchard site from the garden, and some garden trees are visible in the background to the right. The fencing, as noted earlier, appears to be zigzag fencing, but it is not a clear photograph, and the details are blurry. The fencing for the orchard still exists to the north, but it does not appear to extend all the way to the northwest corner. The site certainly does appear to be a "big blank." The northernmost photograph of a panorama of the west edge of Fort Vancouver taken by the Boundary Commission shows a large cleared area extending towards the Catholic mission, probably from the northwest corner of the orchard. There are no trees, no fences and no Hudson's Bay Company buildings. [1037]

The reference to the "young or new orchard" is puzzling. It is possible the Company reclaimed the leased corner of the former orchard site from the army after a year, per the terms of the lease, and laid out new trees there, although given the available work force and the continuing reduced circumstances of the farm at that time--which would have been 1853--it seems very unlikely a new orchard would have been established. What seems more possible is that the terms "new orchard" and "young orchard" were used, and had been used, to describe the entire orchard site from time of its establishment--probably around 1838--to distinguish it from the fruit trees within the garden.

The second 1860 Boundary Commission photograph looking north appears to have been taken from the garden. There are a scattering of fruit trees which appear to have been planted in a grid pattern; the quality of the photograph does not permit assessment of the surface of the ground. These trees are located in the area east of the summerhouse, as shown in the painting attributed to John Mix Stanley; they are not shown on the Stanley illustration, which is remarkably accurate in depicting details. This tends to indicate the trees may have been planted rather late--if the painting is correct, then at least after 1846-47. As noted previously, the north fence of the garden, at least by this late date, appears to have been a picket fence consisting of posts, two sets of stringers, and rived pickets.