The halt and the hunt

All five narrators agree on the day’s purpose and weather, but the bookkeeping varies. Clark fixes the latitude at

46° 48′ 28″

and tallies the hunters’ return at

4 deer a Beaver & 3 Grouse

. Gass, writing more impressionistically, records only

2 deer

killed at midday and

two cranes

on the move — and notably has the party traveling roughly twenty miles down the creek, not halting in camp. This is the day’s sharpest disagreement: Gass describes movement while Lewis, Clark, Ordway, and Whitehouse all describe a stationary camp. Either Gass has conflated this entry with an adjacent day, or his sense of the halt was looser than the captains’.

Ordway and Whitehouse, who frequently track one another closely, agree on

4 Deer a faun and Several ducks and geese

, a tally that diverges from Clark’s beaver-and-grouse count. Whitehouse adds botanical detail neither captain bothers with:

considerable of cotton timber on this creek the choke cherries abound on its bottoms. the natives has lately gethered an amence quantities of them here for food

. He alone registers the recent Indigenous presence on the ground itself — evidence of seasonal harvest the captains pass over.

Colter’s encounter, told five ways

The arrival of the three Flathead riders is the day’s narrative center, and the variation across accounts is instructive. Ordway and Whitehouse give nearly identical sequences — the hunter laying down his gun, the Indians approaching

in a friendly manner

, the ride

verry fast

back to camp — confirming again the Ordway-Whitehouse textual relationship, with Whitehouse expanding rather than rewriting.

Clark alone names the hunter:

one of the hunters Colter, met with 3 Tushapaw Indians

. He also alone records the diplomatic exchange of goods —

we gave them a ring fish hook & tied a pece of ribin in the hare of each

and Lewis’s gift of

a Steel & a little Powder to make fire

. Lewis, who one might expect to record his own gift, omits it and instead supplies ethnographic generalization: the Flatheads

have a great abundance

of horses,

each man in the nation possesses from 20 to a hundred head

, and are

a very light coloured people of large stature and comely form

.

The number of stolen horses migrates across the entries: Ordway says 2, Whitehouse 22, Lewis 23, Clark 21. The Ordway figure is almost certainly a transcription slip; the captains’ numbers bracket a real but uncertain count. Small evidence of how oral information, conveyed by signs, hardened differently in each notebook.

Geography by hearsay

Lewis uses the day to speculate at length about western hydrography, naming the eastern fork the

Valley plain river

and theorizing it joins the

Tacootchetessee

— the Fraser, in Mackenzie’s nomenclature. Whitehouse independently records the guide’s claim that

these waters runs in to Mackinzees River as near as they can give an account

, a striking convergence suggesting this geographical theory circulated in camp, not just in Lewis’s head.

Lewis alone preserves the new guide’s tantalizing report: that some of his relations

were at the sea last fall and saw an old whiteman who resided there by himself

and gave them handkerchiefs. Five sleeps, six days’ travel, to reach the relations on the Columbia. The figure would prove optimistic — the Bitterroot crossing lay ahead — but on the evening of September 10, the Pacific had, for the first time, a concrete human informant attached to it.

The post A Day’s Rest at Travelers’ Rest, and Three Riders from the West appeared first on Lewis & Clark Research Database.

Source: Ordway’s manuscript, printed in Quaife, The Journals of Captain Meriwether Lewis and Sergeant John Ordway (Wisconsin Historical Society, 1916). Public domain.

The post John Ordway: August 20, 1804 appeared first on Lewis & Clark Research Database.

The paper reconstructs the return party (Sheheke, or Big White, and his family; the Pierre Chouteau–led Osage delegation; Clark’s man York; privates Labiche and Frazier; and sergeants Gass and Ordway), the post roads they followed, and the long history of the Gap from Walker’s 1750 sighting through Daniel Boone’s Wilderness Road. It is a window onto Lewis the trained surveyor still at work, weeks after the journey west was over.

This summary is provided for reference on the Lewis and Clark Research archive; the full article by Lorna Hainesworth is available at the source link.

The post Meriwether Lewis’s Survey at Cumberland Gap appeared first on Lewis & Clark Research Database.

Framing the sketches is a concise narrative of the war’s origins — from the embargo years through the treaties of 1815 — along with an appendix on the presidents involved. It is a useful group portrait of where the expedition’s people landed in the decade after the journey home.

This summary is provided for reference on the Lewis and Clark Research archive; the full compilation by Lorna Hainesworth is available at the source link.

The post The Corps in the War of 1812 appeared first on Lewis & Clark Research Database.

A Shared Event, Different Emphases

Clark frames the morning around weather and hospitality, noting that the party remained sheltered at the house of Mr. Proulx until the rain abated. He used the delay productively:

This morning being very wet and the rain Still Continueing hard, and our party being all Sheltered in the houses of those hospitable people, we did not think proper to proceed on untill after the rain was over… I took this oppertunity of writeing to my friends in Kentucky &c.

Ordway makes no mention of Proulx, of letters home, or of the morning’s deliberations. His entry compresses the hours before departure into a single clause — the party was collected “about 11 Oclock A. M.” — and moves quickly to the arrival at “Bell fountain a Fort or cantonement on South Side which was built since we ascended the Missourie & a handsome place.” Where Clark, with his officer’s awareness of geography and command, specifies the cantonment’s location “at Coldwater Creek about 3 miles up the Missouri on it’s Southern banks,” Ordway is content with a general impression of place.

Reception, Rank, and the Salute

The most striking divergence concerns the ceremonial welcome. Both men note an artillery salute, but their accounts differ in detail and in social orientation. Ordway, attentive to the mechanics of the reception and to his own peers, records:

the Company of Artillery who lay at this fort fired 17 Rounds with the field peaces the most of our party was Quartered in the cantonment… a number of these Soldiers are acquaintances of ours &C.

The detail of seventeen rounds is precisely the kind of specific that a sergeant — concerned with drill, ordnance, and the protocols of garrison life — would notice and preserve. Equally telling is Ordway’s closing observation that many of the artillerists were old acquaintances, a reminder that the enlisted men of the Corps were rejoining a familiar professional community.

Clark, by contrast, leaves the number of guns blank in his manuscript — “we were honored with a Salute of ____ Guns” — and devotes his attention instead to the officers and ladies of the post:

at this place we found Colo. Hunt & a Lieut Peters & one Company of Artillerists we were kindly received by the Gentlemen of this place. Mrs. Wilkinson the Lady of the Govr. & Genl. we wer Sorry to find in delicate health.

Clark’s social world at Bellefontaine is one of named officers and the wife of General James Wilkinson, then governor of the Louisiana Territory. His concern for Mrs. Wilkinson’s health, the named identification of Colonel Thomas Hunt and Lieutenant George Peters, and his interest in the “publick Store” reportedly holding “60000$ worth of indian Goods” all reflect the priorities of a commander returning to the world of territorial administration, Indian policy, and official correspondence.

Two Registers of Homecoming

Read together, the entries demonstrate how a single day in the expedition’s record can refract through differing registers. Ordway preserves what Clark omits: the precise number of rounds fired, the presence of newly built flat boats at the cantonment, and the human warmth of reuniting with fellow soldiers. Clark preserves what Ordway omits: the names of the post’s officers, the condition of Mrs. Wilkinson, the commercial valuation of the Indian-trade store, and his own attention to private correspondence.

Neither narrator appears to be copying the other on this date — a pattern that distinguishes the homeward leg from earlier stretches of the journey, when Ordway’s entries sometimes echo the captains’ phrasing closely. As the party drew within a day’s travel of St. Louis, each man wrote increasingly from his own social vantage, and the cross-narrator record grows correspondingly richer for it.

The post Salutes at Bellefontaine: Two Views of the Expedition’s Return to Settled Country appeared first on Lewis & Clark Research Database.

Crossing to the north bank

Gass opens May 14 with frost and labor:

white frost. Three hunters went over very early to the north side of the river. All the rest of the men were employed in collecting our horses and taking over the baggage.

By noon the horses and baggage were across, and the party camped at

the remains of an ancient village on the north side of the Koos-koos-ke river

. Clark and Lewis give the same move with surveyor’s measures: the river about 150 yards wide and extremely rapid; the old habitation a circle some 30 feet across, sunk about four feet, with an earthen wall. Ordway is the enlisted confirmation:

we took our baggage and Swam our horses across the river to the N. Side and mooved a Short distance down the river and Encamped in a Smooth bottom partly covred with young pitch pine in order to stay untill we can cross the mountains

They were settling in to wait out Bitterroot snow. Gass on the 15th says they expected to remain a month.

Bears, and who counted them

Ordway names the hunters: Collins two bear “of the white kind,” Labiche three. Gass, not naming them, reports two at midday and three more by evening,

all of the grizly kind

. Lewis and Clark have Collins’s pair in the morning — one fat male, one lean female with cubs — and Labiche later with a female and two cubs. Lewis uses the mixed colors (black, bay, white-tipped) to argue that the “variagated bear” here is one species, not twenty. Clark adds the Chopunnish valuation: killing one of those animals ranks with killing an enemy in the field. The claws of Collins’s bears went to Hohastillpilp.

Gelding, two methods

Gass records the operation without naming a surgeon:

In the afternoon we had an operation performed on seven of our horses, to render them more peaceable; which was done by one of the natives upon all but one.

Lewis and Clark explain why. The stallions would not trade even at two for one, “Cut each other very much,” and had to be castrated. A Chopunnish man present offered to cut them without tying the cord, scraping it clean first; Drewyer gelded two in the usual way. The next day Clark found those cut by Drewyer the most swollen. That is not Gass noticing a craft the captains ignored — the captains wrote the method; Gass wrote the count.

Stone and pine boughs

They gave bear meat to about fifteen Chopunnish at camp. Gass describes layered hot stones, meat, and brush, covered like a small coal pit, needing about an hour and a half. Clark and Lewis give the fuller procedure: river stones on a brisk fire, pine boughs, flitches of bear, more boughs, a little water, earth four inches deep, about three hours. Lewis tasted it and found it more tender than roast or boiled meat, “but the strong flavor of the pine distroyed it for my pallate.” Ordway’s comparison is the enlisted key:

they cooked it in the Same manner as they Swet their commass roots

The six-thumbed scalp, May 15

The trophy is Gass’s May 15, not May 14. While the party put up sail-cloth and grass shelters, a visitor

had round his neck the scalp of an Indian, with six thumbs and four fingers of the other Indians he had killed in battle, of the Sho-sho-ne, or Snake nation.

Gass adds that the Chopunnish and Shoshone “have been long at war and destroyed a great many of each other in a few years past,” then describes the war-mallet — a club with a wooden or stone head, the stone heads covered with leather and sinew. A printer’s footnote in the 1807 Pittsburgh edition (David McKeehan) compares a similar stone head later seen near the Allegheny; that note is McKeehan’s, not a field sentence. Ordway on the 15th does not mention the scalp. He has a white bear chased on horseback and not killed, a shelter over the old cellar “so as in case of an alarm we can jump in the celler and defend ourSelves,” a bowery for the officers to write in, and five gallons of bear oil kegged for the mountains. Lewis that day is still on bear species, deer-head decoys, and the swollen geldings.

Read across four pens, these two days are the making of Camp Chopunnish: a defensive hollow on the Clearwater, horses cut so they would travel, bear oil for the snow, and one ethnographic page in Gass that the captains, busy with chiefs, species, and surgery, did not write.

The post Crossing the Koos-koos-ke: Bears, Horse Surgery, and a Six-Thumbed Trophy appeared first on Lewis & Clark Research Database.

Three Registers of the Same Morning

Gass, characteristically, gives the barest skeleton. His sergeant’s log notes only the rain of the previous day, the unfavorable wind, a three-hour halt to hunt, and four deer killed before the party encamped at sunset. He says nothing of McClellan, nothing of Clark’s illness, nothing of the timber on the bottoms. His entry is the kind of compressed military summary he had been producing since the winter at Fort Mandan.

Ordway, by contrast, opens with the social texture Gass omits. He records the leave-taking from McClellan’s party in some detail:

our party as much whiskey as they would drink and gave our officers three bottles of wine and we took our leave of them

Where Gass counted four deer, Ordway counts five — a small discrepancy typical of the enlisted journals, where tallies were often jotted from memory after the fact. Ordway’s account of the day is otherwise brief, conceding only that they “detained along at different places to hunt” and “Camped having made but a Short distance this day.”

Clark’s Expansive Eye

Clark’s entry dwarfs the other two and is the only one to explain why the day was short. He names McClellan, records the morning dram, fixes the time of the wind’s interference, and gives the practical reason for laying by:

the wind being too high for us to proceed in Safty through the emecity of Snags which was imediately below

Neither Gass nor Ordway mentions the snags at all. Clark also alone reports his own ill health and McClellan’s gift of chocolate:

I felt my Self very unwell and derected a little Chocolate which Mr. McClellen gave us, prepared of which I drank about a pint and found great relief

This is one of the small medical asides that distinguish Clark’s homeward journals. He also alone preserves the day’s minor mishap — that George Shannon, the same young soldier who had been lost on the prairie in 1804, left his horn, pouch, powder, ball, and knife behind and did not realize it until nightfall.

The Botanist of the Bottom

The most striking divergence comes at the close of Clark’s entry, where he turns from event to environment. Having walked in the bottom while the hunters worked, he produces a catalogue of vegetation and birds that has no counterpart in the other journals:

cotton wood, Sycamore, ash mulberry, Elm of different Species, walnut, hickory, horn beem, pappaw arrow wood willow, prickly ash, &c and Grape vines, pees of 3 species

His comparison is telling — he calls this “the Growth of timber Common to the Illinois.” The expedition is now within a recognizable eastern forest, and Clark registers the homecoming through species rather than sentiment. Ordway’s two men, sent into the same bottom, had returned only with a turkey and the report “that the rushes was so high and thick that it was impossible to kill any deer.” Where the hunters saw an obstruction, Clark saw a flora worth listing.

Patterns of Attention

The three entries together illustrate a pattern visible across the homeward leg. Gass abbreviates; Ordway preserves social and ceremonial detail (the whiskey, the wine, the leave-taking) that the officers’ journals sometimes pass over; and Clark, even when unwell, expands into natural-historical observation. None of the three appears to be copying another on this date — the deer count differs, the noted details do not align, and Clark’s botanical list is wholly his own. The day’s eighteen miles are short by the standards of the descent, but the convergence of three independent voices on a single wind-bound afternoon offers an unusually full record of how the captains and their sergeants divided the labor of remembering.

The post Wind, Whiskey, and a Pint of Chocolate: Three Views of a Slow Day on the Lower Missouri appeared first on Lewis & Clark Research Database.

A Shared Event, Three Registers

The bare facts agree across all three journals: the party set out early, met three large boats from St. Louis, halted roughly two hours, received whiskey and provisions, killed deer along the banks, and camped on an island. Gass, the carpenter-sergeant whose published journal favors brevity, compresses the encounter into a single sentence of hospitality:

The people in them were very glad to see us, and gave us some whiskey, pork, and biscuit. We remained with them two hours and again went on.

Ordway, often Gass’s closest parallel, supplies more texture. He notes that the boats were first sighted under sail, that the party “put to Shore Spread our flags,” and that the traders were a mixed company — “tradors from S^t Louis and frenchman but could Some of them Speak English.” He alone names the destination as “the Mahars nations” and itemizes the gifts as “ardent spirits buiscuits and cheese &C. onion.” Ordway’s eye for the practical — the flags, the language barrier, the cheese — gives his entry a sergeant’s-eye specificity that Gass’s printed prose smooths away.

Clark, by contrast, writes as a captain composing a record of state. He alone names the proprietors of the boats — “Mr. Lacroy, Mr. Aiten & Mr. Coutau all from St. Louis” — and identifies their two destinations as “the Yanktons and Mahars.” His entry runs longer than Gass’s and Ordway’s combined, and it frames the day in terms neither sergeant supplies.

The Kanzas Threat Only Clark Records

The most striking divergence is Clark’s opening paragraph, which has no counterpart in either Gass or Ordway. Before the boats appear, Clark explains the strategic anxiety of the morning:

this being the part of the Missouri the Kanzas nation resort to at this Season of the year for the purpose of robbing the perogues passing up to other nations above… it is probable they may wish to take those liberties with us, which we are deturmined not to allow of and for the Smallest insult we Shall fire on them.

Ordway, descending the same river, mentions only that the party “Soon passed the old village of the Kansers” — a geographic note shorn of menace. Gass omits the Kanzas entirely. Clark’s later remark that the upriver traders “were much affraid of meeting with the Kanzas” confirms that the apprehension was current along the river, not merely a captain’s caution; yet it surfaces in writing only under his pen. The pattern is consistent with what scholars have long observed: Clark’s journal carries the diplomatic and military framing of the expedition, while the sergeants’ journals record the day as experienced rather than as commanded.

Hunting, Distance, and the Evening’s Close

The deer-killing reports show another characteristic divergence. Gass writes simply, “We killed five deer on the bank to-day.” Ordway specifies that the hunters “killd Several deer from their canoes about 3 oClock P. M.” and adds a separate note that “Gibson shot an other deer from his canoe at dark.” Clark gives the totals with a quartermaster’s precision — “we Saw 37 Deer on the banks and in the river to Day 5 of which we killed” — and offers a judgment the others omit: “those deer were Meager.”

Only Clark records the day’s mileage (“haveing decended only 53 miles”) and the celebratory aftermath. Gass closes at sunset with the island camp; Ordway ends at dark on the north side. Clark alone writes that

our party received a dram and Sung Songs untill 11 oClock at night in the greatest harmoney.

That closing image — whiskey shared out from the traders’ stores, the men singing into the late hours after weeks of hard descent — appears nowhere in the other journals. It is a reminder that even on a day when three witnesses agree on the essential events, the texture of the expedition survives in the gaps among them: Gass’s economy, Ordway’s inventory, and Clark’s blend of strategic wariness and human warmth.

The post Whiskey, Biscuit, and the Phantom Kanzas: Three Accounts of a Riverside Encounter appeared first on Lewis & Clark Research Database.

Compression Versus Expansion

Gass condenses the entire day into a single sentence:

early. Ina short time we killed a fine large elk; at 11 o’clock passed the Kanzon river, and encamped at sunset.

Three events—elk, river mouth, camp—frame the whole. Gass’s spelling of “Kanzon” preserves a phonetic rendering distinct from Ordway’s “Kanzas” and Clark’s “Kanzas,” suggesting Gass either heard the name differently or did not consult the captains’ notebooks before recording.

Ordway’s entry, by contrast, is observationally dense. He notes the headwind “as usal,” specifies that the elk was “a buck” shot “from their canoe on the lower point of an Isld,” and adds a second buck shot from a canoe later in the day. Ordway is also the only narrator to give a count of game seen but not taken—”about 20 deer on the shores this day”—and the only one to record the rattlesnake episode at the pawpaw grove:

an emence Site of pappaws & as the men were gathering them Saw a number of rattle Snakes and killed one of them and saved the skin.

Clark mentions the pawpaw stop in passing—”we landed one time only to let the men geather Pappaws or the Custard apple of which this Country abounds, and the men are very fond of”—but says nothing of snakes. The detail is Ordway’s alone, consistent with his pattern throughout the return voyage of recording incidents involving the enlisted men that the captains either omit or generalize.

Clark the Surveyor and Climatologist

Where Ordway counts and Gass compresses, Clark interprets. His entry is the longest of the three and is structured around two extended digressions that have no parallel in the other journals. The first is a reconnaissance of military terrain:

about a mile below we landed and Capt Lewis and my Self assended a hill which appeared to have a Commanding Situation for a fort, the Shore is bold and rocky imediately at the foot of the hill, from the top of the hill you have a perfect Command of the river

Neither Gass nor Ordway records this ascent, though it occupied both captains and presumably required the boats to wait. The omission is telling: the hill’s strategic value was a captains’ concern, not a sergeant’s, and the enlisted journalists had no reason to log it.

Clark’s second digression is climatological. He observes that the party is no longer “tormented by the Musquetors” as it had been above the Platte, and offers a meteorological explanation for the discomfort the men feel in the lower river:

Comeing out of a northern Country open and Cool between the Latd. Of 46° and 49° North in which we had been for nearly two years, rapidly decending into a woody Country in a wormer Climate between the Latds. 38°& 39° North is probably the Cause of our experiencing the heat much more Senceable than those who have Continued within the parralel of Latitude.

This is Clark in scientific mode, framing bodily sensation as a problem of latitude and acclimatization. Ordway registers the same general fact—the wind is “a head as usal”—but offers no analysis. Gass says nothing of weather at all.

Convergences and a Missing Scene

The three accounts agree on the essentials: an early start, the Kansas River passed at 11, an elk killed, sunset camp. Clark and Ordway agree the elk was a buck and that it was taken on an island; Clark names the hunters as “the 2 fields and Shannon,” a specificity Ordway lacks. Gass alone calls the animal “a fine large elk” without naming hunters or location.

Notably, the editorial footnote attached to Ordway’s entry reports that Clark elsewhere placed the camp on an island and noted the men “received a dram and Sung Songs untill 11 oClock at night in the greatest harmoney.” That convivial scene appears in none of the three entries transcribed here—a reminder that any single day in the expedition’s record is assembled from overlapping but incomplete fragments, and that the cheerful camp on the lower Missouri survives only because one narrator, on one occasion, chose to write it down.

The post Pawpaws, an Elk, and a Commanding Hill: Three Views of the Kansas River Mouth appeared first on Lewis & Clark Research Database.

A Shared Itinerary, Three Registers

All three accounts agree on the basic sequence: an early start, a morning meeting with a pirogue bound for the Pawnees on the Platte, a second meeting near midday with a keelboat and two canoes, and an evening camp on an island. Patrick Gass, characteristically terse, compresses the entire day into five sentences:

ceeded on early, and at 9 o’clock met a large periogue with eight men, going to trade with the Ponis nation of Indians on the river Platte about seventy or eighty miles from its mouth. At 11 we met a batteaux and two canoes going up to the Kanowas nation, who live on a river of the same name.

Gass supplies useful geographic detail — the distance of the Pawnee trading destination from the mouth of the Platte — but suppresses every diplomatic and political dimension of the encounter. For Gass, these are simply boats met and passed.

John Ordway and William Clark, by contrast, both linger over the second meeting. Ordway names the proprietor as “Mr Reubode of Su1d57 Louis” and notes that the keelboat “was under the charge of Mr Reubados Son.” Clark identifies him as “young Mr. Bobidoux” — both narrators are wrestling with the surname Robidoux. Ordway’s count of “about 20 frenchman in Company” gives the encounter a scale that Clark omits.

The Passport Problem

The most revealing convergence between Ordway and Clark concerns the captains’ inspection of the trader’s license, an episode Gass entirely ignores. Clark, writing in the register of a commanding officer assessing legal documents, expresses pointed skepticism:

the licenes of this young man was to trade with the Panias Mahars and ottoes reather an extroadanary a license for young a man and without the Seal of the teritory anexed, as Genl. Wilkensons Signeture was not to this instrement we were Somewhat doubtfull of it. Mr. Browns Signeture we were not acquainted with without the Teritorial Seal.

Clark’s concerns are procedural and bureaucratic: the breadth of the license, the missing territorial seal, the unfamiliar signature of “Mr Brown” in place of General Wilkinson’s. Ordway preserves the diplomatic content of the captains’ response — the substance of the warning delivered to the young trader:

our officers gave instructions to this trador after reading his passport directing them not to speak against the government of the United States to the Indians as his brothers did to the Zotoes last winter

Clark echoes this in slightly softer language, recording that the captains “Cautioned him against prosueing the Steps of his brother in attempting to degrade the American Charector in the eyes of the Indians.” The two accounts reinforce one another: Ordway, the sergeant, captures the directive as instruction (“directing them not to speak against the government”); Clark, the officer who delivered it, frames it as caution against degrading “the American Charector.” Both versions point to a recent incident the previous winter involving Robidoux’s brother and the Otoes — a piece of intelligence the Corps had evidently absorbed during its westward journey or its winter at Fort Mandan.

Heat, Distance, and What Each Man Notices

Beyond the trading encounters, each journalist preserves details the others omit. Clark alone tabulates the day’s mileage (“haveing Came 52 miles only to day”) and locates the evening camp by reference to an earlier outbound campsite (“a little above our encampment of the 16th & 17th of June 1804”) — a navigational habit that distinguishes the captains’ journals from the enlisted men’s. Clark and Ordway both register the oppressive heat; Ordway notes “the day verry warm indeed,” while Clark elaborates that “the men rowed but little” because of it.

Ordway alone records two further encounters: a meeting with two French hunters whose canoe came out to the boats, bringing word that “an american Boat was on their way coming up Some distance below,” and a glimpse of “a black bear which run [into] a thicket of bushes.” These details suggest Ordway’s journal-keeping practice on this date was the most attentive to incidental observation, while Gass economized ruthlessly and Clark prioritized the official and the navigational.

The post Three Boats on the Homeward River: Traders, Licenses, and a Suspect Passport appeared first on Lewis & Clark Research Database.