CREATION OF YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK
The return of Everts operated as a springboard for an attempt to get
government action. Graphic accounts of the exploration in general filled
the columns of the _Helena Herald_ during October. An article written by
Cornelius Hedges, which appeared in the issue of November 9, suggested
an extension of Montana's southern boundary to include the whole
Yellowstone region. He also outlined the proposal for appropriation of
the same for public purposes. An excited public interest consumed every
issue. Bursting upon national attention, these highly entertaining
narratives, spontaneous and vivid like tales from Arabian Nights,
carried a large measure of conviction.
Nathaniel P. Langford went east to proclaim the discovery. He first
announced the good news to his own people in a public meeting in
Minneapolis. They gave him a responsive hearing, which encouraged him
for the work ahead.[143] On January 19, 1871, a large crowd listened
intently to his delineation at Lincoln Hall in New York City. The people
of Washington accorded similar attention. In fact, one of the lectures
was presided over by Senator James G. Blaine, and one of the most alert
auditors was Dr. Ferdinand V. Hayden who was soon converted to the
importance of the project and agreed to conduct a government geological
survey the following summer. Hayden's leadership was an important factor
in making Yellowstone a live political issue. Sam Hauser also visited
Washington, D. C., and he was subsequently joined by Truman C. Everts.
Henry D. Washburn started for the national Capitol, but he fell ill on
the way and died at his former home in Clinton, Indiana, on January 26,
1871. Walter Trumbull was serving as clerk of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, of which his father was chairman. Interesting accounts of
Yellowstone's features by Langford and Trumbull appeared in the May and
June numbers of _Scribner's_ and the _Overland Monthly_. The Firehole
campfire resolution was bearing fruit.
[Illustration: _Dr. Ferdinand V. Hayden_]
Montana's new but able territorial representative, Hon. William H.
Clagett, went assiduously to work upon the members of Congress. In his
view there was a great prize to be secured for the benefit of all people
and especially his constituents. A wonderland was available for the
taking. As yet there were no complications of private ownership to
arrest an alert government's purpose. The Congress responded with
alacrity by making provision for an official exploration. The sundry
civil service act of March 3, 1871, carried an item of $40,000 for the
construction of the Hayden Survey, to complete "the season's work about
the sources of the Missouri and Yellowstone Rivers." In fact, the bill
also provided for a reconnaissance of the upper Yellowstone under
Captain J. W. Barlow and Captain D. P. Heap of the Army Engineer Corps.
Congress was not entering into the problem halfway; it was actually
doubling up.[144]
The chief officer, Dr. Ferdinand V. Hayden, was an unusually capable
geologist. In addition, he possessed an inspiring personality and
statesmanlike views. There were nineteen scientists directly under his
command. The personnel included James Stevenson, managing director;
Henry W. Elliott and Thomas Moran, artists; Professor Cyrus Thomas,
agricultural statistician and entomologist; Anton Schonborn, chief
topographer; William H. Jackson, photographer; George B. Dixon,
assistant photographer; J. W. Beaman, meteorologist; Professor G. N.
Allen, botanist; Robert Adams, Jr., assistant botanist; Dr. A. C. Peale,
mineralogist; Dr. C. S. Trunbull, physician; Campbell Carrington, in
charge of zoological collections; William B. Logan, secretary; F. J.
Huse; Chester M. Dawes, son of Representative Henry L. Dawes of
Massachusetts; C. De V. Hegley and J. W. Duncan, assistants. Barlow's
army detail also had a competent and well-balanced personnel.[145]
A military escort, including Lieutenant Doane, rounded out these
expeditions and provided all that could have been desired in point of
training and ability. Each detachment had a retinue of helpers. Two
technical studies and scientific reports, which not only substantiated
but actually enhanced the findings of the previous civilian
explorations, resulted from these two expeditions.
Hayden's party left Fort Ellis, near Bozeman, on July 15, 1871. Upon
reaching the junction of the Yellowstone and Gardner rivers they elected
to ascend the latter. It was a good choice because within the hour they
beheld a white mountain which resembled a vast cascade of frozen snow.
The Mammoth Hot Springs Terraces "alone surpassed all the descriptions
which had been given by former travelers."[146]
As this expedition progressed, the geological record was interpreted.
Thereafter, rocks were identified as travertine, gneiss, rhyolite,
dacite, basalt, breccia, geyserite, sinter, and obsidian. Trees and
plants were likewise classified, and in addition to geysers, springs and
pools there were fumaroles and _solfataras_. Geological speculations
were formulated relative to petrified forests, Grand Canyon, the lake's
former Snake River outlet, and the relationship of heat, water, and
"plumbing" essential for geyser action.
[Illustration: _The Hayden expedition in camp_]
Henry Elliott and Campbell Carrington launched a canvas boat and made a
survey of Yellowstone Lake's hundred-mile shoreline. Later the
temperatures of over six hundred hot springs were taken. Sketches were
made of many features, and significant names were given, such as
Architectural Fountain Geyser. Captain Barlow's division paid particular
attention to the mapping of Snake River's headwaters. It also made a
cursory survey of the Lamar River. Unfortunately most of the data and
accompanying photographs were destroyed in the great Chicago fire. This
delayed Barlow's official report until six weeks after the Park Bill was
enacted. However, an interesting summary appeared in the _Chicago
Journal_ for January 13, 1872. Thus, the report and collection of
specimens and photographs by Dr. Hayden represented the principal result
of the season's endeavor.[147]
The beauty of Jackson's photographs and Moran's paintings could scarcely
be denied. Each represented the work of a master. Dr. Hayden's report to
Secretary of Interior, Columbus Delano, was received in February, 1872.
He also contributed feature articles to the _American Journal of Science
and Arts_ and _Scribner's_. Thus, a number of authorities had taken up
the national park cause without reservation. Indeed, after he became
intrigued with the idea of government development, Dr. Hayden's efforts
were so impressive that many people regarded him as the true originator
of the movement. In fact, his own enthusiasm unfortunately caused him to
make pretensions for which he was severely criticized by his colleagues
in the effort.[148] Although Dr. Hayden's contribution was invaluable,
it was not exclusive. It was through the combined effort of the entire
Montana delegation, and its powerful friends, that Congress was made
receptive and responsive.
On December 18, 1871, a bill to create Yellowstone National Park was
introduced simultaneously in both houses of Congress. The direct
sponsors were Delegate William H. Clagett of Montana and Senator Samuel
C. Pomeroy of Kansas. A thorough canvass was made; photographs,
specimens, and testimonials did heavy duty in both the Senate and the
House. Four hundred copies of _Scribner's_ containing Langford's
articles were distributed among the congressmen, and all were personally
interviewed. The advocates were few, but effective, and there was never
any doubt as to the outcome. In the Senate, Pomeroy's efforts were
backed by George F. Edmunds, H. B. Anthony, and Lyman Trumbull. They
made an unsuccessful attempt to bring the bill, S392, to a vote on
January 22 and 23, but objections were raised, and it came up in
calendar order on the thirtieth. Senator Edmunds appealed for unanimous
support for the bill. Senators Cameron of Pennsylvania and Morton of
Indiana were curious about the number of square miles in the proposed
reservation. Senator Pomeroy assured them that, although it was a large
tract, there were no arable lands therein because of the elevation.
The advocates were puzzled by the opposition exhibited by Senator
Cornelius Cole of California. He entertained grave doubts as to the
value of the bill. Settlers should not be excluded from such a large
area. As to the natural curiosities, they would remain. Edmunds replied
that the region was north of 40° and about seven thousand feet
elevation. Pomeroy affirmed that:
... the only object of the bill is to take early possession of it by
the United States, and set it apart, so that it cannot be included in
any claims or occupied by any settlers.[149]
Opposition was removed from the discussion by the forceful and tactful
speech made by Senator Trumbull. He reviewed the history of Yosemite and
the Big Trees in California:
I think our experience with the wonderful natural curiosity, if I may
so call it, in the Senator's own State, should admonish us of the
propriety of passing such a bill as this.... Here is a region of
country away up in the Rocky Mountains, where there are the most
wonderful geysers on the face of the earth.... It is possible that
some person may go there and plant himself right across the only path
that leads to these wonders, and charge every man that passes along
... the gorges of these mountains a fee of a dollar or five
dollars....
I think it is a very proper bill to pass, and now is the time to enact
it.... Now, before there is any dispute as to this wonderful country,
I hope we shall except it from the general disposition of the public
lands, and reserve it to the Government.... At some future time, if we
desire to do so, we can repeal this law, if it is in anybody's way;
but now I think it a very appropriate bill to pass.[150]
The matter was then presented for a vote, and it passed without a call
for the ayes and noes.
The progress of the Park Bill, H.R. 764, through the House was just as
sure, if not so speedy, as in the Senate. On February 27 Chairman Mark
H. Dunnell of the Public Lands Committee brought out a favorable report.
He personally was convinced by careful investigation that the bill
should pass. Henry L. Dawes clearly and forcibly explained its purpose
and observed that it went a step further than the Yosemite precedent. In
this case "the title will still remain in the United States.... This
bill treads upon no rights of the settler ... and it receives the urgent
and ardent support of the legislature of that Territory [Montana], and
of the Delegate himself...."[151]
The roll call on February 28, 1872, showed 115 ayes, 65 noes, and 60 not
voting. George W. Morgan, the minority leader, was opposed to the bill
on partisan principles in general and his personal dislike for Secretary
Delano in particular. Within ten weeks the measure had passed both
houses by large majorities, and on March 1, 1872, it received the
signature of President Ulysses S. Grant.
Upon passage of the act the _Helena Herald_ printed a laudatory
editorial on "Our National Park," while the Helena _Rocky Mountain
Gazette_ considered the bill "as a great blow struck at the prosperity
of the towns of Bozeman and Virginia City ... if it were thrown open to
a curious but comfort-loving public." Other local papers joined the
_Herald's_ side of the controversy.[152]
A mild national reaction was generally favorable to the reservation
idea. The bill even attracted attention abroad, as evidenced by an
article in the _London Times_, April 10, 1873, under the caption, "A
Very National Park."
Who should receive the credit for this eminent accomplishment? A careful
examination of the facts warrants the conclusion that the idea of
establishing Yellowstone as a public reservation had a dual birth. It
was independently conceived in the minds of two men. This view is
attested by the deliberate statement of N. P. Langford:
It is true that Professor Hayden joined with Mr. Clagett and myself in
working for the passage of the act of dedication, but no person can
divide with Cornelius Hedges and David E. Folsom the honor of
originating the idea of creating the Yellowstone Park.[153]
[Illustration: W. S. Chapman
President Ulysses S. Grant signing the Yellowstone National Park
Bill.]
In his _Westward America_, Howard R. Driggs states that the pioneer
artist, George Catlin, made a similar observation about other parts of
the Old West in the eighteen thirties. Surely it was Hedges' suggestion
at Madison Junction campfire that initiated the conception of a program
which other men were well conditioned to execute. N. P. Langford was the
enthusiast, the zealous crusader. William H. Clagett was the man at the
helm, but he was ably supported by the sage advice of Henry L. Dawes,
representative from Massachusetts, who probably formulated the general
principles of the measure.[154] Dr. F. V. Hayden's scientific reports
and unstinted support must be weighed heavily in the scale. Senators
Samuel C. Pomeroy and Lyman Trumbull gave strength to the movement. The
good will of General Phil Sheridan was a constant factor. Beyond this
spearhead of ability and integrity the number of contributors broadens.
It was an altogether democratic effort, and little injustice results
from the omission of other efforts toward the cause. Most of them would
probably have had it so. It was a program for the benefit and enjoyment
of all people, rather than the personal aggrandizement of a few.
The rapidity that characterized the government's action in this matter
will always stand as a tribute to the common sense and natural idealism
of the Forty-second Congress. Judge Hedges' idea had found ready
acceptance as it journeyed along the legislative course. The "Dedicatory
Act," as it is now called, was a remarkably well-drawn bill, especially
when it is remembered that the issues involved were not only new in
America but to the entire world. It was a pioneer measure in the field
of conserving natural phenomena for recreational and spiritual
appreciation. John Muir has cogently expressed the significance of the
endeavor:
Fortunately, almost as soon as it--the Yellowstone region--was
discovered it was dedicated and set apart for the benefit of the
people, a piece of legislation that shines benignly amid the common
dust-and-ashes history of the public domain.[155]
The philosophy in the statement of the purpose was both unique and
basic. The reservation was "dedicated and set apart as a public park or
pleasuring ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people."
Conservation was keynoted in "the preservation from injury or spoliation
of all timber, mineral deposits, natural curiosities or wonders within
said park and for retention in their natural condition." There was a
declaration against "the wanton destruction of fish and game--and the
capture or destruction for the purpose of merchandise or profit."
Senators Anthony and Tipton wanted to strike out the last phrase so
there would be no destruction of game for any purpose. Anthony said, "We
do not want sportsmen going over there with their guns," and Mr. Tipton,
"... if the door is once opened I fear there will ultimately be an
entire destruction of all the game in the Park."[156] Within a score of
years their fears were fully vindicated, and their wishes realized in
the passage of a Protective Act on May 7, 1894.
Altogether, the Yellowstone National Park bill represents a
comprehensive glance into the principle of use without abuse. Nature was
to be preserved, protected, and not improved. Art could not embellish
what God had wrought in Yellowstone. The Act of Dedication became the
touchstone of a national conservation policy whose blessings are legion.
The bill did not carry an appropriation. It appears that the program was
to be implemented entirely by voluntary service. In the years that
followed there was a noble devotion which burned brightly, then waned,
and almost died before resuscitation came. Eventually Yellowstone
administrative experience evolved a program of surpassing merit which
served as an example for the whole nation in the matter of managing
certain phases of natural resources.