Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1905-04-28

UeaS WIN the Oficldl ACTS OF Governor
Isaac !. Stevens is Misleading and Unjust
| II Goes Forth, With Protest From All
| Pioneers Familiar With the History Of Those
Times
BY EDMOND :. MEANY.
"God forbid that /, through preju-
dice, should write aught against the
patriot, Issac |. Stevens"
1t is a great pity that Ezra Meeker'
prayer was not offered up at the be-
ginning instead of at the end of his
"Tragedy OF Leschi," and it is great.
er pity that it was not then summarily
answered.
Everyone will praise the first part
Of Mr.. Meeker's book-his Pioneer
Reminiscences-and the concluding
chapter by Clarence b. Bagley shows
a vast amount OF careful research
among old records.
Between these two meritorious por.
tons is the Tragedy" which deserves
criticism because it assails in ruth
less fashion the character of q man
whose memory has been cherished in
love for nearly half a century. The
author invites criticism in this, that
he says on page 206: "This writing
is intended as history" When one
pretends to write history he must be
willing to abide by the rules. These
are lbs old atfdi as we'll known as the
process OF writing itself. Cicero said :
1t is the first law Of history that the
writer should neither dare to advance
what is false, nor to suppress what is
true; that he should relate the facts
with strict impartiality, free from i'll
will or favor. Modern historians have
ever since freely conceded the validity
of that law as voiced by Cicero.
Judged by that old and valid law,
Mr.. Meeker's Tragedy OF Leshi" is
not good history, for it advances false
hood. 1t suppresses truth, it shows
utter lack of impartiality, and if the
animus behind the writing be not ill.
will toward Stevens, it is something so
nearly like it that its name would be
quite as ugly if pronounced.
In establishing this judgment or
criticism it will not be necessary to 60
outside OF the book itself except in one
or two instances, and then only to
submit evidence easily accessible to
one who has read the sources as thor.
oughly rs has Mr.. Meeker.
The charge OF forgery will be con-
sidered first because in that case the
author violates all the tenets of the
first law OF history. In the first place
he advances what he knows to be q
falsehood. The basis OF the charge of
forgery is in the quoted words of
Hazard Stevens in the Life of Isaac
l. I.Stevens," as follows: Hearing the
arrival OF Looking Glass announced,
(the Governor) seized the occasion to
call upon the Yakima chief to sign
the treaty in the name OF Looking
Glass, there being great friendship
between the two"
Now, Mr.. Meeker knew his charge
OF forgery was false. because the
author of those quoted words met
him in the State Library at Olympia
and explained that he meant the
qualifying phrase ain the name Of"
to refer to the verb "urge" and not to
the verb "sign." To make it more
clear, a letter was written by Hazard
Stevens to Thomas W. Prosch, and
later another letter to Mr.. Meeker
himself. Yet the author imagines
that he is justified in continuing his
charge OF forgery if he also inserted
both OF Hazard Stevens letters.
The question does not turn upon
the action of Gov. Stevens, but upon
the words OF the son in writing his
life. The author OF those words is the
prime source in this case, and the
historian practically calls him a liar
when he refuses to accept his earnest
and lucid explanation of what had
! been intended by the words.
Mr.. Meeker not only makes this
charge, which in the table OF contents
he calls an astonishing forgery" on
pages 24O-241, but he repeats it on
page 254: "The Governor at the
Walla Walla council employed repri.
hensible means to obtain signatures"
Any freshman in college who would
seek to bolster up such grave charge
with such flimsy and reprehensible
statements would be marked zero on
the composition. The story has often
been told of the really remarkably
success achieved by Gov. Stevens and
Gen. Joel Palmer at the Walla Walla
council in concluding three important
treaties. BY far the best account oil
the whole transaction is that by Col.
Lawrence Kip, who as q Lieutenant in
the U. S. Army, was present and
signed one OF the treaties as q witness.
His account is contemporaneous with
the event. He kept a diary at the
council, and during the same year oil
1855 it was published in San Francisco.
For many years it was almost impos.
sible to see copy OF that work, but in
1897 IL was reDrinted hy the university