Three of the freemen belonging to Mr Ogdens party arrived here two

days ago for supplies & say they were permitted to leave the party

to proceed across the mountains to the S. side. But as they had no

writings with them but notes specifying the state of their a/c which

we did not consider sufficient authority to give them any advances and

deeming it necessary to send them back to Mr Ogden, so that he might

keep his party as strong as possible, they were refused any advances

but a little ammunition to take them back to where they would likely

meet Mr. Ogden. These men are (A. Valle). A. (Curvais) and (Wetacass),

they have brought some beaver & have all money coming to them. Mr

Ogden's notes are dated on the 15 Augt. when all the freemen but 6

had parted from him,[145] his party then was only 15 strong, and he

was going through a dangerous country, they had been successful in

their hunting since Mr Kittson left them.--All the freemen but these

three and another, turned back with the Flat Heads.--These men met the

Indians who went off on Sunday week with the despatches to Mr Ogden, he

was getting on well.--

The Indians whom I left yesterday evening arrived with the horses, some

of them are much fatigued.

Nothing material has occured here since I have been absent.

Tuesday 6

Fine weather.

Mr. Kittson arrived from the Kootenais and has made a pretty good

trade, 99 beaver, 62 deer & 34 elk skins & 2 horses, he changed some

of his horses which were jaded for others. The Kootanies desire a

Post[146] to be in their country this season, though some of those we

saw at the Flat Heads said it would not be necessary.

(To be continued.)

FOOTNOTES:

[88] John McLeod, Senior, stationed at Thompson river or Kamloops.

Consult "Peace River," by Archibald McDonald, for his career.

[89] Probably Charles McKay, son of Alex McKay who was blown up with

the Tonquin, and step-son of Dr. John McLoughlin.

[90] Celilo, or the Falls of the Columbia, above The Dalles.

[91] The Sandy river, Multnomah County, Oregon; camp being near

Washougal on opposite shore.

[92] Portage around the Cascades on north bank, where railroad portage

was built in later years.

[93] The Upper Cape Horn, below Klickitat river; see Wilkes' Map of

Oregon.

[94] This was the long portage of about 4-1/2 miles from Big Eddy to

the upper end of Ten Mile rapids. From here they used their boats to

the Falls, or Chutes, where again carried boats and goods a short

distance. Here was the "Wishram" village of Washington Irving. See

"Astoria."

[95] John Day river, Oregon side.

[96] David Douglas, the English botanist, who was then on the Columbia.

Consult Oregon Historical Quarterly, Vol. 5, pp. 218 and 245-6-7.

[97] Now known as Blalock Island but more often referred to by the fur

traders as the Long Island; opposite Cayote station of O. W. R. & N. Ry.

[98] The Umatilla rapids, above mouth of Umatilla river, Oregon side.

[99] Also called Fort Walla Walla, built in July-Aug., 1818, by Donald

McKenzie & Alex. Ross: consult "Fur Hunters of the Far West," chaptres

6 & 7 and frontispiece for picture of the Fort. Location 1-1/2 miles

west of Wallula, of present day.

[100] South branch of the Columbia, that is the Snake river.

[101] Mr. Thos. Dears, a clerk of the H. B. Co., but not attached to

any special Post. Mr. J. W. Dease, a Chief Trader, was then in charge

of Fort Nez Perces.

[102] The Palouse river of today; the Drewyer's river of Lewis and

Clark, and known to the fur traders also as Payton and Pavillon river.

[103] Spokane House, about 100 miles northward; see Ross Cox'

"Adventures" etc for an account of this trail to the Spokane river.

[104] Meaning the Pend d'Oreille Indians.

[105] Almota Whitman county, Wash., always a favorite Indian camping

place, and meaning the hilly or mountainous stream or place. Lewis

and Clark camped here Oct. 11th, 1805 and mention the Indian houses

described by John Work a little further on in this text.

[106] That is, the junction of the Snake and Clearwater rivers.

[107] Red Wolf crossing of the Snake river, at mouth of Alpown creek

Garfield country, Washington. Col. E. J. Steptoe's expedition crossed

here in the year 1858 on its disastrous expedition.

[108] John Work's corruption of the Indian family name Shahaptin.

[109] The Palouse and the Cayuse tribes. Not unlike Lewis and Clark Mr.

Work was "something of a speller."

[110] Where Lewiston, Idaho, now stands. See page 128 of Vol. 2 of

"Trail of Lewis & Clark" (Wheeler) for photo and description of this

site.

[111] That is, the Snake river proper but designated by Lewis and

Clark as the Kimooenim, while the Clearwater from the S. E. was the

Kooskooske.

[112] A very correct description of "Lewiston Hill" and of the famous

Palouse country beyond. Travelers by stage over that road all remember

it. Mr. Dease evidently returned direct to Fort Walla Walla by the

river.

[113] The regular Indian trail northward followed the line between

Washington and Idaho, generally speaking; consult Mauring's "Conquest

of Coeur d'Alene, Spokane & Palouse Indians" for this.

[114] Probably near Phileo Lake between Spangle and Cheney, Spokane

county, Washington.

[115] Spokane House, at junction of main with the Little Spokane

river, nine miles N. W. of City of Spokane, first established by Finan

McDonald in 1810; Mr. James Birnie in charge. Mr. Birnie afterward

settled at Astoria and Cathlamet near the mouth of the Columbia.

[116] This, and previous entries, give us the actual plans for removal

of this trading post to Kettle Falls on the Columbia, as had evidently

been agreed upon during the winter at Fort George. Consult "Fur Hunters

of Far West" (Ross) Vol. 2, p 162 as to this. Also Gov. Stevens large

map in Vol. 12 of Pac. Ry. Reports.

[117] The Pend d'Oreille river, from its mouth to the Calispel river

and flats near Cusick, Washington.

[118] The Kootenay river.

[119] Evidently Gov. Simpson was not without some gift of humor; he was

preparing Mr. Work for David Douglas' expected visit to the Interior to

collect botanical specimens.

[120] After at least 150 miles across the best farming lands of

Spokane, Lincoln and part of Douglas counties, Washington. Fort

Okanagan was then on the Columbia river side of the plateau at mouth of

Okanogan river.

[121] The San Poll river, from the north.

[122] These horses were for use in transporting goods to the Thompson

river and New Caledonia Districts, which from now on were to deliver

furs and get goods at Fort Vancouver on the Columbia. Up to this time

they had shipped everything to and from York Factory to Hudson Bay,

using the Tete Jaune Pass across the Rocky Mts.

[123] Peter Skene Ogden, who was in charge of the Snake Country

trappers that season. Consult Oregon Historical Quarterly Vol. 10, pp.

229-273.

[124] A half breed named La Prate, who afterward was for many years

resident at Fort Okanogan.

[125] The mouth of the Spokane river.

[126] This name should be Robideaux, another half breed.

[127] Alexander Ross, who had proceeded to Red River with Gov. Simpson

this same Spring and whose family now follows: and Mr. McLeod sends his

family preparatory to himself leaving the Columbia river district the

following spring.

[128] Meaning Fort Vancouver.

[129] That is Whirlpool Rapids at the foot of Nespalem Canyon. Consult

Lieut. Thos. W. Symon's Report of Examination of Upper Columbia River

for this journey from Okanogan to mouth of Spokane river.

[130] The trading post to be known as Fort Colville just above Kettle

Falls.

[131] Probably Spirit Lake Northeast of Spokane, and the little river

mentioned a little further on was probably Rathdrum creek.

[132] Mr. Finan McDonald, who built Spokane House in 1810 and had but

recently left there.

[133] Pend d'Oreille river at Sineacateen crossing, the north end of

David Thompson's "Skeetshoo Road"; later known as Markham's Ferry,

Kootenay County, Idaho.

[134] William Kittson; see "Fur Hunters of Far West" Vol. 1, p. 207.

[135] Thompson Falls, Montana.

[136] Lake Pend d'Oreille.

[137] Probably the Cabinet Rapids in Clarks Fork river. Barrier river

next mentioned is probably Trout Creek of today and maps.

[138] Thompson Falls, Montana, where the Indians would be gathered for

the summer trade and to fish. Mr. Ogden's party was either on head

waters of Jefferson's Fork of the Missouri in Montana, or on the Snake

or Salmon rivers in Idaho.

[139] This wide traverse or crossing of Lake Pend d'Oreille was from

near Hope, Idaho westward across the Lake.

[140] That is at Sinecateen again. During mining days this was the

principal crossing of the Pend d'Oreille river and is well known to all

early settlers of Idaho and Montana and the Kootenay country.

[141] Spokane House.

[142] Probably they had camped for the night at the Hoodoo lake

and this Bindash Campment at Spirit Lake, but impossible to locate

certainly.

[143] Mr. Kittson goes as far as Bonners Ferry, Idaho, near which

David Thompson's "Lake Indian House" had been, for a summer trade with

Kootenays there.

[144] The Colville river and valley, and we now get a glimpse of the

beginnings of actual settlement and trade in that valley. The "little

nick" mentioned further on is Marcus Flat, just above Kettle Falls,

where Fort Colvile (so named after one of the H. B. Co. officials) was

maintained until about 1872.

[145] This refers to the desertions of the H. B. Co. Free-hunters under

inducement from the American traders, concerning which there has been

some reflection cast upon Gen. W. H. Ashley, but without real evidence

to support it.

[146] Probably meaning the rebuilding of the Post or Fort near Bonners

Ferry; a regular Post had been maintained further up the Kootenay river

about opposite Jennings, Montana. See Ross Cox' "Adventures." p. 233.

HISTORY OF THE LIQUOR LAWS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

The State of Washington passed through three forms of government

before attaining statehood. The present state was first a part of the

"Old Oregon" under the provisional government. In 1840 the American

population sent a petition to Congress enumerating reasons for a

territorial government. This petition closed with these words:

"We pray for the high privilege of American citizenship. The peaceful

enjoyment of life, the right of acquiring, possessing and using

property and the unrestrained pursuit of rational happiness and for

this your petitioners will ever pray."

In 1848 Congress approved the "Oregon Bill" and for four years longer

Washington continued a part of the territory of Oregon. The region was

then, in 1853, organized as a separate territory and for thirty-six

years the "Organic Law." with added amendments, served as the

territorial constitution. Washington then became a state in 1889. It

is under these different forms of government and through the different

stages of growth and development, therefore, that the question of

legalizing or prohibiting the sale of alcoholic liquors becomes

interesting: Provisional government, 1843-1849: Oregon territory,

1849-1853; Washington territory, 1853-1889; Washington state, 1889.

The first territorial legislature of the present state of Washington

convened in 1854. During this session of the legislature there was

an effort made to pass a state-wide prohibition law. There had been

widespread agitation upon temperance and prohibition throughout the

country, by such reformers as John B. Gough and Neal Dow. In the

state of Maine Dow's work had resulted in the Maine prohibition law.

The effort for prohibition in the territory in 1854 failed but in

1855 a general liquor law was passed entitled "An act to prohibit the

manufacture or sale or Ardent Spirits in the Territory of Washington."

It is interesting to note the language of this law in the light of the

present.

Sec. 1 says "The manufacture, sale or gift of intoxicating liquors is

prohibited."

Sec. 2 says "A public agent may be appointed to sell spirituous

liquors for certain purposes, such agent to conform to the rules and

regulations of the appointing power and receive a compensation."

There is further provision in this law for bond, for punishment, for

violation and for fines under the law to go to the public school fund.

In addition to this there were two general liquor laws and much minor

legislation which we wish to notice.

This law passed June 30, 1855. Five days previous to this date, January

25, there was an enactment prohibiting the sale of liquor to Indians.

The penalty for violation was a fine of from $25 to $500. These fines

also went into the school fund.

In 1858 another law was passed making it a crime to sell to the Kanakas

(Hawaiian Islanders). This law was re-enacted in 1860.

In 1863, as there came to be more respect for law and community life

was more firmly established, we find the first provision of a jail

sentence for the violation of a liquor law. This was under an act

to prevent the sale of adulterated liquor, which made provision for

inspectors and defined the duties thereof. The penalty for violation of

this law was $500 and six months in jail.

The first law to prohibit the sale to minors was passed on November

9, 1877. For violation of this law there was a jail sentence and fine

not to exceed $500, one or both. At the same session on the same

day there was a law passed to protect those who sold to a minor who

misrepresented his age. Any minor misrepresenting his age was liable to

fine of $25 to $100, and jail sentence of not to exceed three months.

Two years later we find the first law for the recovery of damages for

injury by use of intoxicating liquors. The law holds the owner of the

building liable jointly with the seller. This law was enacted November

14, 1879.

An interesting bit of legislation is a law passed in 1879 restraining

the sale of intoxicating liquor in certain counties, Spokane, Stevens

and Whitman, within one mile of the Northern Pacific Railroad, during

construction. For violation of this law there was provided a fine of

$300 or three months in jail or both.

In 1881 a second damage law providing for damages for one who suffered

injury in person, property or means of support. This law says no

license shall be granted without the consent in writing of the owner

of the building for his property to be used for saloon purposes. The

property then becomes liable and the owner may be held for damages. The

money for damages may be recovered by civil action.

No further legislation of notice follows till the year 1885, just

thirty years after the first general liquor law was passed--thirty

years of attempted control which had not been very successful. The

agitation for teaching the effects of alcohol and narcotics in the

public schools resulted in the passage of such a law in this state

December 23, 1885. This law applies to all schools supported wholly or

in part by money from the territorial treasury. "The County Treasurer

shall withhold the county funds from any school not complying with

the provisions of this act." A fine of $100 is assessable against any

county or state superintendent who fails to enforce the provisions of

the law. This law, passed December 23, 1885, went into effect in July,

1886, and provided that teachers must take an examination in this

subject after 1887.

In the year 1886 a second general liquor law was passed. This law is

known as, "An act to prohibit the sale of Intoxicating Liquors in

Election Precincts of Washington Territory, Whenever a Majority of

Legal Voters of Any Such Precinct, at any election to be held for that

purpose, shall vote in favor of the prohibition of such liquors." This

is quite a lengthy law beginning with Section 1 which defines the terms

used, stating the singular shall include the plural and the plural the

singular. Nouns and pronouns of the masculine gender shall include the

feminine. The term intoxicating liquor shall include all liquor of any

nature. We may infer from this clause that there had been some dispute

over the interpretation of previous laws. Through court cases under

this law an incorporated town or city shall be a voting precinct. This

law contained eighteen different sections.

In 1887 there was a license law passed. This law permits the county

board to license outside of cities and towns. The license fee was from

$300 to $1000 divided as follows: 10 per cent goes to the state; 35 per

cent goes to the school; 55 per cent goes to the county. In cities the

council may grant the license. Then 10 per cent goes to the state, 90

per cent goes to the city. Bonds are fixed at $1000. It was approved

February 2, 1888, to be in force sixty days after approval.

In 1893 there was a law passed amending municipal incorporation liquor

tax regulation.

In 1895 a law was passed making it a nuisance to sell liquor contrary

to law.

Another law was passed in the same year, 1895, which is of interest.

This was an act prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquor on or

within two miles of the University Grounds, making an exception of a

small corner of ground in Madison Park on Lake Washington. This law was

drawn by Professor Edmond S. Meany, Department of History, Washington

State University. Illinois has a law similar to this one, but the

limit in that state is one mile while in Washington it is two. In 1903

a law passed prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquor within the

proscribed limit (of 2000 feet) of state institutions. This applied to

state institutions, not educational as well, and contained a clause

stating that this law would not affect the law concerning the State

University. The fine for violation of this law was a fine of $200 to

$1000. Another law in 1903 was for the search and seizure of liquor.

In 1905 a law passed providing for the license to be endorsed by the

treasurer of the state when he received his share of the license fee.

This law would lead one to believe that there might sometimes be some

irregularity in handling license monies.

Another act in 1905 was an amendment to the act providing for the right

of action for damages.

In 1907 there was passed "An act relating to sale of intoxicating

liquors," fixing a state license fee of $25 and providing punishment

for violation thereof.

A number of measures were passed in 1909; An act to prohibit a

wholesaler from holding an interest in a saloon or acting as bondsman.

The fine for the violation is from $100 to $500 or a jail sentence for

thirty days to six months. Monies loaned for such purposes in violation

of this law are forfeited to the city or state. An act prohibiting the

sale of liquor to Indians or mixed bloods and fixing a penalty for the

violation thereof. The state board of tax commissioners are empowered

to regulate the enforcement of the law of 1907.

The Military Code gives the commanding officer of the National Guard

authority, saying, "He shall prohibit or prevent the sale or use of all

intoxicating liquors. The sale of intoxicating liquor is prohibited

within 2000 feet of State institutions, Normal, Agricultural Colleges,

etc., and provides a fine of $200 to $1000 for the violation of this

act."

In this same year, 1909, the third general liquor law of this state was

passed. This is known as the "Local Option Law." The unit of territory

under this law shall be each city of the first, second, third or fourth

class each unclassified city having a population of 1000 inhabitants

and each county having no first, second, third or fourth class city.

Under this law the question shall be submitted at the general election

or at special elections by the petition of 30 per cent of the electors

at the last general election. This is quite a lengthy law and would

appear to cover almost every point of regulation of the traffic. One

clause of the law says, "No provision is intended or shall be construed

to violate or contradict the laws of the United States." The text of

this act contains twenty-three sections. This local option law passed

the Senate February 18, 1909; passed the House March 4, 1909, and was

approved March 12, 1909.

We are now close to the present time and it may be well to notice that

in 1911 an effort was made to amend the law of 1909. The amendment was

introduced in the Senate by Mr. Falconer and known as Senate Bill No.

121. The bill was read the first and second time and was referred to

the Committee an Morals--evidently an effort was made to kill the bill

in committee. There was two reports, a majority and a minority report.

The former was accepted. The bill was advanced to third reading. Eight

amendments were offered but all were lost. It passed the senate by a

vote of 24 to 16. The measure did not fare as well in the house. Here

also it was House Bill 121. It was read the first time, referred to the

committee on rules of order, reported back without recommendation, then

indefinitely postponed.

The legislature in 1911 did at least pass one measure. This law made it

a gross misdemeanor to permit minors in saloons.

The general law of 1909, which is known as the Local Option Law, was

secured through the temperance forces of the state. The strongest

and most active organizations are the Independent Order of Good

Templars and the Anti-Saloon League. The Good Templars of this state

have in addition to the American order a branch society among the

Scandinavians, which numbers several thousand voters. Much credit for

the advance in temperance and anti-saloon sentiment in Washington

must be given to George F. Cotterill, the former mayor of the city of

Seattle. Mr. Cotterill has not only been active among the American and

Scandinavian Good Templars of which he is the national head in America,

but he has been fully as diligent in the circles of organized labor.

Labor organizations have been active in temperance agitation. They

realize that sober men command a higher wage than drinking men and are

quite as zealous as the church in training their members to stay sober.

The question of "State Wide Prohibition" will be submitted to a

referendum vote of the people of the state in 1914.

We have the same question confronting us today that we had 59 years ago.

ANNA SLOAN WALKER.

DIVORCE IN WASHINGTON

In the matter of divorce, the commonwealth of Washington has passed

through a social evolution. In the early part of the territorial period

it was a common practice for the legislature to enact private laws,

granting divorces. The first of these divorces on record was granted

by the Oregon territorial legislature as far back as 1845. The ease

with which divorces could be obtained resulted in a wholesale abuse

of this legislative privilege. According to Arthur A. Denny, Fayette

McMullin accepted the office of governor of the territory and came

to Olympia for the expressed purpose of obtaining such a legislative

divorce. Mr. Denny was plied to vote for the measure but refused. He

never would vote for a divorce bill, and always told the applicants

to go to the courts for their divorces. Mr. Denny's attitude on the

question was shared by many others, as the constant opposition to the

practice shows. As for Governor McMullin, he was successful in getting

his divorce. It was granted on the 25th day of January, 1858. Two other

such divorces were granted at the same session. One was granted at the

following session and fifteen at the next. The average at the next

few sessions was between ten and fifteen. McMullin afterwards married

Miss Mary Wood of Olympia. The fact that he was removed from office

for incompetency in July, 1858, will serve to give one an index to his

personality. His term of office was from 1857-59 and Charles H. Mason,

secretary of the territory, filled out the unexpired term.

A more sturdy type of man, who served as war governor, was William

Pickering. His views on the granting of legislative divorces is

but a voicing of the general sentiment. Prior to his arrival in

the territory, unhappy married people had usually applied to the

legislature for the granting of divorces. At nearly every session

one or more acts had been passed and the divorce business had been

particularly active during the two preceding sessions, at one of which

fifteen and the other seventeen such acts had been passed. Secretary

Turney, as acting governor, had declared against this practice in the

message he sent to legislature in December, 1861, but no attention

was paid to his recommendation that it be discontinued. Turney's

attitude on the question was expressed as follows: "All good citizens

acknowledge and respect the marriage relation. Yet, the interests of

society are often stabbed and stricken down, and public sentiment

outraged and insulted by disregarding that sanctity, in severing those

who have been united in wedlock's holy bands. Those ties should be

sundered only by courts of competent jurisdiction, and only for one

cause--the scriptural ground for a writing of divorcement."

The Washington Historical Quarterly, Volume V, 1914 · 第 11 / 32 段