Fort Vancouver Cultural Landscape Report

Site
(continued)

Fort Plain (continued)

River Front

The river front complex, for the purposes of this study, is the area west of the "river road" and south and east of the road extending from the intersection of Lower Mill Road and "river road" to the river. At present, no known illustrations or photographs of this area exist for this period; only maps. [1086] A few illustrations show the site at a distance, but details are hard to discern. As with the Kanaka Village site, the Hudson's Bay Company structures extant in 1846 were largely gone by May of 1860. Historic documents indicate the army was largely responsible for clearing the site of Company structures, a process which began in 1857-58, and terminated in a demolition frenzy in March of 1860.

The most significant natural feature of the site was the pond which extended inland from the river. Its size must have fluctuated significantly with the periodic floods and freshets. Maps in this period show it of varying relative size and proportions, but most show it was spanned by a bridge of unknown length and width. The Company certainly had a bridge spanning it; the structure is shown on the 1846 1846 Covington stockade area map. The army or the Company may have built a second bridge by 1854; one of the maps executed in this year shows the road along the river crossing the pond's mouth below, and not at, a pair of lines which may represent the earlier Company bridge.

Hudson's Bay Company Structures

On October 31, 1846 Thomas Lowe recorded that "a Boat Shed at the water side was blown down breaking one of the River Boats which was inside," referring to a heavy wind storm which also knocked over trees, blocking roads around the farm, and demolished the dairy on Lower Plain. [1087] The 1846 Covington stockade area map shows a large structure immediately east of the bridge, labeled "shed." This building may have been the one blown down; in 1854 the maps show the lower road along the river extending across its site, and, as noted, what appears to be a second bridge north of the road. However, the 1846-47 inventory lists a large one hundred by twenty-four foot boat shed, and a second ninety by thirty foot building shed, and the inventory was apparently not completed until early 1847; it was sent to George Simpson on the 1847 spring express, and further, it is believed both Covington maps were prepared to document the Company's holdings. If the structure shown on the map is a new building, then its position seems to be inaccurate, at least according to later maps. If it is the pre-windstorm boat shed, then the question is, where is the boat shed listed in the inventory?

In 1854 the maps show two long, narrow structures which ran perpendicular to each other; in these maps one is located south of the line of structures which must include the hospital, and the other is slightly west of the line. They conform only roughly to the position of the two sheds shown in the 1846 Covington stockade area map; in fact, if one were to consider both maps accurate at least in regard to relative positions, the long building running east-west would appear to be a new structure, and the one running north-south would appear to encompass at least the second shed and saw pit in one building. They are set well back from the river and the pond, and, if they were boat houses, their position seems questionable. Boat houses were seen in 1849 by army officer Lloyd Brooke, who said they were "fir posts stuck in the ground, with slab roofs." [1088] Dr. Tuzo said there were two boat houses south of the stockade when he was at the fort, between 1853 and 1858, and said he thought there were boats after 1856 in the boat houses. [1089] Dugald Mactavish later testified that the boat houses had disappeared by 1858. [1090] If the boat houses were as ephemeral as Lloyd Brooke suggests, they may not have been considered worth mapping in 1851.

These types of anomalies crop up frequently in an attempt to assess the location of the structures east and southeast of the pond and south of the extension of Lower Mill Road. If analysis begins at the end of the period, around 1859-60, it can be stated with some degree of accuracy that the three buildings shown at the south edge of an enclosure east of the pond had to have been the hospital, the Field house, and one other structure, probably a dwelling. This is known because John Work recorded that on March 19, 1860, "Govt removed house on the river bank belonging to Co and formerly used as a hospital, and also the house rented in 1855 and 1856 by the Volunteer Quartermaster and Commissary as an office, part of the sills and posts were hauled to the govt bakery and part to the Ordnance Reserve." [1091] Also, on March 5 1860 Rufus Ingalls told Work in a letter that "...the Salmon House, the Johnson and Field House will not be disturbed as they seem to be of some little value," an assessment later confirmed by Work. [1092] The Johnson house, as noted in an earlier section, was west of the river front complex. According to this evidence, then, a house used as a hospital by the Company, the Field house, and a house rented by the volunteer quartermaster as an office were still standing in 1859.

The Field house, at least until 1853, was the dwelling labeled "J" on the 1846 Covington stockade area map. The structure is shown well to the north of the building labeled Hospital, also "K," on the map. This does not agree with the 1859 maps, nor seemingly with the 1854 maps, which show structures within an enclosure similar to the ones shown on the Covington map, of which the Field house would be one. Either the Covington map is wildly inaccurate regarding the location of the structure, or the Field family moved further south to another Company building within the river front complex.

The history of building "J," in so far as can be traced, is that the building was, in the 1840s, occupied by a Robert Johnson, apparently a Company employee--it is referred to as his house when rented to the army, beginning in September of 1849. Between February and March it was occupied by Mr. Noble--almost certainly the commissary clerk who later moved to the Lattie house with his young wife Kitty. Between May and December of 1850 it was occupied by a Captain Jones; in 1851 it was rented for "one quarter," although the rolls do not specify to whom, although it appears as if it could have been a "Carson," referred to as renting an unspecified structure in 1851, and in 1852 as renting this house until April 16, 1852. In May of 1852 a Mrs. "Stubbs" or "Tubbs" appears as the renting party, and continues through February of 1853, when the rolls cease to identify individual houses. The Catholic church records for this period show a Tubs or Tubbs family, very closely intertwined with a Fields family and a Carson or Casson family. In fact, they appear to all have been related by the marriage of two sisters, Agnes Jane Tub or Tubbs, who was the wife of James Carson or Casson, and Maria or Marie Tub or Tubbs, the wife of Aram or Hiram Fields. It appears that at least a Michael Tubs was posted at the garrison at Vancouver, and possibly a John Carson and an Aram Fields were also soldiers. [1093] In 1850 the census reveals Michael Tubs, Maria Tubs--wife of Aram Fields--and Agnes Jane Tubs, wife of James Carson living in the same house in the Vancouver area. In 1851 a Field was renting the Lattie house west of the church (building "M"). According to the 1860 census, the Fields/Tubbs/Carson household includes Aram or Hiram Fields, Michael Tub, now a carpenter, Maria Fields, Agnes Jane Tubs Carson, and Sarah Tubs, the Tubs' mother, age sixty. It appears that the house labeled "J" on the Covington map, contained this household in 1852, and was thus referred to as the Field or Fields house.

The hospital's location is also confusing. According to Dr. Henry Tuzo, at the fort between 1853 and 1858, three buildings were used as hospitals. [1094] Unfortunately he does not elaborate on whether they were hospitals sequentially or simultaneously, and does not indicate if all were used only during his tenure at Fort Vancouver, or prior to his arrival. Almost certainly, one of these was the hospital still extant in the early spring of 1860, but which one is unknown. Tuzo also stated that he "had charge of sick persons in one of those [hospital] buildings, but it was afterwards rented to the quartermaster of volunteers." [1095] This seems to indicate that one building--perhaps the original Company hospital listed on the 1846-47 inventory, and shown on the 1846 Covington stockade area map--was later rented as the office for the volunteers, various companies of which were at the fort sometime between the dates of October 16, 1855 and July 16, 1856. [1096]

By the time of the 1860 army demolition, then, the house the Field family lived in--probably not the one they occupied in 1852-53 (Building "J"); a building used as a hospital--perhaps the original hospital, perhaps not; and a building formerly used as a hospital--perhaps the original hospital, perhaps not--and then as an office for the volunteer army, were still standing. From the positions of structures on the 1854 and 1859 maps, these buildings seem to be among the four shown in a rough east-west line just south of the enclosure shown on the 1854 maps. The only buildings on the Covington map that seem even remotely to have this relationship are: the Hospital (K); McLean's House, and Smith's house, building "R." Building "R" is listed on the rental rolls for the first time in January, 1851 as "House near the Hospital," and only appears as a rental through May 31 of that same year. It does not appear on the 1852 rolls. Prior to 1851 an amount received as rent of eighteen dollars per month is listed below the hospital on the list as "Paymaster's Office,'" but it is not given a letter. McLean's house is never listed as a rental on the rolls, so far as can be determined. The 1860 survey by Washington Deputy Surveyor Lewis Van Vleet is considered remarkably accurate by contemporary archaeologists. In his survey, Van Vleet calls out the position of the "Field house." The position is very near to the position indicated on the maps for Building "R," the house identified as "Smith's" on the 1846 Covington map. Given the evidence of the maps and this survey, at this time it seems logical to conclude that the Field family moved from Building "J" to Building "R" some time after 1852 and before 1860.

One other dwelling--making a total of five dwellings--is shown on the 1846 Covington stockade area map. It is labeled "G," and shows up on the rental roll beginning at the end of October, 1849; it is called "Scarth's House." In 1851 it is rented as an office, and later to a Charles Deroche (one month in July 1852). After that it does not appear on the rolls. [1097]

As noted earlier, George Foster Emmons, with Wilkes at Fort Vancouver in 1841, recorded that the hospital was stockaded. The 1846 Covington stockade area map does indicate an enclosure in that area, and archaeologists believe they have found the remains of part of it. [1098] As can be seen in other illustrations of the period, a low picket fence--with posts set vertically, side-by-side--does enclose several structures west of the stockade, such as the the Lattie and Ducheney houses; such fences were probably sturdy enough to keep wandering livestock out of the area. [1099] There are several other enclosures indicated on the Covington map in this area: one to the west of the Cooper's shop, and one enclosing the Scarth and Field (building "J") houses. It is not known if these additional enclosures were picket-work or post or rail fences, as seen elsewhere in Kanaka Village. By 1854, only one enclosure is indicated, and that appears to be in approximately the same location as the one fencing the Scarth and Field houses, although it appears larger, running further north than indicated on the Covington map, and probably further south, although it is difficult to tell. By 1859 it appears to have been rebuilt or expanded again, further south to incorporate the area near the hospital; it is called out in the VanVleet survey and noted as a "picket" fence. In any case, it appears that the fence in the configuration shown by Covington in 1846 had disappeared by 1854.

Of the other structures shown on the 1846 Covington stockade area map, it is difficult to determine which, if any, had survived into 1854. The tanning pits appear to be gone by that time. The saw pit does not seem to appear, unless incorporated within the long north-south shed. The Cooper's shop may be one of the buildings in the east-west row of structures--if Covington's map is incorrect--or it may be the building in the southwest corner of the enclosure; it may also not be there at all. Joel Palmer, visiting the fort in 1845, said he slept in the Cooper's shed, and that it "provided very little shelter from the wind and rain..." and it is entirely possible it was in ruins or gone by that time. [1100]

There is also a question regarding the location of the distillery, listed in the 1846-47 inventory. It is not noted on the Covington map, yet Mactavish, testifying later, said it had disappeared in 1858, and implied it was in the vicinity of the river front. Tuzo also said the distillery was south of the stockade, in the river front area, listing it along with the three buildings, "formerly used as hospitals," the bridge, and two boat houses. [1101] Tuzo also said that by 1856 "...what remained of the distillery was in possession of the quartermaster's men," when discussing the south area of the stockade. This implies that at least a part of the distillery was in the area in 1856, and would be indicated on the 1854 maps. Perhaps it was, as discussed earlier, located in one of the long sheds.

West and northwest of the pond were the four Company livestock sheds or stables--the horse stables, the ox byre or stable and two pig sheds, arranged in a line, more or less, which ran in a northeasterly direction. All these buildings stood until March of 1860, as shown on the maps of the period, and as described in later testimony, although the uses to which they were put after about 1853 is uncertain. Dr. Henry Tuzo mentioned them as a "long range of stables," but he does not say if they were in use when he was there, between 1853 and 1858. [1102] As noted previously, the company after the early '50s kept only as many horses as required for the immediate business of the establishment, and most of the cattle and sheep had been sent to other posts or had been lost to settlers. It seems likely oxen would still have been required to haul heavy loads to and from the stockade, even if they could no longer be put to use in farming by the early '50s. There is no known mention of what happened to the eight hundred pigs still at the post in 1848, located in piggeries on Fort Plain and Lower Plain, and apparently at Sauvie Island, which provided so much of the company's salted pork provisions during its years of development. [1103] John Work reported that in 1860, on March 16, the "Govt burnt down Company pig house...;" on March 26 the "Govt removed hay and oats in HBC stable and Cow house and tore down both buildings, destroying all fittings including mangers, racks etc..." and on March 27 the "Govt removed part of the wood of the stable and cow house and supplied it to houses in garrison for firewood." [1104]

In 1849 Honore-Timothee Lempfrit observed that sailing ships could come close to the river bank, apparently near the Company wharf. [1105] Dr. Tuzo noted that the Company's landing jetty was removed, and "a large warehouse and wharf erected by the Govt. on its site." [1106] This occurred in the late summer and fall of 1857. However, the army continued to rent the schoolhouse for ordnance storage through March of 1860, and the rental rolls show that the salmon store was also rented for two months in 1859. An 1859 map shows the new wharf and the quartermaster's storehouse. By mid-August of 1860, the army had pulled down and burned the salmon store. [1107]

U.S. Army Structures

In April of 1856 Rufus Ingalls wrote to the chief quartermaster of the army's Department of the Pacific in Benicia, California, and told him the building he was renting as a storehouse--the schoolhouse--was "not fit for any use if another and proper one could be put up." He went on to say that one should be put up on the bank of the river "to avoid the great expense of transporting supplies to and from the storehouse now under rent," and noted that the individuals serving as quartermasters during his absence from Fort Vancouver had submitted plans for a new storehouse. "One building," he said, "will answer." [1108] In December he wrote the Quartermaster General in Washington, D.C., reiterating his opinion of the Company's schoolhouse, which was "now old and greatly dilapidated...We have quarters in abundance and a commodious hospital and a strong guardhouse &c. but we need store rooms." [1109]

By June of 1857 Ingalls had apparently received permission from the army, but his request to tear down the Company wharf was denied by Dugald Mactavish, in charge of Fort Vancouver at that time. Ingalls proceeded to build a new wharf anyway, not "foreseeing any possible obstacle to a fair understanding and settlement between the military authorities and your Company," as he later wrote to William Tolmie, who was on the Company's Board of Management. By August 6 he reported a "...capacious, convenient, and expensive wharf nearly completed, right in front of the 'Salmon House.' It is one of the most thorough works of the kind on the Coast, and is prepared already for any steamer or other vessel that can come to this point. It has been constructed with a view of having a permanent storehouse attached to it on the shore line, and, to do this, it will be necessary to take down, or remove the Salmon House." He also said he had authority and orders to erect the long-awaited new storehouse, for which, he said "We have an imperative necessity..." [1110] One storehouse--the Quartermaster's Storehouse, was erected that year, or possibly early the following year at the army's new wharf. It can be seen on the 1859 maps, jutting out onto the new wharf. The second structure, known to exist by 1862, is not on the map, although Ingalls had reported, with evident satisfaction in 1858 that he now had "New large and convenient storerooms on the bank of the Columbia river for the QM and Subsistence Departments supplies." [1111] In 1862 they were described as a two-story frame Commissary storehouse and office, with basement, and a two-story frame Quartermaster's warehouse and office, with basement, and with "convenient and suitable wharfs to each for shipping stores." [1112] The wharf Ingalls later described as "resting on piles and planned not to be flooded." [1113] The salmon house was never moved. [1114]