University of Virginia Library

THE STORY OF LEWIS AND CLARK'S JOURNALS

The final entry in the journal of Captain Clark is significant:

This shows that on the third day after their return to civilization,
the commanders began placing its literary records into
definitive form. The history of these records, thus promptly
commenced, proved to be almost as romantic as that of the
great discovery itself.

Jefferson's concern

In his detailed instructions to Lewis (June 20, 1803),[21] President
Jefferson had displayed particular concern for the journals
of the proposed expedition to the Pacific, which with all possible

scientific data were to be prepared "with great pains & accuracy,
to be entered distinctly, & intelligibly for others as well as
yourself." The notes of the two captains were to be
guarded against loss by making copies of them—
"one of these copies [to] be written on the paper of
the birch, as less liable to injury from damp than common
paper."[22] Not only were Lewis and Clark to keep such journals,
but they were to encourage their men to do likewise.
Jefferson especially requested of Lewis that "several copies of
. . . your notes should be made at leisure times & put into
the care of the most trustworthy of your attendants, to guard
by multiplying them, against the accidental losses to which
they will be exposed." The captain was reminded that "in
the loss of yourselves, we should lose also the information you
will have acquired;" and as a further precaution was required
"to communicate to us, at reasonable intervals, a copy of your
journal, notes & observations of every kind, putting into
cypher whatever might do injury if betrayed"—for we have
seen that at the time these instructions were written the country
to be explored and thus opened to American trade, was in the
hands of the Spanish, whose suspicions must not be aroused.

The various journals

The two leaders faithfully performed their duty in this regard,
and the four sergeants— Charles Floyd, Patrick Gass,
John Ordway, and Nathaniel Pryor—also wrote
journals.[23] Tradition has it that at least three of the
twenty-three privates (Robert Frazier, Joseph White-house,
and possibly George Shannon) were, as well, diarists
upon the expedition—but the only private's note-book now
known to us is that of Whitehouse.

Journalizing methods

It was the daily custom of the captains to make rough notes,
with rude outline maps, plans, and miscellaneous sketches,[24] in

field-books which they doubtless carried in their pockets.
When encamped for a protracted period, these were developed
into more formal records. In this development,
each often borrowed freely from the other's notes—
Lewis, the better scholar of the two, generally rewriting
in his own manner the material obtained from Clark; while
the latter not infrequently copied Lewis practically verbatim,
but with his own phonetic spelling. Upon returning to St.
Louis, these individual journals were for the most part transcribed
by their authors into neat blank books—bound in
red morocco and gilt-edged—with the thought of preparing
them for early publication. After this process, the original
field-books must have been cast aside and in large measure
destroyed; for but one of these[25] is now known to exist.
There have come down to us, however, several note-books
which apparently were written up in the camps.

Collectively, these journals of the captains cover each and
every day the expedition was out— largely a double record,
although there are occasional periods when we have the
journal of but one of them.[26] The manuscripts well exemplify
the habits and characteristics of the two men— Clark, the
more experienced frontiersman of the two, expressing himself

sententiously with Doric simplicity and vigor of phrase, and
often amusingly eccentric orthography; Lewis, in more correct
diction, inclined to expatiate on details, especially with regard
to Indians and natural history, and frequently revealing a
poetic temperament and a considerable fund of humor.

The first news

In February, 1806, when the expedition was upon the
Pacific coast, President Jefferson sent to Congress a message
enclosing, among other matters, a letter from Lewis,
dated at Fort Mandan in the previous April, just as
the explorers were leaving for the upper country,[27]
at that point the party had passed their first winter. This
communication, describing the experiences of the expedition
as far as Fort Mandan, was accompanied by brief reports of
explorations on the Red and Washita rivers by Dr. Sibley,
Dr. Hunter, and William C. Dunbar, together with statistics
of the Western tribes and other data of the kind; the illassorted
whole being promptly printed as a public document.[28]
Based upon this fragmentary publication there soon sprung
up, both in England and America, a long list of popular corn-pilations
telling the story of the Lewis and Clark expedition
during its first year, expanded with miscellaneous information
about the Western Indians, picked up here and there— some
of it singularly inaccurate.[29]

Gass's Journal

A year later (early in 1807), only a few months after the return
of the party, there was published at Philadelphia the first detailed
report of the entire tour; being the journal of Sergeant
Patrick Gass, an observant man, whose rough but generally
accurate notes had been expanded with small regard
to literary style, by an Irish schoolmaster, named David
McKeehan, of Wellsburg, West Virginia. This little volume of
about 83,000 words,[30] with its curiously crude illustrations, was
reprinted in London in 1808, while new American editions appeared
at Philadelphia in 1810, 1811, and 1812, and a French
translation at Paris in 1810. It is now, in any form, a rarity.

Lewis's prospectus, 1807

It had been the intention of Lewis and Clark to publish
their own journals; they had presented no official detailed
report to the government, it being left with them by
Jefferson, as we shall see, to make such literary use
of their material as they saw fit. During the year
following the return, and the one in which Gass's Journal had
appeared, Lewis issued a prospectus announcing the speedy
publication of the official narrative by C. & A. Conrad, of
Philadelphia. The first volume was to contain the "narrative
of the voyage," the second to be devoted chiefly to an account
of "the Indian nations distributed over that vast region," and
the third "exclusively to scientific research." Apart from this,
was to be published "Lewis and Clark's Map of North
America, from longitude 9 west to the Pacific Ocean, and
between 36 and 52 north latitude, with extensive marginal
notes, dimensions five feet eight inches by three feet ten
inches, embracing all their late discoveries, and that part of
the continent heretofore the least known."[31]

Delayed by public duties

Unfortunately for this enterprise, both explorers soon after
their return had received, together with commissions as generals,
important government appointments: Lewis
being made governor of Louisiana Territory, and
Clark its superintendent of Indian affairs and brigadier-general
of militia.[32] The onerous duties appertaining to
these offices, in the new and vast territory through which they
had journeyed, were necessarily absorbing; and neither being
a literary man, the task of publication under such circumstances
was easily deferred.

Lewis's death

Urged by Jefferson—who from the first had been keenly
desirous to have the records of the exploration as soon as possible
made the common property of the world—it was in 1809
agreed that General Lewis should in earnest undertake the
work. He was travelling on horseback through Tennessee,

on his way to Washington, intending thereafter to go to Philadelphia
to enter upon this editorial task, when he lost his life
during the night of October 11th. A guest, at the
time, of a wayside settler some sixty miles southwest
of Nashville, it was reported that he had committed
suicide—a theory which Jefferson, probably his closest friend,
accepted without question; but it was and still is believed by
many that he was murdered for the small sum of money upon
his person at the time.[33]

Clark engages Biddle

Clark, now the sole surviving head of the expedition,
prompted by the indefatigable Jefferson, appears to have
soon sought the assistance of an editor in bringing
out the proposed publication. It seems that, probably
early in 1810, overtures were made to him from
some literary person in Richmond, Virginia;[34] but these he
rejected, and earnestly solicited the aid of Nicholas Biddle, of
Philadelphia. Biddle, who was descended from one of the
oldest Philadelphia families, had graduated from Princeton in
his sixteenth year (1801); he had been secretary to John Armstrong,
our minister to France (1804), and while in Paris bad
superintended the payment of American claims growing out
of the Louisiana Purchase —in this capacity greatly surprising
the French officials both by his brilliancy and his youth-After
travelling extensively in Europe, he became secretary to
Mr. Monroe while the latter was minister to Great Britain
but in 1807 returned to practise law in Philadelphia. At the
time of Clark's invitation, Biddle was but twenty-four years
of age; nevertheless he had already attained considerable
reputation as a financier, lawyer, and man of letters— in the
last-named field being editor of the Port-folio—and socially
was by many considered both the handsomest and the most
charming man in Philadelphia, as he certainly was one of the
most cultivated. It is small wonder that Clark selected him
as the writer of the narrative.

In his second letter to Biddle, dated February 20th, 1810,
from the home of his father-in-law, Colonel George Hancock,
near Fincastle, Virginia—then being visited by the general—
he invites his correspondent to come to him at that place,
"where I have my books and memorandoms and stay with me
a week or two; read over & make yourself thereby acquainted
with everything which may not be explained in the Journals.
. . . Such parts as may not be full, I can explain, and add
such additional matter as I may recollect. I brought the
Books with me to Copy such parts as are intended for the
Botanical work which I shall send to Doctr Barton, and will
deliver the Books to you if you will engage to write the
naritive &c."

On the third of March Biddle replied to Clark, regretting
"that it will be out of my power to undertake what you had
the politeness to offer;" explaining that "My occupations
necessarily confine me to Phila. and I have neither health nor
leisure to do sufficient justice to the fruits of your enterprize
and ingenuity. You cannot be long however without making
a more fortunate selection.

Two weeks later, however (March 17), he again addressed
Clark—who was still at Fincastle—and reports having been
seen by some of the latter's friends in Philadelphia; the result
of the conference being that he "will therefore very readily
agree to do all that is in my power for the advancement of
the work; and I think I can promise with some confidence
that it shall be ready as soon as the publisher is prepared to
print it. Having made up my mind today, I am desirous
that no delay shall occur on my part." He therefore will soon
visit the general at Fincastle. The latter replied (March 25)
with "most sincere acknowledgements for the friendly sentiments,"
and urged an immediate visit, "as my business calls
me to Louisiana; and nothing detains me, but the business l
wish with you

Biddle at work

Biddle made the trip to Fincastle, noted Clark's oral statements,
and carried back with him to Philadelphia the journals
and maps of the expedition, from which he at once began to
prepare its history. In May, Clark sent to the editor George

Shannon[35] who when a lad of sixteen years, had creditably
served as one of the privates in the detachment. Then
twenty-three years old, and studying for the law,
Shannon appears to have remained in Philadelphia
during most of the time spent in draughting the
narrative, and to have materially assisted Biddle both in interpreting
the note-books and giving personal recollections of
the tour. Not only did Clark tender the services of Shannon,
but he himself was in frequent correspondence with the editor,[36]
and purchased and forwarded to him the journal of Sergeant
Ordway. The journal of Sergeant Gass being already in print,
was of course also accessible to Biddle.

The talented young editor at once surrendered himself
almost completely to the difficult task before him; he had
promised Clark that the narrative should be ready for the press
within twelve months. By the seventh of July he appears to
have finished the story up to July 7th, 1805, above the Falls
of the Missouri; for in a note to his distinguished correspond
ent, chiefly concerning the maps for the publication [37] he playfully
says: "Today I have sent you and ten men up into a
bottom to look for wood to make canoes after the unhappy
failure of your iron boat." A year later (July 8, 1811) he
wrote to Clark, informing him that he had "completed the
work agreeable to our engagement," and was "ready to put it
to the press whenever Mr. Conrad chose."

Wanted: a publisher

In our day, a manuscript of this character would eagerly be
sought by publishers. Stanley, Nordenskjöld, Nansen, and
Hedin have had but to choose among applicants
from the book trade. Ninety years ago, the situation
was far different. John Conrad, a prominent publisher
of his day, was finaily prevailed upon to undertake the
work, the financial outcome of which seemed to some others
doubtful. He appears to have entered into the project with
much interest; but by the time Biddle was ready, Conrad had
fallen into financial straits, and in due course was plunged into
bankruptcy; for this was the period of the second war with
England, and business was unsettled. Biddle accordingly
writes to Clark, July 4th, 1811, stating the facts in the case,
and incidentally mentioning that "Last winter I was prevented
from going to the legislature chiefly by a desire to stay
& superintend the printing." He has, however, made an
arrangement with Thomas Bradford, "one of the best booksellers
here," and hopes that "we can proceed vigorously &
soon get the volumes out"

Despite Biddle's optimism affairs dragged slowly, for Bradford's
terms were unsatisfactory. Over a year later (September 5
1812), we find Clark offering Biddle "the half of every profit
arising from it, if you will attend to it, have it Completed as
far as it is possible and necessary, printed published &c. including
the advances which have and may be necessary &c."
Biddle does not appear to have accepted this financial proposi
tion; familiar with the book market, he probably anticipated
the failure of the project.

Throughout the course of the work Conrad continued his
friendly concern, and assisted Biddle in his strenuous search
for a publisher. November 12th, he writes Biddle that he
has tried Johnson & Warner without success; that firm "seem
to have so incorrect an idea of the value of the work and probable
profits arising from the publication of it." He advises
Biddle to "agree to Mr. Bradfords offer. It is I am confident
the best bargain you can make for Genl Clarke. The copyright
I presume will be in him (Genl. C.) & I suppose he will
derive the entire benefit of the sale of the M. S. in England."

A publisher found

This advice Biddle in due time felt impelled to accept, and
February 23d, 1813, tells Clark that having found Bradford's
terms "not such as I thought advantageous I made
proposals to all the booksellers in town. The stagnation
in that branch of business was so great that
no one was willing to embark in it, and after a great deal of
fruitless negociation I was obliged to return and on the advice
of Mr. Conrad accept Mr. Bradford's proposals. . . I now
wait only for the engravers who will soon I hope finish their
work and then we can strike off the printing immediately & in
a little time the work will be published." Nevertheless a year
was spent in the mechanical execution of the two small volumes.
Meanwhile the publishing firm of Bradford & Inskeep, who
had undertaken the work, in their turn became insolvent and
at the actual time of publication (February 20, 1814)[38] were in
the bankruptcy court.

Paul Allen's revision

Just before going to press, Biddle was elected to the legislature,
in which he soon won an enviable reputation for statesmanlike
qualities. Being thus prevented from paying
that attention to the book which he thought it
deserved, he engaged Paul Allen, a Philadelphia
newspaper writer, to supervise the issue. In a letter to Clark
(March 23), reviewing some of the circumstances of the publication,
Biddle says: "The gentleman who received and prepared
it for the press, Mr. Allen, is a very capable person, and
as I did not put the finishing hand to the volumes I did not
think it right to take from him the credit of his own exertion
and care by announcing personally the part which I had in the
compilation. I am content that my trouble in the business
should be recognized only by the pleasure which attended
it and also by the satisfaction of making your acquaintance,
which I shall always value. I could have wished that your
time had permitted you to revise the whole of the work, as
no doubt some errors and inadvertencies have from the nature
of the volumes and the circumstances attending the publication
crept into them. I hope however that you will not

find them very numerous or important . . . Henceforth you
may sleep upon your fame, which must last as laong as books
can endurc. Mr. Bradford has I presume sent you a copy of
the work."

Despite Biddle's determination to claim no credit for the
narrative which has long been regarded a classic in American
history, it is quite apparent that Allen's connection with the
enterprise was but that of reviser for the press. He himself
frankly states in the Preface, that he does not wish "to arrogate
anything from the exertions of others;" that "he found but
little to change, and that his labor has been principally confined
to revising the manuscript, comparing it with the original
papers, and inserting such additional matter as appears to have
been intentionally deferred by the writer [Mr. Biddle] till the
period of a more mature revisal." Allen secured from President
Jefferson an admirable memoir of Lewis; possibly, he also
blocked out the chapters; and in a measure the mechanical form
may be due to him. His labors were doubtless important from
the typographical and clerical side; but of course the credit
for the enterprise should chiefly rest with Biddle. That the
latter had finished the work, ready for the final touches of a
practical reviser for the press, is evident from his own letters
to Clark, as well as the confirmatory statement which has come
down to us from Conrad.

In his richly annotated edition of theTravels (N. Y., 1893,
4 vols.) Dr. Elliott Coues spends much space and energy in
persistently heaping vituperation on Allen for fathering a work
mainly performed by another. Biddle had the undoubted
right to withdraw his name from public connection with the
narrative. We may consider his reasons Quixotish, but he
was entitled to be guided by them, and they certainly bespeak
a nature more generous than we are accustomed to meet. As
for Allen, it is evident that he did his part with becoming
modesty; no doubt he well earned the fee of $500—partly
taken out in trade—with which he was rewarded by the publishers.
Press-revision and proof-reading are no light tasks;
although we might wish that, while he was at it, he had also
given us an index.

A profitless undertaking

The size of the edition was, apparently, 2,000 copies[39] Of
these it would seem that 583 were either lost in some manner—
"supposed to be destroyed in binder's or printer's
hands"—or were defective from lacking plates; this
would leave for sale only 1,417 perfect copies, which
explains why the book is now rare. The net profits on the
enterprise were computed at $154.10, of which neither Clark
nor Biddle appears to have received a penny. The copper
plates of the engraved maps became the property of the latter,
and are now owned by his son, the Hon. Craig Biddle, of
Philadelphia. The Clark was left the copyright. As for the
heirs of Lewis, we find them[40] as late as 1816–17 making application
to Clark for their share of the carnings, "persuaded that
profit arising from that work has been received. "and being
informed by the latter of the dismal result of the enterprise.

Over two and a half years after the publication, a letter from
Clark to Jefferson (October 10, 1816)[41] reveals the fact that
the explorer had himself "not been so fortunate as to procure
a single volume, as yet"—thus showing that Bradford, in the
midst of his financial troubles, had not carried out the abovementioned
agreement with Biddle, to transmit a copy of the
work to the man chiefly concerned in its appearance.

Difficulty of Biddle's task

The service of Biddle in editing the journals of the Lewis
and Clark expendition, was a far more difficult literary
undertaking than is commonly supposed. The entire
mass of notes which he had before him may be
thus roughly computed:

       

Lewis and Clark journals (Amer. Philosophical Society codices)	900,000	words
Gass Journal (as printed)	83,000	"
Ordway Journal—unknown, but possibly	100,000	"
	1,083,000

Barton's proposed work

To this we should add about 160,000 words in the Clark-Voorhis
collection, later to be described, and undoubtedly at

one time in Biddle's hands; and whatever additional notes he
may himself have made during conversations with Clark and
Shannon, or as the result of correspondence with the former
— and they must have been copious. A large proportion of
the scientific matter of the Lewis and Clark note-books, howover,
which may have aggregated a fourth of the journals as a
whole, had at the outset been eliminated by Clark and Biddle.
This material, carefully copied out, was sent to Dr. Benjamin
Smith Barton, an eminent naturalist in Philadelphia.[42]
Dr. Barton agreed to edit a special volume,"which
was to have been (by contract) prepared in six months
from the time" of the appearance of the narrative of the
journey. Owning to Barton's illness and consequent death, this
"cientific part"[43] was not written. Thus, while the Biddle
narrative gives a popular account of some of the principal discoveries,
the scientific data so laboriously kept by Lewis and Clark,
chiefly the former, has not heretofore been published.

A successful paraphrase

It was Biddle's task to weave this mass of heterogeneous
data into a readable paraphrase which should have unity and a
simple and forceful literary style. Adopting so far
as possible the language of the original journals,
where essential he amplifies and explains them from
his additional data—Clark and Shannon's verbal statements,
and the Ordway and Gass journals, assisting him to a more
complete understanding. The nearly 1,500,000 words of
manuscript he condensed into 370,000 printed words. The
first person plural is used, save where the captains are individually
mentioned, and then we have the third person singular.
So skilfully is the work done, that probably few have realized
that they had not before them the veritable journals of the
explorers themselves, written upon the spot. The result will
always remain one of the best digested and most interesting
books of American travel, comparable in many respects with
Astoria and Bonneville's Adventures—of course lacking Irving's

charm of style, but possessing what Irving's two Western classics
do not, the ring of truth, which never fails to appeal to those
who love a tale of noble adventure in the cause of civilization.[44]

Jefferson dissatisfied

We have seen that Jefferson, who set on foot the expedition,
had from the first expressed much concern in its records, both
in the making and the publication. He had urged
their early printing, and on Lewis's death spurred
Clark to action; with what result, has been related
The dilatoriness of that performance—for which Clark, how-ever,
was only partly responsible—fretted the great man.
December 6th, 1813, he wrote to Baron von Humboldt:
"You will find it inconceivable that Lewis's journey to the
Pacific should not yet have appeared; nor is it in my power
to tell you the reason. The measures taken by his surviving
companion, Clark, for the publication, have not answered our
wishes in point of dispatch. I think, however, from what I
have heard, that the mere journal will be out within a few
weeks in two volumes, 8vo. These I will take care to send
you with the tobacco seed you desired, if it be possible for
them to escape the thousand ships of our enemies spread over
the ocean. The botanical and zoological discoveries of Lewis
will probably experience greater delay, and become known to
the world through other channels before that volume will be
ready. The Atlas, I believe, waits on the leisure of the
engraver"[45] Nearly a hundred years have elapsed, and until
the present work neither scientific data nor atlas has been given
to the public.

Jefferson's search for Original Journals

Three years later (1816), we find Jefferson instituting a
search for the manuscript journals of the explorers, with a
view of placing them in the archives of the American
Philosophical Society. He writes (April 26)[46] to
Prof. Joseph F. Correa da Serra, a botanist then
holding membership in the Society, asking him in
the cause of science to interest himself in the matter, and

describing in some detail the character of the documents—
with which he was himself familiar, for he had handled them
at Monticello. These papers, he informs Da Serra, "are the
property of the government, the fruits of the expedition undertaken
at such expence of money and risk of valuable lives.
They contain exactly the whole of the information which it
was our object to obtain for the benefit of our own country
and of the world, but we were willing to give to Lewis and
Clarke whatever pecuniary benefits might be derived from the
publication, and therefore left the papers in their hands, taking
for granted that their interests would produce a speedy publication,
which would be better if done under their direction.
but the death of Cap.t Lewis, the distance and occupations of
General Clarke, and the bankruptcy of their bookseller, have
retarded the publication, and rendered necessary that the government
should attend to the reclamation & security of the
papers. their recovery is now become an imperious duty.
their safest deposit as fast as they can be collected, will be the
Philosophical society, who no doubt will be so kind as to
recieve and preserve them, subject to the order of government.
. . . As to any claims of individuals to these papers, it
is to be observed that, as being the property of the public, we
are certain neither Lewis nor Clarke would undertake to convey
away the right to them, and that they could not convey
them, had they been capable of intending it. . . . my interference
will, I trust, be excused, not only from the portion which
every citizen has in whatever is public, but from the peculiar
part I have had in the design and execution of this expedition."

It appears that Biddle, who still held the majority of the
note-books, was disinclined to surrender them to Jefferson
save on order of Clark. September 8th, Jefferson wrote to
the general, soliciting such an order, to "be given in favor
either of the War office or myself. . . . I should receive them
only in trust for the War office to which they belong, and
take their orders relating to them." He wishes to deposit
with the Philosophical Society "for safekeeping the travelling
pocket journals as originals to be recurred to on all interesting
questions arising out of the published journal;" his desire

being to secure "to the world all the beneficial results we were
entitled to expect from it [the expedition], and which would
so fully justify the expences of the expedition incurred by the
United States in that expectation."

October 10th, Clark responds to Jefferson by enclosing "an
Order on my friend Mr. Biddle for the papers in his possession,"
Biddle being at the same time instructed, as his agent,
"to collect all the Books, papers, specimens, &c." in the hands
of Dr. Barton's heirs or others. Clark expresses interest in
Jefferson's desire to collect the papers, and adds: "From the
mortification of not haveing succeeded in giving to the world all
the results of that expedition, I feel Relief & greatitude for the
interest which you are willing to take, in effecting what has not
been in my power to accomplish." Nevertheless, we shall
presently see that Clark had retained in his possession at St.
Louis five of his own original journals, nearly all the maps made
by him upon the expedition, and many miscellaneous documents
concerning the enterprise; these he did not surrender.

Jefferson now writes to Dr. John Vaughan of the Society
(June 28, 1817), saying that although Da Serra had obtained
several note-books from Mr. Biddle and Mrs. Barton, considerable
difficulty is being experienced in collecting all the
documents. Evidently much annoyed, he proposes to bring
pressure to bear, through the secretary of war, "that office
having some rights to these papers." The further suggestion
is made, that the Society publish "in their Transactions or
otherwise," a digest of the "zoological, vegetable & mineralogical
papers & subjects."

Biddle surrenders note-books

On the eighth of April, 1818, we learn from the manuscript
minutes of the corporation that "Mr. Nicholas Biddle
deposited the original journals of Lewis and Clark,
with an account of them and of those journals and
documents which he was not possessed of." The
deposit consisted of eighteen note-books and twelve parcels of
loose sheets; of these, thirteen are in red-morocco covers—
seven by Lewis and six by Clark.[47]

Used by Coues

Here the records of Jefferson's search suddenly cease.
Neither the federal government nor the American Philosophical
Society having decided to publish them, these
precious manuscripts slumbered untouched for nearly
seventy-five years in the library vault of the Society,
practically unknown to historical scholars outside of that institution.
In 1892, Dr. Elliott Coues, eminent as a scientist and
traveller, as well as an editor of American historical sources,
was engaged in preparing the new edition of Biddle, to which
frequent reference has already been made. Most if not all of
his matter was before him in galley proofs, when he learned
for the first time of the existence of the original manuscripts in
Philadelphia. Armed with a letter from the explorer's son,
Jefferson Kearny Clark, of St. Louis, Coues requested the loan
of the note-books from their custodian. This was granted by
the Society (vote of December 16), and the manuscripts were
accordingly sent to him at Washington. Concluding that it
was too late to block out the work afresh and discard Biddle's
text, he compromised by enriching his notes with many citations
from the originals—unfortunately freely modernized, as
was his custom with all the Western manuscripts which he
edited; and from them he also compiled a new chapter in the
Biddle style, which he inserted into the body of the book, as
though a part of the Biddle text. His modified excerpts but
served to whet the appetites of students of American history,
and thus led to the project for their eventual publication in
extenso and with literal accuracy.

Coues's report on codices

In returning the journals to the Society, Coues transmitted
therewith a detailed report upon their scope and condition.[48]
While in his possession, he attached to each codex
(note-book) a memorandum summarizing its contents,
and to each gave an identifying letter, running from
A to T. This was commendable; but certain other liberties
which he took with the manuscripts merit our condemnation
—for in many codices he freely interlined the text with his
own verbal changes and comments; and in general appeared

to treat the material as though mere copy for the printer, which
might be revised by him with impunity. Apparently the
codices remained unopened after their return; for it was not
until the summer of 1903 that the Society authorities were
made aware, by one who was examining them in detail, of the
surprising treatment to which they had been subjected.

Philosophical Society concludes to publish

The next chapter in the story opened in the spring of 1901,
when the Society's Committee on Historical Manuscripts
determined—in view of the forthcoming centennial
of the Louisiana Purchase—at last to carry out
Jefferson's suggestion, and secure the publication of
the Lewis and Clark journals direct from the original
manuscripts in their custody. They interested in this project
the present publishers, who in turn engaged the writer as
Editor of the work.

In the course of consequent investigation into the sources,
there came to view in the Society's library a few other Lewis
and Clark items, besides the codices handled and labelled by
Coues; these were chiefly statistical tables regarding the Western
Indians, a meteorological record, and a list of the explorers'
specimens sent from Fort Mandan to the Society[49] —matters
of considerable although not commanding importance.[50]

Search for Ordway Journal

In Coues's report on the codices, occurs this note: "One
of Clark's Journals is now in the possession of his son, [the
late] Mr. Jefferson K. Clark, of St. Louis. I am
not informed of the date covered by this volume,
nor of the nature of its contents." Upon assuming
charge of the proposed publication, the present writer at once
approached the heirs of General William Clark for permission
to use the Ordway Journal, in case it could be found among

the family papers. As the result of protracted negotiations,
an unexpected situation was revealed. The third son and
fourth child of General Clark and his first wife, Julia Hancock,
was George Rogers Hancock Clark, born at St. Louis in
1816 and dying in 1858. This son was his father's executor,
and as such came into possession of the explorer's papers and
many other family relics, which he appears to have arranged
and labelled with some care. Upon his death they descended
to his eldest child, now Mrs. Julia Clark Voorhis of New York
City, whose proprietary rights are at present shared with her
daughter, Miss Eleanor Glasgow Voorhis.

The Voorhis collection

It appears that a few years ago Mrs. Voorhis began the
examination of the collection with a view to selecting therefrom,
for a projected compilation of her own, certain
documents which pertained to the public careers of
various members of the Clark family, particularly
William and George Rogers. This examination was still privately
in progress when, in the autumn of 1903, the present
Editor— quite unconscious of the existence of other historical
manuscripts at the Voorhis home—appeared upon the scene
with his application for the Ordway Journal. Indeed, the
ladies themselves were as yet unaware of the full significance
of their treasures, especially those appertaining to the great
expedition. The result was that the writer in several visits
personally completed the examination of the collection, with
the papers of the expedition especially in view; and arrangements
were concluded between the proprietors of the documents
and the publishers, by which all those essential to the
complete narrative of the Lewis and Clark exploration are to
be published in the present work.

The Voorhis collection of Lewis and Clark material is of
surprising richness, and consists of the following items:

Clark Journals

• Red morocco note-book No. 1—Diary, April 7–July 3, 1805;
  38,000 words, with 3 maps of the Falls of the Missouri.

• Field-book, bound in a rude piece of elk skin, secured by a thong
  and button, and undoubtedly carried in Clark's pocket upon the expedition
  

  ---

  lii

  
  
  
  —Diary, Sept. 11–Dec. 31, 1805; 20,000 words, with over a
  dozen full-page sketch-maps of the trail over the mountains, and the
  neighborhood of Fort Clatsop, interwoven with the badly blurred text.
  On the skin cover is a rude plan of the fort itself.

• Red morocco note-book No. 2—Diary, Jan. 30–April 3, 1806;
  41,000 words, with numerous pen sketches of canoes, birds, dwellings,
  tools, etc. by the same hand (Clark's) as those contained in Lewis's
  codices of similar dates, in the American Philosophical Society's
  collection.

• Red morocco note-book No. 3—Diary, April 4–June 6, 1806;
  35,000 words, with some sketch-maps.

• Fragment of Journal—Detached leaves, giving evidently first draft
  of entries, April 16–21, 1806; 2,300 words.

• Red morocco note-book No. 4—No diary, but containing sundry
  notes and tables of weather, distances, astronomical and ethnological
  data—all covered, however, in more finished manuscripts in the American
  Philosophical Society's collection. There are also in this book four excellent colored maps.

Miscellaneous Material

• An orderly book, by several hands, running from April 1 to Oct. 13,
  1804, and a detached entry for Jan. 1, 1806; detached orders promulgated
  at River Dubois camp, Feb. 20 and March 4, 1804; also a few
  detached orders issued during the expedition.

• Ten letters (some of them drafts)—Lewis offering (June 19, 1803)
  Clark an equal partnership in command of the expedition; Clark's
  acceptance thereof (July 17); Clark's letter to President Jefferson
  (July 24), informing him of this fact; Lewis to Clark (Aug. 3),
  expressing his gratification at the latter's favorable response; six others,
  chiefly by Clark, relating to various phases of the expedition.

• Letter of Clark to "Mr. Hugh Henry at the N. W. Co. establishments
  on the Assiniboin River," written from the Yellowstone, July
  20, 1806 (2,000 words); and Clark's order to Sergeant N. Pryor, dated
  July 25, 1806, directing him to take the aforesaid letter to Henry,
  together with twelve or fourteen horses (320 words).

• An address from the citizens of Fincastle and its vicinity to Captains
  Lewis and Clark, dated January 8, 1807 (300 words); and Clark's
  undated answer thereto (300 words).

• Numerous other letters and memoranda—among them the original
  of Jefferson's letter of credit; Clark's various military commissions,
  

  ---

  liii

  
  
  
  before, during, and after the expedition; fragmentary records of courses
  and distances, Indian tribes, weather data, and the like; information
  concerning the Assiniboin country obtained from British traders at Fort
  Mandan; and one of Clark's speeches to the Indians, in 1806.

Maps

• Most important of all are about sixty detailed maps, for the most
  part made by Clark while on the trip, he being engineer of the detachment.
  Collectively, these illustrate the greater part of the journey
  both going and returning, indicate camping-places, and contain many
  interesting comments on the country and the Indians. These charts
  vary in size from eight inches square to several feet long.

In addition to the above manuscripts, there are in this collection
several oil paintings of the Clarks—chiefly George
Rogers and William—together with numerous valuable relics
of these men, making of the Voorhis home a museum of great
interest to students of Western history.

An interesting query

Neglected manuscripts

Why did not General Clark surrender this wealth of manuscripts
either to the American Philosophical Society or to
Jefferson, when the latter was searching for all the
documents of the expedition, stoutly claiming them
as the undoubted property of the government? The
probable answer is, that Biddle found the four Clark-Voorhis
morocco note-books of no service to him; for practically all
the facts contained in them are either in Lewis's journals of
similar dates or in other drafts by Clark. He doubtless returned
the books to Clark, in the early stages of the work,
keeping only those which later were placed in the Society's
archives. It is probable, also, that the engraver having completed
such maps as he deemed necessary for the publication,
all the charts made upon the expedition were returned to
Clark. As for the skin-bound field-book, this having already
been transcribed into a red morocco note-book, very likely
the original did not go to Biddle at all; the orderly book, the
various fragments, the Lewis-Clark correspondence, and the
letter of credit, were doubtless also retained at St. Louis as being
deemed, for Biddle's purpose of a popular narrative, unusable

material. On his part, it is probable that Clark had either
forgotten the existence of these documents, or, like Biddle,
considered them as of relatively slight historical value.
His seemingly careless treatment of them would
appear to bear out the last conclusion. In all events,
they remained among his papers untouched, until tied into
packets and labelled by his son and executor, George Rogers
Hancock Clark.[51] The manuscripts again suffered a long
period of neglect, and eventually were sent to New York,
where they became the property of Mrs. Voorhis, the story
of whose connection with them has already been told.

Pryor, Floyd, Frazier, and Woodhouse Journals

It has often been asserted that Sergeant Pryor wrote a journal
of the expedition, and some have assumed that
Biddle used it in preparing the narrative of 1814;
but evidence to this effect is wanting—in any event,
no one now seems to know the whereabouts of this
manuscript.

The journal (12,500 words, covering the dates March 13 —
August 18, 1804) of Sergeant Floyd, the only man of the
party to meet death during the trip,[52] was in the spring of 1805

sent from Fort Mandan to his parents in Kentucky, and eventually
became the property of the Wisconsin Historical Society.
With many textual errors in transcription, it was published in
1894 in the Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society,
with an introduction by Dr. James Davie Butler.

Soon after the return of the expedition, Robert Frazier, one
of the privates, solicited subscriptions in Vermont for a publication
of his journal, to be "contained in about 400 pages
octavo;" but it did not appear, and the present writer has no
knowledge of the manuscript.[53]

The existence of a journal by Private Joseph Whitehouse
was unknown until recently. It was purchased in San Francisco
by Dodd, Mead & Co., to be published in connection
with the Original Journals of Lewis and Clark; after having
been edited for the press, the manuscript (containing 67,000
words, covering the dates May 14, 1804–November 6, 1805)
was acquired from the publishers by Edward E. Ayer, the well known Chicago collector.[54]

All records now in sight

Thus, seventy-five years after Jefferson's quest, and within
the centennial year of the departure of the Lewis and Clark
expedition from their preliminary camp on River
Dubois, there have at last been located presumably
all the literary records now extant, of that notable
enterprise in the cause of civilization. The Original Journals,
now definitively published to the world, in a dress which surely
would have satisfied Jefferson, must create a new interest in
the deeds of Lewis and Clark. They are, in the mass, much
more extensive than the Biddle narrative; the voluminous
scientific data here given—in botany, zoölogy, meteorology,
geology, astronomy, and ethnology —is almost entirely a fresh
contribution; and we obtain from the men's note-books as
written from day to day, a far more vivid picture of the explorers
and their life, than can be seen through the alembic of
Biddle's impersonal condensation.

A new view of Lewis and Clark

The pages of the journals are aglow with human interest.
The quiet, even temper of the camp; the loving consideration
that each of the two leaders felt for the other; the
magnanimity of Lewis, officially the leader, in equally
dividing every honor with his friend, and making no
move without the latter's consent; the poetic temperament
of Lewis, who loved flowers and animals, and in his
notes discoursed like a philosopher who enjoyed the exercise
of writing; the rugged character of Clark, who wrote in brief,
pointed phrase, and, less educated of the two, spelled phonetically,
capitalized chaotically, and occasionally slipped in his
grammar—all these and more, are evident on every page;
causing the reader deeply to admire the men, and to follow

them in their often thrilling adventures with the keenest sympathy
and anticipation. We shall henceforth know Lewis and
Clark as we never knew them before. The Biddle narrative
will no doubt continue to live as the brief popular account of
an exploration fraught with great consequence to American
expansion; but at least the student of history will feel that the
original records, as the men wrote them on the spot, are by far
the more satisfying of the two.

Editorial problems

In preparing for the press these Original Journals of the
Lewis and Clark Expedition, many editorial problems have
arisen, which it is unnecessary here to discuss in
detail. In brief, it may be said that the abundance
of material has in itself often proved an embarrassment.
As already stated, the two captains frequently rewrote
their records; for the most part, only the definitive form
remains to us, but there are long periods for which we have
two or more drafts. Then again, each leader freely copied
from the other, although generally with some variation. In
the case of the narrative proper, the Editor has, with a few exceptions,
thought best to retain the several drafts in the order of
their preparation; this method involves occasional repetition of
statement, but in a publication of the original records it appears
advisable to exhibit the literary methods of the explorers. With
regard, however, to the statistical and scientific material, it has
not seemed essential to publish the different drafts—the best
only has been presented. In the department of Scientific Data,
it will be noted that in a few instances some of the tabular matter
has been co-ordinated, the sources being indicated either by
differentiation in type or by explanatory foot-notes. Some of
the tables were prepared by the explorers in a manner quite
impossible of reproduction in type. But wherever practicable,
we have sought to imitate the original as closel as the limitations
of typography will allow.

We have seen that the codices in the possession of the
American Philosophical Society contain many erasures, interlineations,
and emendations—by Clark, Biddle, Coues, and
an unknown hand. The scientific entries were generally crossed
in red ink, with the note, "Copy for Dr. Barton;" this meant

that such matter was to be reserved for Barton's proposed
volume on the scientific results of the expedition, which, however,
was not prepared. The present Editor has disregarded
marks of this character. His method of indicating to the
reader the various emendations, is explained in the foot-note to
page 11 of the present volume, post.

The arrangement of chapters follows the Biddle edition of
1814. In that narrative the chapters were of proper and
nearly equal length; whereas in this, owing to the greater
extent of material, they are unequal and some of them abnormally
extended. A new system of chaptering would have
obviated this difficulty and thus presented a better mechanical
appearance. Nevertheless, it has been deemed best to retain
the Biddle chapters—they are convenient chronological and
geographical divisions; they are familiar to scholars, and thus
have acquired a certain historical and bibliographical standing;
moreover, comparisons between the Biddle paraphrase and the
Original Journals will be facilitated by their retention.

Acknowledgments

A work of this character, involving so wide a range of territory,
interests, and studies, must in considerable measure be
co-operative in its character. The Editor's requests
for advice and assistance have on every hand met
with most cordial responses, for which a mere enumeration
of names seems only cold acknowledgment; it is hoped
that each of his correspondents and colleagues will between the
lines read a heartier appreciation than to others may be apparent.
The Bibliographical Data contributed to the present
work by Mr. Victor Hugo Paltsits, of the New York Public
Library, is a work of great value; like the Original Journals
themselves, this chapter on the literature of the subject will
doubtless prove definitive. The officers of the American
Philosophical Society, particularly the secretary, Dr. I. Minis
Hays, have been kindness itself. Valuable notes on the scientific
results of the expedition have been freely contributed
by Dr. William Trelease, Director of the Missouri Botanical
Garden at St. Louis; Messrs. Stewardson Brown and Witmer
Stone, assistants to the curators of the Academy of Natural
Sciences at Philadelphia; Mr. James Newton Baskett, of

Mexico, Missouri; Professor Edwin H. Barbour, of the University
of Nebraska; Professor E. E. Blackman, archæologist
for the Nebraska Historical Society; Professor Charles V.
Piper, botanist and entomologist of the Washington (State)
Agricultural and Experiment Station at Pullman; and Professor
Franklin H. King, of the United States Department of
Agriculture. Detailed information concerning the over-mountain
trail of the expedition has been obtained from Mr. Olin
D. Wheeler, of the General Passenger and Ticket Department
of the Northern Pacific Railway, whose two-volume work,
The Trail of Lewis and Clark, will prove of much practical value
to American historians; and Professor F. G. Young, of the
University of Oregon. Mrs. Eva Emery Dye, of Oregon
City, Oregon, has contributed most liberally from the surprisingly
rich store of historical materials which, with remarkable
enterprise and perseverance, she accumulated during her preparation
for the writing of The Conquest; her persistent helpfulness
has laid the Editor under unusual obligations. Courtesies
of various kinds have also been received from the following
persons—to mention but a few of the many who, throughout
the past two years, have aided the publication: Hon. Pierre
Chouteau, and Hon. Walter B. Douglas, of St. Louis, members
of the Missouri Historical Society, and the society's
librarian, Miss Mary Louise Dalton; Hon. Craig Biddle, of
Philadelphia; Mrs. Laura E. Howey, secretary and librarian
of the Historical and Miscellaneous Department of the Montana
State Library; Mrs. S. Lou Monroe-Farmer, of Portland,
Oregon; Mr. Peter Koch, of Bozeman, Montana; Mr. Charles
H. Conover, of Chicago; Mr. J. W. Cheney, librarian of the
War Department, Mr. Robert Chapman, of the United States
Coast and Geodetic Survey, Mr. C. H. Lincoln, of the Manuscripts
Division of the Library of Congress, and Major William
Hancock Clark, of Washington, D. C.; Mr. C. H. Anderson,
of Ivy Depot, Virginia; Hon. Nathaniel P. Langford, of St.
Paul; and Mr. William Harvey Miner, of Cleveland.

Emma Helen Blair, A.M., editorial assistant upon The
Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents and now one of the
editors of The Philippine Islands, 1493–1898, assisted materially

upon a majority of the annotations; further help in this direction,
as well as in the difficult work of comparing transcriptions
with the original manuscripts, has been rendered by Louise
Phelps Kellogg, Ph.D., of the Manuscripts Division of the
Wisconsin Historical Library. Finally, the Editor takes especial
pleasure in acknowledging the patient and kindly cooperation
of the Publishers, who have exhibited the deepest
interest in every detail of the work, which owes much to their
many suggestions and their generous determination to leave
nothing undone that might add to its scholarly value and
artistic embellishment.