Fort Vancouver Historic Structures Report

History and location

There was an Indian trade shop at Fort Vancouver from the date of the establishment of the post at its first site during the winter of 1824-25. Business was slow for a time because the local Indians attempted to prevent more distant native groups from visiting the fort. Firm measures were taken by Chief Factor McLoughlin to end this extortion, and by August 1825 he was able to report that Chinooks from the mouth of the Columbia had arrived with "a good Lot of Skins." [1]

Nevertheless, the number of furs collected was considerably less than it had been at Fort George and continued to drop off annually until it reached only about 3,000 in 1827. Governor George Simpson reported in 1829 that the situation resulted from an exhaustion of the fur-bearing animals along the lower Columbia and that it was only by sending small trapping parties out for some distance that even the level then existing could be maintained. [2]

It probably was no coincidence that shortly after Simpson's visit in 1828-29, signs begin to appear that the Indian trade at Fort Vancouver, as distinct from the depot operations at the same post, had been reorganized and revitalized. For Outfit 1830 (mid-1830 to mid-1831) the District Statements of personnel, wages, etc., for the first time carried the subheading "Fort Vancouver Indian Trade" under the main "Columbia" heading. The next year the personnel of the "Southern Expedition" to the Umpqua and California were included under the Fort Vancouver Indian Trade subheading. [3] By 1836 this subheading included the Fort Vancouver "Indian Shop," Fort George, and the post on the Umpqua River, though the Southern Party was once more listed separately. [4] Although there were variations, this arrangement in general continued through the 1845-46 period that is the chief concern of this study. [5]

While it is not yet possible to be positive about the matter, it appears that the Fort Vancouver Indian Hall, as it was sometimes termed, had been transformed from merely the fur trading shop for an individual post to the administrative and supply point for the fairly extensive pelt-gathering operations that centered on the lower Columbia. Such at least is the inference that might be drawn from the fact that for several years the clerk in the Fort Vancouver Indian shop was the only clerk listed for the Fort Vancouver fur trade, and even when he was not the only clerk he was generally the highest in rank (that is, the highest paid). [6] Not too much should be read into this situation, however, because Chief Factor McLoughlin, manager of the entire vast Columbia District, ordinarily made the major decisions and most of the small ones relating to the Fort Vancouver Indian Trade.

In keeping with general Company practice, the Indian shop at Fort Vancouver was usually under the immediate charge of the depot surgeon when there was one in residence. [7] At least one, and possibly two, of the "medical gentlemen" appointed to the Columbia objected to this double duty, but most accepted the burden with good grace. Some, in fact, such as Dr. John Kennedy, Dr. William F. Tolmie, and Dr. Forbes Barclay, demonstrated exceptional skill at fur trading, and a few went on to higher administrative positions with the firm. [8]

Exactly what was expected of the post surgeon was spelled out by Chief Factor McLoughlin. On October 18, 1829, he informed Dr. R. J. Hamlyn that "Besides your professional Duties you will attend to the Indian Shop and Issue the Provisions for our Dinner and give directions that those provisions be boiled or Roasted &c &c as may best suit them and see that these Provisions are not Wasted. . . ." [9] By the 1840s the physician also served the rations to the laborers and other "servants" below the rank of clerk on Saturday afternoons. [10]

Despite the prominent role played by the Indian Trade Shop in the affairs of the district and post, no information concerning its exact location within the fort seems to be available prior to the time George Foster Emmons drew his ground plan on July 25, 1841 (Plate III, vol. I). This diagram shows a large structure (No. 13) described as the "Indian Trade store--Hospital Dispensary &c" situated along the south stockade wall about in the position of Building No. 8 on the present site plan of Fort Vancouver National Historic Site. It stood about fifteen feet east of the 1841 Fur Store and directly east of the southwest palisade gate. The Eld drawing shows this Indian Trade Shop to have been rather low in height, perhaps only one story, and covered by a gabled roof (see Plates IV and LIII, vol. I).

As has been seen in the previous chapter, by late 1844 this Indian shop of 1841 had been transformed into, or replaced by, the Fur Store. In other words, the site designated today as Building No. 8 was no longer the Indian Trade Shop, but the Fur Store.

When it can next be definitely located, on the Vavasour plan drawn in late 1845 (Plates VI, VII, VIII,, vol. I), the Indian Trade Shop had been moved almost 200 feet east, though still close to the south palisade wall, to the location presently designated as Building No. 21 on the site plan of Fort Vancouver National Historic Site. This spot was in the southeast quadrant of the fort and about twenty to twenty-five feet east of the southeastern fort gate.

A glance at the Emmons plan of 1841 shows that at that date the site, or the approximate site, of Building No. 21 was occupied by a warehouse called the "Missionary Store" because American missionaries had been allowed to keep property there (Plate III,, vol. I). Because the Emmons plan was not drawn exactly to scale, it is not possible to state definitely that the missionary store of 1841 had the same dimensions as the Indian shop of 1845, but certainly the two structures were very similar, if not identical, in size. A comparison of the Emmons plan with the Vavasour diagram also reveals minor differences in the locations of the 1841 store and the 1845 Indian shop, particularly with reference to the nearby Bachelors' Quarters building. Again, however, these differences could have been due to the deficiencies of the Emmons drawing. [11]

Such discrepancies make it impossible to state positively that the 1845 Indian shop was simply the 1841 warehouse adapted to a new use, yet it is quite possible that such was the case. In the first place, the missionary store was still quite a new structure in 1841 because it must have been built after the fort enclosure was expanded toward the east about 1836. [12] Therefore it is not very likely that it would have been completely rebuilt prior to the fall of 1845 or, if it can be considered that the small-scale "Line-of-Fire" map shows Vavasour's Indian shop, before September 1844 (see Plate V, vol. I). In the second place, portions of the missionary store visible in drawings made by members of the Wilkes Expedition in 1841 (see Plates IV and LIII, vol. I) correspond very well with the fragmentary or very small-scale views of the Indian shop presented in post-1845 pictures (see Plates XIV, XV, XVI, XVIII, XX, XXI, XXVI, vol. 1). All show Building No. 21 to have been a long, low structure with a gabled roof. [13]

Perhaps when the final reports on 1973 archeological excavations in the area of Building No. 21 have been completed they will reveal additional information about the structural history of the 1845-period Indian Trade Shop. Meanwhile, this writer is inclined to favor a hypothesis that the 1841 missionary store and the 1845-period Indian shop were one and the same structure.

If such should prove to be the case, the history of the 1845-period Indian shop could be traced back to a date between 1836 and mid-1841. It is not known when American missionaries stored goods in the warehouse on the site known as Building No. 21, but there were at least two occasions when storage facilities at Fort Vancouver were made available. In late May 1837, when the first reinforcement for the Methodist mission arrived on the Hamilton, Jason Lee hurried from the Willamette to Fort Vancouver in order, among other things, to obtain temporary housing for a part of the "liberal supplies" sent out from Boston. [14] The "Great Reinforcement," which reached Fort Vancouver on the Lausanne during early June 1840, also found it necessary to leave certain supplies, furniture, and baggage in storage until transportation to the scattered Methodist establishments could be obtained. [15] But because this same privilege may have been extended at other times and to other groups, the fact that missionaries used the building for storage throws little light upon exactly when the structure was built.

At any rate, it must have been erected after the stockade was enlarged about 1836 and before Emmons drew his plan on July 25, 1841. [16] After serving as a warehouse or "store," it probably was transformed into the Indian shop when the former Indian hall (Building No. 8) was rebuilt as the Fur Store, sometime between July 1841 and December 1844.

No historical evidence has been found concerning possible alterations or repairs to the Indian shop from the time of its identification on the Vavasour plan of 1845 until the Company abandoned Fort Vancouver in 1860. As was brought out in the previous chapter, however, there seems to have been a change in function. When the army rented the entire Fur Store as a quartermaster and commissary warehouse in 1852 or 1853, the fur storage operations appear to have been shifted to the Indian shop. Such, at least, is the conclusion that might be drawn from the fact that the board of army officers that inventoried the fort buildings on the day after the firm's departure described Building No. 21 on the present site plan as the "fur house, long since abandoned by the Company--in a ruinous condition." [17] Undoubtedly, little trade was being carried on with the natives by 1852-53. In 1854 an observer reported that the "Indian trade here is the ordinary trade of country stores, and for cash." [18]

Nothing specific is known of the fate of the Fur Store after the Company left in 1860, but the building must have disappeared with the rest of the fort structures prior to the end of 1865. Some of the footings uncovered by archeological excavations in 1952 were charred, indicating that fire may have been the final agent of destruction.

Indian shop operations. At many, perhaps most, Hudson's Bay Company posts during the first half of the nineteenth century, Indians were admitted within the gates only in limited numbers and under careful supervision. Sometimes they were confined by fences or palisades to a specified space in the courtyard; and at certain stations, where the natives were considered particularly dangerous, the approach to the trading room from outside the fort was through a long, narrow passage that was only wide enough to admit one visitor at a time and that bent at a sharp angle before the trading window. Under the latter circumstances, the Indians were not allowed to enter the trade shop at all; but generally the natives were permitted inside the building, even if only one or two at a time. [19]

At Fort Vancouver, however, there were few such restrictions, particularly after the fever epidemics of the early 1830s had decimated the native groups in the lower Columbia region. As early as 1834 John K. Townsend found Indians "assembled" in the courtyard "with their multifarious articles of trade, beaver, otter, venison, and various other game." [20] Five years later a British naval captain observed with some misgiving that no guard was observed and that the trading store was "open during working hours, and any increase in the number amongst the Indians would not excite uneasiness on the part of the officers." [21]

Although there exist several very brief mentions of the trade conducted in the Fort Vancouver Indian shop, there apparently is none sufficiently detailed to permit a clear visualization of the actual bartering process carried on there. It is necessary, therefore, to rely largely upon descriptions of such traffic at other Company posts. While the particulars differ according to time and place, there are common elements that undoubtedly were reflected in the operation of the Indian shop at the Columbia depot.

Speaking of conditions at Fort Chipewyan on Lake Athabasca in 1833, John McLean wrote, "trade is carried on in this quarter solely by barter," the old system of extending credit to the natives having been abolished. "Beaver," he continued,

is the standard according to which all other furs are rated; so many martens, so many foxes, &c., equal to one beaver. The trader, on receiving the Indian's hunt, proceeds to reckon it up according to this rule, giving the Indian a quill for each beaver; these quills are again exchanged at the counter for whatever article he wants. [22]

Robert M. Ballantyne, a young apprentice clerk, later described a trading episode at York Factory during the early 1840s:

On the following morning a small party of Indians arrived with furs, and Mr. Wilson [the postmaster] went with them to the trading-room, whither I accompanied him. . . .

Upon our entrance into this room trade began. First of all, an old Indian laid a pack of furs upon the counter, which Mr. Wilson counted and valued. Having done this, he marked the amount opposite the old man's name in his "Indian book," and then handed him a number of small pieces of wood. . . . The Indian then began to look about him, opening his eyes gradually, as he endeavoured to find out which of the many things before him he would like to have. Sympathizing with his eyes, his mouth slowly opened also; and having remained in this state for some time, the former looked at Mr. Wilson, and the latter pronounced ahcoup (blanket). Having received the blanket, he paid the requisite number of bits of wood for it, and became abstracted again. In this way he bought a gun, several yards of cloth, a few beads, &c., till all his sticks were gone, and he made way for another. The Indians were uncommonly slow. . . . [23]

In a broader treatment of the Company's Indian trade in general, Ballantyne made a more complete exposition of certain aspects of such transactions:

Trade is carried on with the natives by means of a standard valuation, called in some parts of the country a castor. This is to obviate the necessity of circulating money, of which there is little or none, excepting in the colony of Red River. Thus, an Indian arrives at a fort with a bundle of furs, with which he proceeds to the Indian trading-room. There the trader separates the furs into different lots, and, valuing each at the standard valuation, adds the amount together, and tells the Indian (who has looked on the while with great interest and anxiety) that he has got fifty or sixty castors; at the same time he hands the Indian fifty or sixty little bits of wood in lieu of cash, so that the latter may know, by returning these in payment of the goods for which he really exchanges the skins, how fast his funds decrease. The Indian then looks round upon the bales of cloth, powder-horns, guns, blankets, knives, &c., with which the shop is filled, and after a good while makes up his mind to have a small blanket. This being given him, the trader tells him that the price is six castors; the purchaser hands back six of his little bits of wood, and selects something else. In this way he goes on till all his wooden cash is expended; and then, packing up his goods, departs to show his treasures to his wife, and another Indian takes his place. [24]

Another generalized account describes operations at a typical post two or three decades later than those depicted by Ballantyne:

The business of the post, with the exception of the necessary employments of the lower servants, is transacted between the hours of nine in the morning and six in the evening, with an interval of an hour between two and three o'clock for dinner, when the offices and stores are closed. . . . When the bell announces the opening of the fort-gates, the inclosure soon fills with Indians and traders, who besiege the counter of the trading-store, or lounge idly about the yard--picturesque vagabonds in motley attire. The few clerks in charge are busily engaged in measuring tea, sugar, ammunition, etc., into colored-cotton handkerchiefs unwrapped from greasy aborginal heads for their reception; in examining furs and paying for them in instalments; in measuring off the scanty yards of blue-cotton prints that are to clothe the forms of dusky belles, or causing howls of delight by the exhibition of gilt jewelry to be sold at ten times its original cost. [25]

A description of the barter at Fort Nisqually, as observed during May 1841 by a member of the Wilkes Expedition, does not provide many details, but it undoubtedly illustrates conditions that must have prevailed at the not-too-distant Fort Vancouver:

I found Mr [Alexander Caulfield] Anderson busily employed in trading for a few skins just brought in by the natives; though the value of the whole could have been only 10 or 15 dollars, much time was occupied and many pipes smoked before the bargain was concluded. I was informed that furs of all kinds were every year becoming more scarce and that the prices were also slightly increasing. [26]

Additional accounts of Indian shop operations could be produced, but these will suffice to indicate the general nature of the activities that must have been conducted in the native trading store at Fort Vancouver. But before the descriptions quoted above can be completely understood, certain matters mentioned therein perhaps require elaboration, and certain additional facts should be stated. The following paragraphs attempt to provide such information as briefly as possible.

Credit. At many posts east of the Rocky Mountains the Indians were allowed each fall to purchase their "outfits" of supplies and equipment for the winter hunt on credit, the debt being repaid when the returns were brought in the next spring. Such advances were made to natives less frequently on the Pacific Slope, and trade was generally on a barter basis. [27]

Tariff or price. American settlers in the Oregon Country sometimes had distorted views of the pricing policies followed by the Hudson's Bay Company in its dealings with the natives. As late as 1848 one newly arrived emigrant was told, evidently by fellow countrymen, that "when an Indian wanted a gun, the trader [at Fort Vancouver] would stand the gun straight up (common-height gun) and the Indian would pile up furs as high as the gun, and then it was the Indian's gun and the Hudson's Bay Company's furs, an even swap, both parties well satisfied." [28] An examination of the Company's records shows the actual situation to have been quite different.

As early as the seventeenth century, almost from the start of its operations on Hudson Bay, the Company had found it necessary to establish a "Standard of Trade," later known as a "Tariff," which was a "formalised price-list for furs in terms of European goods." Or, to put it another way, it was a list "in which the value in trade of each item of goods was rigidly stated." [29]

With the passage of time, a tariff came to be "laid down" for each fur trading district, taking into account such factors as the original cost of the trade item, transportation from Britain to America, carriage inland from the depot, and profit. Tariffs are said to have been adjusted annually. [30] Some, however, are known to have remained unchanged for considerable periods. Also, local adjustments were occasionally permitted to meet conditions, such as the appearance of opposition traders.

In the Columbia District, particularly, Chief Factor McLoughlin was given considerable latitude in this respect. During 1829 he was forced to lower prices of goods considerably to prevent furs being traded to two American vessels in the lower Columbia. Governor Simpson wrote the next year that "we are concerned to find that the Indian Tariff has been reduced so low, but are aware that it could not have been avoided." McLoughlin informed the London directors in 1830 that "we can never bring the Indians to the old prices, of five Beaver for one Blanket, and I do not know if ever we will be able to increase the present price of one Large Beaver for a Blanket." [31]

The existence of a fixed tariff eliminated the necessity of haggling or bargaining with the hunters, native or European. It also prevented competition between the Company's own posts. At certain establishments where the clientele was not exclusively Indian, the list of prices for the available goods and the number of skins taken as equivalent to the price in each case was posted at the shop entrance. [32]

A complete tariff for the lower Columbia region during the 1845-46 period has not yet been encountered by the writer, but an abbreviated version of the "F. Vancr. Indian Shop Beaver Tariff 1842," copied for use at Cowlitz Farm, serves to illustrate the general range of prices:

A much better concept of the prices and of the trade in general can be obtained from what appears to be the complete "Tariff for furs & Provisions at Fort Albert, O[utfi]t '43 & '44." A notation on this list states that it was "copied from that of Fort Langley." On March 20, 1844, Chief Factor McLoughlin wrote to Governor Simpson from Fort Vancouver that the Indian trade tariff at the depot was the same as those at Nisqually, Fort George, and Fort Langley, "but it is impossible to keep a regular standard at this place or Fort George with all these Americans around us." [34] Thus the prices at Fort Vancouver must have been very similar to, if not exactly the same as, those on the following list [prices are given in terms of large beaver skins]:

The importance of the price list reproduced above is obvious. It not only gives the prices of goods sold, but it also shows the amounts received by the natives for the furs and other products they brought to the trade shop. Further, it provides a reasonably complete list of the types of furs, provisions, and other local products for which the Company expected to trade in the lower Columbia region. In any project to refurnish a reconstructed Indian Trade Shop, this list would be an excellent guide to the incoming portion of the items in stock.

The list also points to the fact that in some cases trade goods cost the natives more when paid for in provisions than in furs. It also indicates that certain types of furs and skins were traded "principally" or "generally" for specified goods, such as ammunition, tobacco, and cotton yardage. The meaning of such notations becomes clearer when one considers that in 1825 McLoughlin issued orders that blankets must not be traded for provisions, because they were "one of the few articles held in estimation by the natives about this place and for which we will only take furs." [36] In other words, though 180 pounds of venison equalled a large beaver skin in value, they would not buy a 2-1/2 point blanket that was priced at that amount. And evidently three bearskins would buy three twists of tobacco but not always a covered tin kettle, even though the prices were the same.

The list does not, however, indicate certain other restrictions placed on the barter as a matter of broad Company or district policy. For example, it does not show, except by omission of the item from the tariff, that liquor was not at that time traded to the natives at the Fort Vancouver Indian shop. Nor does it reveal that the amount of ammunition a native could obtain was restricted, at least during the early 1830s. [37]

Unit of value, or "made-beaver." It will have been noted that in both of the tariffs reproduced above the prices are given in terms of beaver, plus, or "large beaver." To describe the situation more succinctly, the "Standard" stated the value in beaver of each item of goods and then the value in beaver of all other kinds of furs. [38]

As Professor E. E. Rich has stated, this standard shows that from the very beginning of its operations, "beaver was the only fur to which the Company paid serious attention." [39] Factors other than market demand that may have been taken into consideration in fixing upon this unit were the wide distribution of beaver, the general abundance of the animal, and the relative stability of beaver pelt prices in Europe. [40]

This unit of value was sometimes termed a "beaver," a "large beaver," a plus, or a "castor," but the name most frequently and most widely used throughout the Company's territories and in its accounting system was "made-beaver." A made-beaver, by definition, was a prime large winter beaver skin taken in good condition and properly prepared for shipment. [41]

But to say that a made-beaver was a fine beaver skin does not convey the entire picture. The term as it was used in the fur trade was also a standard of value by which the relative worths of other furs and trade goods were expressed. This point is best made clear by an illustration. In 1832 the trader at Fort Chimo to the east of Hudson Bay recorded: "an Esquimau arrived with nine made beaver in coloured foxes." [42]

"Counters" or tokens. It will also have been noted in the descriptions of the trading process quoted above that the natives were often given quills or wooden sticks to indicate the value of the furs they had turned in and that these "counters" were then handed back in "payment" for trade goods purchased. Each counter normally had the value of one made-beaver.

Such a system had been found desirable in an economy in which there was no lawful coinage in circulation and in which money, even if present, would not have been understood. The Indians wished to have some tangible evidence of what they had sold so that they could keep track of what they had left to spend as they made purchases. Many of them were acquainted with the use of such items as shell beads as mediums of exchange, and thus the "counter" system proved a highly acceptable solution to the problem.

The North West Company, the predecessor of the Hudson's Bay Company on the Pacific Slope, employed metal tokens as counters during at least part of its tenure on the Columbia. [43] The Honourable Company, however, did not start to use such minted tokens until about the 1850s. Before that time--and in many places for long afterwards--district and post managers devised their own counters. Ivory or bone disks, porcupine quills, musket balls, and wooden sticks were among the items so employed. At Churchill during the 1880s, for instance, the "only coinage" in use was a wooden stick about five inches long, five eighths of an inch wide, and one fourth of an inch thick, made out of oak staves and branded with the figure "1." Each represented one made-beaver. [44]

What type of counter, if any, was employed at Fort Vancouver during 1845-46 is not known. Several crudely fashioned pieces of flat copper, roughly octagonal in shape and stamped with the figure "1" and the initials "HBC," have been found in British Columbia. They appear to have been cut from powder keg hoops and may represent an early form of token in the Columbia District, but nothing is known of their origin. [45] Perhaps archeological excavations at Fort Vancouver eventually will produce something of a similar nature.

Account books. In Ballantyne's account of trading at York Factory, quoted earlier, mention is made of entering an Indian's name, together with a notation of the furs he bartered, in the clerk's "Indian book." What appear to be two such books, though titled "blotters," are to be found in the Fort Nisqually Collection in the Henry E. Huntington Library and Art Gallery. Together they cover the period from February 1844 to December 1845. Undoubtedly, similar accounts were kept at Fort Vancouver.

These books are each eight inches by eleven and one half inches by three eighths of an inch in size, bound merely with heavy buff paper covers or wrappers. Hand-lettered on the cover of the first is the title:

Nisqually Blotter
commencing 7th February 1844
ending 31st December 1844

The blotters contain a daily running account of transactions in the Fur Shop. Also included are notations of the rations given out to the "servants" from time to time and also charges to the "gentlemen's" mess. Perhaps the entries were transferred later to more formal account books or summarized in the post accounts.

A few random entries illustrate how the accounts were kept and, more important, provide a remarkable insight into the operations of an Indian Trade Shop. In the following examples, the names of the natives bringing in the furs are on the left:

This "blotter" is a document of great interest. Among other things, it seems to indicate that the Indians at Fort Nisqually may have traded their furs either one at a time or a few at a time directly for trade goods of equivalent value. In such case there may have been no need for the use of quills or other types of counters. This time-consuming method of direct barter was not uncommon at Company posts across the entire continent. [47]

The "Indian book" also reveals that, despite the general policy on the Pacific Slope against outfitting Indians or advancing credit, the trader at Fort Nisqually quite frequently "lent" or "advanced" trade goods to natives. He also often made small presents to the Indians to promote their goodwill, one of the practices that the fixed tariff was intended to halt.

Tricks of the trade. Having gone thus far into Indian shop operations, it may be useful to carry the discussion a bit beyond those topics that bear directly upon the physical layout or the furnishings and equipment. It has already been seen that Dr. Forbes Barclay, who presided over the Indian trade store at Fort Vancouver from 1840 to 1850, was recognized by his peers as an excellent fur trader. Yet, it would appear from the fixed tariffs and the policies against extending credit and making gifts that the individual trader had relatively little latitude for individual initiative. In fact, the Company intended that such should be the case. [48]

How, then, did certain traders manage to outshine their fellows? How was one clerk able to increase the returns of a post soon after he was assigned to it when his predecessors had failed to do so? Such success was not won easily.

First, the trader had to possess the knack of getting along with Indians. He had to be able to learn their languages quickly. He had to know when to humor them and when to be firm. And the successful ones soon discovered how to "adjust" the tariff and how to use credit and gifts to encourage the maximum effort on the part of the natives and still not incur censure from their superiors.

The Fort Nisqually blotter quoted above illustrates how one skillful trader handled such matters. Perhaps even more revealing is the entry in the Fort Simpson (Mackenzie River District) journal by veteran John Stuart on December 7, 1834. After noting the arrival of some Indians with furs to trade, he added:

another of them had 4 Beaver skins and 6 martens for which he wanted a gun, the remaining part [of the price] to be on debt, but from what I experienced from the others I knew well that if [he] had got the gun, their [sic] would be an end to his industry for the winter, that not one skin more would be got from him; whereas by retaining the Gun until he brings the full payment I am persuaded he will exert himself to hunt some kind of furs and ere the snow is disolved [sic] bring the remaining 14 skins that is still deficient to pay for the gun, which is probably more than ever he killed in his life before. [49]

Toward the end of the century one hardworking trader in the Athabasca region attributed his success to knowing the habits of each Indian and being able to inspire the natives with a new zeal for trapping. One means of imparting this inspiration is revealed by the following story. When he first arrived at his new post, he found that the Indians swarmed around the stove in the shop and neglected their trading. He removed the stove and had to measure out cloth and dispense tobacco with fingers stiff from the 40-below-zero cold, but when natives entered the shop all was "strictly business" with no temptation to laziness. [50]

Storage of furs. Samuel Parker, who visited Fort Vancouver in 1835, recorded that there were then four large buildings "for the trading department" at the depot. "One," he continued, "for the Indian trade, in which are deposited their peltries." [51] Although possibly Parker was referring to the principal fur store, it seems more likely that he was describing the "Indian trade store" of the Emmons ground plan and indicating that the skins traded there were also stored there.

Unfortunately there appears to be no direct evidence concerning the place where the furs brought in by the native hunters were kept after trading operations were shifted to the new Indian Trade Shop (Building No. 21) between 1841 and 1844. It would seem reasonable to assume, however, that the pelts collected at the shop would be retained there at least until sufficient numbers had accumulated to warrant formal transfer to the Fur Store. The fact that the returns of the Fort Vancouver Indian shop, like those of every other post, were kept separated for accounting and baling purposes would perhaps imply some such procedure. [52] It is also possible that the furs collected by the subsidiary posts and expeditions of the "Fort Vancouver Indian Trade" and the returns from certain other establishments, such as the Willamette Falls post and Cowlitz Farm, which were occasionally transferred to that trade, were passed through the Fort Vancouver Indian shop before going to the depot Fur Store, but definite information on that subject has not yet been uncovered.

Volume of furs traded. Thanks to the diligence of Chief Factor James Douglas there exists a detailed statement of the returns of the "Fort Vancouver Indian Shop" for Outfits 1844, 1845, and 1846, the period of most interest for the purposes of the restoration project. Reproduced below, it provides a superb view of the numbers and types of pelts that crossed the counter in Building No. 21:

Fort Vancouver Indian Shop

Dispensary or apothecary shop. It is probable that a special room was set aside at Fort Vancouver for the practice of medicine and the dispensing of medicines from the early days of the establishment. But not until 1833 do available records provide any view of its location and appearance.

Early on the morning of May 4, 1833, two new "medical gentlemen"--Dr. William Fraser Tolmie and Dr. Meredith Gairdner--sent out by the London directors arrived at the Columbia depot. Even before sitting down to breakfast they were taken by Chief Factor McLoughlin, himself a doctor, to visit the "pretty numerous" sick employees and natives, most of whom were afflicted with the prevailing malarial fever. Part of the remainder of the forenoon was spent in bringing "some degree of order" to "Apothecaries Hall," which apparently by that time was already a named room or apartment reserved for use of the depot physician. This "Apoth: Hall," Tolmie noted in his diary that same day, "is to be our temporary domicile." [54]

From a more detailed description of the room entered in his journal two days later, Tolmie seems to indicate that the apothecary shop in 1833 was not situated in the Indian trading store, because he said that the schoolroom could be seen through cracks in the north wall of the apartment, while the "house" on the south side was "unoccupied at present." [55] Unfortunately, because the location of the school at that time is not known with certainty, this information is not particularly helpful in placing "Apothecary Hall" in a specific structure. However, that building does appear to have been a residence and schoolhouse and not the Indian shop.

Another statement made by Tolmie seems of particular significance. He and Gairdner soon decided that they would make the apothecary shop their permanent living quarters, "as we should not then in all likelihood have intruders, when arrivals of brigades occur." [56] These words clearly indicate that it had been intended to house the physicians with the other clerks, who habitually were "bumped" out of their rooms when visitors of higher rank arrived. Tolmie and Gairdner thus appear to have originated a pattern of residence that seems to have been followed by at least some of their successors.

The records provide no further information about the location of the apothecary shop until July 1841, when Emmons drew his ground plan of the fort. His Building No. 13 (the site at present called Building No. 8) was described as the "Indian Trade store--Hospital Dispensary &c." (see Plate III, vol. I).

Clearly by 1841 the apothecary shop and the Indian trade store were in the same structure. This arrangement is not at all surprising in view of the heavy burden that rested on the shoulders of the man who was in charge of both of them--the post surgeon. The triple role of the doctor as physician, Indian trader, and supervisor of rations has already been explained. But there were certain other aspects of his duties that require mention before the full extent of his responsibilities can be understood.

The first call upon the doctor's professional services was had by the Company's sick or injured employees and by such Indians as Dr McLoughlin chose to assist. Seriously ill patients were housed in two hospitals: one, as seen by the notation with the Emmons plan, was connected with the apothecary shop, or dispensary, and evidently was reserved for the Company's "gentlemen" and other persons of standing; the other, outside the stockade toward the river, was where the firm's "servants," their families, Indians, and persons considered of low rank were treated. [57] Sometimes the surgeon's nonmedical duties were so demanding that untrained clerks and boys had to be pressed into service as dispensers of pills and medicines to hospital patients, occasionally with remarkable results. [58]

The doctor's services were provided without charge to employees, Indians, and to occasional patients who were treated gratis as a matter of policy. But by the 1840s the "Medical Department" at Fort Vancouver was expected to cover its expenses through the treatment for fee of settlers and travelers able to pay. Although general Company policy frowned upon post surgeons leaving their stations to attend "outsiders," Dr. Barclay in 1844 said that his practice "extended over all the settlements in behalf of the Company." [59] There are many mentions in early Oregon records and reminiscences of assistance to missionaries and settlers by doctors from Fort Vancouver. One pioneer remembered that the charge was $50 per "home call" plus $2 for ferriage. [60]

Another duty that fell to the doctor was making up the packets of medicines that went out to the posts throughout the district with the annual outfits. This chore involved not only ordering the needed items from London but also the actual packaging of them in the small lots required at the subsidiary establishments. Thus one Company physician remembered putting up "dozens of bottles of Turlingtons Balsalm and Essence of Pepperment [sic], grosses of 'purges' of jalop and Calomel, dozens of Emetics of Ipecacuanha and Tartar Emetic and other simples." The task was not made easier by the fact that bottles and corks were generally scarce. [61]

The surgeon clearly dispensed the medicines that were given out to patients in the hospitals and in the apothecary shop. But the Fort Vancouver depot also stocked a large quantity of medicines for general sale. No evidence has yet been found that would indicate beyond question whether such remedies were stored and dispensed at the regular depot sale shop or at the apothecary shop. The fact that one indent for medicines had included six ounces of strychnine, of which all except about one fourth of an ounce were for sale, makes one hope that the latter was the case. [62]

It also usually fell to the doctor to comply with the not infrequent requests received from Governor Simpson and the London directors for stuffed bird skins, mineral samples, and other scientific specimens. The doctor seems also to have been in charge of the depot library; at least he had the responsibility for ordering new books and periodicals for it from London. All in all, Dr. Forbes Barclay seems to have been justified when he informed Governor Simpson in 1844 that his multitudinous duties, in which he was assisted only by "a boy of 13 years, for the Indian Shop & Medical Department," left him very little spare time to devote to educating any young men who might be assigned to him for training. [63]

Because of the demands made upon the doctor by both the Indian shop and the Dispensary, it would appear logical for both facilities to have been housed close together in the structure whose site is presently known as Building No. 21 when the Indian trading store was moved there between 1841 and 1844. However, direct evidence that the 1845-46-period Indian shop also contained the Dispensary is slight and by no means conclusive.

P. W. Crawford, an American settler who visited Fort Vancouver in 1847 and examined it "critically," later recalled that "on the East side of this Interior [courtyard] is the Apothacury [sic] hall or doctors shop where Medicine is served out to whites and natives." [64] A much more recent description of Fort Vancouver as it existed about 1849 states that the "drug store" under the charge e of Dr. Barclay was situated at the east end of the stockade. [65] Because the Indian shop was almost the only structure in the eastern portion of the fort in which the Dispensary could have been located, (the uses of the others being reasonably well accounted for), these descriptions tend to reinforce the supposition that the two facilities were located in a single building after 1841-44 as they had been previously.

Doctor's quarters. It has been seen that in 1833 the two depot surgeons decided to live in the apothecary shop. There seems to be no positive proof that their successors did the same. In fact, there is at least one statement, based upon recollections of youthful visits and not reliable in all respects, that the post doctor resided with the other clerks in the Bachelors' Quarters. [66]

On the other hand, there is certain evidence that indicates that one or more of the physicians who followed Drs. Tolmie and Gairdner may have made their homes in the Indian shop building. When Joseph L. Meek enumerated the population of Clark County, Oregon Territory, for the Seventh Census on October 30, 1850, the eighth house he visited, clearly within the Fort Vancouver stockade was inhabited by "A. Lee Lewis [sic]," clerk, and "Alferd [sic] Benson," surgeon. [67] The import of this entry becomes clear when it is realized that Adolphus Lee Lewes was the clerk in charge of the Fort Vancouver Indian Trade for Outfit 1850 and that Alfred R. Benson was the surgeon who replaced Dr. Barclay at the depot. (After Barclay's departure, the physician ceased to be in charge of the Indian trade, at least until 1853 when a departmental reorganization and a change in the system of accounts make it difficult to tell who, if anyone in particular, conducted the small volume of fur trade that remained at the post). [68] Perhaps Benson and Lewes found it convenient to room together in the structure where their respective activities centered. It is also possible, of course, that their joint dwelling was simply one of the separate living units in the series of apartments known as the bachelors' quarters. In such case, it is conceivable that the Dispensary was also in that building, which lay only a few yards north of the Indian shop.

There are also physical remains that point toward possible residential use of a part of the Indian shop. In 1973 National Park Service archeologists completely excavated the site of this structure. Although they found the area much disturbed by post-1860 activities, they believe that a concentration of brick and faunal remains in the southeastern portion of the shop building may have resulted from the use of this area as living quarters. Also, a large privy pit behind the structure contained much floral and faunal material, further evidence of domestic occupation. [69] Such remains from the table would have accumulated even though the doctor himself probably took most of his meals in the mess hall in the manager's residence, because his family would have been brought their food from the Big House kitchen. Also, patients in the Dispensary would have produced table scraps.

As the situation stands now, there seems to be no more reason for believing that the doctor lived in the Indian shop building than that he did not. But in the opinion of this writer, it is quite possible that he did so.

Dr. Forbes Barclay. During the 1845-46 period that is of primary concern for the reconstruction project, the surgeon at the Fort Vancouver depot was Dr. Forbes Barclay, who has been described as "a Scotsman of excellent training and unique experience." [70] Born in the Shetland Islands on Christmas Day, 1812, he was afflicted with a cleft palate. His father was a prominent physician who lectured on anatomy at Edinburgh and had authored a book on the movements of muscles. Young Barclay studied medicine in Edinburgh and, beginning in 1834, spent several summers as a surgeon with exploring expeditions to the Arctic. One of these voyages ended in shipwreck, but Barclay was one of the survivors who were rescued by Eskimos and eventually returned to Britain in Sir John Franklin's ship. He was granted his medical diploma by the Royal College of Surgeons, London, on July 5, 1838.

The Barclay family had connections with the Hudson's Bay Company. Archibald Barclay, said to have been an uncle of Dr. Forbes Barclay, was appointed the firm's secretary in London in 1843; but either he or another uncle, the Reverend Thomas Barclay, had been known by Governor George Simpson for at least several years prior to that time. [71] Perhaps this association was related to the fact that on June 4, 1839, Forbes Barclay entered the service of the Hudson's Bay Company in the dual capacity of clerk and surgeon and was placed on the list of those awaiting assignment. That fall he sailed in the Columbia for Fort Vancouver, where he arrived in the spring of 1840.

Relieving Dr. W. F. Tolmie, Barclay at once went to work in the Indian Trade Shop and in the medical department. He served with distinction both as fur trader and physician until he retired from the Company's employ during 1850. He then moved to Oregon City, became an American citizen, and was prominent in professional and political affairs until his death in 1873.

In 1842 Dr. Barclay married Maria Pambrun, eldest daughter of Chief Trader Pierre Chrysologue Pambrun and Catherine Humpherville, herself the daughter of an Englishman in the service of the Company. Born at Fraser Lake, New Caledonia, on October 5, 1826, Marie, as she was known to her largely French-speaking family, was a girl of character and beauty. Early in 1841, while living with her parents at Fort Walla Walla, she became engaged to Cornelius Rogers, an associate of the American Board's Oregon Mission. This event stirred up a storm among the Whitmans and Spaldings chiefly, it seems, because Marie was a Catholic, though the facts that she had Indian blood, could speak little English, and could boast of only a scant formal education evidently were also taken into consideration. Chief Trader Pambrun died as the result of a fall from a horse during May of that year, and soon thereafter Catherine Pambrun moved with her children to Fort Vancouver, where she did "fine needlework" to support and educate her brood. Although described as "distressed," the family was not in desperate circumstances, because Pambrun left an estate then estimated at not "much short of 4000£" [72]

The elder Pambrun had much favored his daughter's planned marriage to Rogers, but shortly after his death Maria terminated the engagement. Her acquaintanceship with Dr. Barclay evidently began with the family's arrival at the depot and resulted in union during the next year. The couple's first child, Jean Jacques, was born on December 13, 1845. He died of diptheria on December 31, 1847. A second son, Peter Thomas, was born on April 6, 1847, and a third son, Alexander Forbes, on September 23, 1849. Four other children were born to the pair after they moved to Oregon City in 1850.

It is known that prior to October 1850 Catherine Pambrun and her children moved from Fort Vancouver to live with her daughter and her son-in-law, Dr. Forbes, in Oregon City. [73] Whether the Pambrun family had also dwelt with the Barclays at Fort Vancouver between 1842 and 1850 has not yet been discovered. [74]

Construction details

a. Dimensions and footings. On the different versions of the Vavasour map of 1845 the site presently known as Building No. 21 is labeled "Indian Trading Store" and "Indian Shop" (see Plates VI-VIII, vol. I). On the two original drawings, the scale indicates that this structure measured eighty by thirty feet. The traced version printed in the Oregon Historical Quarterly gives the dimensions as eighty by thirty-two feet. The inventory of Fort Vancouver structures taken in 1846-47 listed the building as "Indian trade shop," eighty by thirty feet. [75]

Exploratory excavations in 1952 revealed that the area of the Indian shop apparently had been considerably disturbed by post-1860 plowing, grading, and other activities. None of the east and west wall footings could be found, but eight (all but one) of the north wall footings were in place as were six south wall footings, though they were somewhat out of line. The long axes of most of the footings appear to parallel the lines of the walls. Mr. Louis R. Caywood, who supervised the 1952 excavations, interpreted his findings to indicate that the Indian shop measured eighty by thirty-two feet. [76]

The site of Building No. 21 was completely excavated in 1973, but at the time of this writing the final results are not available. Project Archeologist J. J. Hoffman has reported the preliminary findings as follows:

Despite modern destruction of evidence, we have defined lines of wooden footings at the north and west walls; evidence at the south and east walls is ephemeral. Foundation plan of the building appears to [be] 79 ft. long and either 30 or 35 ft. wide. Artifacts found within the building position clearly indicate its function as the Indian Trade Store.

In a later memorandum, Mr. Hoffman stated his belief that the building measured eighty by thirty-five feet. [77]

In view of the almost invariable accuracy of the Vavasour ground plan, architects will wish to study the final excavation drawings, when available, with great care. Meanwhile, Mr. Caywood's estimate of eighty by thirty-two feet, made before the footings were disturbed by his excavations, seems reasonable.

b. General construction. It has been seen that Building No. 21 began to serve as the Indian shop at an undetermined date between mid-1841 and late 1844. Available pictures showing the structure during its Indian shop period range in date from 1845-46 to about 1860 (Plates IX, X, XIV, XV, XVI, XVIII, XX, XXI, XXII, and XXVI, vol. I). Unfortunately these views are not in complete agreement when it comes to such details as the number and placement of doors and windows. But there is unanimity concerning the main profile of the building.

All picture the Indian trading store as a long, low structure with a gable roof. In fact it seems to have been approximately the same height as, or only slightly lower than, the nearby Bachelors' Quarters, and markedly lower in profile than the other principal ware houses. The eave line apparently was lower than the tops of the pickets, although the evidence on this point is conflicting.

If it is assumed that the Indian shop of 1844-60 was the same structure as the so-called "Missionary Store" of the 1841 Emmons plan, a certain amount of additional information becomes available, because the Eld drawing (Plate IV, vol. I) and that attributed to Agate (Plate LIII, vol. I), both depicting Fort Vancouver in 1841, show the roof and west gable very clearly. In those pictures the eave line definitely is below the top of the nearby stockade.

The import of this pictorial evidence is clear. The Indian shop could only have been a one-story structure, almost certainly with a low garret or loft above.

Walls. The lack of satisfactory pictorial evidence is no bar at all to a flat declaration that the Indian trade store was constructed in the usual post-on-sill or Canadian style. The footing pattern alone would prove the point even if there had not been witnesses who testified that the Granary, the Powder Magazine, and the later Kitchen were the only structures not built of squared logs or slabs. [78]

As shown by the footings, there were nine upright posts framing the north and south walls and four in the east and west walls, counting the corner posts in each case. Because the walls were low, these grooved uprights probably were not more than about twelve feet high. Whether the sills they rested upon were raised off the ground evidently has not been revealed by the archeological findings.

The spaces between the uprights were undoubtedly filled with horizontal squared filler logs to a height of about six to seven or even eight feet, at which point particularly large horizontal timbers were fixed in place by being notched or pegged into the uprights. These timbers served as lintels for the doors and windows and sometimes also as supports for the ground floor ceiling beams (which were also the garret floor joists). The height of the lintels above the floor depended on the method of setting the ceiling beams. Sometimes these rested on top of the lintels, often being morticed entirely through the next timber above so that the ends of the tenons were visible from the outside. At other times the ceiling beams were morticed into or through the tops of the lintels or into the tops of the next timbers above the lintels. [79]

Above the lintels the horizontal filler logs continued to the tops of the uprights and to the heavy plates into which the uprights were morticed. This type of construction resulted in a very solid building in which diagonal bracing was seldom required. Occasionally tie beams were run between the intersecting plates at the corners of the walls (see Plate LXXX, vol. I), but diagonal knee braces between plates and uprights or between girts and uprights were almost never employed. Their use in reconstructions to meet present-day building code requirements defeats the entire purpose of historic preservation--to re-create a past scene with absolute fidelity, at least to the extent available knowledge permits.

There is no information available as to whether the timbers for sills, walls, and plates were sawed or axe-hewn. However, an examination of a clear print of the 1860 photograph of the Bachelors' Quarters, which must have been built at about the same time as the Indian shop (assuming the 1841 "Missionary Store" was identical with the later Indian Trade Shop), reveals a remarkable uniformity in the size of most of the infill timbers, leading to the conclusion that they were sawed. Probably the Indian shop had timbers of the same type.

One of the 1841 drawings of Fort Vancouver (Plate LIII, vol. I) distinctly shows that the walls of the gable ends of the "Missionary Store" above the plates were closed in with vertical board siding. This type of gable closure was very widely employed in Hudson's Bay Company construction. Sometimes battens were used to cover the cracks between the boards. [80] Frequently, however, battens were absent (see Plates XIX and XX). Perhaps in such cases tongue and groove siding was occasionally used. In at least one extant Canadian-style, gable-roofed structure, the vertical siding under the gables was nailed directly to the outside of the cross-tie beam and end rafters. [81]

Roof. The 1841 drawings of Fort Vancouver depict the "Mission Store" with a gabled roof of vertical boards capped by ridge boards. Post-1844 views do not permit a determination of the type of roof covering subsequently employed. One frequent visitor to Fort Vancouver later testified that he believed the roofs of all the buildings within the stockade were shingled by 1846. [82] In view of this uncertainty concerning the type of roofing used on the Indian shop during the 1845-46 period, there would seem to be little danger in adding interest to the entire reconstruction project by employing boards to cover this reconstructed building. The method of applying such boards has been described on pages 114-15 in volume I of this report.

This seems to be an opportune place to make a few general remarks about roof construction at Hudson's Bay Company establishments and, in fact, at most fur trading posts manned largely by French Canadians. In 1832 a Yankee missionary wrote a detailed description of the construction technique employed by the American Fur Company at its posts in the present State of Wisconsin. His remarks concerning the roof were as follows:

A post is placed at the center of each end of the building which is continued above the beam [plate] as high as the top of the roof is intended to be. A stick of timber is then laid on the top of these posts reaching from one end of the building to the other, and forms the ridge pole. The roof is then formed by laying one end of timbers on this ridge pole and the other on the plate till the whole is covered. These timbers answer the purpose of boards on the roof of English buildings. [83]

This type of construction, employing a ridgepole and with or without the extension of the center end-wall upright timbers to the ridge line, was used quite often at Hudson's Bay Company posts west of the Rockies. A fine example at Fort St. James during the 1860s is illustrated in Plate XXXV in volume I of this report. A ridgepole would have been a necessity when vertical boards were employed for covering the roof, unless horizontal boards were applied under the vertical ones.

Apparently, however, the more usual construction technique for both gabled and hipped roofs at Company establishments did not require a ridgepole. Each pair of principal rafters formed a truss. The rafters were tenoned to the plate at the foot, and at the peak they were half-lapped and fixed by a wooden peg. Collars, or cross ties, further strengthened the trusses. Trusses seem to have been spaced at about five-foot centers. At least such was the case at Fort Langley. On the surviving warehouse at Fort St. James, however, the rafters are somewhat less than three feet apart on centers, while those on the old granary at Fort Nisqually are spaced at about four-foot centers. Horizontal board sheathing was then spiked to the rafters, seemingly providing the principal longitudinal bracing. [84]

Doors. The Emmons ground plan of 1841 shows only two doors in the "Missionary Store" that then occupied the site now known as Building No. 21 (Plate III, vol. I). They both were in the north wall. If this structure did in fact become the 1845-46-period Indian Trade Shop, the information about the doors is extremely useful, because no other reliable information is known to exist that would indicate the number and locations of the Indian shop doors. Lacking additional data, it would seem safest to follow the Emmons plan in the placement of the doors in the front or north wall of the reconstructed Indian shop.

In addition, there may have been one or two doors in the south wall. As has been seen, during the 1973 archeological excavations the remains of a privy were found behind the Indian shop. A map of the excavations was not available when this report was written, and therefore the exact location of this facility was not known to the writer. Convenient access to the privy from at least the dispensary and living quarters, if there were such, might be expected, though this reasoning does not by any means assure that rear doors actually existed. The locations of the two barriers that, as shall be seen in a later section of this chapter, linked the rear wall of the Indian shop with the south stockade wall might have been related to the positions of both the privy and any possible rear doors, because if these barriers enclosed the privy the only access to it would have been from inside the shop building.

Purely on the basis of reasoning, because it would seem logical to have the door to the Indian trading store proper close to the southeast fort gate, the more westerly of the two north-wall doors probably entered into the Indian shop portion of the building. The other north-wall door perhaps gave entry to the dispensary/ doctor's quarters section.

Undoubtedly the door or doors leading to the Indian shop proper were of heavy plank construction, much like the doors in the other warehouses. They probably were wide, single doors much like that shown in Plate XXI. Security was always a matter of much concern at Company trading shops and warehouses, and the Indian trade store at Fort Vancouver is known to have been broken into at least once. [85]

It is possible, however, that the front door giving access to the Dispensary and doctor's quarters was somewhat more elaborate. It may have been a six-panel door with a light or window over it similar to those in the Bachelors' Quarters (see Plate XXVII, vol. I).

Windows. There is no reliable information available as to the number of windows in the Indian shop building. Three 1850-60 drawings show the north and west walls of this structure, but they are not entirely clear and seem not to be in total agreement. Only that by Sohon in 1854 (Plate XXI, vol. I) and that by Lieutenant Hopkins, ca. 1860 (Plate XXVI, vol. I) are sufficiently distinct to provide useful data.

The Sohon drawing seems to show seven openings (doors and windows) across the front or north face of the Indian store, while the Hopkins sketch appears to show only four. In the west wall Sohon indicates that there were two windows in the gable and two on the ground floor; Hopkins shows one window in the gable and two on the ground floor. It should also be noted that the Eld and Agate sketches of 1841, in both of which the upper portion of the west wall of the "Missionary Store" is visible, show no windows whatever in the gable.

In view of these discrepancies one can only make a logical estimate as to the number and placement of the windows, based on the Sohon drawing, which seems to be the most reliable of those available, and modified on the basis of the probable interior lighting requirements. [86] Purely upon such slender authority, the writer suggests that the window and door openings in the north and end walls be as shown in Figure 1. In the south or rear wall there might be seven windows placed to correspond with the seven openings in the north wall, with one or more doors being substituted for windows if the privy location appears to indicate rear-door access.

Figure 1
Suggested Placement of Door and Window Openings in North and End Walls of Indian Trade Shop.

The windows across the front of the building and those on the east wall, where the living quarters may have been located, probably were double-hung like those on the front of the Bachelors' Quarters Plate (see XXVII, vol. I).

Probably those on the south wall (except possibly those lighting the Dispensary and living quarters) and on the west wall were smaller and side-hung like those in the warehouses generally. These smaller windows most likely would have been protected by solid wooden shutters on the outside and horizontal iron bars on the inside.

It might be opportune at this point to call attention to the fact that the design of Canadian (and perhaps English) double-hung windows in the early nineteenth century differed somewhat from that employed in the United States today, particularly as regards the meeting rail. The construction of a typical Hudson's Bay Company window of the 1840s is a much too technical subject to be treated in this historical data report. (It is suggested that architects concerned with the reconstruction project at Fort Vancouver consult the following two drawings prepared by the Canadian Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Technical Services Branch: (1) Restoration Fraser House, Lower Fort Garry National Historic Park, Drawing No. 8, Main Floor Window Details; and (2) Restoration for Blacksmith's Shop, Lower Fort Garry National Historic Park, Drawing No. 3, Window and Door Details).

Despite the great length of the garret, there should be no windows on that floor other than the two at each end.

Exterior finish. Apparently there is no direct evidence concerning the exterior appearance of the Indian Trade Shop. Based upon what is known of the other warehouses, however, it is fairly safe to assume that the outside surface was unpainted and without weatherboarding. But on the assumption that the Indian shop and the Dispensary would merit somewhat more attention than, say, the New Store, it probably would not be too much in error to follow the pattern shown in the Coode watercolor sketch for the Priests' House and paint the doors, door and window trim, and shutters the prevailing Spanish brown. The window sash, however, including the lights or transoms over the doors, should be white. [87]

It might also be well to repeat here the observation that there evidently was no visible chinking between the horizontal infill timbers at Fort Vancouver, except possibly where large gaps developed due to shrinking. A close examination of an enlarged photograph of the New Store (Plate XIV) and of the photograph of the Bachelors' Quarters (Plate XXVII and the original, untrimmed print of Plate XXIX, vol. I) reveal no, or few, signs of chinking, at least to the eyes of this writer.

And should there be a temptation to make the exterior trim too finished and neat, the description of a typical Hudson's Bay Company Indian Trade Shop during the 1840s given by Robert Ballantyne might be kept in mind."The trading-store, " he wrote,

is always recognisable, if natives are in the neighbourhood, by the bevy of red men that cluster round it, awaiting the coming of the store keeper. . . . It may be further recognised, by a close observer, by the soiled condition of its walls occasioned by loungers rubbing their backs perpetually against it, and the peculiar dinginess round the keyhole, caused by frequent applications of the key, which renders it conspicuous beyond all its comrades. [88]

c. Interior finish and arrangement. As with most Fort Vancouver structures, there is no known record of the number of rooms in the Indian shop or of their arrangement. The reasoning behind a speculation that the western portion of the building might have been devoted to the Indian shop proper while the eastern might have been occupied by the dispensary/hospital and doctor's quarters has already been discussed.

Half of the building, with the entire garret, would seem to be an ample allocation of space for the Indian shop, for a stockroom, and for a fur loft. The Indian shop at Fort William in 1816, when that post was an important station of the North West Company, does not appear to have measured more than about twenty-eight by thirty-five feet. [89] Visitors during the 1830s sometimes spoke of the "Indian Hall" at Fort Vancouver. Such a room, for the accommodation of natives while they were waiting to trade or visit, was a customary feature at Company posts. After the Indian shop was moved to the site now known as Building No. 21, however, there seems to be no further mention of such a hall, at least within the pickets, and perhaps it was no longer needed. If so, the space requirements of the Indian trade would have been reduced.

On the other hand, the eastern half of the building, an area of about forty by thirty-two feet, would seem rather small by present-day standards for the apothecary shop, or Dispensary, part of which seems also to have been used as a hospital and for the doctor's living quarters. But at fur trading posts during the nineteenth century expectations were not so high. When Dr. John Sebastian Helmcken reported for duty at Fort Victoria in 1850 he was shown to the "surgery," a room in the dwelling known as "Bachelor's Hall." The apartment, he later recalled, was unique: "It contained a gun case and a few shelves, with drugs in bottles or in a paper in every direction. The tin lining of a 'packing case' served for a counter; there was a cot slung to the ceiling; to this room I was consigned." [90]

Until the report on the archeological excavations of the Indian shop site is available there is little point in speculating on the arrangement of rooms. Evidence of chimney and fireplace foundations will go far toward indicating the locations of apartments used as living quarters, because it would appear from traces of bricks already uncovered that the Indian shop was one warehouse in which the ban against stoves and other means of heating did not apply.

Nevertheless, a very tentative suggested plan for the ground floor is presented in Figure 2. Doors could be substituted for one or two of the windows in the south wall if no other access to the privy is available due to barriers.

Figure 2
Hypothetical Plan, Ground Floor, Indian Trade Shop.
Scale: 1/2" = 10'

Before going into detail concerning the several rooms in the Indian shop building, a few general remarks concerning interior finish seem to be in order. As with the other warehouses, the ground-level floors probably were of tongued and grooved planks, from two to three inches thick. Most likely even those in the doctor's quarters were not planed. The inventory of 1846-47 does not mention this building as being lined and ceiled, but trade shops, fur stores, and living quarters were generally at least lined. Very probably, then, the walls throughout were lined with vertical boards. The ceilings almost certainly were not lined, except perhaps in the Dispensary and living quarters. On much of the ground floor, therefore, the ceiling beams would have been exposed, with the floorboards of the attic forming the ceiling. The garret floor probably was formed of two-inch tongued and grooved boards. There was no ceiling in the garret except the roof.

Interior doors in the trade shop area probably were of solid planks, beaded at the vertical joints. In the Dispensary half of the building the doors may have been paneled. The stairs to the garret must have been much like those shown in Plate XCIII, volume I.

It is almost certain that the interior of this building was not painted, even in the living quarters.

Indian shop. No specific description of the Fort Vancouver Indian shop proper is known to exist. From accounts of the trade stores at other posts, however, a general picture can be assembled that must fairly well reflect the situation at the Columbia depot.

At Fort Garry during the 1840s the counter enclosed a space just wide enough to admit a dozen men. [91] In most Indian shops drawers under the counter contained the smaller articles of trade goods, while larger items were piled on shelves around the walls. These shelves often contained small or medium-sized compartments or divisions for articles of small or in-between sizes. [92] Pots and other difficult-to-store items frequently hung from nails in the walls and ceiling beams.

In short, the Indian shops at posts where the natives presented no threat were much like the regular trade shops that have been described in detail in Chapter XI in volume I of this report. A typical Company Indian store of the 1840s is illustrated in Plate XXII. The restored general trade store at Lower Fort Garry National Historic Park, shown in Plate XXIII, has many features that might have been found in an Indian shop of the 1840s. Plates XCVI and XCVII in volume I illustrate well the types of shelving in Company shops.

Stockroom. Possibly there was a separate room behind the shop proper for the storage of that part of the annual Fort Vancouver Fur Trade outfit that could not be displayed in the shop or shipped out to the shop's subsidiary posts. Perhaps this room looked something like the one pictured in Plates XXIV and XXV, although the goods shown in for trade with the those photographs are not all of the types used natives.

Fur loft. No record has been found to indicate how long the Indian shop retained the furs it traded before turning them in to the depot Fur Store. But, as has been seen, it is probable that the returns were allowed to collect for some time where they were first received from the natives. Storage methods and treatment undoubtedly were the same as in the main Fur Store, and the furs could have been kept both on the ground floor and in the garret. Plates XXVI and XXVII provide further illustrations of the methods used by the Company for storing furs, and incidentally, they furnish excellent views of the type of garret and roof construction that may have been employed in the Fort Vancouver Indian Trade Shop.

Dispensary. As with every other portion of the Indian shop building, the historical record provides no information at all concerning the size, location, or appearance of the Dispensary (apothecary) shop that very probably was situated in that structure. Even the use of a portion of the 1845-46 Dispensary as a hospital for the Company's "gentlemen" and important outsiders is hypothetical. But because it is known that the doctor occasionally treated and examined the wives of Company employees, missionaries, and settlers, it would seem logical to assume that he had a separate room or office where such consultations could be conducted with some degree of privacy. Also, such a separate room would permit medicines to be dispensed without the necessity of disturbing any patients who might happen to be in the main Dispensary. From the inventories of articles in use in the Dispensary, it would appear that surgery--a not infrequent necessity--was performed in that apartment.

At any rate, all that is known about the size, appearance, and interior finish of any Dispensary at Fort Vancouver is in the description of "Apothecary's Hall" entered by Dr. William F. Tolmie in his journal soon after his arrival at the depot in 1833. As has been seen, this room was not then located in the Indian shop.

Nevertheless Tolmie's words provide much useful information concerning the arrangement of a dispensary at one of the Company's posts:

Our apartment is 13 paces long by 7 broad and extends in E. and W. direction, the roof about 20 feet from floor supported by two rafters and 2 transverse beams. In front is the door and a pretty large window--posteriorly--a window and back door one on each side and in the middle a large fire place, without any grate, built of stone and lime. The walls are formed of rough, strong horizontal deals attached at their extremities to perpendicular ones.

Against the northern wall are placed our bedsteads, between them a large chest and in front a small medicine shelf. Strong shelves of unplaned deal occupy two posterior thirds of south wall and contain the greater part of medicines. Anteriorly there is a small heater and a painted shelf on which have today placed small quantities of medicines most frequently in use. [93]

The deals composing floor are in some places two and three inches distant from each other, thus leaving wide apertures. This is also true of the deals in the walls and the chinks are numerous; by those to N. can look into school room. The house to S. is unoccupied at present. Shall close all apertures with brown paper pasted, or leather. The partition is to extend from the foot of my bed to extremity of large shelves on left and the abutment [apartment] in front to be the surgery. The posterior [is] our bed room and I expect we shall have it busy soon [very snug].

Our attendant is a Sandwich Island boy named Namahama. He is slow in his motion as a sloth, but quiet and docile and will improve. Keep up a blazing pine fire usually; our only fire iron is a pole about 5 feet long with six inches of iron rod fitted to its extremity and is a good apology for a poker. Filled some 8 or 10 quart [corked] vials [phials] with few tinctures on hand and arranged them on front shelf. There is an excellent supply of surgical instruments for amputation, 2 trephinning, 2 eye instruments, a lithotomy, a capping [cupping] case, beside[s] 2 midwifery forceps and a multitude of catheters, sounds, bandages [flexible & silver bougies], probangs, 2 [tooth] forceps, etc., not [yet] put in order. [94]

Doctor's living quarters. There is no certainty that the depot surgeon and his family lived in the Indian shop building, but such has here been tentatively assumed for planning purposes.

As the quotation from Dr. Tolmie's journal makes abundantly clear, the surgeon at Fort Vancouver was accorded no special privileges as far as living accommodations were concerned. He could expect no more and no less than his fellow clerks.

The rooms of the subordinate officers and clerks are described in as much detail as the historical record affords in Chapter IV of this report, and this information is not duplicated here. Suffice it to say that the floors were probably rough boards, and the walls almost surely were lined with unpainted vertical or horizontal fir boards. The ceiling probably was covered with the same material. When analysis of the archeological findings has been completed it may be possible to say whether the quarters were heated by a fireplace, by stoves, or by both.

d. Connections with the stockade. One version of the Vavasour ground plan of 1845 (Plate VII, vol. I) depicts a line connecting the southwest corner of the Indian shop with the south palisade wall. This same line shows on the "Line of Fire" map of 1844 together with a similar linkage located to the east about two-thirds of the distance along the south side of the Indian shop (Plate V, vol. I). These lines probably indicate barriers, palisades, or fences of some type intended to protect the Indian shop from thieves. Thus far archeological excavations have not produced any trace of these barriers.

Furnishings

Indian Trade Shop proper. As was the case with the general depot trade shop, the "furnishings" of the Indian store consisted largely of the trade goods stocked there and of the returns taken in barter. Fortunately, available inventories provide a reasonably adequate picture of the goods offered, the products received, and the equipment required for the operation of the shop.

Before presenting the detailed lists, however, a few general remarks may be useful. The goods offered were, on the whole, of the same quality and types as those sold to employees and settlers, except that the range or variety of items was more limited. There were many articles of European civilization for which the natives had little use. On the other hand, the Indians were excellent judges of quality, and once they accepted a certain brand or pattern they demanded it year after year.

Robert Ballantyne has left an excellent description of a Company Indian shop during the 1840s:

It contained every imaginable commodity likely to be needed by Indians. On various shelves were piled bales of cloth of all colours, capotes, blankets, caps, &c.; and in smaller divisions were placed files, scalping-knives, gun-screws, flints, balls of twine, fire-steels, canoe-awls, and glass beads of all colours, sizes, and descriptions. Drawers in the counter contained needles, pins, scissors, thimbles, fish-hooks, and vermilion for painting canoes and faces. The floor was strewn with a variety of copper and tin kettles, from half-a-pint to a gallon; and on a stand in the furthest corner of the room stood about a dozen trading guns, and beside them a keg of powder and a box of shot. [95]

In another description of a Company trade shop, Ballantyne mentioned tobacco as being sold from "a coil of most appalling size and thickness, which looked like a snake of endless length." [96] Undoubtedly the Fort Vancouver Indian shop contained a similar roll. A visitor to the "shop" at Fort Simpson in 1868 noted that this place where the skins were bartered and goods delivered in exchange presented a curious jumble of all kinds of articles; there were even Indian weapons, knives, muskets, hunting and fishing gear which served . . . as pledges in respect of deals not yet completed." [97]

The inventories of goods on hand and "articles in use" in the Fort Vancouver Indian Trade have one major drawback when considered as guides for refurnishing the Indian shop: they include items at the Umpqua post and Fort George as well as the "Fort Vancouver Indian Trading Shop." This fact is not of great significance when it comes to the trade goods, because what is needed is a good account of the types of items carried in stock. The inventories are not satisfactory indicators of quantities of items in any case, because they only show the amounts remaining on hand when the count was made. Apparently there are no available records that show the full stock at the beginning of each outfit.

When it comes to the equipment employed to operate the Indian shop, the inventories of "articles in use" are of little utility. Both the Umpqua post and Fort George, as operating establishments, required tools, eating utensils, agricultural implements, and many other items for which the Fort Vancouver Indian shop had no need. To identify those articles that might have been used in the Indian shop at the depot is virtually impossible. Therefore, no attempt is made here to reproduce the annual lists of "articles in use" in the Fort Vancouver Indian Trade. Suffice it to say that of the many items listed, an axe or two, a common trading gun, a hammer, one "hand Steelyard," and a few beaver traps perhaps would have been "in use" in the Fort Vancouver Indian shop. [98] The account books that would have been employed in this same shop have been described earlier in this chapter.

As for the trade goods, the following inventories will provide an excellent view:

Inventory of Sundry Goods, property of the Honble. Hudsons Bay Company, remaining on hand at the Umpaqua [sic], F. George & F. Vancouver Indian trading Shop

Inventory of Sundry Goods, property of the Honble Hudsons Bay Company, remaining on hand at the Umpqua, Fort George and F. Vancouver Indian Trading Shop, forming the Fort Vancouver Indian Trade, Spring 1845

An earlier inventory of country-made articles and country produce perhaps gives a better picture of the diverse items that from time to time might have been received in barter or traded to natives in the several shops of the Fort Vancouver Indian Trade The following list is from the "Columbia District, Country Produce & Country Made Articles Inventories Outfit 1840/41":

Fort Vancouver Indian Trade

Fur loft. A list of the types and numbers of skins taken in at the Fort Vancouver Indian Trade Shop for Outfits 1844 to 1846 has been given earlier in this chapter. That information, together with Plates XXVI and XXVII, should provide sufficient guidance for the organization of a fur exhibit in the restored structure.

Apothecary shop or Dispensary. Fortunately, detailed inventories are available not only for the equipment of the Dispensary but for the medicines and "surgical apparatus " carried in stock at the depot for sale or for use at other posts in the Columbia District. Although it is obvious from Dr. Tolmie's journal of 1833, already quoted, that a sizeable quantity of medicine was kept on hand in the Dispensary, it is not certain that the entire depot stock was stored there. Also, the inventories show that a certain number of medicines were carried on the accounts of the depot Sale Shop, but whether they were physically stocked there is not apparent.

Because the depot surgeon was responsible for making up the packets of medicines that were sent out annually to the various posts, and because presumably sales of medicines by the Sale Shop were made under his general supervision, it is not impossible that the combined stocks of medical supplies were actually kept in the Dispensary where the doctor could get at them with minimum distraction from his duties as Indian trader. Such an assumption is purely hypothetical, however, and in furnishing the reconstructed Indian shop it perhaps would be best to display merely a generous representative sampling of the inventoried medicines and apparatus, distributed between the Dispensary proper and the doctor's office.

Inventories are also available for the "Hospital" at the depot. Almost certainly these lists refer to the hospital that was outside the fort stockade near the bank of the Columbia River. Because the Dispensary inventories do not include such items as beds, blankets, bedpans, dishes, glasses, and other articles that might be expected where patients are hospitalized, two conclusions are possible. Either no bed patients were housed in the Dispensary, or the hospital inventories included certain items that were physically located in the Dispensary.

As has been seen, the assumption that persons of a certain rank or class were hospitalized in the Dispensary is quite speculative, yet it is logical. And there is some historical evidence that points in that direction. In 1844, when the captain of the Belgian bark L'Indefatigable was forced to remain at Vancouver for nearly seven weeks because of "dysentery and other diseases," it is recorded that he remained "in the Fort during his illness." [104] Such would not have been said if he had been confined in the hospital. Also, there may be some evidence to support the view that the hospital inventory included some articles physically situated in the Dispensary. The inventory made in the spring of 1848 p laced items in both "Dispensary & Hospital" in a single list. [105] At any rate, for what it is worth, one of the hospital inventories is included below.

The following are representative inventories and requisitions (orders to London) pertaining to the "Medical Department." They are not always exact copies of the originals in the Hudson's Bay Company Archives, because prices have been omitted and occasional ditto marks have been replaced by complete words. But amounts and items are complete as far as the records were legible, and no corrections have been made in spelling except as indicated by a few notations in brackets.

The lists are arranged in the following order: inventories of articles in use in the Dispensary, requisitions of medical supplies, inventories of medicines and medical apparatus remaining on hand at the end of outfit, and a hospital inventory. From an examination of several lists in each category, it seems that the following provide an adequate sampling:

Inventory of Sundry Goods . . . remaining on hand at Fort Vancouver depot.
Spring 1844

In addition to its quite ample stocks of medicines and medical apparatus, the Company also kept on hand at Fort Vancouver a small reference collection of medical books. Although these were generally inventoried as part of the fort library, it seems reasonable to believe that they may have been physically housed in the Dispensary where they would have been available for ready reference.

An inventory of property at the North West Company's western depot at Fort George in the spring of 1821 listed the following medical books:

1 Edinburgh Dispensatory
2 Murray's Elements of Chemistry
1 Harper's Medical Dictionary
2 Cullen's Practical Physic
1 Cooper Dictionary of Surgery
1 Hamilton's Midwifery
1 Hamilton on Female Complaints
2 Murray's Pharmacy
1 Ruberand's Physiology
1 Reid on the Mind
1 Saunders on the Liver
1 Arbuthnot on Air
1 Cullen's Nosology
1 Hooper's Vade Mecum Physician
2 Pharm. Chirurgica
1 Translation Titus Lucretius Corns (Cornelius)
1 Botany
1 Huxham on Fevers
1 Modern Practice of Physic (Thomas)
1 Hunter on Venereal
1 Sharp's Surgery do [112]

A second inventory, taken in the fall of that year, included the works listed above and also the following titles that represent either additions or more complete descriptions of works already noted:

Murray's System Materia Medica and Pharmacy
Hamilton's Botany
Buchan's Medicine
Hooper's Medical Dictionary
Smith's Botany [113]

The inventoried items were transferred to the Hudson's Bay Company after the North West Company merged with the former firm in 1821. Presumably the medical books were moved with the other Fort George property to Fort Vancouver during the first half of 1825.

What apparently are some of the same books appear in the inventory of the Fort Vancouver library made in the spring of 1844. The medical titles on that list are the following:

1 Thomas on Physic
1 Medical Dictionary
1 Huxtrain on fevers
1 Sharps Surgery
1 Materia Medica
1 Thomas practice on Physic
1 Dispensatory
2 Vols. Cattle Doctors [114]

In addition to these works belonging to the Company, it is probable that the depot surgeon had a small collection of medical books of his own that would have been housed in his office or living quarters. Nothing is known about Dr. Barclay's personal library, but there is a fairly good record of the books owned by his immediate predecessor at Fort Vancouver--Dr. William F. Tolmie. The latter's collection perhaps reflects the reference material a physician would have been likely to have had at hand on such a distant frontier.

Among Dr. Tolmie's books now preserved at McLoughlin House National Historic Site in Oregon City are the following medical works published prior to 1845:

Elements of Pathology and Practice of Physic, by John Mackintosh, M. D. 2nd ed. 2 vols. London: Longman Rees, Orme, Brown & Green; Edinburgh: John Carfrae & Son, 1831.

Principles and Practice of Midwifery, by James Blundell, M. D., carefully revised and corrected by Alexander Cooper Lee and Nathaniel Rogers, M. D. London: Joseph Butler, 1840.

Human Physiology, by John Elliotson, M. D. 5th ed. London: Longman, Orme, Brown, Green and Longmans, 1840.

A System of Operative Surgery--etc., by William Hargrave, A. M. Dublin: Hodges and Smith, 1831.

The Retrospect of Medicine and Surgery. Edited by W. Braithwaite; a half-yearly journal. No. 4 (July to December, 1841); No. 5 (January to June, 1842). 2 vols. London: Simpkins, Marshall and Co.; Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd; Leeds: G. Cullingworth.

A Manual of Chemistry; containing the Principal Facts of the Science, arranged in the order in which they are discussed, etc., by William Thomas Brande. 2nd ed. 3 vols. London: John Murray, 1821.

Lexicon Medicum, or Medical Dictionary, by Robert Hooper. London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown & Green, 1831.

A Dispensatory, or Commentary on the Pharmacopoeias of Great Britain, comprising The Natural History, Description, Chemistry, Pharmacy, Actions, Uses, and Doses of the Articles of Materia Medica, by Robert Christison, M. D. Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black; London: Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans, 1842.

Digestion and Diet, by Andrew Combe, M. D. 3rd ed. Edinburgh: MacLachlan, Stewart & Co.; London: Simpkin, Marshall & Co., 1841.

Ruling Passions of the Mind: Translated from the original work of J. C. Layater, by T. LeMessmeier. 20th ed. London: Thomas Tegg; Glasgow: R. Griffin and Co., 1844.

Lectures on Anatomy, Surgery, and Pathology; including Observations on the Nature and Treatment of Local Diseases, by John Abernethy. 2nd ed. London: F. C. Westley, 1831.

The Anatomist's Vade-Mecum: A system of Human Anatomy, by W. J. Erastmus Wilson. London: John Churchill, 1840.

Neurhypnology; or the Rationale of Nervous Sleep, considered in relation with Animal Magnetism, by James Braid. London: John Churchill; Edinburgh: Adam & Charles Black, 1843.

A Dictionary of Practical Surgery, etc., by Samuel Cooper. 7th ed. London: Longman, Orme & Co., 1838. [115]

In addition, Tolmie is known to have ordered the following medical books from London prior to 1845:

The Cyclopedia of Practical Medicine, edited by John Forbes, M. D., Alexander Tweedie, M. D., an d John Conolly, M. D. Tolmie ordered this book in 1836 and requested that it be "In the most compact form & to be full bound."

Johnson's Medico Chir. Review. From the first number published in 1836 up to the latest one issued before the departure of the Company's ship for the Columbia in 1837.

Martinet's Therapeutics.

The Principles of Physiology Applied to the Preservation of Health and to the Improvement of Physical and Mental Education, by A. Combe, M. D. The latest edition, half-bound. Ordered December 1838. [116]

Doctor's quarters. The rooms in which Dr. Barclay and his family resided were probably, at least in 1845-46, furnished in about the same manner as those of the other clerks at Fort Vancouver. Having been brought up in a cultivated and reasonably well-to-do household, he undoubtedly desired better furnishings than the battered deal tables, wooden "sofas," and bunk beds provided at the depot, but it seems doubtful that he would have imported more comfortable and fashionable furniture until he had decided upon the direction of his career. If he remained with the Company he would always be subject to sudden transfer, and as a clerk he could not have expected to take any considerable amount of household goods with him. Probably only after he had decided to retire, which he did in 1850, did he begin to accumulate imported furniture for a more permanent home.

Nevertheless, because of his background, his quarters might have displayed a few more of the amenities of civilization than the rooms of the young bachelor clerks. There may, for instance, have been a tea service, a lamp, brass candlesticks, an d perhaps a family portrait or two. Dr. Barclay did have an appreciation of art, because in 1847 and 1848 he commissioned several paintings from John Mix Stanley. [117]

The furnishings customarily allotted to the clerks at Fort Vancouver will be treated in detail in Chapter IV of this volume. Thus it is not necessary to go into the matter here other than to note that for the 1845-46 period proposed for the reconstruction, the furnishings should be appropriate for a family consisting of one mature, educated male; a frontier-raised wife scarcely more than 19 years of age; and an infant son (born December 13, 1845).

Closets and wardrobes were probably absent from the surgeon's quarters. Yet, if Dr. Barclay was like his predecessor, he possessed a fairly elaborate outfit of clothing; and Mrs. Barclay is known to have had at least several fashionable gowns. Probably most of these clothes were kept packed away in cassettes and trunks--Chinese chests are known to have been imported to Vancouver from the Hawaiian Islands as early as 1830. [118] But, as shall be seen in the discussion of the Bachelors' Quarters, very commonly at Company posts the larger articles of clothing simply hung from pegs on the walls of the bedrooms.

It is of interest, therefore, to know what articles of clothing might thus have been kept in "visible storage." As with the books, nothing is known of Dr. Barclay's sartorial tastes, but some information is available concerning Dr. Tolmie's wardrobe. On November 3, 1838, Tolmie ordered the following articles from London on his own account, because he had found it "more economical to get supplies from home than here":

1 Surtout dark claret col: plain col: with spare velvet one--stout silk facings
1 Blk Cloth Vest rolling Collar
I pr dark grey trousers
2 light Vests rolling collars
6 pr Cotton Drawers--elastic
6 fine woollen Shirts--elastic
6 cotton Shirts 3 Pattern 3 Blue Stripe
2 pr Hickson tanned Gloves
I pr Dundee Kid Gloves
I black silk Stock
I black silk Neck Cloth large
6 prs stout worsted stockings knit expressly
6 prs Socks Do
1 Silk Umbrella
1 tailors measuring Tape
3 pr stout winter shoes iron heeled double soled
1 pr Summer [Do]
1 pr Adelaide Boots
1 Blk oiled silk Cap [119]

As for Maria Barclay's wardrobe, several dresses described as being from her trousseau of 1842 are preserved at the McLoughlin House National Historic Site in Oregon City. [120]

Recommendations

a. It is suggested that architects preparing the plans for the reconstructed Indian shop carefully examine the final report of the 1973 archeological excavations at the site of this structure when it becomes available. Such an examination could be expected to shed light upon such matters as the following:

(1) Whether the Indian shop of 1845-46 was the same structure as the "Missionary Store" of 1841.

(2) The exact dimensions of the Indian shop, a subject presently clouded by conflicting evidence.

(3) Whether concentrations of beads or other trade goods permit identification of the exact location of the trading shop proper; whether broken medicine bottles or other artifacts might indicate the site of the Dispensary; whether evidences of chimneys or hearths might point to the location of possible living quarters.

(4) Whether the sites of the privy and of any barriers connecting the Indian shop with the south palisade might throw any light on the possible existence and locations of doors in the south wall of the Indian shop building.

b. It is recommended that the Indian shop be reconstructed in accordance with the construction data supplied in the body of this chapter. For additional guidance, the 1860 photograph of the Bachelors' Quarters should be consulted, because the building techniques employed in the two structures must have been quite similar. Special attention is called to the following suggestions:

(1) The walls should be constructed of sawed timbers with no visible chinking.

(2) No visible diagonal bracing should be employed in this building. If no means of concealing such bracing (considered to be desirable because of earthquake and wind stresses) can be devised, other means of strengthening the structure should be found. The Hudson's Bay Company sometimes bored holes through three or four successive infill timbers and drove in very heavy wooden pins. This procedure, if the corners of the structure were firmly tied together, resulted in a very rigid building.

(3) The ends of the gables above the plates should be closed with vertical board siding, without battens. There should be no framing under these boards except for the end cross-tie beams and that required for the windows (which should run from cross-tie beam to plate).

(4) Because there seems to be no positive evidence as to the roof covering in 1845-46, it might add interest to the reconstruction project to use vertical board roofing such as was on the building in 1841.

c. The exterior of the Indian shop should be unpainted except for the door and window trim, doors, and shutters, which should be Spanish brown in color. The window sash should be white. The interior should not be painted.

d. It is suggested that the entire Indian shop structure, except possibly the garret, be refurnished and employed as a house exhibit. Because of the many furs and artifacts that would necessarily be lying and hanging about, visitors would have to be conducted through in small groups. At times when sufficient personnel were not available, perhaps the hall and trading shop only could be opened, with visitors being permitted to look into other rooms through doorways closed off by barriers. For use on such occasions, it might be desirable to provide a door between the shop and the fur room.

e. The temptation to refurnish the doctor's quarters with such amenities as upholstered sofas, mahogany tables and chairs, spool beds, etc., should be firmly resisted. The surgeon's status as a clerk allowed few luxuries.

f. In planning the outfitting of the doctor's office and Dispensary, it might be well to bear in mind that a number of medicine bottles, ointment jars, etc., have been recovered during archeological excavations at the post. Also, public-spirited local citizens have already gathered a splendid collection of nineteenth-century surgical apparatus, medicines, etc., which is available for use in the refurnishing project.

1. H.B.C., Correspondence Book, Fort Vancouver, 1825, H.B.C.A., B.223/b/1, MS, fols. 13d—15d, 21d—22d.

2. E. E. Rich, ed., Part of Dispatch from George Simpson, Esqr., Governor of Ruperts Land, to the Governor & Committee of the Hudson's Bay Company, London, March 1, 1829 Publications of the Hudson's Bay Record Society, vol. 10 (London: Hudson's Bay Record Society, 1947), pp. 67-68 (hereafter cited as H.B.S., 10).

3. H.B.C., District Statements, York Factory, 1830-1832, H.B.C.A., B.239/l/4, MS, pp. 12, 68.

4. H.B.C.A., B.239/l/7, MS, pp. 79, 85.

5. H.B.C.A., B.239/l/15, MS, p. 69; H.B.C.A., B.239/l/16, MS, p. 66; H.B.C.A., B.239/l/17, MS, p. 51; The Southern Party was discontinued after 1843, In 1844, at least, furs collected by the Company at Willamette Falls and by the Puget's Sound Agricultural Company at Cowlitz Farm were transferred to the "Fort Vancouver Indian Trade." H.B.C.A., B.223/d/158, MS, pp. 128-29. Perhaps furs collected at the Champoeg post were handled in the same manner.

6. For examples, see H.B.C.A., B.239/l/5, MS, pp. 104, 141; H.B.C.A., B.239/l/7, MS, pp. 79, 85. It should be realized, however, that the clerk in the Indian shop was usually also the depot surgeon and received a higher salary for that reason.

7. For a statement concerning the practice of engaging the firm's "medical gentlemen" in the double capacity of surgeon and clerk, see Margaret Arnett MacLeod, The Letters of Letitia Hargrave, Publications of the Champlain Society, vol. 28 (Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1947), p. 244 fn.

8. Unfortunately, the fascinating story of the physicians as fur traders at Fort Vancouver cannot be dealt with in this report. For summary treatments, see A. G. Harvey, "Meredith Gairdner: Doctor of Medicine," British Columbia Historical Quarterly 9 (April, 1945): 89-111; and O. Larsell, The Doctor in Oregon: A Medical History (Portland: Binfords & Mort, 1947).

9. H.B.C., Correspondence Book, Fort Vancouver, 1829-1830, H.B.C.A., B.223/b/5, MS, fols. 30—31d.

10. George B. Roberts, "The Round Hand of George B. Roberts," Oregon Historical Quarterly 63 (June-September, 1962): 197.

11. For a discussion of the problems with the Emmons plan, see Hussey, History of Fort Vancouver, p. 125. For reasons there explained, the fact that Emmons showed Building No. 21 abutting the palisade, while Vavasour did not, seems of little significance in determining the relative positions of the 1841 warehouse and the 1845 Indian shop. The "Line-of-Fire" map of 1844 seems to support Vavasour as far as the location of Building No. 21 is concerned.

12. See pp. 2-3 in vol. I of this report for a discussion of this enlargement.

13. The only picture that seems not to be in agreement on this point is the Warre drawing of 1845-46 (Plates IX, and X, vol. I of this report, and Plate 40 in Warre, Sketches in North America and the Oregon Territory). This writer has found it impossible to relate the structures shown in the southeastern quadrant of the fort in Warre's picture with all of those shown on Vavasour's ground plan of the same time period. If the building shown by Warre as being in the extreme southeastern corner of the fort is intended to be the Indian shop, that structure is shown as a low building but with a hipped roof. If one of the two gable-roofed buildings to the west of that in the corner is intended to be the Indian shop, it is too short and too high to be the structure shown in the other post-1845 views.

A. D. Lee and J. H. Frost, Ten Years in Oregon (New York: J. Collord, Printer, 1844), p. 147.

15. Ibid., p. 231.

16. W. H. Gray, who arrived at Fort Vancouver in 1836, testified years later that he thought the fort enclosure was doubled in size "about" 1836, and he listed the "Indian trading shop" among the structures built in the new section. These words apparently tend to support the hypothesis that the Indian shop had existed since shortly after the enlargement and was not a new structure built on the site of an earlier warehouse. Br. & Am. Joint Comm., Papers, [8]:184.

17. "Proceedings of a board of officers, Fort Vancouver, June 15, 1860," A.G.O., Ore. Dept., Doc. File 212-S-1860, in National Archives.

18. I. I. Stevens to W. L. Marcy, Washington, June 21, 1854, in Br. & Am. Joint Comm., Papers, [11:]220-21.

19. For information on general practices concerning admitting Indians to forts and trading shops see, for example, Hunter, Canadian Wilds, pp. 48-49; Lord, At Home in the Wilderness, pp. 56-57; "Occurrences at Nisqually House," p. 24; Robinson, Great Fur Land, pp. 85-86, 199-202; and Charles William Wilson, Mapping the Frontier: Charles Wilson's Diary of the Survey of the 49th Parallel, 1858-1862, While Secretary of the British Boundary Commission, ed. George F. G. Stanley (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1970), p. 37.

20. Townsend, Narrative, pp. 297-98. See also Dunn, Oregon Territory, p. 103.

21. George M. Douglas, "Royal Navy Ships on the Columbia River in 1839," The Beaver Outfit 285 (Autumn, 1954): 40, quoting Sir Edward Belcher's Voyage of the Sulphur.

22. W. S. Wallace, ed., John McLean's Notes of a Twenty-Five Years' Service in the Hudson's Bay Territory, Publications of the Champlain Society, vol. 19 (Toronto, 1932), p. 137.

23. Robert Michael Ballantyne, Hudson Bay; or, Everyday Life in the Wilds of North America, During Six Years' Residence in the Territories of the Hon. Hudson Bay Company (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1908), pp. 185-86.

24. Ibid., pp. 61-62.

25. Robinson, Great Fur Land, pp. 97-98; see also ibid., pp. 331-36, for a longer account but one that adds few details to those given in the excerpts from Ballantyne's writings. One of those details, however, is of particular interest: the use of "steelyard and weighing-balance" to measure out stated values in tea, sugar, and other items sold by weight. This was a process completely incomprehensible to the Indians. Also mentioned is the habit of many Indians of trading only one skin at a time, a very slow process. This same habit predominated at Fort Colvile in the early 1860s. See Lord, At Home in the Wilderness, p. 55.

26. Silas Holmes, "Journal Kept by Assistant Surgeon Silas Holmes During a Cruise in the U. S. Ship Peacock and Brigs Porpoise and Oregon, 1838-1839-1840-1841-1842 Exploring Expedition," 3 vols., MS, in Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University, New Haven Connecticut, 2:228. For still another general description of Indian shop operations, see The Fur-Trade and the Hudson's Bay Company (London: W. & R. Chambers, 1854), p. 24.

27. George T. Allan, "Copies of Letters and Journals of George T. Allan, Written at Fort Vancouver on the Columbia River, 1841," typescript, copy in files of Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, Vancouver, Washington, p. 7. See also Robinson, Great Fur Land, pp. 331—36.

28. James D. Miller, "Early Oregon Scenes: A Pioneer Narrative," Oregon Historical Quarterly 31 (March, 1930): 64.

29. E. E. Rich, The History of the Hudson's Bay Company, 1670-1870, Publications of the Hudson's Bay Record Society, vols. 21 and 22 (London: Hudson's Bay Record Society, 1958-1959), 21:75.

30. Hudson's Bay Company Trade Tokens and Promissory Notes--A Special Exhibit, mimeographed leaflet ([Boise Idaho:] Idaho Historical Museum, 1959), pp. 2-3. The text of this leaflet is said to have been provided by the Hudson's Bay Company and thus may be considered authoritative, though no sources are cited.

31. H.B.S., 3:lxxi.

32. Teichmann, A Journey to Alaska, p. 109.

33. Fur Trade Papers, FN1245, MS, in Fort Nisqually Collection, Huntington Library. To simplify tabulation, certain items have been rearranged in the list reproduced above.

34. Fort Vancouver, Correspondence Outward to 1845, Despatches from McLoughlin to Simpson, 1844, MSS, in Provincial Archives of British Columbia.

35. Fur Trade Papers, FN1245, MS, in Fort Nisqually Collection, Huntington Library. The term plus at the head of the price columns was a commonly used name in the fur trade for a prime beaver pelt, particularly when considered as a unit of value. Hiram Martin Chittenden, The American Fur Trade of the Far West, 2 vols. (New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc., 1935), 1:40.

36. John McLoughlin to John Dease, Fort Vancouver, July 23, 1825, in H.B.C.A., B.223/b/1, MS, fols. 13d—15d.

37. Allan, "Copies of Letters and Journals," p. 1.

38. Rich, History of the Hudson's Bay Company, 1:76.

39. Ibid.

40. Hudson's Bay Company Trade Tokens and Promissory Notes, pp. 2-3. Perhaps the best statement of the reasons for the selection is to be found in a manuscript account of the fur trade that seems to be dated 1770: "Beaver being ye chief Article Traded for is made ye Standert [sic] Whereby all other furrs and Comodities are Rated." "Thoughts on the Furr Trade with the Indians in North America . . . Extracted from Some Papers of the Late Mr. John Gray of Quebec," MS, in William L. Clements Library, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, [p. 26].

41. Rich, History of the Hudson's Bay Company, 1:76; The Mountain_Light, The Newsletter of the Idaho Historical Society 4, no. 11 (December 9, 1959): 2.

42. K. G. Davies, ed., Northern Quebec and Labrador Journals and Correspondence, 1819-35, Publications of the Hudson's Bay Record Society, vol. 24 (London, 1963), p. 163.

43. About fifty N.W. Co. tokens, "issued about 1820," have been found in the Columbia Basin. Kardas, "The People Bought This," p. 86.

44. McTavish, Behind the Palisades, p. 212. A photograph of such a wooden counter is in Larry Gingras, "Medals and Tokens of the HEC," The Beaver Outfit 299 (Summer, 1968): [40].

45. Gingras, "Medals and Tokens of the HBC," [p. 40]. For further information on counters and tokens, in addition to the sources already cited, see Chris Harding, "The Monetary System of the Far Fur Country," The Beaver 1, no. 9 (June, 1921): 2; and Hudson's Bay Company Trade Tokens and Promissory Notes, pp. 2-3.

46. Fort Nisqually, Blotter, February-December, 1844, FN1247, MS, vol. 3, in Fort Nisqually Collection, Huntington Library, pp. 5-[37]. Examples of other types of Indian shop records are in the same collection.

47. Lord, At Home in the Wilderness, p. 55; Robinson, Great Fur Land, pp. 332-33. In the description of single-skin trading given by Robinson, counters seem to have been employed.

48. Rich, History of the Hudson's Bay Company, 1:75.

49. [John Stuart], "Journal of Daily Occurrences, Fort Simpson, September 6, 1832-March 22, 1835," MS, n.p., in [John Stuart], Five Letter Books and Journals Relating to the Operations of the Hudson Bay Company, 1822-1835, in The Bank of Scotland, The Mound, Edinburgh. For permission to consult and to quote from these manuscripts the writer is indebted to The Bank of Scotland, owner of the papers.

50. W. M. Conn, "New Fur Commissioner Famed as Trader and Organizer," The Beaver 1, no. 2 (November, 1920): 2-3.

51. Samuel Parker, Journal of an Exploring Tour Beyond the Rocky Mountains, under the Direction of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, in the Years 1835, '36, and '37, 2d ed. (Ithaca, 1840), p. 174.

52. Fort Vancouver, Fur Trade Returns, Columbia District and New Caledonia, 1825—1857, [pp. 1, 3].

53. Ibid. It is not clear whether these figures were strictly for the business of the Indian Trade Shop at Fort Vancouver or for the entire "Fort Vancouver Fur Trade," which would have included also returns from Fort George and Fort Umpqua.

54. William Fraser Tolmie, The Journals of William Fraser Tolmie, Physician and Fur Trader (Vancouver, B. C. : Mitchell Press Limited, 1963), p. 170.

55. Ibid., pp. 172—73.

56. Ibid., p. 170.

57. For an account of the hospital outside the pickets, see Hussey, History of Fort Vancouver, pp. 220-21.

58. Allan, "Copies of Letters and Journals," pp. 7-8.

59. Forbes Barclay to George Simpson, Fort Vancouver, March 28, 1844, in H.B.C.A., D.5/10, MS, fols. 541-542.

60. [Lewis] Love, "Manuscript of Captain Love," typescript, in files of Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, p. 6.

61. John Sebastian Helmcken, "Reminiscences of John Sebastian Helmcken," MSS, 6 vols., in Provincial Archives of British Columbia, 3:43.

62. John McLoughlin to Sir George Simpson, Vancouver, March 20, 1844, in Fort Vancouver, Correspondence Outward to 1845, Despatches from McLoughlin to Simpson, 1844, in Provincial Archives of British Columbia.

63. Barclay to Simpson, Fort Vancouver, March 28, 1844, in H.B.C.A., D.5/10, MS, fols. 541-542.

64. P. W. Crawford, "Description of Fort Vancouver As it Was in 1847," typescript, in Provincial Archives of British Columbia, p. 1.

65. Fred Lockley, History of the Columbia River Valley from The Dalles to the Sea (Chicago, 1928), pp. 352-54. Certain elements in Lockley's description, the sources for which are not evident, are inaccurate, casting a shadow on the whole. But certain other elements, which can be checked from information not generally available when Lockley wrote, are accurate.

66. Anderson, "Fort Vancouver, Oregon," p. 1. The time referred to in these recollections is not clear.

67. United States, 7th Census, Population Schedules . . . 1850, Oregon, MS, from Roll 742, Microcopy 432, National Archives, Micro film Publications, p. 73.

68. H.B.C., District Statements, York Factory, 1850-1851, H.B.C.A., B.239/l/21, MS, pp. 41, 46.

69. J. J. Hoffman to J. A. Hussey, Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, February 12, 1974.

70. Larsell, Doctor in Oregon, p. 88.

71. H.B.S., 6:386-87; John Sebastian Helmcken, "Reminiscences, 1824-1920," MS, in Provincial Archives of British Columbia, pp. 2-3; Glendwr Williams, ed., London Correspondence Inward from Sir George Simpson, 1841-42, Publications of the Hudson's Bay Record Society, vol. 29 (London: Hudson's Bay Record Society, 1973), p. 84.

72. G. P. de T. Glazebrook, The Hargrave Correspondence, 1821-1843, Publications of the Champlain Society, vol. 24 (Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1938), p. 371. Pambrun left nine children ranging in ages from about twenty years to less than one month. It is almost certain, however, that the eldest, Andre, was at Red River in 1841, and the second, Pierre C., may also have been absent.

73. The schedules of the 7th Census, 1850, indicate that there were no Pambruns living at or near Fort Vancouver when Meek made his enumeration on October 30.

74. In addition to the sources already cited, this sketch of Dr. Barclay and his family is based on Hubert Howe Bancroft, History of Oregon, 2 vols. (San Francisco: The History Company, 1886-1888), 1:39-40; Clifford Merrill Drury, Marcus and Narcissa Whitman and the Opening of Old Oregon, 2 vols. (Glendale, California: The Arthur H. Clark Company, 1973), 1:411-12; H.B.S., 7:43 fn.; and Mikell de Lores Wormell Warner, trans., and Harriet Duncan Munnick, ann., Catholic Church Records of the Pacific Northwest: Vancouver, Volumes I and II, and Stellamaris Mission (St. Paul, Oregon: French Prairie Press, 1972), Vancouver, 1:18; and Vancouver, 2:67, 81, 106, A-4, A-37, A-61-63, A-65.

75. Br. & Am. Joint Comm., Papers, [2:]118-19.

76. Caywood, Final Report, p. 17, and Map of Archeological Excavations, sheet 6.

77. J. J. Hoffman, Memorandums to Regional Archeologist, Pacific Northwest Region, National Park Service, Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, August 31 and October 1, 1973, MSS, in files of Pacific Northwest Regional Office, Seattle.

78. See sources cited in Hussey, History of Fort Vancouver, pp. 163, 184, 187-88.

79. For examples of these construction techniques see Plate LXXXI in vol. I and Plate XIX in this vol. An example of notching the lintel into the uprights will be found illustrated in HABS, Fort Nisqually Granary, Tacoma, Washington, 2 sheets of measured drawings. See also Plate XXI in this vol. At Fort Vancouver the 1860 photograph of the Bachelors' Quarters (the low building on the right in Plate XXVII, vol. I) seems to reveal that at least two methods of setting the ceiling beams were employed in this single structure.

80. For an example, see the granary at Fort Nisqually. HABS measured drawings are available in the Library of Congress. See also the center structure in Plate LVII in vol. I of this report.

81. Canada, National Historic Sites Service, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, National and Historic Parks Branch, Engineering and Architectural Division, As-Found Measured Drawings, Riel House, St. Vital, Manitoba, Drawing No. 12 (Exterior Elevations), February 1970 (hereafter this agency is cited as Canadian National and Historic Parks Branch).

82. Testimony of J. W. Nesmith, in Br. & Am. Joint Comm., Papers, [9 ]:37.

83. Erwin N. Thompson, Grand Portage National Monument, Great Hall, Historic Structures Report, History Data Section, multilithed (Washington, D. C.: National Park Service [Office of History and Historic Architecture], May 1970), p. 60, quoting Sherman Hall to Aaron Hall, Jr., Lac du Flambeau, September 30, 1832, MS, in Sherman Hall Papers, 1831-1875, Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul.

84. The use of this type of roof construction at Fort Langley is well described in J. Calder Peeps, "A Preliminary Survey of the Physical Structure of Fort Langley, B. C., 19th November 1858," typescript ([Vancouver:] University of British Columbia, June 30, 1953), pp. 17-18 and Plates 2 and 3. For roof construction at Fort St. James, see Plate LXXX in vol. I of this report. For that at Fort Nisqually, see the two sheets of HABS measured drawings, Fort Nisqually Granary, Tacoma, Washington.

85. Lowe, "Private Journal," p. 30.

86. A careful examination of the clearest available prints of the Sohon drawing seems to show that one of the two lower-story "windows" in the west wall may have been a door; also, the westernmost bay in the front or north wall may have contained a window, while the most easterly seems not to have had any opening. Because none of the available pictures seem entirely reliable, a somewhat different arrangement, based partly on the 1841 Emmons plan, has been suggested in Fig. 1.

87. See colored version of the Coode sketch as printed in The Beaver Outfit 301 (Autumn, 1970): 52.

88. Robert Michael Ballantyne, The Young Fur-Traders: Snowflakes and Sunbeams (London, Melbourne, and Toronto: Ward, Lock & Co., Limited, n.d.), p. 72.

89. "Plan of Fort William, 1803-1820, as Reproduced from Lord Selkirk's Original Sketch of 1816, Drawn by R. L. Moffat" (n.p.: McIntosh & Associates, February 1962), MS, copy at Fort Vancouver National Historic Site.

90. John Sebastian Helmcken, "A Reminiscence of 1850," typescript, in Provincial Archives of British Columbia, pp. 1-2.

91. Ballantyne, Young Fur-Traders, p. 73.

92. Robinson, Great Fur Land, p. 85.

93. In the version of the journal printed in Tolmie, Journals of William Fraser Tolmie, p. 172, this last sentence reads: "Anterially there is a small & neater, painted shelf." This rendition seems more logical.

94. William Fraser Tolmie, "Journal of William Fraser Tolmie--1833," Washington Historical Quarterly 3 (July, 1912): 236; supplemented by extracts given in Larsell, Doctor in Oregon, p. 74. The alternative words in brackets are from the version in Tolmie, Journals of William Fraser Tolmie, pp. 172-73. They seem preferable. Paragraphing has been supplied in the above quotation.

95. Ballantyne, Hudson Bay, p. 185. An almost word-for-word repetition of this description, without credit, is found in Robinson, Great Fur Land, p. 85. Robinson's only important addition was to note that articles of trade also hung from the ceiling.

96. Ballantyne, Young Fur-Traders, p. 74.

97. Teichmann, A Journey to Alaska, pp. 109-10.

98. H.B.C., Account Book, Fort Vancouver, 1844 [Inventories], H.B.C.A., B.223/d/155, MS, pp. 241-42.

99. H.B.C.A., B.223/d/155, MS, pp. 237-41. Prices and total value figures have been omitted as not germane to this study. No attempt has been made to correct spelling, but certain explanatory material has been added in brackets.

100. H.B.C., Account Book, Fort Vancouver, 1844-1845, H.B.C.A., B.223/d/158, MS, p. 104. Prices are omitted. The goods listed here were on hand about June 1, 1845.

101. H.B. C., Account Book, Fort Vancouver, 1845, H.B.C.A., B.223/ d/160, MS, pp. 180-84. Prices are omitted.

102. H.B.C., Account Book, Fort Vancouver, 1845-1846, H.B.C.A., B.223/d/161, MS, fols. 65d—66.

103. H.B.C., Account Book, Fort Vancouver, 1840-1841 [Country Produce Inventories], H.B.C.A., B.223/d/137, MS, p. 17.

104. Lowe, "Private Journal," p. 5.

105. H.B.C., Account Book, Fort Vancouver, 1848, H.B.C.A., B.223/d/181, MS, fols. 85-85d.

106. H.B.C., Account Book, Fort Vancouver, 1844, H.B.C.A., B.223/d/155, MS, pp. 146-47.

107. H.B.C., Account Book, Fort Vancouver, 1845, H.B.C.A., B.223/d/160, MS, pp. 137—39.

108. H.B.C., York Factory Indent Books, 1823-1838, H.B.C.A., B.239/n/71, MS, fols. 163—164.

109. H.B.C.A., B.223/d/155, MS, pp. 135-41. The inventories for 1845 and 1846 are very similar, but after the list of medicines for 1846 appears the following (H.B.C.A., B.223/d/165, MS, p. 46): "pr.Sheep, 9 lbs Muriate of Mercury, 135 lbs Mercurial Ointment, 40 lbs powdered Sulphur, 50 lbs Venice Turpentine."

110. H.B.C.A., B.223/d/155, MS, p. 48.

111. H.B.C.A., B.223/d/160, MS, pp. 139-40.

112. Larsell, Doctor in Oregon, pp. 61-62.

113. Ibid., p. 62.

114. H.B.C., Account Book, Fort Vancouver, 1844, H.B.C.A., B.223/d/155, MS, pp. 144—45.

115. Adapted from Larsell, Doctor in Oregon, pp. 82-83.

116. Tolmie, Journals of William Fraser Tolmie, pp. 323, 325, 333.

117. "News and Comment," Oregon Historical Quarterly 38 (June, 1937): 239; Warner and Munnick, Catholic Church Records, pp. A-4, 1-2. The Stanley portrait of Barclay shows that the doctor wore glasses. The oil painting of Mount Hood, which Stanley painted for Dr. Barclay, is now in McLoughlin House National Historic Site, Oregon City.

118. Barker, Letters of Dr. John McLoughlin, p. 159. These chests were called "China trunks."

119. Tolmie, Journals of William Fraser Tolmie, p. 331.

120. "News and Comment," Oregon Historical Quarterly 36 (September, 1935): 301.