HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-07-12 PACKET 05.C.Cottage
Grove
here Pride and PrOsPerity Meet
TO: Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation
FROM: John M. Burbank, Senior Planner
DATE: July 8, 2016
RE: Cottage Grove and the Mighty Mississippi
Introduction
Over the last year the ACHP has been discussing the completion of a barn -themed display case at
City Hall. The public was invited to participate in the process, but very little response was received.
Staff has been discussing the topic and have identified that a project that aligns with current City
Council goals and direction may be appropriate. The current strategic plan, which has measurable
and accountability, identifies that by 2020 Cottage Grove will be recognized as having a wide variety
of premier recreational opportunities for everyone. One often overlooked premier amenity in the
city is the Mississippi River and its associated backwaters. Cottage Grove has over 39 miles of
shoreline and bluffs, and there are many residents in the community that are not even aware of fact
that the River is at our doorstep.
Given these facts, it was identified that one method to promote the awareness of the River to the
community would be to share interesting facts and information on the history of the Mississippi as
related to Cottage Grove in the City Hall Historic Display Case.
Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation
Cottage Grove and the Mighty Mississippi
July 8, 2016
Page 2 of 2
To help initiate the project discussion, ACHP member Reckinger shared this interesting historic
1891 photo of the river as viewed from Cottage Grove.
close photc
Is�
V! `I [€€e.11,11.
Wingdams below Nininger, Minn., 1891. By Henry P. Bosse. Rock Island District, Corps of Engineers
(Taken from Cottage Grove vantage point near Pine Coulee)
Discussion
It is requested that the ACHP discuss the project and provide a list of topics that can be fleshed out
and included in the draft project design. A large PDF on the River History that was produced by the
National Park Service is included with this packet for educational purposes.
Recommendation
That the ACHP postpone the barn display project and shift to the "Cottage Grove and the Mighty
Mississippi River Display."
%L! U eIrc , f- 9rr
A Historic Resources Study of the Mississippi
National River and Recreation Area
�"q�
A Historic Resources Study of the Mississippi
National River and Recreation Area
By John 0. Anfinson
National Park Service
with contributions by
Thomas Madigan, Drew M. Forsberg
and Patrick Nunnally
al
U5 A7q Corps
Qf Enginears
S1. paul D5'.nd
Printed by St.Paul District, Corps of Engineers, 2003.
r7alr/e � �o ���n t v�
cast,o�' c�ru�ee��................................................................ 6
.Atc%siocoled�.V,M,& ............................................................ 9
C%�iYcrce,.............................................................. 11
r
G'/ccfatu�/...................................................................... 21
The Geology of the MNRRA Corridor
6'/afatu- 2...................................................................... 39
Early Native American Life in the MNRRA Corridor
611496tu-r3..................................................................... 53
Discovery and Dispossession
6'/�accfatu- f...................................................................... 75
Transforming the River I: Commerce and Navigation
Improvements, 1823-1906
G%c�ite��5...................................................................... 95
Transforming the River II: Commerce, Navigation
Improvements and Hydroelectric Power, 1907-1963
�'&9Wi= 0-....................................................................... 11 7
St. Anthony Falls: Timber, Flour and Electricity
6'&96&i- 7......................................................................139
The Patterns of Agriculture, Commerce,
Industry and Transportation
611496tu-d'......................................................................163
Settlement and Urban Residential Development
Along the River, 1841-1950
`iilcr�cfccP........................................................................179
Novel and Familiar Places
'felected'Wiirl9w0�1y'l.......................................................182
(s11/"IaAMI .......................................................................188
6'a"el-
City of St. Paul, 1853.
FIGUREI. Looking upstream atDaytonsBluffand
St. Paul.
FIGURE 2. Map of The Mississippi National River and
Recreation Area.
6h'tg6tes= /
FIGURE 1. River Warren Falls.
FIGURE 2. Map of the MNRRA corridor.
FIGURE 3. Generalized bedrock stratigraphy of the upper
Mississippi River valley.
FIGURE 4. Map of the preglacial bedrock valleys in the
Twin Cities area.
FIGURES Sa-h. Glacial phases in Minnesota.
FIGURE 6. Advance of the Grantsburg Sublobe.
(i/ra,htei-2
FIGURE 1.
Native Americans fishingfrom a canoe
FIGURE 2.
Clovis Point.
FIGURE 3.
Late Paleo-Indian point.
FIGURE 4.
Early Woodland ceramic vessel fragment.
FIGURE S.
Reconstructed Middle Woodland vessel.
FIGURE 6.
Late Woodland ceramic types.
FIGURE 7.
Blue Earth Oneota vessel fragments.
FIGURE 8.
Generalized distribution of Native American
FIGURE 8.
groups during the mid -1 600s.
chtg6ten
FIGUREI. Antoine Auguelleand Father Louis Hennepin
at St. Anthony Falls.
FIGURE 2. St. Paul, 1853.
FIGURE 3. Map of the MNRRA corridor, 1680-1854.
FIGURE 4. Native American petroglyphs from
Carver's Cave.
FIGURE S. Zebulon Pike.
FIGURE 6. Stephen Long.
FIGURE 7. Little Crow II Cetanwakanmani.
FIGURE 8. Fort Snelling about 1848.
FIGURE 9. Ilaposia.
FIGURE 10. St. Paul, 1848.
FIGURE 11. Red Rock and Fawn's Leap.
FIGURE 12. Little Crow.
6ltvtel= E
FIGURE 1.
St. Paul, 1853.
FIGURE 2.
Map of the MNRRA corridor, 1823-1906.
FIGURE 3.
Wreck of the Quincy.
FIGURE 4.
Major General Gouverneur K. Warren.
FIGURE S.
Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railroad
FIGURE S.
Bridge, Hastings, Minn., 1885.
FIGURE 6.
Oliver Kelley.
FIGURE 7.
William Windom.
FIGURE 8.
Pigs Eye Island before and after closing dam
construction.
FIGURE 9.
Wing dam construction.
FIGURE 10. Channel constriction at Pine Bend,
Minnesota, 1891.
FIGURE 11. Meeker Island Lock and Dam.
cllcv'tel- 5
FIGURE 1.
Lock and Dam No. 1 under construction.
FIGURE 2.
Map of the MNRRA corridor, 1907-1963.
FIGURE 3.
Timber raft and raftboat near Wabasha Street
Bridge in St. Paul, 1900.
FIGURE 4.
C. A. Smith Lumber Mill.
FIGURE S.
Theodore Roosevelt.
FIGURE 6.
Lower St. Anthony Falls Dam and
Hydroelectric Station.
r
FIGURE 7. Loch and Dam No. 1.
FIGURE 8. First lockage, Lock and Dam No. 2, Hastings,
June 27, 1930.
FIGURE 9. Lower St. Anthony Falls Lock and Dam under
construction.
FIGURE 10. Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock under
construction.
FIGURE 11. Early Coon Rapids Dam.
FIGURE 1. Reconstructing St. Anthony Falls.
FIGURE 2. Hermann J. Meyer Lithograph of St. Anthony
Falls.
FIGURE 3. Seth Eastman engraving of St. Anthony Falls.
FIGURE 4. Franklin Steele.
FIGURE S. St. Anthony Falls, 1859.
FIGURE 6. West side platform mills at St. Anthony Falls,
about 1870.
FIGURE 7. Eastman Tunnel collapse, Hennepin Island,
1870.
FIGURE 8. Map of Eastman Tunnel disaster and repair
work.
FIGURE 9. Flour mills along the west side canal at
St. Anthony Falls, 1885.
FIGURE 1o. Great Northern, Stone Arch Bridge, 1884.
FIGURE 11. Diagram of first commercial hydroelectric
central plant in the country, 1882.
FIGURE 12. William de 1a Barre.
FIGURE 13. Mill Ruins Park, Minneapolis.
Ohtg6te/'- 7
FIGURE 1. Downtown St. Paul on the Mississippi River.
FIGURE 2. Mississippi River Commission Map, 1895.
FIGURE 3. Log drivers and logjam above St. Anthony
Falls, 1881.
FIGURE 4. Bluff top stone quarry, St. Paul, 1885.
7
FIGURE s. Frank A. Johnson brickyard, 1904.
FIGURE 6. St. Paul Roller Mill Company, St. Paul,
1881.
FIGURE 7. Farmers Union Grain Terminal Association,
1955.
FIGURE 8. Cattle pen, South St. Paul Stockyards, 1930.
FIGURE 9. Meuller and Heinrick's Brewery,
Minneapolis, 1880.
FIGURE 10. Point Douglas Ferry, 1902.
FIGURE 11. Railroads at St. Paul, 1931.
FIGURE 12. Mississippi River BridgeatAnoka, 1905.
�i'dra�ite<< cS'
FIGURE 1. Minneapolis skyline over the Mississippi
60MO'Iycce
FIGURE 1. Wingdams below Ninninger, Minn., 1891.
FIGURE 2. Wingdams below Ninninger, Minn., 1891,
detail.
River gorge.
FIGURE 2.
Panoramic Map ofAnoka.
FIGURE 3.
Village of St. Anthony, 1851.
FIGURE 4.
Hastings, 1850.
FIGURE s.
Bohemian Flats, Minneapolis, 1880.
FIGURE 6.
Gathering wood at Bohemian Flats, 1887.
FIGURE 7.
Little Italy on the Upper Levee, St. Paul.
FIGURE 8.
East River Road, Fridley, 1945.
60MO'Iycce
FIGURE 1. Wingdams below Ninninger, Minn., 1891.
FIGURE 2. Wingdams below Ninninger, Minn., 1891,
detail.
he Mississippi National River and
Recreation Area (MNRRA), National Park
Service, and the St. Paul District, Corps of
Engineers, cooperated to make this study possible, sharing
staff and funding for this work. Personnel from both agen-
cies helped facilitate a seamless research, writing and publi-
cation process. MNRRA's superintendent, JoAnn M. Kyral,
and St. Paul District Engineers, Colonels J. M. Wonsik and
Kenneth S. Kasprisin recognized the value of this study to
both agencies and provided the leadership to see it through.
Bob Post, the chief of Engineering and Planning for the St.
Paul District, in particular, made the partnership work from
the Corps side.
A number of former and current employees of the St.
Paul District, deserve special thanks, including Bob
Whiting, David E. Berwick, Jane Carroll, Brad Johnson, and
Matt Pearcy. I drew on the expertise and knowledge of Jean
Schmidt, librarian, and Al Santo, map collection librarian,
many, many times. Both thoroughly know their respective
collections at the St. Paul District.
National Park Service employees also contributed to
this study. Kate Hanson, manager for MNRRA's Stewardship
Team, not only made the partnership with the Corps work
well, she provided substantive comments and edited the
entire manuscript. Don Stevens, senior historian for the
Midwest Region Office of the National Park Service
reviewed early chapters and offered valuable comments.
Without the research and work on the graphics for this
study by Sharon Woods and Sara Dummer, the production
would have taken much longer.
9
Finally, the trained and experienced archivists at the
Minnesota Historical Society and the National Archives in
Chicago, Illinois, and Washington, D.C., guided me through
endless shelves of historic documents to the manuscript
collections I needed. I owe a special debt to the Minnesota
Historical Society, for most of the images for this report
come from the society's archives.
Under contract, Susan and Dennis Feigenbaum,
Feigenbaum Design Group, provided the design and layout
work Their immense talents have yielded a product that is
aesthetically appealing and presents the many historical
images with power and clarity.
JOHN O. ANFINSON
f fA
T
FW -Or p
5 �r
A4 i
bh.
4 _ a -,
.mac
F
FIG URE 1. Looking upstream at Daytous Bluff and St. Paul. Artist. Ferdinand Uebel. Minnesota Historical Society.
_V�P Q'CPi
River of History
n about March 19, 1680, one hundred and twen-
ryDakota warriors beached their canoes at the
mouth of Phalen Creek, just below downtown St.
Paul. Dayton Bluff, with it large, ancient burial mounds,
loomed above them to their right. To their left rose the hills
and lowlands on which St. Paul rests today. The Dakota had
sallied far down the Mississippi River to attack the Miami
Indians of Illinois. They returned not with Indian prisoners
but three Frenchmen: Michael Accault, Antoine Auguelle and
Father Louis Hennepin. The captives had been traveling up
the Mississippi hoping to be the first Europeans to discover
the river's source and the fabled Northwest Passage, the all -
water route to the Far East. They were part of an expedition
headed by the explorer Robert Cavelier, Sieur de la Salle. De
la Salle, however, had been called back from his base camp
near Peoria, Illinois, to Montreal, Canada. The Dakota did
not give the Frenchmen time to contemplate their landing
site, as they destroyed the Frenchmen' canoes and hurried
overland to their villages around Mille Lacs Lake.
On July 1, 1680, the Dakota, taking the Frenchmen
along, left their villages to hunt buffalo in southwestern
Minnesota. Traveling in small groups, they rendezvoused at
the Rum River's mouth, at what is now Anoka. Hennepin
and Auguelle received permission to continue downstream
to find de la Salle, who was to have sent supplies and rein-
forcements. Accault stayed with the hunters. As they pad-
11
dled with the current, they came to the great falls of the
Mississippi, which Hennepin named for his patron saint,
Anthony of Padua. Here they witnessed a Dakota ceremony
to Oanktehi, the spirit of the falls. The Dakota pleaded for
safe passage and success in their battles and headed down-
stream. The Frenchmen and some Dakota continued down -
river well past the mouth of the St. Croix, but did not find
de la Salle. The parry then headed back to Mille Lacs. Just
below the St. Croix, they met Daniel Greysolon, Sieur du
Luth (who later claimed he rescued them). In late
September, the Frenchmen left the Dakota.'
The encounter between the Dakota and the French
marked a new epoch in the history of the upper Mississippi
and in the history of what is now the Twin Cities metropoli-
tan area. For 10,000 years Native Americans had had the
river to themselves. From March 1680 forward, Europeans
and then Americans would increasingly define human inter-
action and the river's physical and ecological character. The
Dakota and their predecessors left many historically impor-
tant places telling of their presence. Europeans and
Americans would begin adding their own places.
Transformed though it is, the place below Dayton Bluff
where Hennepin, Accault and Auguelle landed is the first of
these and deeply historic (Figure 1).
This historic resources study focuses on the archeologi-
cal and historic resources in that part of the Twin Cities
FIG URE 2. 71e 72 -mile -long Mississippi National River and Recreation
Area extends frorn the confluence of the Crow and Mississippi Rivers at
Dayton and Ramsey, south to the Vermillion River bottoms in Ravenna
Township, just below Hastings.
Lill NNEAP-CLIS
r
a^
L
f4
t � � W.,
f
Mississipp] National River and Recreation Area
FMLWlkllff
04 -W -F
F.MEIWP,P
!
12
metropolitan area now included in the Mississippi National
River and Recreation Area. This 72 -mile -long, National
Park Service corridor extends from the confluence of the
Crow and Mississippi Rivers at Dayton and Ramsey, south
to the Vermillion River bottoms in Ravenna Township, just
below Hastings (Figure 2). It also extends four miles up the
Minnesota River valley. The corridor covers some 54,000
acres that are filled with places and stories of local, region-
al, national, and even international significance.
Congress established the Mississippi National River and
Recreation Area (MNRRA) as a unit of the National Park
System (NPS) on November 18, 1988 (Public Law 100-696).
In doing so, Congress stated: "(1) The Mississippi River
Corridor within the Saint Paul -Minneapolis Metropolitan
Area represents a nationally significant historical, recreation-
al, scenic, cultural, natural, economic, and scientific
resource." And, "(2) There is a national interest in the preser-
vation, protection, and enhancement of these resources for
the benefit of the people of the United States. "Z This study
expands the story of the MNRRA corridor's significance. It
also identifies and provides the context for many sites of local
and regional significance, sites that illustrate processes and
events that tell much about our national development.
Acknowledging the importance of the corridor's cultur-
al resources, the Mississippi River Coordinating Commission
(a MNRRA planning commission established by Public Law
100-696 and which sunset in November 1998) dedicated
three of its six guiding purposes to the identification, preser-
vation and enhancement of such resources.
"PURPOSE. Preserve, enhance, and interpretarcheologi-
cal, ethnographic, and historic resources."
"PURPOSE. Improve the public's understanding of the
river and promote public stewardship of its resources."
"PURPOSE. Recognize and strengthen people's relation-
ships with the riveras a dynamicpart of ourheritage, our
quality of life, and our legacy forfuture generations."'
13
The significance of historical and cultural resources in the
first purpose is clear. Understanding the river better and
caring for its resources will follow from knowing the river's
history and the role various places and sites have played in
that history. likewise, knowing the river's history, knowing
what "a dynamic part of our heritage" it has been, will lead
more people to care for it and realize what a legacy it is and
will continue to be.
Within the NPS, a historic resources study is done for
each unit of the National Park system. According to NPS
guidance, "A historic resource study provides a historical
overview of a park or region and identifies and evaluates the
park's cultural resources within historic contexts." Historic
context defines a site's significance. This study cannot pro-
vide the specific context for every historic site in the corri-
dor; there are far too many. The goal is to offer general con-
texts in which we can place most of the corridor's sites.
Some contexts are more thoroughly examined than others.
The historic resources study is also supposed to "syn-
thesize all available cultural resources information from all
disciplines in a narrative designed to serve managers, plan-
ners, interpreters, cultural resource specialists, and interest-
ed public as a reference for the history of the region and the
resources within the park." To gather all available cultural
resources information for the MNRRA corridor and synthe-
size it will take many years. We have compiled an inventory
of all known archeological and historic sites within the corri-
dor as of January 1998, which will be available from the
Minnesota Historic Preservation Office on a need to know
basis. Historic preservation law protects specific site loca-
tions, but they are generally available to planners and cultur-
al resources specialists as needed. The Minnesota Historical
Society's Historic Preservation Office is the repository for
site locations. Each chapter of this study provides a reference
for the history of the region and the corridor and offers both
specific and general information on the corridor's resources.
Overall, the study is written for a general audience.
Chapter 1, literally and figuratively, establishes the
foundation of the MNRRA corridor's history, for the corri-
x
x
dor's geologic history has closely defined its human history.
This chapter explains why the Mississippi River has three
dramatically different reaches in the corridor. The upper
reach runs from St. Anthony Falls north to Dayton and
Ramsey. Here the prairie used to run up to the river. No
imposing bluffs line the riverbanks. No sprawling flood-
plain spreads across the valley floor. Below the falls down
to St. Paul, the Mississippi enters its most confined reach on
the entire river. This stretch is known as the gorge. Here
the bluffs crowd in against the river, allowing little room for
a floodplain. Below St. Paul the bluffs get higher and spread
apart, hinting at the force cmeated by the glacial River
Warren as it sculpted the Minnesota River Valley and the
Mississippi River Valley below the Minnesota River's mouth.
Here, surviving fragments of the broad floodplain are eco-
logically rich. In some places along the corridor, geologic
layers, millions of years old, lay exposed to see and touch.
As the last glaciers retreated, Native Americans began
occupying the MNRRA corridor. While little evidence of
their earliest presence remains, there is enough to say they
were here. Chapter 2 reviews over 12,000 years of Native
American history. Important archeological sites exist within
the MNRRA corridor that provide glimpses of life along the
Mississippi before Europeans arrived. The burial mounds on
Dayton Bluff occupy one of the most dramatic settings in
the corridor. Excavated in the nineteenth century, the
mounds contained artifacts associated with the well-known
and widespread Hopewell Culture (belonging to the Middle
Woodland Era, which dated 2,000 to 1,500 years before the
present (B.P.)). The Institute for Minnesota Archaeology
Consulting wrote Chapters 1 and 2 on contract.
Native American life and the Mississippi River's ecosys-
tems in the MNRRA corridor would change dramatically as
Europeans and Americans entered the region. After Father
Hennepin's visit in 1680, French fur traders spread quickly
through the region, followed later by British and American
explorers and fur traders. Traders introduced guns and
other goods that upset the balance of power. They induced
the Chippewa, Dakota and other tribes to focus on the
beaver, muskrat and other fur bearing animals, changing in
fundamental ways their traditional economies and spurring
the decimation of many species. The most striking changes
would come after the Americans established their sovereign-
ty in 1815. In only 3 6 years, the Americans forced most of
the Dakota out of the MNRRA corridor. Covered in Chapter
3, the events of this era (1680-1851) represent national
and international events and processes.
In 1823 the Virginia became the first steamboat to
paddle up the Mississippi River from St. Louis to St. Paul.
In doing so, it signaled a new era. Now traders and settlers
could enter the region much more quickly and in greater
numbers. As the Dakota and Chippewa lost their lands in
the Treaties of 1837 and 1851, pioneers swiftly moved in.
The Mississippi was the settlers' primary highway from and
to the rest of the world, and they began calling for naviga-
tion improvements before the Civil War, with little success.
Following the war, as railroads expanded across the river
and throughout the region, settlers demanded navigation
improvements to provide competition and hopefully reduce
railroad rates. Their successful efforts to win navigation
projects tie the Twin Cities and the MNRRA corridor to large
regional and national events. For this reason and because
these projects would physically and ecologically transform
the Mississippi River more than any force since the glaciers,
this study devotes two chapters (4 and 5) to navigation
improvements.
In 1866 Congress authorized the Corps of Engineers
to begin dredging, removing snags and clearing trees back
from the river's banks. While this work helped, it was not
enough to make the Mississippi a reliable highway for com-
merce. Responding to a national movement for railroad rate
control and regional efforts to make the river a competitive
alternative to railroads, Congress authorized the 4'/2 -foot
channel in 1878. To achieve this depth, the Corps used
wing dams and dosing dams. The wing dams, made of rock
and brush, projected into the river from the shoreline. They
focused the river's current into a single channel, like the
nozzle on a garden hose being tightened down, so it could
14
scour away sandbars. Closing dams blocked side channels,
directing all available water to the main channel. By 1906
channel constriction (as the Engineers called this work) had
radically altered the river's landscape and ecosystems from
St. Paul to St. Louis. By 1907, the Corps had completed the
Meeker Island Lock and Dam and had begun work on Lock
and Dam No. 1. These dams, both above St. Paul, would
change the river's flow and appearance up to St. Anthony
Falls. Chapter 4 examines the movements for the various
navigation projects and the effect these projects had on
the river.
Navigation boosters did not stop with these projects.
In 1907, they convinced Congress to authorize the 6 -foot
channel project. Under this project the Corps added more
wing dams and closing dams, raised the height of old dams,
and extended some wing dams farther into the channel. The
river between Hastings and St. Paul became one of the most
intensely constricted reaches on the upper Mississippi.
Still, railroads drew traffic away from the river. So naviga-
tion boosters pushed for more locks and dams. Congress
again responded to the calls for navigation improvement. In
1917, the Corps completed Lock and Dam No. 1 near the
Minneapolis -St. Paul border, and in 1930, the Corps com-
pleted Lock and Dam No. 2 at Hastings. These dams perma-
nently changed the river's physical and ecological character.
While Lock and Dam 1 allowed boats and barges to reach St.
Anthony Falls, Minneapolis navigation boosters had long
hoped to get the boats above the falls, where terminals
would not be hemmed in by the bluffs of the gorge. The
Upper Harbor Project fulfilled the city's dream. Under this
project, the Corps finished the Lower St. Anthony Falls Lock
and Dam in 1956 and the Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock in
1963. Chapter 5 examines the history of these projects.
The most dramatic physical and ecological changes in
the Mississippi River occurred from St. Anthony Falls down-
stream. Private interests, however, built one important
structure above the falls. Completed in 1914, the Coon
Rapids Dam has a unique history and physically segments
the upper corridor. The dam lies at river mile (RM) 866.3,
is
approximately 167, miles above St. Anthony Falls (RM
85 3.9). To build the dam, the Northern Mississippi Power
Company established a camp, a "little city," on the
Mississippi's east bank in 1913. "Streets were laid out, a
store, clubhouse, hospital, office buildings, school, dormito-
ries, new houses, carpenters shops and storehouses were
built." As the city met and exceeded the prediction of 1,000
workers, the company added a movie theater, dance hall and
billiard parlor.' Chapter 5 looks briefly at this history, as
well.
St. Anthony Falls anchors the MNRRA corridor's
national significance. The only large cataract on the
Mississippi River, St. Anthony was a place of spirituality
and power to Native Americans. To early explorers it
became a "landmark in the wilderness."s To settlers it repre-
sented a different kind of power, a power that when cap-
tured would become the economic foundation of a milling
center to rival any back East. In this role, St. Anthony
would make Minneapolis into the nation's leading lumber
and flour milling center. Chapter 6 examines the history of
St. Anthony Falls from its birth in St. Paul over 12,000
years ago through its heyday as a timber and flour milling
hub to its abandonment after 1930.
Chapter 7 outlines the MNRRA corridor's economic
development from flour and timber milling to brick making
and beer brewing. It also surveys the development of the
corridor's multi -modal transportation system and how that
system changed the Mississippi and the relation of the area's
people to the river. Unlike Chapter 6, which focused on eco-
nomic development at St. Anthony Falls, Chapter 7 looks at
the growth of business and industry from Dayton and
Ramsey to Hastings. The MNRRA corridor's economic histo-
ry is far too broad and varied to be covered in depth in any
one chapter. The purpose of this chapter is to provide an
overview of significant events and developments.
Flour and timber milling were important not only at
the falls; most communities in the corridor had mills during
their earliest years. Flour and timber milling were not the
only regionally and nationally significant businesses. At
x
least three nationally recognized beers had their start in
Minneapolis and St. Paul. Grain trading and the stockyards
in St. Paul also attracted or yielded nationally recognized
firms such as Cargil, Peavey, Swift, Armour, Cudahy, and
Wilson.
Flour and lumber milling, grain shipping, the stock-
yards, brewing, and other industries depended upon the
river, at least initially. The river's geologic history defined
where these businesses located. Millers used the river for
transportation and power and to carry their wastes away.
Shippers depended upon the river to haul their grain or to
provide an alternative to railroads as a way to keep rates
down. The stockyards, to the chagrin of people downstream
and to the detriment of the river's ecosystems, cast animal
wastes into the Mississippi. And brewers used the valley's
natural sandstone caves or excavated their own tunnels and
establish the Mississippi National River and Recreation
Area. From the glacial River Warren to the latest lock and
dam, this area harbors places with stories so rich and impor-
tant they define who we are as a people, where we have
come from, what we have to celebrate, and what we painful-
ly cannot forget. The remnants of Native American villages,
early European and American sites, and existing structures
are more than archeological artifacts, wood, concrete or
steel. They embody the local, regional and national trends
or events that gave birth to them. They tell stories about the
dreams and desires people in the Midwest have harbored
caverns into the bluffs to store their beer. All of these
since the region's beginnings and about how those dreams
o aspects of economic history are discussed in Chapter 7.
and desires shaped the region and reshaped the river.
Chapter 8 focuses on the process of urban growth in
The Mississippi National Riverand Recreation Area,
w the MNRRA corridor. It examines what towns began where,
0
National Park Service and the St. Paul District, Corps of
when and why. It is not and cannot be a history of every
Engineers jointly produced this study. The study fulls
W community, every riverfront neighborhood, along the
important historic preservation requirements forboth agencies
MNRRA corridor. Urban history in the MNRRA corridor is
and will help both manage the Mississippi River better.
intimately tied to the history presented in preceding chap-
ters. Geology and geography, the Native American presence,
exploration and early military objectives, navigation
improvements and economic activities all played a role in
determining where towns located, how fast they grew, and
how they related to the river. So the corridor's urban histo-
ry draws on all these stories.
Some chapters in this study are more complex than oth-
ers, depending upon your background. Chapter 1, on
MNRRA's geology, and Chapter 2, on Native American pre-
history, present many terms and information unfamiliar to
most readers. We have tried to soften the jargon, but some is
necessary. You do not need to read this study from beginning
to end. However, the early chapters provide a foundation
upon which subsequent developments make more sense.
The results of this study reaffirm Congress' decision to
16
twi",- Pf- 9ns Wy,,
A Historic Resources Study of the Mississippi
National River and Recreation Area
FIGURE 1. What the Glacial River Warren Falls might have looked tike in St. Pant 12,000 years ago. Gustav Grunewat, Horseshoe Falls from below High Bank. Fine Arts
Museums of San Francisco. Gift of John Davis Hatch, V, in memory of John Davis Hatch, A. LA., architect of San Francisco, 1996.52.2.
The Geology of the MNRRA Corridor
Thomas Madigan • Hemisphere Field Services, Inc.
his chapter is about foundations. As subse-
quent chapters show, landforms created thou-
sands to millions of years ago shaped the cor-
ridor's development. Native American villages, early
American settlements, milling sites, locks and dams, rail-
roads, roads and modern urban expansion overlay or
responded to ancient geologic processes. A cursory glance at
the present-day Mississippi River valley reveals that the geo-
logic processes operating during the valley's formation were
much different from those of today. This chapter summa-
rizes the current knowledge regarding the physical history
of the Mississippi River valley. It includes a brief introduc-
tion to some of the early studies of the valley's geology, an
overview of the valley's geologic configuration, and a sum-
mary of geologic events responsible for the valley's appear-
ance today.
The Mississippi River winds more than 2,300 miles
across the heart of the nation on its course to the Gulf of
Mexico. In Minnesota, the river flows over 660 miles from
its source at Lake Itasca through bogs and spruce forests in
the glaciated northern region, across fertile agricultural
fields in the central portion of the state, then southeastward
through scenic bluff country. Along this course the river's
character varies dramatically, due to the geologic events.
The Mississippi River, within the MNRRA corridor
(Figure 2), cuts through a sequence of sedimentary rocks,
21
revealing a geologic history spanning over 5 00 million
years. Spectacular bedrock bluffs are common along the
river between St. Anthony Falls and Hastings. The Crow
River, which marks the corridor's northern boundary, occu-
pies an ancient glacial river channel that drained into the
Mississippi. Between Dayton and Minneapolis, the river
has developed on thick layers of sediment deposited during
the last glacial era. Glacial sediment borders the river south
of Dayton and large deposits of sand and gravel form flat -
lying terraces along both sides of the river south to the con-
fluence of the Minnesota River. Below Minneapolis, the
Mississippi is cut into flat -lying, 5 70- to 45 0 -million -year-
old Paleozoic sedimentary rocks. Throughout the stretch
from Dayton to the Minnesota River, the valley is relatively
narrow and floodplain development limited.
Near Fort Snelling, the Minnesota and Mississippi
Rivers join, and consequently the Mississippi valley
becomes much wider. Glacial River Warren, predecessor to
the Minnesota River, carved out the river's wide valley, as it
carried the meltwater pouring from glacial Lake Agassiz,
between 11,800 and 9,200 years before the present (B.P.).
Since that time, sand, silt, and clay have been filling the val-
ley, forming a complex mosaic of landforms across the
floodplain.
Downstream from the confluence, the Mississippi
heads northeast toward downtown St. Paul, bordered on
x
• •4
�l ■�
-h-
FIG URE 2. The Mississippi National River and Recreation Area located
in the Twin Cities metropolitan area.
both sides by glacial terraces lying more than 100 feet
above the floodplain. In this reach, glaciers did not erode
the bedrock subsurface as severely. Therefore, glacial sedi-
ments are thin and terraces developed over the bedrock sur-
face, unlike the braided outwash types occurring upstream.
Going south, however, the glacial deposits form a belt of
hummocky topography containing numerous depressions
and lakes, typical of a recently glaciated landscape.
Just past downtown St. Paul, the Mississippi makes a
wide arc and turns southward. At this point the river
enters its preglacial valley, where spectacular bluffs expose
the ancient bedrock As the river winds southward toward
Cottage Grove, the valley widens dramatically, due to ero-
sion that occurred before the last glaciation. During the
last glacial maximum (the farthest the glaciers advanced),
this part of the river valley filled with sand and gravel
deposits forming a broad level surface at an elevation of
about 120 feet above the modern floodplain.
Today the Vermillion River joins the Mississippi at
Hastings, forming a large alluvial fan and diverting the
channel of the Mississippi to the northeast. Alluvium accu-
mulating on the floodplain near the confluence has formed
a delta in the Mississippi that has been migrating down-
stream for the last 9,500 years. Backwater lakes and
sloughs, meandering secondary channels, and small terrace
remnants characterize the floodplain at the southern end of
the MNRRA corridor. This area was once part of Lake Pepin,
the large river lake downstream, and at one time may have
extended up to St. Paul.
Early Investigations
The first studies into the geologic history of Minnesota
began in the 18 70s under Newton H. Winchell, at the
newly formed Minnesota Geological and Natural History
Survey. Winchell, with the aid of Warren Upham, began
mapping and describing the surface geology in central
Minnesota_ Most of the surface features in the area devel-
oped in response to continental glaciation during the last
two million years (Quaternary Period), and their form pro-
vided clues to the processes that helped shape them.
However, because of the scarcity of subsurface information
regarding glacial stratigraphy and lack of adequate base
maps covering the area, a complete understanding of the
complex glacial history was never fully realized.
Although the details of Minnesota's geologic history
were not fully known, perhaps some of the most important
investigations into the history of geologic development of
the Mississippi River were completed at this time. Winchell
was the first to address the retreat of St. Anthony Falls from
its former position at the confluence of the Mississippi and
Minnesota Rivers upstream to its present location.' Using
the final ice retreat from Minnesota as a basis he estimated
that it took approximately 7,800 years for the waterfall to
retreat, a figure that has proven remarkably close to current
estimates. Upham conducted a detailed study of glacial
Lake Agassiz, whose outlet stream, glacial River Warren,
22
had a profound effect on the Mississippi River valley's shape
and configuration. His work led to the publication of a huge
monograph detailing Lake Agassiz's development and
drainage.'
The Minnesota Geological and Natural History Survey
officially ended in the early 1900s following the retirement
of Winchell and Upham. Shortly thereafter, Frank Leverett,
with the aid of Frederick Sardeson, began studying the gla-
cial history of Minnesota_ Leverett and Sardeson used much
of Upham's earlier work in their reevaluation of Minnesota's
surface geology.' Leverett first recognized that multiple gla-
cial advances formed the region's glacial deposits, and each
subsequent advance created numerous deposits, containing
distinct landforms.' The work completed during this time
period was a major step forward in recognizing the complexi-
ty of the Upper Midwest's glacial history.
In addition to his work in glacial geology, Sardeson
mapped and described fossils contained in the bedrock out-
cropping along the Mississippi River valley in southeastern
Minnesota_' Sardeson also reevaluated Winchell's original
estimate of retreat for St. Anthony Falls by considering the
geometry and thickness of the limestone cap rock' His cal-
culation of 8,000 years is even closer than Winchell's to the
current estimate of 10,000 years, which is based on radio-
carbon dating.'
W. S. Cooper evaluated the sequence of glaciation in
central Minnesota and its relation to the formation of the
Mississippi River during Late Wisconsin and postglacial
time." His work detailed the origin of the Anoka Sand Plain
in east central Minnesota, which formed when an advancing
ice lobe diverted the Mississippi River's flow southward. A
portion of the MNRRA corridor, between Dayton and
Fridley, occupies the sand plain.
From the early 1950s to the 1980s, many studies of
Minnesota's glacial geologic history were conducted. Herb
Wright, Jr., his colleagues, and students at the University of
Minnesota completed most of them. Each study shed new
light on the complexities of the glacial sequence in
Minnesota and how the glacial sequence relates to develop-
23
ment of the Mississippi River valley.
More recently, the Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul
District has sponsored geomorphological investigations
along various portions of the Mississippi River valley in
conjunction with cultural resource investigations. The
studies have focused on detailed mapping of surficial land -
forms within the floodplain environment in an effort to
predict the location of buried archaeological sites. On the
basis of information from these studies, it has become
apparent that the Mississippi River floodplain is a dynamic
environment with an ever-changing set of resources.
Archaeological site distribution is a function of resource
availability during the time of occupation, and geomorphic
processes operating on the floodplain influence the poten-
tial for site preservation.
General Geology
Bedrock Geology • Southeastern Minnesota, wherein the
MNRRA corridor lies, is composed of gently dipping sedi-
mentary rocks that form a plateau. The Mississippi River
and its tributaries have eroded this plateau extensively.
Because glacial deposits have buried the bedrock, few out-
crops appear along the Mississippi River above St. Anthony
Falls. However, deep incision by the river below the falls
has exposed the bedrock in the valley walls. The rock for-
mations were deposited during the Cambrian and
Ordovician periods (5 70-43 8 million years BY), when
shallow seas covered southeastern Minnesota and the sur-
rounding region. Sand accumulated along the shoreline in
beaches and bars, where wave action constantly reworked
it. Silt and clay formed in mud flats or settled out of rela-
tively quiet water offshore. Calcium carbonate accumulat-
ed from the remains of biologic organisms in coral reefs and
as large layers on the sea floor. The sediments eventually
became compacted and cemented to form sandstone, shale,
limestone, and dolomite.
The high bluffs along the river, locally averaging from
100 to 400 feet in relief, have resisted weathering and ero-
sion. Limestone and dolomite units are strong and usually
x
form steep cliffs adjacent to tributary stream valleys. Shale
and poorly cemented sandstone are easily eroded, forming
more gentle slopes along the valley sides. Glacial processes
removed much of the bedrock in the Twin Cities area. Ice
followed topographic low area in the bedrock, carving out
valleys during advance across the area. Stream erosion and
deposition also played a major role. Glacial meltwater,
flowing from the retreating ice masses, cut the valleys wider
and deeper. After the glacial meltwater slowed and disap-
peared, the valleys gradually began filling with sediment
derived from the erosion of upland surfaces.
Bedrock has been an important factor in determining
the valley width, the location of glacial terraces, and the
course of the Mississippi River. Valley width is controlled
largely by the sedimentary properties of the bedrock.
Where the river intersects more resistant carbonate units,
the valley is narrow. Where poorly cemented sandstone
units occur, stream flow has more effectively eroded the val-
ley, resulting in a much greater width. Consequently, late
glacial outwash terraces generally occur on top of carbonate
units and occupy areas where erosion cut away the sand-
stone. Also, floodplain development is more extensive in
areas that have greater valley width.
Each bedrock unit has a distinct set of physical charac-
teristics setting it apart from adjacent units. From oldest to
youngest, the bedrock units are: the Jordan Sandstone,
Prairie du Chien Group, St. Peter Sandstone, Glenwood
Shale, Platteville limestone, Decorah Shale, and Galena
Group (Figure 3). A brief description of the major bedrock
formations outcropping in the MNRRA corridor is presented
below. The Jordan Sandstone (515-505 million years B.P.)
is the oldest bedrock unit outcropping within the park
boundaries. Exposures are few, however, and occur only
along Spring Lake near Nininger Township in the southern
portion of the MNRRA corridor. The unit is a generally
white, massive to well -bedded, commonly cross -bedded
sandstone. Total thickness of the Jordan Sandstone is
unknown, but it maybe as much as 80 to 90 feet in the
area around Cottage Grove."'
Overlying the Jordan Sandstone is the Ordovician
Prairie du Chien Group (505-458 million years BY), which
appears along the Mississippi River channel near South St.
Paul, and in the bluffs at Hastings, forming an extensive flat -
lying plateau across the upland areas. The Prairie du Chien
is divided into two formations on the basis of variations in
sedimentary properties. At the base of the group, the Oneota
Dolomite is a light gray to buff tan, medium -grained, thinly -
layered to massive dolomite. Lying above the Oneota is the
Shakopee Formation, which consists of two members. The
New Richmond member is a light gray, fine-grained
dolomitic to glauconitic sandstone, and the Willow River
member is a bluish gray dolomite similar in nature to the
Oneota dolomite. Total thickness of the group ranges from
100 to 300 feet throughout the MNRRA corridor."
One of the most extensively exposed bedrock units in
the upper Mississippi River valley is the St. Peter Sandstone
(458-455 million years B.P.). Exposures of this rock type
are common in bluffs throughout the northern half of the
MNRRA corridor. The St. Peter Sandstone consists of white
to yellow, medium -grained, friable quartz sand. Because of
its poorly cemented nature, the sandstone is easily eroded.
On the basis of information obtained from wells in the area,
total thickness of the St. Peter is approximately 150 feet.
The thinnest bedrock unit outcropping in the bluffs of
the Mississippi River is a greenish gray, thinly bedded,
sandy shale called the Glenwood Formation (45 5 million
years B.P.). On average, the Glenwood ranges from 3 to 5
feet in thickness, and in some places is entirely absent. The
Glenwood Shale, when present, is easily identified as a
small seam of highly weathered bedrock between the under-
lying St. Peter Sandstone and overlying Platteville
Limestone.
Possibly the most recognized bedrock formation, and
one that forms relatively flat-topped benches and mesas along
the Mississippi River, is the Platteville Limestone (455-454
million years BY). In general, the Platteville is a light gray to
buff tan, thinly bedded, dolomitic limestone. Because of its
highly resistant nature, the limestone serves as a caprock that
24
S#rak raphk
Nomenclature
Galeria Plateau
Pl evillle'Mese
Prairie du Chien Plateau
Duk" RmW;on
++non
F+Oefe wim
pmw
�tikkk\k�k3�k1�kk3kk4k�k���k�kk��kk�kk��kk�tik�ki\
1fAri$y1�i�
FDrmaton
i\\i\4k\ik\ii\ kti kk kk� k�.�Lk kkk k kkkkkk
V1211�
k\\k3\k\ZZ L.% \\�
A
Rlath rite formmbn
\�\\�\\k�k�k\kkk3kkkkkti3tklkktitik�h}1��11��1���i��1
Galeria Plateau
Pl evillle'Mese
Prairie du Chien Plateau
ML
Valley F4,11
a8pbsil:q
FIGURE 3. Generalized bedrock stratigraphy of the upper Mississippi River valley in southeastern Minnesota. Redrawn from Hobbs.'
25
St.
++non
�tikkk\k�k3�k1�kk3kk4k�k���k�kk��kk�kk��kk�tik�ki\
��k�kk��k�lkk��k�kkkklkkk kkk\kkitikkkti�kk}�kkkkkk
i\\i\4k\ik\ii\ kti kk kk� k�.�Lk kkk k kkkkkk
F' f,h
k\\k3\k\ZZ L.% \\�
A
Fkkkkkkkkkk44kkk�kktik�.�ikk�kkkikkkkkk
C�y��yy,�.y
FonTa+I n
\�\\�\\k�k�k\kkk3kkkkkti3tklkktitik�h}1��11��1���i��1
����k1��1��i�h�1��1111ti111ti�1ti31\k��11 1\\1
\}\�\\fit\kk\k\kk\\\moi\\�ti��t
tilX��������� y
bonbon &
S�ndepor�$
�
Emu claire
3kkk\kkkkk�\k�ik�Yi�kk��ki�k��k���k��k��kk�ki\kklkkk4
r
\\\i\\ktkkk3kk3kk�4k�Mk�k4�k4�kk��kl�kk�kkklkkl�kkt�;
ML
Valley F4,11
a8pbsil:q
FIGURE 3. Generalized bedrock stratigraphy of the upper Mississippi River valley in southeastern Minnesota. Redrawn from Hobbs.'
25
x
is partially responsible for controlling the rate of retreat and
location of waterfalls within the MNRRA corridor.
Lying above the Platteville is the Decorah Shale (454
million years BY), a greenish gray, calcareous shale contain-
ing thin limestone interbeds. The lateral extent of this
bedrock unit across the area is limited, but it does outcrop
in bluffs along the Mississippi River in St. Paul above
Pickerel Lake.
The uppermost bedrock unit exposed in the MNRRA cor-
ridor is the Galena Group (454-450 million years BY), con-
sisting of three members: Cummingsville Formation; Prosser
Formation, and Stewartville Formation. Only the lower part
of the Cummingsville is exposed within the MNRRA corridor
(in southeastern Minnesota the entire Galena Group forms an
extensive plateau across the uplands).
SudYcial Geology • Surficial geologic deposits occurring
within the MNRRA corridor can be separated into two gener-
al categories on the basis of their relation to the geologic his-
tory of the area. The first group, nonglacial deposits, con-
sists of sediments that are accumulating in upland areas and
along the river floodplain in response to the present geomor-
phic agents operating on the landscape. The second group,
deposits related to glaciation, consists of sediments that
were deposited during the advance and retreat of glaciers
across Minnesota.
Nonglacial surficial deposits consist of three main
types: organic sediments; river alluvium, and colluvium.
Each deposit has a distinct environment of deposition, spa-
tial location, and morphological expression on the landscape.
Organic deposits consist of plant material and fine-
grained sediment in sloughs, lakes, and poorly drained
depressions occupying the floodplain, or on upland sur-
faces. Plant litter continually collects at the surface, trap-
ping silt and clay brought in by wind or fluvial activity.
Soils formed from organic deposits are dark colored, water
saturated, and have a mucky consistency.
Alluvium is the accumulation of sand, silt, and clay
deposited by streams on riverbeds, floodplain, and alluvial
fans. The deposits often exhibit complex sedimentary prop-
erties and display a highly variable internal stratification.
Individual landforms created by stream processes include
point bars, cutbanks, natural levees, terraces, and numer-
ous backwater features.
Colluvium is the unsorted mixture of weathered
bedrock in a matrix of sand, silt, and day flanking the hill
slopes and cutbanks along the river valley. Colluvial
deposits generally consist of two units: an upslope unit
consisting of small boulders in a matrix of sediment eroded
from upland areas, and a downslope unit containing large
masses of bedrock slumped off the valley wall in a matrix of
fine-grained sediment.
The second group of surficial deposits, those related to
glaciation, consists of outwash and till deposited during
the Great Ice Age. Glacial till is the unsorted mixture of
pebbles, cobbles, and boulders in a matrix of sediment
deposited directly from glacial ice. The compositions of
rock types found in the till provide cues about the source
of the deposits. Outwash typically consists of sand and
gravel laid down by glacial meltwater streams flowing
across the surface. Many outwash deposits consist of broad
terraces that were once large braided streams draining the
front of an ice sheet.
The complexity of the surficial landscape within the
MNRRA corridor reflects the geologic processes operating
on the surface throughout time. Many of the surficial geo-
logic features formed in response to continental glaciation,
which had a direct impact on the development of natural
resources that are part of the present-day landscape.
Glacial History of the Mississippi River
The upper Mississippi River valley has experienced a complex
series of geological events since the beginning of the
Quaternary Period. The Quaternary Period is divided into
two formal geologic periods: the Pleistocene and Holocene
Epochs. The Pleistocene, known as the Great Ice Age, span
from two million years to 10,000 years B.P. Four major ice
advances are known to have taken place during the Great Ice
26
Age, and each has been given a name based on the geographic
location of characteristic glacial deposits associated with the
advance. For simplicity, the following discussion ignores the
first three named glacial advances and uses the term pre -
Wisconsin for glacial geologic events occurring prior to
35,000 years B.P. The Wisconsin Glaciation, spanning from
about 35,000 to 10,000 years B.P., dramatically altered the
landscape of Minnesota. The Holocene, or Recent Epoch, rep-
resents the last 10,000 years of geologic time.
Most of the present-day landforms developed during
the multiple glacial episodes that occurred during the
Wisconsin Glaciation. In Minnesota the sequence of glacia-
tion had a direct impact on the development of the MNRRA
corridor. Therefore, an overview of the glacial history of
Minnesota is necessary to provide a context for discussing
geologic development of the river in the MNRRA corridor.
Pre -Wisconsin Glacial History • In Minnesota, early gla-
cial events within the valley have largely been obscured by
late -glacial and post -glacial events. However, exposures of
pre -Wisconsin drift occur at the surface in Washington and
Dakota Counties." Near the Mississippi River valley the
upland landscape consists of gently rolling hills topped by a
thin veneer of glacial drift or weathered bedrock residuum.
A system of well -integrated stream networks, forming a den-
dritic (branch -like) pattern across the region, drains the
uplands. Erosion along stream valleys has exposed a consid-
erable amount of bedrock.
It is uncertain when the upper Mississippi River valley
initially formed. However, on the basis of present geologic
evidence, deep cutting must have occurred during the early
Pleistocene." The presence of glacial till in southeastern
Minnesota, deposited during a pre -Wisconsin glacial
advance, supports the theory of an early Pleistocene begin-
ning.' The course of the upper Mississippi River along the
margin of the Driftiess Area of southeastern Minnesota is
believed to have been established during pre -Wisconsin
time when a glacial advance from the west displaced the
river eastward from central Iowa to its present position.
27
Researchers investigating stream valleys of the Driftiess
Area in southwestern Wisconsin suggest deep valley inci-
sion by streams also occurred during the early Pleistocene."
Wisconsin Glaciation (35,000-10,000 B.P.) • The early
Pleistocene history of the Mississippi River above St. Paul
has been obscured by late Wisconsin glacial events. The
course of the river north of St. Paul changed repeatedly dur-
ing the Pleistocene.16 Presumably each major glacial phase
was followed by the establishment of a new course for the
river, most of which joined the present course south of St.
Paul. Previously formed bedrock valleys were subsequently
filled with glacial sediment derived from the Superior Lobe
and Grantsburg Sublobe. The numerous lakes dotting the
landscape within the Twin Cities area resulted from
meltout of glacial ice blocks buried in the bedrock valleys
(Figure 4).
During the late Wisconsin maximum, the Superior
Lobe advanced down the axis of the Lake Superior basin
southeastward to its terminal position near Minneapolis
and St. Paul, while the Wadena and Rainy Lobes and
Brainerd Sublobe advanced across north -central Minnesota
(Figure 5a). This advance, known as the St. Croix phase of
the Superior Lobe, culminated approximately 15,500 years
B.P." Little is known about the nature of the advance; how-
ever, a detailed record of ice recession has been
documented."' The prominent St. Croix Moraine, a massive
accumulation of glacial sediment extending from the Twin
Cities northwestward to Little Falls, marks the terminus of
the lobe. It is unclear where the position of the Mississippi
River was at this time. The Mississippi River presently
occupies a prominent gap eroded through the St. Croix
Moraine. Most likely the river maintained its current posi-
tion below St. Paul by continued flow underneath the
advancing ice margin. Glacial outwash graded to terrace
deposits along the Mississippi River in southern
Washington County lends support to this hypothesis.
The St. Croix Moraine forms a northeastward trending,
rugged belt of landforms containing numerous hills and
ITWh fir
TVM
LaAr
,�mw
yWPP
+ MOWN Lair
r
L�
i a1�nEitie L i`
Ncw Brite
Lars lab
Ohr r�ao-
&CWJ f Ahe
vffii�dm
t7r remis
LWW j
Lake
N. L 416F
VdWy�x�r++rLod t7 *mb&O elk
'e' lis d tum LOW
N
am. � f�r►!.n
PWk Y
A PWA
hl dq % t
+ '
&As&mVFmaPJ
1
FIGURE 4. Map of preglacial bedrock valleys (solid Tines) in the linin Cites area, showing the location of present-day lakes developed by nieltout of buried
glacial ice. Discharge ofglacial meltwater and waterfall retreat are responsiblefor development ofIrresent valleys (dashed lines).
associated depressions. Glacial sediment deposited during
this advance consists of reddish -brown sandy till, outwash
sand and gravel, and ice -contact sands and gravel.
As the Superior Lobe retreated from the area, the
Mississippi and St. Croix Rivers acted as the major course
for the glacial meltwater. Outwash deposits filled both val-
leys between an elevation of 870 and 920 feet. Meltwater
streams subsequently excavated the outwash deposits dur-
ing a later glacial advance.
Numerous readvances, possibly surges, accompanied
the retreat of the Superior Lobe from the St. Croix
Moraine." Numerous features associated with the retreat-
ing ice, including moraines and associated meltwater chan-
nels, developed behind the moraine (Figure 5h). The
Mississippi River, in the central portion of the state, flowed
28
El
a) the St. Croix phase
c) deposition of eskers in tunnel valleys
FIGURE 5. Pliasesofglaciatio)iittMiutiesota. Takenfrom Mlgkt"
29
b) development of tunnel vallcys
L. kw 1 _ Y�
L AgAln T
s ten+
i" A4F4 Drw+ *
I
N�
d.
d) the Automba phase
x
along the western margin of the St. Croix Moraine, being
fed by tunnel valleys (discrete meltwater channels) devel-
oped underneath the retreating ice lobe. Retreat of ice far-
ther into the Lake Superior basin resulted in deposition of
long, sinuous ridges of sand and gravel (eskers) within the
tunnel valleys (Figure 5c).
The next major advance of the Superior Lobe, the
Automba phase, is marked by advance of the Superior Lobe
into the Mille Lacs region of east central Minnesota (Figure
5d). The extent of this advance is marked by the Mille Lacs
Moraine, which bounds the western edge of Mille Lacs Lake
in southeastern Crow Wing County, extending to the north-
east as the Wright and Cromwell Moraines and then as the
Highland Moraine along the north shore of Lake Superior.
The Automba phase is correlated with the Tiger Cat advance
in Wisconsin."' During the Tiger Cat advance, meltwater
from the Superior Lobe discharged through the St. Croix
River into the Mississippi River valley.
While the Superior Lobe stood at the Mille Lacs
Moraine, meltwater ponded along the northwestern margin
of the ice lobe, resulting in the formation of glacial lakes
Aitkin I and Upham I, which presumably drained along the
western end of the ice margin. The advance of the St. Louis
Sublobe across the area erased any shoreline features that
developed along these lakes. However, evidence for these
lakes is preserved in a thin, red and gray, stone -poor till
deposited by the St. Louis Sublobe after overriding the lake
plain. Any evidence for the location of the Mississippi
River channel in the area was destroyed by subsequent ice
movements; however, it is most likely that meltwater was
still channeled along the outer margin of the St. Croix
Moraine down to the Mississippi valley below St. Paul.
The Superior Lobe retreated from the Automba ice mar
gin into the Superior lowland, initiating the first stage of
glacial lake formation in the Superior basin. Glacial lake
sediments were deposited in a large body of open water,
which formed between the retreating Superior Lobe and
higher topography to the southwest. Fine-grained silt and
clay settled out of the melting ice mass, forming a continu-
ous blanket of sediment on the lake floor. The next advance
of the Superior Lobe overrode the lakebed during the Split
Rock phase, depositing a thin layer of reddish clay across
previously formed deposits. The Split Rock -Pine City phase
marks the readvance of the Superior Lobe to the Cloquet
Moraine and the overriding of the central portion of the St.
Croix Moraine by the Des Moines Lobe (Figure 5e, 5, fl.
Retreat of the Superior Lobe was followed by advance
of the Des Moines Lobe from the northwest during the Pine
City phase, which reached its maximum extent in central
Iowa about 14,000 years B.P. An end moraine near the city
of Des Moines marks the terminal position of the ice lobe.
During this advance, outwash channels were cut through
portions of the St. Croix Moraine, forming sand and gravel
deposits that reached the Mississippi River near Hastings.
The Grantsburg Sublobe, an offshoot of ice developed
from the Des Moines Lobe, advanced from the southwest
overriding the St. Croix Moraine between St. Cloud and St.
Paul, reaching its terminus near Grantsburg, Wisconsin, by
about 13,500 years B.P. (Figure 6). This short-lived
advance was responsible for altering the geologic develop-
ment of the Mississippi River valley in two important ways.
First, outwash coming off the advancing lobe filled the
Mississippi River valley with sand and gravel. The deposits
would later be entrenched by glacial meltwater forming a
series of flat -lying terraces between elevations of 800 and
820 feet along the valley. Second, advance of the lobe
blocked the southward drainage of the Mississippi, result-
ing in the formation of glacial Lake Grantsburg.
While the Grantsburg Sublobe occupied east central
Minnesota and west central Wisconsin, meltwater draining
south flowed into glacial Lake Grantsburg. A large delta
was formed near Spooner, Wisconsin, as sediment -laden
meltwater entered the head of the lake. The lake drained
down the St. Croix River, eventually reaching the
Mississippi River valley at Prescott, Wisconsin. As the
Grantsburg Sublobe retreated to the southwest, meltwater
drained around the outer (northeast) margin of the ice lobe,
reworking the former lake bed and forming the Anoka Sand
30
g.) Nickerson-Alborn phase
FIGURES. Phases of glaciation in Minnesota (continued). taken from Wright' 6
31
Q formation of the Anoka Sand Plain
L L"a4 S
L Agam9i t
MS rW h
'H
up"
golf
`. a,,h„ a
L C41 h
u
t4
7.
h.) drainage of glacial Lake Duluth
D e
� fake Grantsburg
FIG URE 6. Advance of the Grantsburg Sublobe, an offshoot of the Des Moines Lobe, overriding the St. Croix Moraine blocking southward drainage of the
Mississippi River, andformingglacial Lake Grantsburg. Drainage channels show paths taken by meltwater coming off the Grantsburg and Des Moines ice
lobes. Redrawn from Meyer et al.2'
32
Plain in east -central Minnesota (Figure 5, fl.
Farther south, retreat of the Des Moines Lobe was
punctuated by a number of readvances, forming a series of
discontinuous moraines in northern Iowa and southern
Minnesota. By 12,300 years B.P., the Grantsburg Sublobe
retreated back into Minnesota to join the Des Moines Lobe,
which was retreating up the Minnesota River valley. A large
braided meltwater stream developed along the retreating
Grantsburg ice margin, forming a continuous blanket of
sand and gravel along the present course of the Mississippi
River above its confluence with the Minnesota River. As ice
retreated further, the level of the Mississippi and Minnesota
Rivers was established at an elevation of about 810 feet in
the Twin Cities metropolitan area.
The last major glacial advance in Minnesota occurred
during the Nickerson-Alborn phase when the St. Louis
Sublobe, an eastward extension of the Des Moines Lobe,
invaded north central Minnesota, forming the Culver
Moraine. Retreat of the St. Louis Sublobe allowed glacial
lakes Aitkin and Upham II to develop, ponded between the
ice margin and the Culver moraine.
Lake Aitkin II most likely drained into Lake Upham II,
which eventually drained down the St. Louis and
Mississippi Rivers. At the same time, the Superior Lobe
readvanced to the Nickerson -Thomson Moraines in north-
eastern Minnesota (Figure 5g, 5h). The Nickerson Moraine
is marked by a belt of hummocky topography along the
Carlton -Pine County line between Moose Lake and Holyoke.
A broad outwash plain extends off the Nickerson Moraine
southward where it coalesces into a fairly well defined
channel along the Kettle River. The Kettle channel drained
meltwater into the St. Croix River and then down to the
Mississippi.
By 12,000 years B.P., all ice lobes that had previously
covered the surface of Minnesota were in full retreat. The
Des Moines Lobe was retreating rapidly northward up the
Minnesota River valley. Ice then readvanced a short dis-
tance to form the Big Stone Moraine in west -central
Minnesota about 11,900 years B.P. After the ice retreated
33
north of the divide that separates the Hudson Bay and
Mississippi drainages, glacial Lake Agassiz came into exis-
tence. In northeastern Minnesota, the Superior Lobe
retreated from the Nickerson ice margin into the Superior
Lowland, initiating the formation of glacial Lake Duluth.
Drainage of sediment -free meltwater from glacial Lakes
Agassiz and Duluth resulted in multiple downcutting
events within the Mississippi River valley. A number of
geologists have been active in working the drainage rela-
tionships of these lakes and their impact upon the land-
scape. Below is a summary of these works and how the
events associated with glacial lake drainage affected the
morphology of the upper Mississippi system.
Meltwater from Lake Agassiz drained down the River
Warren into the Mississippi River valley. River Warren was
named after G. K. Warren, the first commander of the St.
Paul District, Corps of Engineers. Above St. Paul, the
Mississippi River was flowing on top of the Platteville
Limestone, which resisted the river's erosive force. Below
St. Paul, the River Warren intercepted a preglacial bedrock
valley of the Mississippi River that was filled with outwash
up to the elevation of the Platteville Limestone. The dis-
charge of River Warren was more than adequate to carry the
sediment load supplied to it; therefore, the unconsolidated
outwash sediment was rapidly eroded from the preglacial
valley. Once the outwash was carried away, a waterfall
formed where the River Warren plunged over the Platteville
Limestone into the preglacial bedrock valley. The waterfall
was named River Warren Falls in honor of the mighty river
that was responsible for its formation.
Glacial ice, advancing again across the continental
divide, caused a build up of sediment within the River
Warren, the St. Croix, and presumably the Mississippi val-
leys approximately 11,700 years B.P. Glacial Lakes Agassiz
and Superior reformed after 11,500 years B.P. as the ice
again retreated beyond the continental drainage divide.
Discharge of meltwater out of the lakes established a fairly
active period of downcutting that lasted until approximate-
ly 10,800 years B.P.
x
One final advance of ice blocked eastern outlets and
caused renewed downcutting within the Mississippi valley
between 9,900 and 9,500 years B.P. This final episode is
the last time that meltwater from glacial lakes flowed down
the upper Mississippi River system north of Illinois. These
events played a vital role in the Holocene evolution of the
Mississippi valley.
Early Holocene (9,500-7,000 years B.P.) • The decrease
in discharge through the Mississippi River following the
drainage of glacial lakes and subsequent rerouting of melt-
water through northern and eastern outlets initiated a stage
of alluviation within the valley. The River Warren Falls
began retreating up the Mississippi valley, as water eroded
the soft St. Peter Sandstone that underlay limestone caprock
(Figure 4). Below St. Paul the valley had been cut far below
its present-day level, possibly up to 50 meters (about 163
feet) deep." In response to the change in base level, tribu-
tary streams initially cut their channels to reach the level of
the Mississippi. Sediments stored in tributary valleys were
soon transported into the Mississippi River, resulting in a
fairly active period of alluviation. More sediment entered
the Mississippi from its tributaries than the big river could
carry away. As a result, a number of tributaries built fan
deltas into the Mississippi River, deflecting its course and
altering the physiography of the floodplain.
A good example of a tributary delta occurs at the con-
fluence of the Mississippi River with the Chippewa River in
Pepin County, Wisconsin. The formation of the delta effec-
tively dams the Mississippi River, forming Lake Pepin.
Zumberge proposed that lake Pepin once extended upstream
to St. Paul, based on the existence of clay deposits found in
borings taken during the construction of the Robert Street
Bridge in St. Paul." Sediment entering the river above Lake
Pepin has built a delta within the Mississippi that is slowly
moving downstream. This delta begins at Hastings and
extends to the head of Lake Pepin, south of Red Wing.
Equilibrium between the Mississippi River and its trib-
utaries began to establish itself by 8,000 years B.P. By this
time, the River Warren Falls had reached the Minnesota
River valley, where it split into two parts. The River Warren
Falls continued to retreat up the Minnesota River valley an
additional two miles, where it intersected a buried valley of
the preglacial Mississippi died out. St. Anthony Falls devel-
oped at the confluence of the Minnesota River near Fort
Snelling and retreated up the valley of the Mississippi
(Figure 4).
Middle Holocene (7,000-3,500 yearsB.P) • Slow alluvi-
ation along the Mississippi River continued into the middle
Holocene. Vegetation was well established on upland areas
by this time. Therefore, the change in upper midwestern
rivers was most likely related to climatic effects on river dis-
charge rather than changes in vegetation "
Geomorphic processes acting in the valley were vari-
able along the entire stretch of the upper Mississippi River.
The upper reaches were characterized by vertical accretion
(built up) of sediment, while lateral channel migration and
incision into previously deposited sediment were occurring
in downstream reaches.
As the middle Holocene progressed, climatic changes
would again alter the processes acting within the valley.
Cooler temperatures and increased precipitation began to dom-
inate the regional climate, which may have initially increased
runoff. In response, active lateral channel migration and inci-
sion dominated fluvial processes acting in the valley.
Late Holocene (3,500 years B.P. -A.D. 1550) • Much of
the present-day surface morphology of the Mississippi River
floodplain is the result of fluvial activity occurring during
the late Holocene. However, fluvial processes varied with
location along the valley. Vertical accretion dominated vari-
ous portions of the valley, while lateral channel migration,
or cut and fill sequences, dominated other parts. As a
result, the appearance of floodplain features within the val-
ley varies, depending on location.
During the late Holocene, climate was still a major
driving force for geomorphic processes. The regional cli-
34
mate continued its trend toward cooler temperatures and
increased precipitation. By this time, vegetation and soils
were most likely well developed on landforms not subject to
inundation by floodwaters. Lateral channel migration, or
cut and fill cycles, dominated these portions of the valley.
Geomorphic studies conducted in various portions of
the upper Mississippi River valley indicate that the present-
day position of the river channel changed little during the
late Holocene." This realization is important for several
reasons. First, active fluvial processes would be confined to
a limited channel area. As a result, the potential for erosion
of landforms would be greatest near the active channel mar-
gin. Second, landforms within the floodplain away from
the main channel would be subject to vertical accretion of
sediment and preservation of natural features. This has
implications for both the environmental and cultural
resource records. Third, landforms that are topographically
higher along the valley margin would have been less prone
to flooding and the burial of previously developed surfaces.
It is difficult to assess the major changes that occurred
within the floodplain of the upper Mississippi River valley
during the late Holocene, without absolute chronological
dates. Many of the changes occurring within the area were
related to shifts in regional climatic patterns, which had a
direct influence on geomorphic processes. Vertical accretion
of sediment and forward movement of alluvial fans/deltas
dominated portions of the valley near the confluence of
tributary streams. Areas away from tributaries were most
likely subjected to lateral channel migration, resulting in
reworking of previously deposited sediment. Erosional
processes would have been dominant near the active chan-
nel, while constructional processes would have been active
in backwater areas on the floodplain.
A.D. 1550 -Present • Land clearing efforts for the devel-
opment of agriculture began during the mid -1800s within
and adjacent to the MNRRA corridor. Erosion of topsoil
from exposed fields increased the influx of sediment into
the Mississippi River, especially in areas near the confluence
35
of major tributary streams. Review of Mississippi River
Commission maps provides evidence of the changes that
have occurred." Accumulations of up to two meters of
post -settlement alluvium may occur on the floodplain in
the southern reaches of the MNRRA corridor.
With the increased awareness of soil erosion along the
land areas adjacent to the upper Mississippi valley and the
development of modern agricultural equipment, farmers
began to use improved farming techniques. By the 1930s
farmers increasingly practiced contour plowing, conserva-
tion tillage, and no -till planting. Some farmers left their
fields fallow to increase the soil's nutrient capacity. These
efforts greatly reduced topsoil erosion, decreasing sediment
loads entering the Mississippi River.
Humans have changed the landscape of the valley and
the flow of the Mississippi River in other ways, some as pro-
foundly as the glaciers. Overall, however, humans have
adapted to and developed around the river's geologic foun-
dation. This will become clear in each subsequent chapter.
Prominent Natural Features
The Mississippi River valley is a significant natural feature in
its own right. However, a number of individual features found
along the river valley through the MNRRA corridor are
notable. A brief description of each locality is presented below.
Glacial Terraces • Three prominent terraces occur along
the course of the Mississippi River in the MNRRA corridor.
Each formed as a result of late glacial meltwater drainage
along the major rivers in the MNRRA corridor. The
Richfield Terrace is the highest terrace surface, ranging in
elevation from 890 feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the
northwest corner of the MNRRA corridor to 840 feet amsl
in the southeast corner. The city of Minneapolis is built
largely upon this terrace surface.
Inset below the Richfield Terrace is the Langdon
Terrace, which has the widest range of distribution through-
out the corridor. Elevation of the Langdon Terrace ranges
from 850 amsl in the northwest corner of the MNRRA corri-
x
dor to 800 feet amsl in the southeast corner. The Langdon
Terrace exhibits a tremendous amount of variability in its
sedimentary characteristics along the valley. Between St.
Anthony Falls and Dayton Bluff the terrace developed on
top of the underlying Platteville Limestone. Terrace sedi-
ments are only a few feet to tens of feet thick. Throughout
the rest of the area, where preglacial erosion removed much
of the bedrock, the terrace consists of 100 feet or more of
sand and gravel. The cities of South St. Paul and Cottage
Grove are built largely upon this terrace surface.
The Grey Cloud Terrace is the lowest terrace present
along the Mississippi River in the MNRRA corridor. The Grey
Cloud Terrace occurs only south of St. Paul and ranges in ele-
vation from 750 to 700 feet amsL Like the Langdon Terrace,
it formed partially over bedrock. At Newport, the terrace
consists of sediments a few feet thick on top of the Prairie du
Chien Group. However, at Grey Cloud Island the terrace con-
sists of a thick sequence of sand and gravel left as an erosion-
al remnant of the once higher Langdon Terrace surface.
St. Anthony Falls • The Mississippi River cascading over
the Platteville Limestone at St. Anthony Falls exemplifies
the power of fluvial processes operating upon the land sur-
face. Long revered for its natural beauty, the waterfall was
once located at the confluence of the Mississippi and
Minnesota Rivers but migrated upstream to its present loca-
tion. The natural state of the falls has been modified by the
construction of milling and hydroelectric power structures
and a lock and dam system.
Shadow Falls • At Shadow Falls, a small tributary valley on
the east bank of the Mississippi, in St. Paul, is one of the best
exposed and easily accessible outcrops of the St. Peter
Sandstone, Glenwood Shale, Platteville Limestone, and
Decorah Shale in the Twin Cities. A variety of invertebrate fos-
sils, including conodonts and trilobites, can be collected here.
Minnehaha Falls • Formed in a manner similar to St.
Anthony Falls, Minnehaha Falls offers the observer an
opportunity to view a waterfall in its natural state. The
location of the falls within Minnehaha Park provides ready
access to explore the bedrock geology of the Twin Cities in a
small tributary to the Mississippi River.
Mississippi Minnesota Rivers Confluence • Bdo-te, or conflu-
ence, as the Mdewakanton Dakota call it, is where the
Mississippi and Minnesota rivers converge. Created by the dis-
charge of meltwater from glacial Lake Agassiz down glacial
River Warren, the confluence has been a gathering place for
people throughout several millennia. Pike Island separates the
two rivers where the valleys j oin, and the physical confluence
is one mile downstream. Steep bedrock bluffs covered with a
variable thickness of glacial sediment characterize the valley
here. The confluence offers the opportunity to explore the nat-
ural riches contained in two very different river valleys.
Twin City Clay Pit/Lilydale Regional Park • Exposures of
the Platteville Limestone, Decorah Shale, and lower
Cummingsville Formation offer excellent fossil hunting at
the Twin City Clay Pit/Lilydale Regional Park. In addition
to bedrock geology, exposures of glacial till deposited by
both the Superior and Des Moines Lobes can be found upon
diligent search. The Decorah Shale was formerly mined at
this location for clay used in the manufacture of bricks.
Dayton Bluff/Mounds Park • The St. Peter Sandstone,
Glenwood Shale, and Platteville Limestone are exposed
along Warner Road in Dayton Bluff. Overlying the bedrock
is a thin cover of glacial sediment deposited by the Superior
Lobe during late -Wisconsin glaciation. At the base of the
bluffs is an apron of colluvium derived from sediment
weathering and eroding of bedrock Six mounds, built by
Native American inhabitants some 2,000 years ago, lie on
top of the bluff. This location offers an excellent example of
combined natural and cultural resources.
Battle Creek Park • The uppermost 50 feet of the St. Peter
Sandstone is exposed within the valley of Battle Creek Park.
36
It is one of the best examples of a preglacial valley developed
in bedrock that escaped being filled with glacial sediments
in late -Wisconsin time.
Pigs Eye Lake • Pigs Eye Lake was a naturally occurring
open body of water within the floodplain of the Mississippi.
At one time it may have been part of Lake Pepin, which is
believed to have extended to St. Paul during the early
Holocene. The lake now serves as a haven for a variety of
wildlife, including birds, fox, beaver, raccoon, and similar
floodplain dwellers.
Lower Grey Cloud Island • A terrace remnant related to
late glacial trenching of the Mississippi River, Lower Grey
Cloud Island is composed of stratified sand and gravel
deposits overlain by fine sand. The island has many mound
groups constructed by the river valley's early inhabitants.
37
dizv.'
+4
Low
NJ
1
f
d
Ir-- 4'
c
FIGURE 1. As the glaciers retreated some 12,000 years ago, Native Americans began inhabiting the northern Mississippi River Valley. Indians Spearing
Fish 3 Miles below Fort Snelling. Artist: Seth Eastman. Minnesota Historical Society.
64crAtc-,r- 2
Early Native American Life in the MNRRA Corridor
Drew M. Forsberg, M.S. • Hemisphere Field Services, Inc.
y archaeological accounts, Native American his-
tory in Minnesota spans some 12,000 years
(Figure 1). During this time, the Mississippi
River and its valley became important to Native American
peoples, providing plant and animal resources, shelter, and
an important route for transportation and trade. This chap-
ter examines Native American history in the MNRRA corri-
dor beginning with the earliest occupants and ending with
the coming of European explorers and traders.
Written records help document Native American histo-
ry over the last 350 years. European and American explor-
ers and fur traders left accounts that provide details about
Native American history and lifeways. Archaeological exca-
vations of villages, trading posts, forts, and human burials
add to this written record. However, written records extend
back only as far as the mid -1600s. The long history of
Native Americans that predates contact with Europeans and
Americans must be reconstructed from archaeological infor-
mation and, when possible, from oral histories preserved by
modern Native American peoples. Because archaeological
data pertaining directly to the MNRRA corridor is limited, it
is necessary to look at a broader region of Minnesota when
discussing pre -contact Native American history.
Archaeological information for the earliest periods is
sparse, making it necessary to draw inferences from far
afield.'
39
Early Native American Contexts within
the MNRRA Corridor
Paleoindian Tradition • Humans probably began occupy-
ing the MNRRA corridor as the last glaciers retreated. As
the ice sheet of the Des Moines Lobe melted, a new land-
scape emerged and communities of plants, animals, and
humans colonized it. Initially, tundra vegetation covered
this landscape, but as the climate warmed, a boreal forest
dominated by spruce moved north to replace the tundra
ecosystems. Humans most likely followed the spread of
plants and animals northward.'
Archaeologists generally refer to the earliest Americans
as Paleoindians. In other parts of North America, where
archaeologists have excavated early sites, they have identi-
fied patterns in lifeways and material culture over time and
space. However, because few Paleoindian sites have been
identified in Minnesota and even fewer have been excavated,
our knowledge of this period is limited. The Paleoindian
tradition is usually divided into two periods: Early
(12,000-10,000 years before present [B.P.]) and Late
(10,000-8,000 years BY.).'
Early Paleoindian (12,000-10,000 years B.P.) • The Early
Paleoindian period is poorly known in Minnesota_ No
intact sites from this period have been identified. Some pro-
jectile points (Clovis and Folsom), resembling types found
elsewhere in North America, are the only evidence that
Early Paleoindian peoples occupied Minnesota_ These
points, however, were found on the surface and not well
documented. Based on these finds, we can make some gen-
eralizations about Minnesota's Early Paleoindian people
and their way of life. These people probably lived in small,
highly mobile bands, hunting large, now -extinct animals,
such as the mammoth, mastodont, or camel. Because there
is little diversity in projectile point forms over large areas
and because groups were so mobile, we assume that Early
Paleoindian peoples had little sense of regional identity.
The projectile points attributed to this period are distinc-
tive in form, generally being lanceolate (leaf -shaped) and
rather large. In addition, their makers removed long flakes
(flutes) from each face of the projectile point near the base
where they would have attached it to a wooden shaft.
y Paleoindians generally made their projectile points from
Fhigh quality stone, which they sometimes procured from
great distances.'
w Fluted points have been found in or near the MNRRA
0
w corridor (one in Anoka County and seven in Hennepin
County).'
However, amateur collectors found most of these arti
facts on the surface of cultivated fields, and information on
the exact location and circumstances of discovery is meager.
One point reportedly comes from the MNRRA corridor
(Figure 2). In 1941 a collector discovered a Clovis -like fluted
point "eroding from a high bank of the Mississippi River just
south of the Washington Avenue Bridge" in Minneapolis.'
While these finds indicate that Native Americans used
the MNRRA corridor during Early Paleoindian times, noth-
ing is known of the extent of their occupation and little of
their specific lifeways.
Late Paleoindian (10,000-8,000 years B.P.) • Cultural
changes that coincided with climatic and subsequent envi-
ronmental shifts mark the Late Paleoindian period. As the
glaciers left, the climate warmed. By about 10,000 years
B.P., forest vegetation covered much of Minnesota, except
FIGURE 2. AClovis-1iheprojectile pointfounderodingfrotnthe river
bluff in 1941 just south of the Washington Avenue Bridge. Reproduced
front Steinbring (1974: Figure 1).
for the western part. In southeastern Minnesota, oak,
maple, ehn, and ash dominated the forest, whereas a pine
forest covered central Minnesota_ A trend toward a warmer
and drier climate and the northeasterly expansion of prairie
vegetation characterize the subsequent millennia. By about
8,000 years B.P., the prairie/forest border had advanced
into east central Minnesota.
In general, lifeways during the Late Paleoindian period
initially resembled those of the Early Paleoindian period.
Late Paleoindian peoples moved frequently and depended
upon hunting. However, as communities of plants and ani-
mals changed in response to the changing climate, so too did
the humans that relied on them for subsistence. As the mam-
moth, camel and other megafauna that flourished during gla-
cial and immediately postglacial times became extinct, the
Late Paleoindian peoples increasingly turned to other quarry.
In the prairie regions of North America, bison became the pri-
mary food, although Native Americans undoubtedly con-
sumed smaller animals and various plants as well.
10
Recognition of the Late Paleoindian period is most
often based on the presence of distinctive, finely crafted pro-
jectile points made from high quality stone. These points
were lanceolate but lacked the pronounced fluting seen in
Early Paleoindian specimens. Rather, their makers removed
narrow flakes from both faces in parallel patterns. Late
Paleoindian points display greater variation in form, and
archaeologists have identified many distinct types, such as
Alberta, Cody, Agate Basin, and Scottsbluff.
Late Paleoindian sites in Minnesota are rare, and few
have been excavated. Only two have yielded radiocarbon
dates: the Brown's Valley site (21TR5), located in Traverse
County in western Minnesota, and the Bradbury Brook site,
located south of Mille Lacs Lake in east central Minnesota.'
Human bone from the Brown's Valley site was radiocarbon
dated to about 9,000 years B.P., whereas a piece of charcoal
from a pit feature at the Bradbury Brook site was radiocar-
bon dated to about 9,200 years B.P."
A recent survey of literature and collections indicates
that Late Paleoindian points have been found throughout
Minnesota_' Most are surface finds, often picked up by col-
lectors, who recorded the locations imprecisely or not at all.
Although a moderate number of points have been found in
or near the MNRRA corridor, most came from uplands well
away from the Mississippi River."' However, archaeologist
T. H. Lewis discovered several points in the late 1800s on
the floodplain across from downtown St. Paul (Figure 3)."
He did not record the exact location(s) where he found these
artifacts, and no State site number exists. Recently, archae-
ologists recovered a Late Paleoindian point during excava-
tions at the Sibley House/American Fur Company site
(21DK31) near Mendota, but they discovered no other Late
Paleoindian materials. Native Americans clearly lived in
the area during Late Paleoindian times, but until someone
finds a well-preserved site, nothing substantial can be said
about the people of this period.
Archaic Tradition (5,000-2,500 years B.P.) • During
Archaic times, Minnesota's occupants continued to adapt to
41
FIGURE 3. Three Late Paleoindian projectile points found by T. H.
Lewis on the floodplain of the Mississippi River near downtown St. Paul.
Reproduced from Florin (1996: Figure 139).
ongoing changes in climate and vegetation. The trend
toward a warmer and drier climate that began about 9,000
years B.P. continued, accompanied by the northeasterly
expansion of prairie vegetation. By about 6,000 years B.P.,
prairie covered much of Minnesota, including the entire
MNRRA corridor. Lake levels in the region fell, and substan-
tial sand dunes spread in the Anoka Sand Plain region,
located just east of the Mississippi River in Anoka County.
After about 6,000 B.P., the climate gradually became wetter
x
and cooler. In response, forests pushed the prairie to the
southwest. The forest -prairie border reached its present
location by about 3,000 years ago."
In general, changes in subsistence and settlement pat-
terns differentiate the Archaic tradition from the preceding
Late Paleoindian period. Archaic peoples became somewhat
more sedentary, as they learned to use more diverse plant
and animal resources for subsistence, and their tool tedmol-
ogy changed and diversified. They used grinding stones to
process plant foods, and they made tools from metamorphic
or igneous rocks for cutting and chopping wood. In addi-
tion, by about 7,000 years B.P., Archaic peoples began to
develop a copper tool technology, using pieces of native cop-
per mined from the Lake Superior region or found locally in
glacial drift. They fashioned knives, projectile points,
gouges, other tools, and decorative items from copper. In
the past, archaeologists thought that copper artifacts from
the Midwest represented part of an "Old Copper" industry
dating to later Archaic times (ca. 5,000-3,000 years B.P.).
However, archaeologists now recognize evidence that Native
Americans used copper before and after this period. No cop-
per artifacts have yet been recovered from sites located in
the MNRRA corridor.
As with the Paleoindian tradition, the form and com-
position of stone projectile points provide information
about Archaic lifeways. The narrower distribution and
greater diversity of projectile point styles may indicate an
increase in regionalism. Innovations in hafting technology
(how Native Americans attached their points) are evident in
the change from lanceolate points to points that were
notched or stemmed at the base. Archaic points lack the
finely executed, parallel flaking seen in Late Paleoindian
specimens, and the craftsmanship declined or became less
important. In addition, Archaic peoples relied more upon
stone procured from local sources, which was often inferior
to materials used during preceding periods.
In parts of the Midwest where greater numbers of
Archaic sites have been identified and excavated, archaeolo-
gists divide the Archaic tradition chronologically into three
periods: Early, Middle, Late. However, known Archaic sites
are rare in Minnesota, and it has not yet been possible to
assign this chronology to the region with any confidence.
Moreover, because the environment influenced the lifeways
and material culture of Archaic peoples, there are differ-
ences in the subsistence/settlement strategies and toolkits
of inhabitants of the western prairie, the deciduous forests
of the eastern woodlands, and the northern boreal forests of
the Canadian shield.
Excavations of Archaic sites in western Minnesota at
the Itasca Bison Kill site, in Itasca County, and the Canning
site, in Norman County, indicate a subsistence pattern that
focused on hunting bison but also exploited smaller animals
and plant foods. Farther to the east, in areas that were con-
tinuously forested during Archaic times, a different adap-
tive pattern is evident. Here, subsistence focused on river-
ine resources (like fish and freshwater clams), nuts and deer.
Because the environment of the MNRRA corridor changed
dramatically during the Archaic (from forest to prairie, and
back to forest again), it is likely that adaptive strategies
changed as well."
Few Archaic sites have been identified and excavated in
eastern Minnesota. Those few sites that are known general-
ly date to the later portions of the Archaic period. The
Petaga Point site (21ML11), located just south of Mille Lacs
Lake, contains an Archaic component.' While the artifacts
recovered from this component resemble types seen at sites
from the same period in the Great Lakes region and the
upper Mississippi River valley, the site lacked good informa-
tion on the lifeways of the site's Archaic inhabitants. The
St. Croix River Access site (21 WA49), on the St. Croix River
in Washington County, just east of the MNRRA corridor,
yielded evidence for two separate episodes of occupation
during Archaic times." The site's occupants manufactured
tools from stone taken from nearby bedrock outcrops.
Animal remains present at the site indicate that they con-
sumed white-tailed deer and beaver.16 The King Coulee site
(21WB56), located at Lake Pepin, includes a Late Archaic
component." Archaeological evidence from the site indi-
42
cates that its inhabitants focused on riverine animals,
although nuts and seeds were important. Most significant-
ly, archaeologists obtained a radiocarbon date from a domes-
ticated squash seed excavated from an Archaic horizon at
the site, providing evidence for the earliest use of domesti-
cated plants in the upper Mississippi River valley.
At present, it is unknown whether the lifeways prac-
ticed at the Archaic sites mentioned above extended into the
MNRRA corridor. Although three sites within the MNRRA
corridor are thought to have Archaic components, including
the Lee Mill Cave (21DK2), Ranelius (21DK4), and Sibley
House/American Fur Company (21DK31) sites, little infor-
mation is available. The Archaic component at the Lee Mill
Cave site consisted only of a fire pit that contained fish
bones. No artifacts were associated with the fire pit, and its
affiliation with the Archaic period was determined solely
because it was located below a Woodland component.
Further characterization of the Archaic occupation of the
MNRRA corridor must await the identification and excava-
tion of additional sites."'
Woodland Tradition (2,500-350 years B.P.) • Several new
technologies and activities characterize the Woodland tradi-
tion. The introduction of pottery and the construction of
earthen mounds for burial of the dead are hallmarks of this
period. Initially, few changes in lifeways accompanied the
Archaic -Woodland transition, but a trend toward more
sedentary settlement patterns and the intensification of hor-
ticulture characterizes this era. Within the MNRRA corri-
dor, it is likely that Native American peoples continued to
rely on riverine resources for their subsistence."
During the Woodland era, the climate continued mov-
ing toward current conditions. Prairie vegetation decreased
while forest vegetation (pine and oak) increased, and the
prairie/forest border reached its present location. Lake lev-
els rose across the region in response to cooler and moister
conditions. Although the climate was relatively stable over
the long term, several short-term fluctuations occurred.
Between about 1,000 and 500 years B.P., temperatures
43
increased. This warmer period, known in other parts of the
world as the Medieval Warm Period, corresponds to the
emergence of maize horticulture and intensification of wild
rice use among Minnesota's Native American peoples. At
least two episodes of cooler and moister conditions occurred
as well: one from 1,600 to 1,400 years B.P. and the other
from A.D. 1550 to 1850. It is likely that the little Ice Age
affected Minnesota's Native Americans, especially those
who relied upon horticulture. In any case, during the cool-
er and moister conditions of the Little Ice Age, the forested
area expanded south from east central Minnesota to create
the so-called Big Woods.
Early Woodland (2,500-2,000 years B.P.) • The Early
Woodland period is poorly known in Minnesota. Elsewhere
in the Midwest, the period is marked by an increased focus
on riverine resources and the use of domesticated plants.
Early Woodland peoples first began to manufacture and use
pottery, which initially was heavy and thick-walled. In
addition, they began to bury their dead in large conical
earthen mounds, which often possessed internal structures
or chambers built of rock or logs. Proj ectile points from
this period are often straight -stemmed.
In Minnesota, few Early Woodland sites have been
identified, and most of these lack radiocarbon dates. The
most famous Early Woodland site in the region is the La
MoiIle Rockshelter (21 WN 1), located in the Mississippi
River valley downstream from the MNRRA corridor. This
site, probably a fishing camp, yielded a ceramic vessel that
strongly resembles Early Woodland ceramics found in Ohio,
Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Kentucky. The vessel is
thick-walled (10-15 mm) with a flat lip, and its exterior was
cord -roughened and decorated below the rim with rows of
circular punctuations and fingernail impressions. The clay
used to construct the vessel was tempered with crushed
stone or grit. At the King Coulee site (21WB56), on Lake
Pepin, archaeologists recovered similar thick-walled ceram-
ics. As at the La MoiIle Rockshelter, fishing seemed to be
the primary subsistence activity, although the remains of
x
FIGURE 4. Part of an Early Woodland ceramic vessel excavated front the
Schilling Archaeological District (21 IM) on Grey Cloud Island.
Reproduced frons Withrow et al. (1987. Figure 3).
other animals (mammals, birds, reptiles, and shellfish) were
present. Moreover, King Coulee's Early Woodland inhabi-
tants ate nuts and seeds.'°
The Schilling site (21WA1), located on the eastern tip
of Lower Grey Cloud Island, is the only known Early
Woodland site recorded in the MNRRA corridor.
Excavations at the site yielded thick-walled ceramics
(Figure 4) that are similar to those recovered from the La
MoiIle Rockshelter and the King Coulee site. During the
Early Woodland, the site was probably inhabited during the
summer. Its inhabitants ate various mammals and birds.
Interestingly, despite the site's setting and despite the
apparent importance of fishing at other Early Woodland
sites, fish remains are absent from the Schilling site?'
Middle Woodland (2,000-1,500 years B.P.) • During Middle
Woodland times, complex cultures developed along the
Ohio, Illinois, and Mississippi River valleys. These cultures
are best known for the appearance of sophisticated mound
and mortuary centers, long-distance trade in exotic raw
materials (copper, marine shell, and obsidian), increased
population density, and the first use of corn as a cultigen in
eastern North America_ The major Middle Woodland centers
were in Ohio and Illinois, although evidence of Middle
Woodland influence occurs at many sites in the midconti-
nental region. Although archaeologists are debating how to
interpret Middle Woodland culture, they agree that it repre-
sents a major florescence.
In Minnesota, the influence of eastern Middle
Woodland groups is most apparent on the Anoka Sand
Plain. The region contains the most northerly Middle
Woodland center, which is represented by the Howard Lake
phase. Numerous sites containing Middle Woodland materi-
als related to the Havana Hopewell complex of Illinois have
been identified. The large number of Middle Woodland sites
in the Anoka Sand Plain indicate that it was an important
population center, and several large conical burial mounds
are present in the area. Howard Lake ceramics are quite
similar to the Havana Hopewell materials of Illinois, and
artifacts made of exotic raw materials, particularly copper,
have been found in this area. The Howard Lake phase
appears to parallel the rise and subsequent decline of the
Middle Woodland culture farther south and east.
Evidence for a Middle Woodland presence has also been
found south of the Anoka Sand Plain, along the Mississippi
River. A number of sites in the MNRRA corridor show
Hopewellian influences. Most dramatically, several large,
conical burial mounds at the Indian Mounds Park
(2IRA 10), in St. Paul, were excavated in the nineteenth cen-
tury, revealing burials interred in log tombs and limestone
cists. Grave goods included exotic items typical of Hopewell
burials, such as platform pipes carved from stone, orna-
ments hammered from sheets of copper, and a clay death
mask. Unfortunately, nearly all the artifacts excavated from
this site have disappeared.
Hopewellian influences are also seen, albeit less dra-
matically, at several habitation sites a short distance down-
stream. These sites, exemplified by the Sorg site (21DK1),
yielded ceramics stylistically similar to Havana Hopewell
14
specimens (Figure 5). The decorative traits of the Sorg
ceramics are similar to those seen on Howard Lake ceramics;
however, the chronological and cultural relationships
between Howard Lake and Sorg are not understood. The
presence downriver, in Trempealeau County in western
Wisconsin, of other sites showing Havana Hopewell influ-
ence suggests that ideas and technology may have traveled
from Minois via the Mississippi River. With sites extending
from the Anoka Sand Plain to Spring Lake, near Hastings,
the Middle Woodland peoples clearly used the Mississippi
through the MNRRA corridor."
FIGURE 5. A reconstructed Middle Woodland vessel excavated from the
Sorg site (21D%1) at Spring Lake. Reproduced from Jolnrsou (1959:
Plate M.
45
Middle to Late Woodland Rausitiou (1, 600-1,100 years B.P.)
At the close of the Middle Woodland, following the decline
of the Havana Hopewell influence, a transitional phase
occurred. This transition was expressed somewhat differ-
ently in east -central and southeastern Minnesota. In each
region, certain Middle Woodland traits persisted (ceramic
styles and conical burial mounds), but distinct regional life -
ways developed.
EAST -CENTRAL MINNESOTA • The halhnarkofthis tran-
sitional period in east central Minnesota is the growing
importance of wild rice as a food staple. Projectile points
became smaller and triangular, suggesting that Native
Americans used the bow and arrow. This new, more effec-
tive weapon allowed Native Americans to concentrate on a
few species of large animals, such as deer or bison. These
developments suggest that Native Americans developed a
more focused subsistence strategy, and perhaps as a result of
these changes in subsistence, the Native American popula-
tion increased across the region."
In east central Minnesota, the St. Croix phase repre-
sents the Middle to Late Woodland transition. St. Croix
habitation sites are typically located near lakes good for
wild rice, fishing, and waterfowl hunting. Projectile points
associated with the St. Croix phase are finely made isosceles
triangular points or side -notched points. Grit -tempered ves-
sels, with cord -roughened surfaces, characterize St. Croix
series pottery. Decorations consist of simple geometric
designs made with a dentate stamp, a comb stamp, or a stick
finely wrapped with cord.
The Onamia series is a second ceramic type associated
with the Middle to Late Woodland transition and may post-
date St. Croix ceramics. Onamia ceramics are similar in
form and surface treatment to St. Croix ceramics. However,
the two types differ in decorative styles. Onamia ceramics
are distinguished by loosely wound, widely spaced, cord -
wrapped stick impressions, whereas dentate and comb
stamping are less common decorative traits.
No St. Croix/Onamia sites are currently recorded for the
x
MNRRA corridor. The majority of sites with St. Croix and/or
Onamia components are located in the lake region of east
central Minnesota. However, sites with St. Croix and/or
Onamia ceramics are often found near the MNRRA corridor,
at lakes in the uplands of Anoka, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey,
and Washington Counties. Moreover, sites occasionally lie
within the St. Croix valley and elsewhere in the Mississippi
valley. For example, the St. Croix Access site (21 WA49)
yielded St. Croix ceramics. Given the proximity of so many
St. Cmix/Onamia sites, it is possible that sites of that affilia-
tion will be discovered along the MNRRA corridor.
SOUTHEASTERN MINNESOTA • During the Middle to Late
Woodland transition, inhabitants of southeastern
Minnesota continued to use riverine food resources, as in
the preceding periods, but increased their use of domesticat-
ed plants. A horticultural economy, focused on squash,
sumpweed, and starchy seeded plants (goosefoot and
knotweed), began to emerge. Ceramic vessels became slight-
ly thinner, although the use of grit temper and Havana
Hopewell decorative traits (dentate stamping) continued.
The La Crosse area has well-known sites dating from this
period. The previously mentioned King Coulee site at Lake
Pepin contains a Middle Woodland/Late Woodland
Transition component; however, it lacked detailed subsis-
tence data. No one has discovered a site from this transi-
tional period in the MNRRA corridor. Still, some potential
exists that sites will be identified, particularly in the corri-
dor's southern reaches .21
Late Woodland (1, 350-300 years B.E) • During the Late
Woodland period, lifeways differed significantly in east
central and southeastern Minnesota. Environmental
differences between the two areas may account for much
of this difference.
EAST CENTRAL MINNESOTA • In the "lakes district" of
east central Minnesota, the Kathio/Clam River phase repre-
sents the early Late Woodland period. During this phase, the
trend toward the more focused subsistence practices contin-
ued. Increasingly, Native Americans relied on the harvesting
of wild rice and the hunting of deer and other small mam-
mals. An increase in the size and number of sites indicates
that their population was rising. In general, these sites lie
near shallow lakes or streams where wild rice would have
been plentiful. Projectile points from this period are small,
triangular points that are sometimes notched, reflecting the
continued use of the bow and arrow. The Kathio and Clam
River pottery, which are closely related, are similar to the
preceding St. Croix and Onamia ceramics in terms of temper,
surface treatment, and decorative traits. However, these Late
Woodland vessels are more globular, and their walls are
somewhat thinner. These trends indicate a gradual evolution
of ceramic manufacturing techniques and decorative styles."
No sites with Kathio/Clam River components are record-
ed in the MNRRA corridor. Kathio and Clam River sites are
more frequent north of the MNRRA corridor but do appear in
the uplands of Anoka, Hennepin, and Washington Counties
away from the Mississippi River valley. As with the preceding
St. Croix/Onamia phase, there is some potential for the exis-
tence of sites with Kathio/Clam River components in the
MNRRA corridor, particularly in its northern reaches.
Around 1,000 years B.P., a new pottery type, called
Sandy Lake, suddenly replaced the Kathio/Clam River
ceramic series across central Minnesota. Sandy Lake ceram-
ics are thin-walled, have cord -roughened or smooth surfaces,
and are tempered with grit or crushed shell. Decoration is
rare. When present, it usually consists of simple notching
around the rim. Lifeways in the Sandy Lake phase resem-
bled those of the preceding Kathio/Clam River phase,
although Native Americans developed techniques for roast-
ing and storing wild rice during this period. Archaeologists
interpret the sudden advent of Sandy Lake ceramics as evi-
dence of the arrival of a new people, perhaps the Eastern
Dakota, who displaced the earlier Woodland population.
Sandy Lake sites are concentrated in central Minnesota, but
the ceramics are found occasionally at sites to the south.
For example, a few shards of Sandy Lake pottery were recov-
46
ered from Late Woodland levels at the St. Croix Access site
(21WA49). Interestingly, ceramics that resemble Oneota
materials (see below) are sometimes found at Sandy Lake
sites, suggesting some level of contact and/or trade between
the inhabitants of central and southeastern Minnesota.
SOUTHEASTERN MINNESOTA • Inthe riverineenvlron-
ment of southeastern Minnesota, the Late Woodland has
unique characteristics. Most notably, Native Americans
here did not use wild rice as much. Wild rice was present in
some areas along the Mississippi River, but not in enough
quantities to serve as a major food resource. Instead, inhab-
itants of the region began to practice horticulture intensive-
ly. In addition to domesticated plants (squash, sumpweed)
grown during the preceding period, corn and beans became
increasingly important. As with wild rice to the north, use
of corn may have stabilized seasonal subsistence patterns,
allowing for more sedentary settlement and greater popula-
tion growth. Because of climatic factors, corn cultivation
was generally limited to southern Minnesota, and corn was
not widely available to the more northerly peoples of east
central Minnesota.
Other distinct cultural traits emerged during the Late
Woodland in southeastern Minnesota. Although construc-
tion of conical burial mounds probably continued, a new
mound form emerged. Native Americans here built so-called
"effigy" mounds in the shape of familiar animals, such as
snakes and bears. The most famous mound group of this
type occurs at Effigy Mounds National Monument, on the
Mississippi River in northeastern Iowa. Projectile points
from this area are small and triangular, with both notched
and unnotched bases. Three Late Woodland ceramic types
are known in southeastern Minnesota: Nininger
Cordwrapped Stick Impressed, Bremer Triangular Punctated,
and Madison Plain (Figure 6). In general, vessels are thin-
walled and wide-mouthed with cord -roughened surfaces."
Late Woodland sites of the southeastern Minnesota
type appear in the MNRRA corridor in Dakota and
Washington Counties. Several sites possessing Late
47
FIGURE 6. Examples of Late Woodland ceramic types: A). Bremer
Triangularl'unctate; B). NiningerCordwrapped Stick Impressed; and Q.
Madison Plain. Reproduced from Scott E Anfiusou, edit., A Handbook of
Minnesota Prehistoric Ceramics, Occasional Publications in Minnesota
Anthropology Number 5, (St. Paul- Minnesota Archaeological
Society, 1979), Figure 35).
Woodland components are near Spring Lake. Nininger
Cordwrapped Stick Impressed ceramics were first identified
at the Sorg site (21DK1). Although a variety of lithic arti-
facts were present (triangular points, scrapers, knives,
drills), subsistence data were lacking from the site's Late
Woodland component. Similarly, Bremer Triangular
Punctated was first defined at the Bremer Village site
(21DK6). Other sites in the MNRRA corridor with similar
Late Woodland materials include the Lee Mill Cave
(21DK2), the Hamm (21DK3), and the Sibley
House/American Fur Company (21DK31) sites. Z'
Oneota Tradition (1,000-300 years B.P.) • Beginning
about 1,000 years ago, a new cultural tradition known as
" Oneota," emerged in the upper Mississippi River valley.
Oneota probably represents Woodland peoples influenced
by the ideas and lifeways of the Mississippian tradition,
which arose to the southeast along the middle Mississippi
River. In southeastern Minnesota, Oneota peoples were
present until the first Euro -Americans arrived in the mid -
1600s. The Oneota presence was more limited in east cen-
tral Minnesota, including the MNRRA corridor. In this
region, it appears that the Late Woodland tradition contin-
ued until first contact with Euro -Americans.
y In Minnesota, the Oneota tradition appears to emerge
z
0 near Red Wing and Lake Pepin between about 1,000 and
F
x 800 years B.P. Subsequently, clusters of Oneota villages
o spread to the La Crosse area and the Blue Earth River valley
w in south central Minnesota (Blue Earth Oneota), the river
a valleys of southeastern Minnesota (Orr Focus Oneota), and
portions of central and southeastern Iowa. The Oneota sub-
sisted on a wide variety of plants and animals. Most signifi-
cantly, they practiced horticulture, cultivating corn, beans,
squash, and other domesticated plants in gardens on river
floodplain. They lived in villages on river terraces overlook-
ing rich floodplain, although they established temporary
camps associated with hunting and gathering of wild plants
in upland locations. Oneota villagers sometimes erected pro-
tective walls or palisades. Oneota society was segmented by
clan affinities. Oneota ceramics display variation in form
and decoration, but in general, vessels are smooth -surfaced
and tempered with crushed shell (Figure 7). Oneota peoples
used a rich suite of bone and chipped and ground stone tools.
They also made pipes carved from pipestone or ornaments
fashioned from shell, bone, or copper.
Although Oneota sites are concentrated in southern
Minnesota, evidence for an Oneota presence in the more
FIGURE 7. Examples of Blue Earth Oneota ceramics. Reproduced from
Anfinson, Prehistoric Ceramics, Figure 17.
18
southerly portions of east central Minnesota has been found
at several sites. In addition, the presence of ceramics with
Oneota affinities (Ogechie ceramics) at Sandy Lake sites in
central Minnesota suggests that there was some contact
between the Oneota and more northerly peoples.
Within the MNRRA corridor, Oneota components have
been identified at the Schilling site (21WA1), the Lee Mill
Cave site (21DK2), the Point Douglas Townsite (21WA54),
and the Grey Cloud Mounds site (21 WA9). Evidence sug-
gests that these sites were probably temporary camps occu-
pied when Oneota peoples ventured north from their perma-
nent village settlements to hunt for food or to trade. The
Oneota component at the Lee Mill Cave site contains ceram-
ics that resemble those found on Oneota sites in the Blue
Earth River valley. The best excavated Oneota site in this
region is the Sheffield site (21 WA3), on the St. Croix River
south of present-day Marine on St. Croix. Oneota peoples
used this site as a seasonal hunting and fishing camp some
700 years ago. No evidence of agriculture was found. As at
the Lee Mill Cave site, the ceramics recovered from the
Sheffield site resemble Blue Earth Oneota types.
Interestingly, the site also contained Woodland components
that predated, postdated, and were contemporaneous with
the Oneota occupation. The relationship between the more
southerly Oneota peoples and the Woodland peoples to the
north is not well understood at present.Z"
Contact and Post -Contact Periods
When Europeans first entered the Midwest in the mid -
1600s, several different Native American groups occupied
Minnesota (Figure 8). By that time, European settlement in
the East had forced some tribes west, resulting in a distribu-
tion of tribes different from what it had been a century
before. In some cases, archaeologists have been able to link
tribes present in the area in the 1600s to earlier peoples
known only through archaeological data. In other cases, the
link between historic tribes and cultures known only
through archaeology is more tenuous. Contact with
Europeans brought sweeping changes to Native American
49
FIGURE 8. Generalized distribution of Native American groups during
the mid -1600s. Reproduced from Guy E. Gibbon, "Cultures of the Upper
Mississippi River Valley and Adjacent Prairies in Iowa and Minnesota,"
in Plains Indians, A.D. 500-1500: The Archaeological Past afHistoric
Groups, edited by K. H. Schlesier, (Norman: University of 0klahoma
Press, 1994), Map 6. S.
society, as Europeans introduced new values, lifestyles,
ideas, technologies, and diseases.
Chiwere-Winnebago Language Group • When the French
entered the area that is now Minnesota and Iowa in the late
1600s, speakers of the Chiwere-Winnebago language group,
a subdivision of the Central Siouan language, lived there.
These peoples were divided into several groups (including
the Ioway, Oto, and Missouri) that were closely related by
language, belief, culture, and kinship. Oral histories sug-
gest that these groups had split apart from a common ances-
x
tral tribe. In particular, the Ioway and Oto were closely
allied, often hunting together. The Winnebago, who lived
in eastern Wisconsin, were closely related to the Ioway, Oto,
and Missouri, and sometimes hunted with the more wester-
ly tribes.
Although the French had heard reports about the
Ioway through eastern tribes since the 1650s, the first con-
tact between the two peoples occurred in 1676 at a
Winnebago village near present-day Green Bay, Wisconsin.
Father Louis Andre described the visiting Ioway in the fol-
lowing manner: "Their village which is 200 leagues from
here is very large but poor, since their greatest wealth is in
buffalo hides and red stone calumet pipes. They speak the
language of the puants [Winnebago]." Subsequently, French
explorers and traders ventured to the west, learning that the
Ioway occupied southeastern Minnesota and northeastern
Iowa, whereas the Oto occupied north central Iowa .21
Initially, the French had traded with the Ioway through
the Algonquian -speaking tribes living to the east in
Wisconsin and Illinois. However, as the fur trade spread
westward, contact between the French and the Ioway
became more frequent and direct. The French traded metal
items, glass beads, guns, and ammunition to the Ioway in
exchange for bison hides, and later, beaver pelts. Direct con-
tact with the Ioway troubled the easterly Algonquian -speak-
ing tribes, particularly the Mascouten. By losing their posi-
tion as middlemen, these people feared that the Ioway and
Oto would get firearms more easily, which would upset the
balance of power. An intense intertribal rivalry developed,
often resulting in war. By the late 1680s, the Ioway had
abandoned their homes in southeastern Minnesota and
northeastern Iowa and moved nearer to the Oto in north-
western Iowa. This move, however, did not protect them
from their enemies for long. In the 1690s, the Mascouten
apparently pursued the Ioway into northwestern Iowa,
attacking and decimating their large village. Subsequently,
the Ioway and Oto moved farther to the west. In 1701-
1702, the Ioway moved near Fort Effaillier on the Blue
Earth River in Minnesota at the invitation of French trader
Pierre Le Sueur. However, after the fort was abandoned in
1702, the Ioway returned to the southwest.
Historic evidence links the Ioway to the archaeological-
ly known Orr Focus Oneota. Orr Focus sites along the
Upper Iowa River in northeastern Iowa contain European
trade goods, as do several Orr Focus sites in southeastern
Minnesota_ By comparing historic documents and archaeo-
logical data, researchers have determined that the sites in
northeastern Iowa corresponded to the Ioway villages visit-
ed by French fur trader Nicholas Perrot in 1685. Similarly,
the Oto maybe related to the Blue Earth Oneota of the Blue
Earth River valley near present-day Mankato, although
direct evidence is lacking."
No Ioway or Oto sites are known within the MNRRA
corridor. However, if these historic tribes are indeed related
to earlier Oneota peoples, they had at least a limited pres-
ence. As discussed above, several sites with Oneota compo-
nents have been documented in the St. Croix and
Mississippi River valleys of northern, southeastern and
southern, east central Minnesota. In particular, the Lee Mill
Cave (21DK2) and Sheffield (21 WA3) sites both yielded
Oneota ceramics similar to Blue Earth Oneota specimens.
Also, some ceramics found at Sandy Lake sites in central
Minnesota share affinities with Oneota materials. Thus, it
is likely that the people who came to be known as the Ioway
and Oto passed through the MNRRA corridor via the major
rivers, perhaps on seasonal hunting and gathering trips or
on their way to visit other regions and peoples.
Eastern Dakota (Santee) • At the time of the first European
contact, the Eastern Dakota or Santee inhabited much of
Minnesota. The Santee included the Mdewakanton,
Wahpeton, Wahkepute, and Sisseton, and lived along and
east of the Mississippi River. The Santee were closely related
by language and culture to the Yankton and Yanktonai
(Nakota), who lived along the Minnesota River upstream
from present-day Mankato; the Teton (Lakota), who lived in
western Minnesota near Lake Traverse; and the Assinboin,
who occupied northwestern Minnesota. Together, these peo-
so
ple came to be known to the French as the "Sioux," which
was derived from the Algonquian term "Nadouessiw" mean-
ing "snake" (i.e., "enemy").31
Early accounts indicate that during the late seven-
teenth century, the Eastern Dakota had adapted their subsis-
tence and settlement patterns to the environment of the
prairie/forest border. They occupied relatively permanent
villages in forest areas, for example, near Mille Lacs lake.
From this base, the Eastern Dakota hunted mammals and
waterfowl, fished, and gathered shellfish. Intermittently,
they traveled to the western prairies to hunt bison, elk, and
deer. Wild rice grew plentifully in the shallow lakes of the
forest region. The Eastern Dakota also relied on a number
of other plant foods, including starchy seeds, tubers, maple
sugar, fruits and berries, and nuts. Unlike peoples to the
south, the Eastern Dakota did not intensively cultivate corn,
beans, or squash (presumably because the climate of east
central Minnesota did not favor horticulture).
On the basis of written accounts, the Eastern Dakota
used tools made of stone and bone, cooked in earthen pots,
and buried their dead with grave goods in earthen mounds.
Links to earlier known archaeological cultures are tenuous
at present. Excavations at village sites and burial mounds
near Mille Lacs Lake suggest that the Eastern Dakota had
occupied the area for at least several centuries prior to con-
tact with the French. During this period, the Eastern
Dakota may have produced ceramics of the Sandy Lake vari-
ety, which replaced Kathio and Clam River ceramics across
central Minnesota rather abruptly about 1,000 years B.P.
This sudden appearance of Sandy Lake ceramics may repre-
sent the arrival in the region of the Eastern Dakota, who
displaced the indigenous Woodland populations. However,
archaeologists have not been able to establish a connection
between the late prehistoric archaeological cultures and the
early historic tribes of northern and eastern Minnesota.
Few archaeological sites associated with Eastern Dakota
occupation are recorded for the MNRRA corridor. The
approximate locations of early nineteenth century communi-
ties such as Kaposia or Pine Bend are known, but no archaeo-
51
logical work has been completed at these sites. In the
1980s, the University of Minnesota conducted archaeologi-
cal excavations at the Little Rapids (21SC27) site, a nine-
teenth century summer planting village located a short dis-
tance up the Minnesota River. Data from the excavations,
supplemented by historic records and oral interviews with
descendants of the village's residents, furnished detailed
information about nineteenth century lifeways at the village,
especially those of its female inhabitants. Archaeologists
conducted more limited excavations at the probable location
of Black Dog's village, which the Dakota occupied from
about 1750 to 1850. The Dakota Internment Camp, where
some 1,500 individuals were held following the Dakota
Conflict of 1862, is located in the river bottom below Fort
Snelling but has never been investigated archaeologically.
Similarly, Pike Island (located at the confluence of the
Mississippi and Minnesota rivers) was frequently occupied
by the Eastern Dakota but has never been investigated. 12
Many significant changes occurred in the lifeways,
material culture, and geographic distribution of the Eastern
Dakota in the years following their initial contact with the
French. It is likely that for at least 100 years before the
French arrived, the Dakota had been venturing into the
western prairies to hunt bison with increasing regularity.
The cooler and moister conditions of the Little Ice Age may
have prompted this shift by making subsistence more diffi-
cult in the eastern forest regions. But the Chippewa may
have forced the Dakota to move, as the Chippewa migrated
south and west from the Lake Superior region in response to
the fur trade. European and American expansion and the
associated tribal migrations intensified Dakota use of the
Mississippi River in the MNRRA corridor. For eons, Native
Americans had adapted to environmental changes and the
movements of other Native American groups. Increasingly,
European and American expansion would define Native
American lifeways, and in ways as dramatic as the glaciers,
transform the river and its ecosystems.
Y
OU
FIGURE 1. Father Louis Hennepin and Antoine Auguelle "discover" St. Anthony Falls in 1680. Artist. J. N. Marchand. Minnesota Historical Society.
OlzcrAter� 3
Discovery and Dispossession
o French explorers and traders probing westward
from eastern Canada in the early 1500s, rumors
of a great river stirred fantasies that only the
unknown can evoke. Was it the Northwest Passage, that long
hoped for shortcut to the riches of China? They knew that who-
ever found that fabled passage would gain enduring fame and
wealth. To talk of the Mississippi River's discovery, however, is
an ethnocentric endeavor. To the Dakota and other Native
Americans, the great river was as well known as a local freeway
to an urban commuter. It was their daily and seasonal highway.
But it was more. It was their front and back yards. It was their
supermarket as well as their superhighway. They fished, hunt-
ed, gathered plants, planted crops, swam, and prayed in or near
the river. The contrast between European discovery and Native
American familiarity could not have been greater. The stories of
European discovery lay bare this contrast.
Dakota life changed dramatically as French, British and
American explorers and traders found the MNRRA corridor.
Where the Dakota lived, what they hunted and ate, and the
tools and other material objects they relied upon changed.
They began the era as the region's dominant people and
ended it, in 1854, with a forced exodus away from the river
they had known and used for so long. While the French and
British left little evidence of their presence in the MNRRA
corridor, the Americans took it over, transforming not only
Dakota life but the river valley's landscape and ecosystems.
53
The French
During the French era, the Mississippi evolved from a rumor
into a thoroughfare of exploration and Euro -Indian com-
merce. The French period on the upper Mississippi covers
approximately 100 years, but the French presence was limit-
ed and sporadic. The French began exploring eastern Canada
in the early 1500s. In 1534 Jacques Cartier sailed up the
St. Lawrence to the site that would become Montreal. But
the French only established small fishing camps and trading
sites. Samuel de Champlain finally founded a settlement at
Quebec in 1603-04, and the French began sending traders
and explorers into the continent's depths. In 1623 or
1624, Etienne Bride became the first to report on rumors of
a vast lake (Lake Superior) to the far west. Ten years later, in
1634, Jean Nicolet voyaged into Green Bay, contacting the
Winnebago, or Ho -Chunk And in 1641, Recollet priests
Charles Raymbault and Isaac Jogues became the first to docu-
ment the discovery of Lake Superior. They met the
Saulteurs, or Chippewa, and reported on news of the Dakota,
who lived on a great river, only 18 days away. These are the
recorded accounts. The coureur de bois (independent, illegal
fur traders, who ranged in advance of the official explorers
and legal traders) may have visited the Great Lakes, the
Dakota and the Mississippi earlier, but we may never know'
Medard Chouart, Sieur des Groseilliers, and Pierre
d'Espirit, Sieur de Radisson, might have been the first
x
Europeans to see the upper Mississippi. Between 1654 and
1660 they conducted fur trading expeditions into the west-
ern Great Lakes and supposedly beyond. On at least one
voyage, they purportedly canoed into Green Bay and up the
Fax River. They then crossed over a short portage and into
the Wisconsin River and paddled down to the Mississippi
River. This route -the Fox -Wisconsin waterway -would
become one of the principal highways of exploration and
trade. Groseilliers and Radisson possibly traveled upriver
as far as Prairie Island. The evidence is sketchy, and
Minnesota historian William Watts Folwell calls it too far
fetched to give Radisson and Groseilliers the title of the
river's European discoverers'
By the 1670s, the French were poised to explore the
Mississippi River. They had posts as far west as La Pointe,
on Madeline Island, in Chequamegon Bay. Rumors of the
"Mechassipi" or "Micissipi" grew and inflamed the hope
that it was the Northwest Passage. Jean Talon, the inden-
dant or head of finance, commerce and justice, in New
France, chose Louis Joliet and Father Jacques Marquette to
lead an expedition to the far-off river. On May 17, 16 73,
they left Michilimackinac, near Sault Ste. Marie, took the
Fox -Wisconsin waterway, and glided into the Mississippi on
June 17, 16 73, becoming the first Europeans to unques-
tionably discover the river. From here the party drifted
south, hoping to find the river's mouth. After a month they
decided that the river flowed into the Gulf of Mexico.
Fearing the Spanish and Native American tribes, they
turned around and headed back to the Illinois River.
Traveling up the Illinois, they crossed into Lake Michigan.
Although the French had discovered the upper Mississippi
River, the reach above the Wisconsin River's mouth lay
unexplored. Joliet's account and France's desire to expand
its claim to America, to capture the trade, and to find the
route to the Far East, however, spurred the French govern-
ment to want more detailed information about the river and
its inhabitants.'
Merchants from Montreal and Quebec, hoping to be
the first to seize the fur trade of the region, assembled a
irFm-`:4
party to visit the Dakota and chose Daniel Greysolon, Sieur
du Luth, as their leader. He left Montreal on September 1,
16 78. The next summer, on July 2, 1679, he reached the
Dakota villages on Mille Lacs Lake. Du Luth then returned
east, leaving three men behind to learn more about the tribe
and about a route to the western sea. Boosting French
hopes, these men heard of a great, salty body of water only
20 days to the west. Some speculate that this might have
been the Great Salt Lake, although the French hoped it was
the Pacific Ocean. This news and his desire to discover the
storied western river made du Luth want to return as soon
as possible.'
The French had now been near the Mississippi's headwa-
ters and at Prairie du Chien, but the river in between
remained a mystery, and others hoped to beat du Luth to the
Northwest Passage and the furs of the upper Mississippi. In
1677 Robert Cavelier, Siem de la Salle, gained royal permis-
sion for an expedition to discover the river's mouth and
S4
T
FIGURE 2. Looking down on Phalen Creek's mouth and the beginnings of St.
Paul. When Hennepin, Auguelle and Accault landed here on March 19, 1680,
they stood between worlds, one represented by the ancientHopewell burial
mounds on Dayton's Sluff and the other by the low hills that would become
downtown St. Paul. Artist: 1. M. Stanley. Minnesota Historical Society.
source. Delays, however, left him only as far as a fort on the
Illinois River, just below Peoria, in January 16 80. When
directed to return to Montreal, la Salle chose Michael Accault,
a voyageur, to lead an expedition to the Mississippi, accompa-
nied by Antoine Auguelle and Father Louis Hennepin.
The small party headed down the Illinois on February
29, 1680. As they paddled upstream, they met a Dakota
war party of 120 men in 33 canoes. After convincing the
Dakota that their enemies, the Miami of Illinois, had
already gone west, the two partes returned upriver.
Nineteen days after beginning their journey, Hennepin esti-
mated they were 14 miles below St. Anthony Falls, near the
mouth of Phalen Creek (since filled in), just upstream of
Mounds Park (Figures 2 and 3). So the first recorded
European visit to the MNRRA corridor occurred about
March 19, 1680. The European discovery of the falls
would have to wait. Rather than continue upriver, the
Dakota abandoned their canoes and marched overland to
55
Mille Lacs Lake, where they arrived after five days.'
Three and one-half months later, on July 1, 1680, the
Dakota, taking the Frenchmen along, left Mille Lacs and
started off to hunt buffalo in southwestern Minnesota.
Traveling in small groups, they rendezvoused at the Rum
River's mouth at Anoka_ Hennepin and Auguelle received
permission to continue down the Mississippi to find la
Salle, who was to have supplies and reinforcements.
Accault stayed with the hunters. As they paddled down-
stream, Hennepin and Auguelle came to the great falls of the
Mississippi, which Hennepin named for his patron saint,
Anthony of Padua (Figure 1). (For Hennepin's description of
St. Anthony, see Chapter 6, which focuses on the falls.)
FC
FIGURE 3. Dakota, European andAmerican interactions became
increasingly more intense in the lo"verMississippi National Riverand
Recreation Area conidorbetween 1680, when the French arrived, and
1854, when the Minnesota Territorial govenrmentforced the Dakota out.
. Sain[Anlhnny Falls
Saint Paul
Phalen Carvers Cave
Creek Mounds Farkl
aaytons Bluff
Fountain Ka saa (to 1 B37
Cave
!
Pike
Camp . Island (1838-1858) '%
ddwat r r
Furl S n$llrng } Mendolai
Pilot knob
Black Cog's VIllage
4.
! I �
IVINIR I Boundary
G re! Cloud island k-
MWidne, Bottle's Village --,\
Hennepin and Auguelle continued downstream but appar-
ently did not make it to the Illinois River. Soon Accault and
the Dakota hunters joined them somewhere below the St.
Croix. Together they headed back to Mille Lacs.'
Meanwhile, du Luth, itching to reach the Mississippi
and the Dakota, left his post on Lake Superior, near Thunder
Bay, crossed over the continental divide, and canoed down
the St. Croix River. At the St. Croix's mouth, he heard
rumors of some Europeans who had passed downriver
shortly ahead of him. Fearing they could be English or
Spanish, expecting they might be French, he took a canoe
and pursued them. On July 25, 1680, he found the French
and Dakota paddling upriver and "rescued" Hennepin's
party. Together they continued on to Mille Lacs, where they
arrived on August 14. On this trip, the Dakota traveled up
S6
the river to St. Anthony, portaged around the falls and con-
tinued up the Mississippi and Rum Rivers. Late in
September, the Frenchmen finally returned east. Since they
left in canoes and took the Fox -Wisconsin route, they proba-
bly went down the Mississippi through the MNRRA corri-
dor again.'
To the extent that we can trust Hennepin's flawed and
exaggerated account, we learn for the first time about
Dakota culture and the Mississippi River in the MNRRA cor-
ridor. From Hennepin we learn that to the Dakota the falls
was a place of energy, spirituality and history (see Chapter
6)" As Hennepin's party descended the Mississippi below
St. Anthony Falls, they found some members of a Dakota
band he called the Issati camped on an island. They had a
great deal of buffalo meat. Two hours later, 15 or 16
Dakota, who had been with the Frenchmen at the falls,
"came with their war clubs in hand, pulled down the wig-
wam of our hosts, and took all the meat and bear's grease
they found." Hennepin learned that those with the meat
had gone ahead and, "contrary to custom," had killed what
they wanted and scared the rest away. Therefore, those
hunters coming later had the right to take the meat'
After their early expeditions, the French hoped to estab-
lish a series of posts in the interior to hold off Spanish and
English expansion. As a result, the French began building
posts on the upper Mississippi River. These posts were south
of the MNRRA corridor, however, near Trempealeau,
Wisconsin, on Lake Pepin, and on Prairie Island, just above
Red Wing."' During the 1680s, Nicholas Perrot built Fort
St. Antoine on Lake Pepin. From the 1680s to the mid -
1690s, Pierre Charles Le Sueur worked for Perrot, trading
with the Dakota on the upper Mississippi River. In 1695 Le
Sueur returned to France and helped the French cartographer
Jean -Baptiste Louis Franquelin draw "the first accurate map
of the upper Mississippi watershed." The map shows 10 vil-
lages east of the Mississippi and 12 west of the river cen-
tered around Mille Lacs Lake." M 1699 Le Sueur returned
to America, sailing up the Mississippi River to Biloxi and
from there canoeing all the way to Minnesota. Entering the
57
MNRRA corridor, he reached the mouth of the Minnesota
River on September 9, 1700, and pushed up the Minnesota
to the mouth of the Mankato River, where he built Fort
Ulluillier for the Dakota trade." While Le Sueur's voyage
seemed to portend a surge in French trade, that trade did not
follow.
French expansion into the upper Mississippi River fal-
tered during the late seventeenth century. By 1696 the
French began gathering their forces around Montreal under
pressure from Ifoquois attacks. Then, from 1702 to 1713,
France became embroiled in the War of Spanish Succession
in Europe and turned its attention away from Canada and
America. Under the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713 that ended
the war, France lost its claims to Nova Scotia,
Newfoundland, and its lands around Hudson Bay. Although
the French returned to the Great Lakes shortly thereafter,
they did not establish a post (Fort Beauharnois) on the
upper river again until 1727, and it was well downriver
from the MNRRA corridor at Frontenac, Minnesota. Ten
years later, the French abandoned the fort and, for the most
part, gave up their efforts among the Dakota and on the
upper Mississippi River, focusing instead on the Great Lakes
and Ohio River Valley. Still, the French managed to build
another fort on Prairie Island in 1752. But the potential
for further French involvement ended with the French and
Indian War, which began in 1756 and concluded with the
Treaty of Paris on February 10, 1763. Under the treaty, the
French transferred their claims in Canada and east of the
Mississippi in America to the British, except for New
Orleans."
The impact of French trade on intertribal relations and
tribal migrations exceeded the French presence and would
increase the Dakota's use of the MNRRA corridor. At the
time of French contact, there were four primary Dakota
groups: the Mdewakantons, Wahpekutes, Sisseton, and
Wahpetons. The Mdewakantons occupied the area around
Mille Lacs Lake and were known as the "People of the Spirit
Lake" or "People of the Mystic Lake." The Wahpekutes lived
near the Mdewakantons, and the Sisseton and Wahpetons
x
resided to the north and west.' When Le Sueur returned to
the upper river in 1700, after being gone for five years, he
discovered the Dakota had begun migrating west and south
from Mille Lacs."
Some scholars argue that the Chippewa had started
pushing the Dakota out of their homelands. Since the
Chippewa had better access to guns and ammunition, the
argument goes, they were more powerful than the Dakota.
Other scholars disagree, contending that certain forces
pulled the Dakota away from Mille Lacs. Dakota historian
Gary Anderson suggests that the presence of French traders
on the Mississippi at Lake Pepin and below helped draw the
Dakota out of the Mississippi Headwaters region by the
1720s. And the buffalo and horse provided a strong incen-
tive for the Sissetons and Wahpetons to begin moving
toward the plains.16 A combination of these factors most
likely convinced the Dakota to leave their traditional vil-
lages around Mille Lac Lake.
By the 1750s the Dakota had largely abandoned their
ancestral homeland. The Mdewakantons had begun living
in semipermanent villages along the lower reaches of the
Minnesota River, on the Mississippi below St. Anthony, and
on the St. Croix. When Pierre Boucher, Sieur de
Boucherville, arrived at Lake Pepin in September 1727 to
build Fort Beauharnois, he hoped to find the Dakota there,
but they had gone to St. Anthony Falls. Anderson suggests
that the falls might have become the primary gathering
place for the eastern Dakota by this time. The Dakota not
only moved, they began changing their lifestyle. Between
1680 and 1727, they extended their buffalo hunting trips
to the plains from a few weeks to a few months. Even
though the Dakota had begun migrating south and west,
they remained the strongest tribe on the upper Mississippi
River from its headwaters to well below Lake Pepin and still
asserted control over the St. Croix River and lower
Chippewa River." Overall, they remained very mobile."
As the Dakota settled along the Mississippi River below
St. Anthony Falls and on the Minnesota River, traffic
through the MNRRA corridor increased. The Dakota, other
Indians, and traders often traveled through the MNRRA cor-
ridor on their way to and from villages on the main stem or
on the Minnesota. The Chippewa came down from the
headwaters to attack the Dakota, using the Mississippi, St.
Croix, Rum and other rivers that fed into the main stem.
Traders ventured up the Mississippi to the Dakota villages
within the corridor or turned up the Minnesota to Dakota
villages there. They also portaged around St. Anthony and
paddled upstream to trade with the Chippewa. The Dakota
employed the Mississippi and the Minnesota, St. Croix and
other tributaries to travel between their villages, to hunt,
gather, and go to war.
Whether the Dakota moved out of their homeland vol-
untarily or retreated from it, we know that intertribal war-
fare increased greatly as the French spread westward. When
the French built Fort Beauharnois on Lake Pepin in 1727
and Fort St. Charles on Lake of the Woods in 1732, they
bypassed the Chippewa_ The Chippewa resented this, both
because it took away their middleman position in the trade
and because it brought firearms directly to their enemies.
As a consequence, warfare between the Chippewa and
Dakota intensified and became a central part of Dakota life
in the MNRRA corridor. The French did not invent inter-
tribal warfare, but they unquestionably helped define its
nature and extent, as would the British and Americans."
The British, 1763-1815
The British did not immediately fill the political vacuum
created by their victory over the French, but no economic
vacuum occurred. French and Spanish traders continued to
frequent the area, the French coming up from New Orleans
and the Spanish from St. Louis. When the British did enter
the fur trade of the upper Mississippi River valley and the
western Great Lakes, they tried a different system. Rather
than sending traders to the tribes, they expected the tribes
to come to them at posts like Michilimackinac, which was
at the border of Lakes Michigan and Huron. The policy
failed. In 1767 the British granted licenses to traders and
let them rush into the interior, setting off rampant competi-
ss
tion. By the 1780s many English traders worked among
the Dakota. No evidence exists, however, that the French,
Spanish or English established posts in the MNRRA corridor
during the British era. Prairie du Chien was the primary
trading place on the upper Mississippi. Not only did vari-
ous tribes meet French, Spanish and British traders there,
the traders fanned out from the wilderness entrepot.
British and French traders canoed the MNRRA corridor regu-
larly to trade with the Dakota and Chippewa."'
Not many British explorers or traders left detailed
accounts of their travels on the Mississippi River or of their
encounters with Native Americans. Fortunately, Jonathan
Carver, 1766-67, and Peter Pond, 1773-75, did. Carver
had asked to go west to help England secure the lands it had
won from France. He had fought in the French and Indian
War and knew well the French influence in the interior.
After securing a commission from Robert Rogers, the com-
mandant at Fort Michilimackinac, Carver set out for the
Mississippi River from the fort on September 3, 1766.
Rogers sent Carver west, hoping to discover the Northwest
Passage. More pragmatically, he directed Carver to convince
the Dakota and other tribes to visit the British posts and
abandon the French and Spanish traders. Misinformation,
plagiarism, deceit, and exaggeration plague Carver's
account. So his observations, like those of many early
explorers, warrant caution."
On November 8, 1766, somewhere between Lake
Pepin and the St. Croix River's mouth, Carver met the
Dakota or " Naudowwessee" as he called them. Stopping for
the day, he read them a speech from Major Rogers and
offered them rum, tobacco and a wampum belt, hoping to
persuade them to visit the British posts. To his journal, he
confided the Chippewa resented traders who bypassed them.
A band of the Chippewa (possibly the Pillager Band), Carver
wrote, robbed traders they caught on the Mississippi
between the St. Croix and Lake Pepin. The traders, accord-
ing to Carver, usually went up and down the river in large
groups for security. Carver left the next day and reached the
mouth of the St. Croix.""
59
Carver expands our knowledge of Dakota social and
cultural traditions within the MNRRA corridor. On
November 14, he came to "the great stone cave calld by the
Naudowessee," he said, "Waukon Tebee, or in English the
house of spirits." The cave would take Carver's name.
Carver "discovered" something already old to the Dakota.
He found "many strange hieroglphycks cut in the stone
some of which was very a [n] dent and grown over with
moss." (Figure 4) Like a graffiti vandal, he etched the king
FIGURE 4. These petroglyphs in Carver's Cave demonstrate the historical
and spiritual significance places within the MNRRA corridor held for the
Dakota and other tribes. Theodore D. Lewis, The NorthwestArchaeological
Survey, 1898.
x
of England's coat of arms among the Native American char-
acters. From the cave, Carver headed up to St. Anthony
Falls on the 15th. After visiting the falls, Carver returned
downstream and canoed up the Minnesota River where he
camped with the Dakota for the winter."
The following April, Carver heard about "an annual
council" to be held near the cave he had visited. The chiefs
of several bands planned to attend. Such a meeting would
provide Carver the opportunity to harangue the Dakota to
go to the British and to stop trading with the French. So on
April 26, 1767, he left what he termed the "Grand
Encampment" of the Dakota on the Minnesota River and
traveled down to the Mississippi, where he arrived on April
30. The next day he met the Dakota near the cave, possibly
at or near a village that would become Kaposia, and got him-
self invited to the council. Eight bands attended .21
The hereditary chief of the Mottobauntowha band (pos-
sibly Wabasha I) presided at the conference. The chief
addressed the advantages and disadvantages of going to the
French and British. His people feared disease if they trav-
eled to the French in Louisiana, although at least one chief
still favored the trip (although the French usually came to
the Dakota). Carver comments that while the Native
Americans were "great travelers," few were willing to make
the journey to Michilimackinac. The chief encouraged
Carver to return again with more traders to bring them
guns, powder, tobacco and other goods. The Dakota espe-
cially wanted guns for war .21
Intertribal warfare intensified during the British era,
as the Chippewa expanded farther south and west into
Minnesota, as the Dakota became more well armed, and as
fur animals and game supplies dwindled. Prior to entering
the council, Carver had learned that an Iroquois man, whom
he had employed as an interpreter the previous fall, had
joined a band of Chippewa that had stolen down to the
Mississippi to attack the Dakota .2' By the 1790s the
Dakota and the Chippewa fought along the Mississippi River
from St. Anthony Falls to Prairie du Chien so intensely that
one British trader claimed few Indians came to the area .21
Peter Pond, another British adventurer to leave an
account during this era, had less grandiose goals than
Carver. He simply wanted to bring out as many furs as he
could. In 1773, Pond shows, fur traders had established
themselves throughout the upper Mississippi River region
and especially among the Dakota of the Mississippi and
Minnesota Rivers. Upon arriving at Prairie du Chien, Pond
found "a Larg number of french & Indans Makeing out thare
arangements for the InSewing winter and Sending of thare
canues to Differant Parts Like wise Giveing Creadets to the
Indans who ware all to Randavese thare in Spring." Pond
had nine traders that he sent to different places, including
two that he accompanied up the Minnesota River in
October. During the winter, he traded with the Dakota who
visited him and noted that he had a French competitor near-
by who had been trading with the Dakota for several years.
Although Pond does not indicate that traders wintered or
bartered within the MNRRA corridor, he demonstrates that
numerous British and French traders had infiltrated the
Dakota lands. At a minimum, he shows, traders traveled on
the Mississippi through the corridor to reach bands on the
Minnesota River and to get to the Chippewa at the
Headwaters.Z"
After returning to Michilimackinac, Pond learned that
the conflict between the Dakota and Chippewa had wors-
ened. Fearing that the trade would collapse, the British sent
their traders out with wampum belts to bring as many
chiefs to Michilimackinac as possible. In 1775, after anoth-
er year of trading on the Minnesota River, Pond headed back
to the British entrepot bringing eleven Dakota chiefs with
him for the treaty negotiations. At the confluence of the
Minnesota and Mississippi, a delegation from the Chippewa,
accompanied by traders who had spent the winter near the
Headwaters, startled Pond's party. Given the recent battles,
Pond recalled, "I was Much Surprised to Sea them So
Ventursum among the Peaple I had with me, for the Blad
[blood] was Scairs Cald the Wound was yet fresh." The two
parties then proceeded together to Michilimackinac, some-
how avoiding serious conflict. Hoping to end the intertribal
60
war and ensure their profits, the British tried to convince
the Dakota and Chippewa to make the Mississippi River the
fixed boundary between the two tribes. The traders succeed-
ed in getting the Dakota to agree not to cross the Mississippi
to the east and the Chippewa not to go to the west. The
attempt to create a dividing line between the Chippewa and
Dakota failed, however. Despite their statements at
Michilimackinac, the Dakota still viewed some lands east of
the Mississippi as theirs."
British sovereignty (ignoring Dakota claims) over the
eastern MNRRA corridor technically ended with the Treaty
of Paris, in 1783, that concluded the American Revolution.
By that treaty, United States now owned the land to the east
of the Mississippi. The Spanish still claimed the land west
of the river. In reality, British traders continued to domi-
nate the fur trade in the region and with it the politics and
economy. British traders, especially those of the Northwest
Company (established in 1787), continued building posts
in Minnesota and Wisconsin, including sites at Grand
Portage, Fond du Lac (at the mouth of the St. Louis River),
Prairie du Chien, Sandy Lake and Leech Lake."
The only official American effort to establish its pres-
ence came after the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, by which
America gained control over an 825,000,000 -square -mile
tract west of the Mississippi from France for $15,000,000.
(France had reacquired Louisiana from Spain three years
before.) General James Wilkinson, determined to eliminate
the British influence in the region, dispatched Zebulon Pike
up the Mississippi from St. Louis to the river's headwaters
(Figure 5). Wilkinson ordered Pike to choose the best sites
for military posts and obtain the land for them from the
Native Americans. He also directed Pike to prepare the way
for government trading posts, make alliances with the
Chippewa and Dakota, stop intertribal fighting, and locate
the Mississippi's source."
Pike left St. Louis on August 9, 1805. As he proceeded
up the Mississippi River, he found an active and thriving fur
trade. At Prairie du Chien he picked up James Fraser, a trad-
er who was planning to winter with the Dakota bands on
61
the Minnesota River. At Lake Pepin, another trader,
Murdoch Cameron, joined Pike's expedition. Cameron also
planned to trade with the Dakota on the Minnesota River.
When they reached the St. Croix River, on September 19,
Fraser and Cameron begged leave to undertake some busi-
ness in the area and departed. Three miles below the mouth
of the Minnesota River, Pike came upon a "Mr. Ferrebault's"
(Jean Baptiste Faribault) camp. The trader's piroque had
been damaged, forcing him to stop. There is no indication
that Faribault made this camp a trading site or if, as had
happened to Pike many times already, he had laid up to fix
his boat."
On September 21, Pike reached Kaposia, where he had
breakfast. He counted 11 lodges but the band was out col -
FIGURE 5. In 1805, Lieutenant Zebulon Pike tried to assertAmerican
control over the upperMississippi River. America had acquired the land
west of the river through the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. Artist: Charles
Wilson Peale. Independence National Historic Park.
x
lecting "fols avoir," or wild rice. Two miles farther up, he
met a small Dakota camp of four lodges. Whether this was a
separate village or a temporary camp is not clear. When
Pike reached the large island at the Minnesota's mouth that
bears his name, he set up camp on the island's northeast
point and waited for the Dakota."
He did not wait long. The next day Petit Corbeau or
little Crow and about 150 of the band's warriors arrived.
Later that day Pike went up the Minnesota River to the
Dakota village where Cameron had his post. While the
Dakota warriors had left, they had returned upon hearing of
Pike's arrival. The following day, at noon, Pike began nego-
tiating with seven Dakota chiefs at Pike Island. He wanted
Dakota lands at the mouths of the St. Croix and Minnesota
Rivers. Although only two Dakota leaders signed, Little
Crow and Le Fils de Pinchow or Pinichon, the cession would
become fact. The Dakota gave up some 100,000 acres for
which the Senate initially agreed to pay only 52,000.3
Unlike Carver and Pond, Pike delivers some insights
about the river itself in the MNRRA corridor. After passing
the St. Croix's mouth on his journey upstream, Pike
remarked that the river became surprisingly narrow. To
emphasize the point, he tested how many strokes he need to
cross in his bateau. It took only 40. And, he wrote, "The
water of the Mississippi, since we passed Lake Pepin has
been remarkably red; and where it is deep, appears as black
as ink. The waters of the St. Croix and St. Peters
(Minnesota), appear blue and dear, for a considerable dis-
tance below their confluence."" Pike offers rare details
about the river above St. Anthony Falls. On October 1,
after portaging around St. Anthony Falls, Pike initially
found the river deep enough. Within four miles, however,
the river became shallow, and his party struggled for the rest
of the day, having to fight their way over three rapids. The
next day the Mississippi became so difficult Pike claimed
that anyone less determined would have turned back His
party passed some large islands and more rapids. For much
of the day they waded in freezing cold water, "to force the
boats off shoals, and draw them through rapids." The river
winds only some 25 miles from St. Anthony Falls to the
Crow River's mouth. For Pike's crew, it seemed an inter-
minable distance. They did not reach the Crow River until
October 4.i6
Like the British traders and explorers, Pike found inter-
tribal warfare rampant and hoped to end it. Only his arrival
had stopped the Mdewakantons living up the Minnesota
River from going to war. Upon reaching the Crow River, he
found one reason why the Dakota had probably set off to
attack the Chippewa. On October 4, Pike recorded that
"Opposite the mouth of Crow river we found a bark canoe,
cut to pieces with tomahawks and the paddles broken on
shore; a short distance higher up, we saw five more; and
continued to see the wrecks, until we found eight" Pike's
interpreter recognized the canoes as Dakota and some bro-
ken arrows as Chippewa. The Chippewa had carved marks
on the paddles, indicating the number of men and women
they had killed.
On his return trip down the Mississippi, Pike hoped to
convince the Dakota to make peace with the Chippewa. So
on April 11, when he again reached Pike Island, he sent for
the Dakota chiefs. Le Fils de Pinchow came soon after and
agreed to host a council. At sunset, the Dakota called Pike
to Le Fils de Pinchow's village, about nine miles up the
Minnesota. Pike found some 40 Dakota chiefs waiting.
They represented the Mdewakantons, Sisseton and
Wahpetons. The Dakota numbered about 100 lodges or
600 people. As this was the same time of year that Carver
had attended a great annual Dakota conference in 1766,
Pike may have arrived at the time of another annual meet-
ing. "The council house," Pike recorded, "was two large
lodges, capable of containing 300 men. In the upper were
40 chiefs, and as many pipes, set against poles; Pike
placed some Chippewa pipes that he had acquired next to
the Dakota pipes as a gesture of his desire to establish peace
between the tribes. Pike apparently had little effect. The
next day as he headed back down the Minnesota River, some
Dakota from a number of lodges about three miles above the
mouth hailed him. Although they initially received him
62
well, the Dakota forcefully let him know they intended to
go to war."
Pike's expedition signaled a new era. His was the first
of an increasing number of missions to establish America's
political and economic control over the upper Mississippi.
But for now, the British and French traders remained active
on the upper river. Demonstrating how much activity he
found on the Mississippi River below St. Anthony Falls,
Pike regarded the falls as the gateway to the wilderness
beyond. On September 2 7, he penned a letter to his wife
and prepared a package for his commander in St. Louis.
"This business, closing and sealing," he remarked,
"appeared like the last adieu to the civilized world.""' On
April 10, on his return trip, he commented again on this
feeling. "How different my sensations now," he confessed,
following with a long description about how bleak the expe-
dition's outlook and condition had been when they had
passed earlier. They had been tired, cold, sick, and "just
upon the borders and the haunts of civilized men, about to
launch into an unknown wilderness; ... "" While that
wilderness may have been unknown to Pike and the
Americans, it would not be for long.
Pike's influence was short-lived, as America failed to
follow up until after the War of 1812. The growing
American presence did disrupt the flow of trade goods to
the Native Americans in the MNRRA corridor and through-
out the region. As tensions between the United States and
Britain mounted, President Thomas Jefferson embargoed
all commerce in the fall of 1807. The United States active-
ly tried to stop British traders from delivering goods to and
collecting furs from Indians in the western Great Lakes and
upper Mississippi River valley. This move forced some
British traders to withdraw."' As the Americans limited
the supply of goods reaching the Dakota and as American
traders failed to make up the difference, the Dakota began
to suffer. The War of 1812 led to even greater shortages of
goods and, according to Anderson, left the Dakota impover-
ished. Because the English traders had married Dakota
women and had had children by them, and because the
63
British made an effort to keep trade open, the Dakota sided
with the British during the war. Only with the Treaty of
Ghent, in 1815, which ended the war, did the British
traders begin to withdraw"
By the end of the British era in 1815, we know much
more about the MNRRA corridor. While some aspects of
Dakota lifeways had changed little, the Dakota were under-
going an important transition." The Mdewakanton vil-
lages still had about 4,000 to 5,000 people—close to the
numbers they held 20 years earlier. Important changes
had occurred, however. On both his trips to trade with the
Dakota on the Minnesota River, Pond commented on the
abundance of game along the Mississippi and Minnesota
Rivers. He killed deer, buffalo, ducks, geese and other ani-
mals with little effort.' By the end of the British era, over -
hunting and the depletion of fur and game animals forced
the Mdewakantons to break into smaller groups and to
begin thinking about agriculture. As early as 1775, Pond
noted, the Dakota living near the mouth of the Minnesota
River raised "Plentey of Corn...: "" At Kaposia, Pike dis-
covered the Mdewakantons living in bark lodges, which
Anderson suggests indicated a change in subsistence pat-
tern to rely more on corn and beans. Anderson also argues
that "changing economic conditions had broken up the
larger villages seen by earlier travelers, and this had affect-
ed tribal unity.
Assuming Carver's and Pond's accounts are somewhat
true, they capture many of the particulars we know charac-
terized the British period. The Dakota had moved out of
their traditional homeland around Mille Lacs Lake. They
had settled on the Mississippi in the MNRRA corridor and
downstream and up the Minnesota River. The MNRRA cor-
ridor had become increasingly important to the Dakota.
Carver, Pond, and others found the Mdewakantons and
other Dakota bands holding regular councils within the cor-
ridor or just up the Minnesota River. And the Kaposia band
had established a seasonal village on the Mississippi above
the St. Croix's mouth. The area had gained more than sea-
sonal importance to the Kaposia band, as the burial of band
x
members near the village demonstrated.
One of the most obvious changes was the extent to
which European and American products had begun replac-
ing native goods. Although the supply was never steady and
full, the Dakota grew more dependent upon foreign manu-
factures. Guns had become essential for successful warfare,
and warfare, as a result of the fur trade, was becoming more
frequent and deadly. While still an independent people, the
Dakota would look more often to outsiders for the tools of
their existence, and they would increasingly deplete their
natural resources to get them.
The Americans
American explorers and traders dispersed through the upper
Mississippi River valley following the Treaty of Ghent in
1815, which codified the American victory. Only eight
years after the treaty, the Virginia, the first steamboat to
navigate the upper Mississippi River, reached the first per-
manent military post in the area. Steamboats hurried explo-
ration, trade and settlement, and they hurried change for
the Dakota and the river. The era of exploration would end
and the era of settlement begin during these 25 years,
although it would be decades before Americans knew the
land as well as the native inhabitants had. As the number
of Americans swelled, they would squeeze the Dakota into a
smaller and smaller area, forcing more changes in their
lifestyle and, before long, forcing them away from the
Mississippi River and the MNRRA corridor. As game and fur
bearing animals disappeared, upsetting the ecosystems of
the river and its watershed, the Dakota would turn to agri-
culture and annuities from the American government, fur-
ther undermining their traditional ways.
Following the War of 1812, the American Fur Co.,
under John Jacob Astor, bought the Northwest Company's
posts in the United States and began asserting control over
the fur trade. In an attempt to eliminate foreign traders,
Astor convinced Congress to pass the Foreign Intercourse
Act of 1816, which required foreign traders to become nat-
uralized or leave. The Americans, however, had to enforce
the act." Despite the American victory and ignoring the
new act, some British traders remained on the upper
Mississippi. But this time the Americans had come to stay,
and in 1816 they began building forts at Prairie du Chien
and Green Bay.
As the Mdewakantons had relied on, fought with, and
married English traders, they did not readily accept the
Americans. In 1816 little Crow II (Cetanwakanmani) and
Wabasha II traveled to the British post at Drummond
Island, near Sault Ste. Marie, to learn how seriously they
should take the Americans. The British commander
answered: seriously. little Crow and Wabasha quickly
learned what he meant. They returned up the Fox River and
down the Wisconsin, entering the Mississippi just below
Prairie du Chien. When they tried to pass the frontier hub
and camp above with the other Dakota already there, the
American commander, Brevet Brigadier General Thomas A.
Smith, refused to let them. Smith insisted that the two
Mdewakanton leaders first had to renounce the British and
recognize the Americans as their new sovereigns. Little
Crow and Wabasha conceded, giving up their British flags
and medals. But British traders continued to reach the east-
ern Dakota, and the Americans felt a growing need to drive
the British out.'
So in 1817, Secretary of War John C. Calhoun sent
Stephen H. Long, a Topographical Engineer (a branch of the
army that had split temporarily from the Corps of
Engineers), to map the upper Mississippi and locate poten-
tial military sites (Figure 6). On July 15, 1817, Long
reached the mouth of the St. Croix River. His description of
the Mississippi beyond this point provides more informa-
tion about the MNRRA corridor than had been left by the
uncounted traders who had been through it so many times.
Four miles above the St. Croix's mouth—an area now made
wide by the pool behind Lock and Dam 2—Long said was the
narrowest place below St. Anthony Falls. As he measured it,
the river was only 100 to 120 yards wide. Since Pike had
crossed the river nearby in 40 strokes, Long decided to see if
he could beat him. Although Pike's bateau may have been
64
FIGURE 6. StephenIlan-innanLong. Artist. Charles Vincent Peale.
Independence Hall Collection, Philadelphia.
much more clumsy than Long's six -oared skiff, Long needed
only 16 strokes." Shortly after passing this narrow gap,
Long commented that his party had "Passed the Detour de
Pin or Pine Turn of the Mississippi (Pine Bend), which is the
most westwardly turn of the river, between St. Louis and the
Falls of St. Anthony."" It was only nine miles to the
Minnesota River overland, he observed, but two days by
boat. Delaying him further, Long complained that the twist-
ing river made using their sail nearly impossible. On Long's
second expedition up the Mississippi, in 1823, William H.
Keating, the expedition's journalist, grumbled that the river
up to St. Paul was "crooked and its channel impeded by
sandbars; and the current rapid, so that the progress of the
boat was slow""
Long provides the first comment on the river's water
quality. Long recorded, during his 1817 trip, that "The
65
Mississippi above the St. Croix emphatically deserves the
name it has acquired, which originally implies, Clear River.
The water is entirely colorless and free from everything that
would render it impure, either to the sight or taste. It has a
greenish appearance, occasioned by reflections from the bot-
tom, but when taken into a vessel is perfectly clear." While
Mississippi more accurately means "great river," Long pres-
ents a stream dramatically different from the one choked
with pollution and sediment at the end of the century. Like
Pike, Long noted the water's reddish appearance below the
mouth of the St. Croix."
On July 16, 1817, Long's party passed Kaposia, which
held 14 lodges (three more than Pike had counted 12 years
earlier), and its nearby burial ground. Demonstrating that
the Chippewa had not forced the Mdewakantons out of the St.
Croix valley yet, most of Little Crow's people were hunting up
that river when Long passed. Given how narrow the river was
here, Long noted that the village commanded the river and all
who tried to pass. Little Crow's people, he remarked, used
their strategic position to exact tolls from traders. 12
Long also arrived at Carver's Cave that day but was
unimpressed. While the cave had once contained Native
American etchings and a small lake, Long found that the
cave had collapsed in many places and was filling with
sand. He records no markings by anyone in his 1817
account." During the 1823 voyage, Keating reports that
they found the names of Henry R. Schoolcraft and the party
of Lewis Cass, the Michigan Territorial Governor, carved
into the sandstone inside. Cass and Schoolcraft had visited
the cave in 1820."
Pike was much more impressed with Fountain Cave,
which lay some three miles above Carver's Cave and a few
miles below the Minnesota River's mouth. Long observed
that "The entrance of the Cave is alarge windinding [wind-
ing] hall, about 150 feet in length 15 feet in width & from 8
to 16 in height, finely arched over head & walled on both
sides by cliffs of sandstone nearly perpendicular. Next suc-
ceeds a narrow passage & difficult of entrance which opens
into a most beautiful circular room, finely arched above and
x
about 50 feet in diameter. The cavern then continues a
meandering course, expanding occasionally into small
rooms of a circular form." Long also recorded that a dear
stream flowed through the cave "& cheers the lonesome dark
retreat with its enlivening murmurs." Fountain Cave, Long
says, had been discovered recently, and the Mdewakantons
had learned of it about six years earlier. The cave would
become a popular nineteenth-century attraction."
While Long examined the sites acquired by Pike and
recommended that the United States build a fort at the con-
fluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers, he did not
try to impress the Dakota with the Americans' growing
might in the region. An Indian agent named Benjamin
O'Fallon initially assumed this role. In the spring of 1818,
O'Fallon took a detachment of 50 U.S. soldiers up the
Mississippi River in two armed keelboats. He stopped at the
Mississippi Mdewakanton villages and continued 3 0 miles
up the Minnesota to Shakopee's village. This was the
largest U.S. expedition into Dakota territory and helped con -
FIGURE 7. Little Croiv II, Cetanwakamnani. Artist: Henry Imran.
Minnesota Historical Society.
vince the Dakota to abandon any hope the British might
return." Little Crow's actions made it dear that the United
States still needed to make this point. When O'Fallon
arrived at Little Crow's village, the chief was absent, having
gone to visit and protect British traders in western
Minnesota (Figure 7)."
The Americans eliminated any doubts little Crow had
about their permanence the following year. In August
1819, Colonel Henry Leavenworth arrived at the conflu-
ence of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers to begin build-
ing a new fort. Joining him on the trip was the Sac and Fox
Indian agent, Thomas Forsyth. At Wabasha's village, and
probably at all the Mdewakanton villages, Forsyth laid out
the three purposes that the fort would serve for the tribe: it
would protect them from the Chippewa and other Indians; it
would provide a blacksmith to fix their weapons and tools;
and it would be a trade center. The Americans' objectives,
which he did not emphasize, were to protect the fur trade
from British traders and to control the Native Americans.
Contrary to common assumptions, Anderson asserts that
Little Crow and other Mdewakantons `viewed the garrison
as an asset, They saw it not as a symbol of American
control, which is how the Americans viewed it, but as a
demonstration of the Americans' care and concern for the
Mdewakantons. Therefore, he surmises, they did not think
the fort represented an invasion of their land.'"
In August 1820 Colonel Josiah Snelling replaced
Leavenworth, and on September 10, Snelling set the fort's
cornerstone. After visiting the nearly completed fort in
1824, Major General Winfield Scott recommended that the
fort's name be changed from Fort St. Anthony to Fort
Snelling (Figure 8). The following year, the War Department
agreed."
Fort Snelling quickly became the regional center for
intertribal gatherings and negotiations. In addition to the
Dakota, the Chippewa, Menominee, and Winnebago visited
the fort. As Forsyth promised, the fort became a trade cen-
ter, as traders located across the river at Mendota and nearby
at Camp Coldwater."
66
of the Mississippi River below St. Paul. Buffalo no longer
drank from or wallowed in the Mississippi. Long had
encountered a few buffalo near the Buffalo River (Beef
Slough), just below Lake Pepin, during his 1817 expedi-
tion." As more American traders moved into Dakota lands,
FIGURE 8. Fort Snelling about 1848. Artist: Henry lends. Minnesota Historical Society.
By the 1820s the Dakota participated in an economic
system that would undermine their traditional culture. The
more they relied on European and then American trade
goods and food, the more they hunted to acquire the furs to
trade. By the 1820s beaver were scarce, and the Dakota
turned to muskrats. Muskrat skins brought far less than
beaver pelts, so the Dakota had to capture many more
muskrats. Muskrats totaled three-fourths of the furs
trapped by the Dakota during the 1820s, and by the mid -
1830s, they accounted for some 95 percent.
The destruction of game and fur -bearing animals east
of the Mississippi and the focus on the muskrat and other
small animals for food and furs forced the Mdewakantons to
hunt farther west." Keating, in his account of Stephen
Long's 1823 expedition, reported that game was rapidly
disappearing. He found little game along a 200 -mile reach
67
competition among the traders encouraged even greater
destruction of fur and game resources 63
During the 1820s, forces introduced by the fur trade
and the growing American presence began to tear at Dakota
community life. More traders and steamboat transportation
meant that American and European goods became abun-
dant, replacing ever more native articles. Faced by growing
competition, traders relied more on alcohol, and alcoholism
became rampant. At Kaposia factionalism intensified.
little Crow, himself prone to excessive drinking, could not
hold the village together. Grand Partisan and Medicine
x
Bottle left to create their own villages after 1825. Grand
Partisan established a village at "Pine Turn" or Pine Bend
about eight miles south of Kaposia, and Medicine Bottle
selected the west end of Grey Cloud Island for his. Even
American efforts to stop intertribal warfare, which had been
a traditional way for men to gain status, undermined the
Dakota way of life."
The depletion of game and the focus on muskrats also
brought changes to the Dakota settlement and economic
patterns. While the Mdewakantons still hunted along the
Chippewa, St. Croix, Sauk and Crow Wing Rivers, they had
less and less success each year. At Black Dog's village, just
up the Minnesota River from Fort Snelling, the
Mdewakantons broke into small groups to hunt muskrats.
Small groups worked more efficiently (suggesting a similar
pattern for little Crow's people). By the mid -1830s,
Dakota families began leaving their villages on the
Mississippi to hunt muskrats on the Minnesota River and
its tributaries. Little Crow IV, Taoyateduta, and the man
who would assume his grandfather's name and role, even
left for the prairies.
By the end of the 1820s and early 1830s, survival for
the Mdewakantons who stayed in their villages became dif l
cult. The demise of the region's fur and game resources
forced the Dakota, especially the Mdewakantons, to experi-
ment more with agriculture. The small number living
around the fort increasingly relied on handouts " William
Clark, the superintendent for Indian Affairs, captured the
plight of the Dakota hunter well. "`This period,"' he wrote
in 1826, "`is that in which he ceases to be a hunter, from
the extinction of game, and before he gets the means of liv-
ing, from the produce of flocks and agriculture.""'
By 183 6 the Mdewakantons faced a crisis. Their num-
hers had fallen to about 1,400, as starvation, a smallpox
epidemic, and warfare sapped their population. Thinking
he could stop the downward spiral, Lawrence Taliaferro, the
Indian agent at Fort Snelling, suggested that the Dakota sell
their lands east of the Mississippi River. Although settlers
were not pressing for the land, Taliaferro thought the
Dakota could benefit far more from its sale than its use. He
hoped the money would encourage the Mdewakantons to
take up agriculture. Already Little Crow, Black Dog and
Cloud Man had asked Taliaferro to help their people learn
farming. Cloud Man's people planted crops at Lake Calhoun
in 1830, establishing a community named Eatonville, after
John Eaton, the Secretary of War. By 1834, 135 Dakota
lived at Eatonville. The U.S. government initially balked at
Taliaferro's treaty proposal. But when Congress created the
Wisconsin Territory in August 1836, the government
endorsed the idea 67
By the end of September 183 7, the treaty's details had
been worked out and the Dakota had agreed to them. Under
the treaty, the Mdewakantons were to receive $25,000 in
food, farm tools, and goods annually for 20 years. They were
also to get a permanent $15,000 annual annuity that repre-
sented the interest on a $300,000 trust fund. Congress did
not officially approve the treaty until June 15, 183 8.61
The payments from the 183 7 treaty gave the
Mdewakantons a brief respite. As the annuities provided
another food source and as more tribal members received
smallpox vaccinations, their population began to recover.
On the treaty's eve, the Mdewakanton population had stood
at about 1,400. By 1850 it reached 2,250 individuals, a
60 -percent surge. (Granted, members returning from the
west boosted the band's numbers.) Ironically, Anderson
contends, the treaty allowed the Dakota to continue their
nomadic lifestyle, by making up for the declining success of
the hunt.
The annuities could not hide the demise of the
Dakota's game and fur resources. By the late 1830s,
muskrat prices had fallen so low in the East that some
traders quit taking them. Outside the annuities, muskrats
furnished most of the Dakota's income, allowing them to
buy food and trade goods. Without muskrats, the
Mdewakantons depended more upon the annuities and the
Americans. This dependence deepened as game disappeared
and pork and flour replaced wild meat and wild rice. And
the Dakota, although they had begun experimenting with
68
American settlers started crossing over by the hundreds to
squat on lands they believed the Federal Government would
inevitably open to settlement. Some hoped to capture the
waterpower on the west side of St. Anthony Falls (like some
entrepreneurs had already done on the east after the 183 7
-
WON=- ,
MI.-
.�
**Sri
R
r F
T
VN__T_
r
FIGURE 9. Kaposia II, Little Crow's Village. Artist. Seth Eastman. Minnesota Historical Society.
agriculture, were far from becoming sedentary"
As the Mdewakantons and other Dakota relied more
upon the Americans, the Americans steadily pushed onto
the Mdewakanton's lands. By 183 8 little Crow had moved
Kaposia across the Mississippi River (Figure 9). Almost
immediately settlers, including the whiskey seller Pierre
"Pigs Eye" Parrant, claimed the land at the old village site.
Parrant had built a cabin at Fountain Cave on June 1, 1838,
but Fort Snelling's commandant kicked Parrant and others
off the military reservation later that year. Parrant then set-
tled at or near the old Kaposia village. Throughout the
1830s and 1840s, the American population east of the
river steadily increased, and Methodist missionaries opened
a school near Kaposia shortly after the 183 7 treaty"
The river was supposed to have been a boundary, but
69
treaty). Others simply wanted to stake their claim to farms,
knowing they could get the land as cheap as possible.
Pressure began mounting for the Dakota to sign anoth-
er treaty, one that would bring an end to their residence
along the Mississippi River and lower Minnesota River.
This time the Americans would force the treaty on the
Dakota. After Wisconsin became a state in 1848 and
Congress created the Minnesota Territory in 1849, talk of
removing the Dakota intensified. Within a couple of years
St. Paul had 142 buildings (Figure 10). Pig's Eye—the old
x
r
FIGURE 10. St. Paul about 1848. Artist: Heuiy Lewis. Minnesota Historical Society.
Kaposia village—had about a dozen farms, and two frame
houses stood at the new Kaposia (Figure 11). St. Paul's
expansion and the Dakota's growing dependence upon the
Americans made another treaty inevitable."
While the western bands, the Sisseton and
Wahpetons, wanted a treaty so they could get annuities, the
Mdewakantons were not so anxious. The Mdewakantons
knew they would be giving up their homeland on the
Mississippi and Minnesota rivers. But they, like the other
bands, were becoming desperate. On July 18, 1851, the
United States, under a commission headed by Alexander
Ramsey, the territorial governor, began negotiating with the
western, or upper bands, of the Dakota. Despite some ini-
70
tial troubles, the Sisseton and Wahpetons signed the Treaty
of Traverse des Sioux on July 23. This put the Wahpekutes
and Mdewakantons in the middle of lands ceded to the
United States and intensified the pressure on both bands to
sign a treaty"
On July 29 the Mdewakantons and the Wahpekutes
began negotiating with Governor Ramsey and the U.S.
treaty commission, in a warehouse at Mendota. Ramsey
addressed the Dakota frankly: "`You would not only have
71
the whites along the river in front but all around you....
You should pass away from the river and go farther west""
Wabasha III and the other chiefs balked. The United States
had failed to comply with provisions of the 183 7 treaty,
and the Dakota insisted these be met before continuing. At
Wabasha's (III) request, the council moved outside to Pilot
Knob, above the Minnesota River, in full view of the land
and rivers that had been so important to them for so long
(Figure 11)." Wabasha then warned everyone that some
Mdewakantons had threatened to kill any chief who signed
the treaty. Nevertheless, on August 5, Little Crow (IV of
Taoyateduta) stood up for the Mdewakantons and signed
(Figure 12). Thirty-five other leaders followed. With this
event, Little Crow assumed leadership of the Mdewakantons
and acknowledged that his people would have to leave their
homeland."
Under the Treaty of Mendota, as it became called, the
Mdewakantons and Wahpekutes were to receive a 20 -mile -
wide reservation on the Minnesota River in return for their
land. The government also promised goods and services
worth S1.41 million. Of this, S 1.16 million was to go into
a trust fund for 50 years. The government would pay 5 per-
cent (558,000) of this annually to the bands as food, accul-
turation projects and cash (530,000).76
The Treaties of Mendota and Traverse des Sioux sig-
naled the explosion of American settlement around the
Mississippi River in the Twin Cities metropolitan area.
Settlers in the Minnesota Territory celebrated the two
treaties. Many hurried west across the river at the news of
the Mendota treaty and staked claims to farms and town -
sites, before the Senate ratified it. The Mdewakantons com-
plained. The government had not made any payments
promised by the treaty. The commandant at Fort Snelling
referred the matter to Washington and nothing came of it.
While the Mdewakantons resented the settlers, they felled
on them for handouts, when they returned from their
winter hunt."
The Senate finally ratified both treaties but eliminated
the provision for permanent reservations. The Dakota then
x
HCURE 11. This image captures something of what tine Aldeivakantons gave up in the 1851 meaty. Red Rock, a Dakota sacred object, sits to the left. Air
Indian face is painted into tire waterfall atFazvu's Leap, a waterfall that lay just below St. Anthony. The face may suggest something about the spiritual impor-
tance of waterfalls to tire Dakota. Both images attest to depth of Dakota history in the area. Artist. Rudolph Cronau, 1881. A inaesota Historical Society.
questioned whether they should move. While the western
bands agreed to the change, the Mdewakantons rejected it.
On September 4, 1852, the band finally agreed to the
amendments. Henry M. Rice, a St. Paul fur trader hired by
Ramsey, apparently assured the Mdewakantons that they
would get the reservation on the upper Minnesota River that
they wanted."`
The task of convincing the Dakota to leave their ances-
tral homes fell to Willis A. Gorman, who succeeded
Alexander Ramsey as Minnesota's territorial governor in
1853. In the spring of 1853, speculators and settlers sur-
veyed Kaposia II for town lots and farms, usurping the
Dakota's fields. While Little Crow's people did not overtly
resist the intrusions, the Dakota at the villages under Black
Dog, Wabasha, and Wakute (Red Wing) did and pressure on
the Dakota to leave grew. Little Crow won a short reprieve
from Gorman, however. The United States had agreed to
prepare the reservation by planting fields and building
warehouses, but failed to do so. Little Crow insisted that
his people could not survive the winter without provisions
and convinced Gorman to let the Mdewakantons stay on the
72
PF
%ft . �;n
FIGURE 12. Little Crow. Prisoner at Ft. Snelling following the 1362
Dakota Conflict. Photo byJ. E. Whitney. Minnesota Historical Society.
Mississippi through the winter of 1853-54.
In the spring of 1854, Gorman took little Crow to
Washington, D.C., and introduced him to the Secretary of
the Interior and President Franklin Pierce. Little Crow
received enough assurances about the reservation to satisfy
him, and he learned how futile resisting would be. In May
1854, Little Crow led his people on an exodus up the
73
Minnesota River to the new reservation near Redwood. By
the end of June, most of the Mdewakantons had reached
their new home; only a few remained around the
Mississippi River."
Removing the Mdewakantons from the Mississippi
River and the MNRRA corridor closed an important era in
the river's history, in Dakota history, and in the history of
American settlement. For hundreds of years, the Dakota
had used the river without changing it much, physically or
ecologically. But under the fur trade, the Dakota began
altering the river's ecosystem, nearly eliminating some
species. After the Dakota left, American settlers freely cut
down the forests, plowed the ground, and fully harnessed
the falls. As more Americans came and the more they relied
on the river, the more they would want to change the river
and the land to fit their needs. At this point the history of
settlement takes over the story in the MNRRA corridor.
Transforming the River I: Commerce and Navigation
Improvements, 1823-1906
he Mississippi River gave birth to most cities
along its banks, and those cities did all they
could to ensure that the river would nurture
their growth. From their pioneer days on, they insisted that
the federal government should "improve" the river for navi-
gation. St. Paul and Minneapolis pushed especially hard.
Lying at the head of navigation, they demanded a river capa-
ble of delivering the immigrants needed to populate the
land (not considering that they had taken it from Native
Americans) and the tools and provisions needed to fully use
it. They also demanded a navigable river so they could
deliver the bounty of their labor and their new land to the
country and the world. All this, they believed, was part of
their manifest destiny. To fulfill that destiny, they would
help transform the entire upper Mississippi River and make
the reach between Hastings and St. Anthony Falls one of the
river's most engineered. (Figure 1)
The Twin Cities had to see that the entire Mississippi
River was remade. They needed local navigation projects,
but these did little good without a navigable river down-
stream. So they actively participated in local, regional and
national campaigns for navigation improvement. In
FIGURE 1. Port of St. Paul, head of naidgation, 1853. Steamboats at
the Upper and LoiverLandings. Artist. Thompson Ritchie. American
Memory Project, Library of Congress.
75
response to their lobbying, Congress authorized four broad
projects to improve navigation on the upper river and a
number of site-specific projects in the Twin Cities metropol-
itan area since 1866. The four broad projects are known as
the 4-, 472-, 6- and 9 -foot channel projects. Key local proj-
ects included Locks and Dams 1 (Ford Dam) and 2
(Hastings), Lower and Upper St. Anthony Falls Locks and
Dams, and the little known Meeker Island Lock and Dam,
which was the river's first and shortest -lived lock and dam
(Figure 2). In less than 100 years, these projects would rad-
ically transform the river that nature had created over mil-
lions of years and that Native Americans had hunted along,
canoed on, and fished in for thousands of years.
Navigation on the Natural River:
1823-1866
Early Navigation - Paddling upstream from St. Louis to St.
Paul in 1823, the Virginia became the first steamboat to
navigate the upper Mississippi River. It did so twice that
year. Other boats had been plying the upper river—Indian
canoes, piroques, flatboats and keelboats—but the Virginia
announced a new era. Under steam power, people and goods
could be transported upstream far more quickly and in
greater numbers and quantities than on boats with sails or
oars or poles. As steamboats evolved and as the region's
population and production grew, the river's limitations as a
I.arrs• � � F�
Fry*V"Wft Wen
r Po ir SLA1da
SHIM Paul
Mork or hAmW Ltii d Dam t
Minneapolis «x s [A-'
d
Fort Sr+,
V. MMA n,-�,w,
FIGURE 2. To the residents of the growing metropolitan area, the
Mississippi promised unlimited wealth ifthey could harness its power
and make it navigable. The early dams, however, served only one purpose.
navigation route would become unacceptable and
Midwesterners would repeatedly call for its improvement as
a commercial artery.
Steamboat traffic grew quickly after 1823. Between
1823 and 1847, mostboats carried lead and worked
around Galena, Illinois. Few boats plied the river above
Galena. After 1847, as miners depleted the lead supply, the
trade quickly declined.' Despite the fall of lead shipping,
steamboat traffic on the upper Mississippi boomed. One
measure of this was the number of times steamboats docked
at the upper river's port cities. Some steamboats might land
only once, while others returned many times. St. Paul
recorded 41 steamboat arrivals in 1844. and 95 in 1849.
During the 1850s, traffic soared. By 185 7, St. Paul had
become a bustling port, with over 1,000 steamboat arrivals
each year by some 62 to 99 boats?
Table 5.1
Number of steamboat arrivals
at St. Paul, 1844-1862.
1844 ...... 41 1854......
256
1845 ...... 48 1855......
560
1846 ...... 24 1856......
837
1847 ...... 47 1857....
1,026
1848 ...... 63 1858....
1,090
1849 ...... 95 1859......
802
1850..... 104 1860......
776
1851..... 119 1861......
772
1852..... 171 1862......
846
1853.....200
(Sources: Frank Haigh Dixon, ATraffic History of the
Mississippi River System, Washington: Government
Printing Office: 1909, p. 20; Mildred Hartsough, From
Canoe to Steel Barge, Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 1934, p. 100.)
As rapidly as the number of steamboats increased, they
could not keep pace with demand. In 1854 the Minnesota
Pioneer, a St. Paul newspaper, reported that passengers and
freight overflowed from every steamboat that arrived and
that "the present tonnage on the river is by no means suffi-
cient to handle one-half the business of the trade."' While
two steamboats often left St. Paul each day, they could not
carry goods away as quickly as merchants and farmers
deposited it, and many upper river cities mirrored St. Paul_'
Each steamboat that docked created new business and a
greater backlog, as more immigrants disembarked to estab-
lish farms and businesses.'
Spurred by Indian land cessions that opened much of
the Midwest between 1820 and 1860, by Iowa's statehood
76
in 1846 and Wisconsin's in 1848 and by the creation of
the Minnesota Territory in 1849, passenger traffic on the
upper river boomed. Many passengers came from the East;
others came from Europe, fleeing famine in Ireland and
political unrest on the continent. While some arrived by
way of the Great Lakes, many settlers entering Iowa,
Minnesota and western Wisconsin made part of their jour-
ney on the upper river.' Historian Roald Tweet contends
that, "The number of immigrants boarding boats at St. Louis
and traveling upriver to St. Paul dwarfed the 1849 gold
rush to California and Oregon."' More than one million
passengers arrived at or left from St. Louis in 1855 alone"
As a result, the population of the four upper river states
above Missouri ballooned between 1850 and 1860.
Minnesota's population jumped from 6,077 to 172,023,
Iowa's from 192,000 to 674,913, Wisconsin's from
305,391 to 775,881 and Illinois' from 851,470 to
1,711,9512 Passenger traffic became so important to the
steamboat trade that by 1850 passenger receipts exceeded
freight receipts. "'
The Natural River
Before 1866, during the heyday of steamboats, the upper
Mississippi River still possessed most of its natural charac-
ter. Trees filled and enshrouded it. Where steamboat pilots
followed the deepest channel, as it hugged one shore or the
other, leaning trees might sweep poorly placed cargo or an
unwary passenger from a steamboat's deck. Many trees fell
into the water to become snags. Snags skewered the careless
and even the cautious steamboat. Snags were such frequent
and treacherous hazards that steamboat pilots named them
(Figure 3). Those that swayed back and forth with the cur-
rent they called sawyers. Those that bowed in and out of the
water they labeled preachers. Planters were those that
became lodged in the river's bottom, and sleepers hid
beneath the water's surface. Snags could, in an instant,
FIGURE 3. Wreck of the Quincy, lying on the bottom. Minnesota
Histodcal Society.
77
impale a steamboat or tear it apart." The natural river
became surprisingly narrow in places. Zebulon Pike and
Stephen Long both not only commented on how confined
the river became above Hastings, they rowed its width to see
how few strokes they needed. Pike took 40 strokes in his
bateau and Long only 16 in his skiff. II
Hundreds of islands, some forming and others being
cut away, divided the natural river, dispersing its waters into
innumerable side channels and backwaters. By dividing the
river, islands limited the water available to the navigation
channel and thereby its depth. Islands created dangerous
currents." From just below Hastings to St. Anthony Falls
roughly 40 islands broke the river's flow. The number of
islands, of course, varied with the season and the year, as
many islands were temporary.
Sandbars posed the most persistent and frequent prob
y lem. They divided the upper Mississippi into a series of
z
o deep pools separated by wide shallows that sometimes
xstranded even the lightest steamboats. Sandbars determined
o the river's overall navigability. A bad bar could sever St.
w Paul's and Hastings' connection with St. Louis, the Gulf of
Mexico and the world." Normally, dining the late summer
or early fall, the river began falling and would enter the
stage steamboat pilots and Corps engineers called low water.
During low water, no continuous channel existed. Deep
pools might run near one bank for a short reach and then
jump to the other. Or a series of deeper pools separated by
shallow sandbars could be scattered across the main chan-
nel. Deep was anything over three feet.
Sandbars determined the river's controlling depth—the
minimum depth for navigation at low water. From St. Paul
to the St. Croix River, the controlling depth at low water
was 16 inches. From the St. Croix to the Illinois River it
varied from 18 to 24 inches." A few miles below St. Paul,
the river sometimes became so shallow that boats would
have to stop within sight of the city.16 The folklore that peo-
ple once waded across the Mississippi is true.
George Byron Merrick captures well the perils of sail-
ing the natural river. Born in Niles, Michigan, on the St.
Joseph River, Merrick watched steamboats go back and forth
between South Bend, Indiana, and the town of St. Joseph on
Lake Michigan." When Merrick was 12 years old, his fami-
ly left Michigan and traveled to Rock Island, Illinois. There
they took a steamboat upriver to Prescott, Wisconsin, some
30 miles below St. Paul, arriving in June 1854. Merrick's
father bought a warehouse on the levee from which he ran a
storage and transshipping business. He also sold "boat -
stores" and groceries to the steamboats that stopped at the
levee. The family lived in the upper two stories, George
sharing the attic with his brother." From there the boys
could see and hear every steamboat that stopped at or passed
the levee. "And thus," Merrick recalled, "we grew into the
very life of the river as we grew in years."" When old
enough, Merrick began working on a steamboat as a cabin
boy and after one season became a cub engineer. Over the
next nine years he worked his way up to become a cub pilot.
But in 1862, he left the river to fight in the Civil War.
After the war, he settled in New York. In 18 76, he returned
to Wisconsin to become—fittingly—a railway agent.
Subsequently he turned to newspaper editing and publish-
ing.Z°
From his experiences, Merrick learned much about the
natural river. Pilots, Merrick recounted, had to study the
"nightmares" first. Three of those nightmares—the sandbars
at Prescott, Grey Cloud, and Pig's Eye—received special note
in Merrick's history. The dangers of navigating the natural
river were so great, he said, that pilots had to memorize
"every bluff, hill, rock, tree, stump, house, woodpile, and
whatever else is to be noted along the banks of the river.1121
And pilots, he added, learned "The artistic quality in han-
dling of a boat under the usual conditions—in making the
multitudinous crossings, ...dodging reefs and hunting the
best water."ZZ Poor hunters often fell prey to the river they
hunted.
In 1862, Nathan Daly, the son of a Minnesota pioneer
family fleeing from the Dakota Conflict in Minnesota,
recounts the effect bars could have on a steamboat's hull.
Traveling down the Mississippi to Illinois, Daly's family
78
camped for a night a few miles below St. Paul. Here, the
Northern Light, one of the largest steamers on the upper
river, passed them just after sundown. The young Daly
recalled in his memoir that he could "distinctly hear the
grinding of her bottom on the gravel bar over which she was
passing."" Some boats ground to a halt on sandbars. To get
off, pilots sometimes used spars, long wood poles on which
the front and back of the boats would be alternately jacked
up and pushed forward. In this way, pilots hoped to walk
their boat over the bar. If lucky, they avoided "hogging" the
boat; that is, warping or breaking its hull."
Rocks and rapids were a greater problem for steamboats
trying to ply the river above St. Paul. From St. Anthony
Falls to downtown St. Paul, some 15 river miles, the river
falls more than 100 feet. This steep slope, combined with a
narrow gorge and limestone boulders left by the retreat of
the falls, made the river through this reach too treacherous
for steamboat navigation." Thus, St. Paul had become the
head of navigation.
A Four -Foot Channel, 1866-1877
To steamboat pilots the natural river was too perilous, and
Midwesterners feared an unreliable river might limit their
region's destiny. That destiny, they believed, was to become
a commercial and industrial power as strong as the East, as
well as the nation's breadbasket. Before the Civil War,
Congress authorized minor improvements for the upper
Mississippi River but no work for the river above Hastings.
On June 23, 1866, Congress passed the first postwar
River and Harbor Act. This act signaled a new era of inter-
nal improvements and the beginning of dramatic changes to
the upper Mississippi River. Historians generally agree that
with the Civil War's end the federal government took a very
different position on internal improvements. Prior to the
war, with a few exceptions, Congress and/or the President
had opposed a federal role in internal improvements."
The 1866 act provided for the first project to focus on
the whole upper river.Z' It directed the Corps to survey the
Mississippi River between St. Anthony Falls and the Rock
79
Island Rapids, "with a view to ascertain the feasible means,
by economizing the water of the stream, of insuring the pas-
sage, at all navigable seasons, of boats drawing four feet of
water...:' In other words, Congress asked the Corps to
determine how to establish a continuous, 4 -foot channel for
the upper river at low water. Low water was based on the
river's elevation in 1864, when a severe drought occurred.
By a 4 -foot channel, Congress meant a channel at least 4
feet deep if the river fell as low as it did in 1864. (The 9 -
foot channel today is based on the same benchmark.)
To create a 4 -foot channel and deal with the Rock
Island and Des Moines Rapids, the Corps established its first
offices on the upper Mississippi River: one at St. Paul and
one at Keokuk, Iowa (the latter would be moved to Rock
Island in 1869)." On July 31, 1866, A. A. Humphreys, the
Chief of Engineers, ordered Brevet Major General and Major
of Engineers Gouverneur K. Warren to St. Paul to begin the
Corps' work on the upper Mississippi River (Figure 4). With
Warren's arrival in St. Paul in August, the Corps established
FIGURE 4. Major General Gouverneur K. Warren. First head of St. Paul
District, Corps of Engineers. Corps of Engineers.
x
a permanent stake in how the upper Mississippi River
would be managed and changed. From this time forward,
the Corps' role in the river would become as deep and broad
as the river itself. It came at the insistence of the states,
farmers, business interests and the general public. All
demanded the federal presence, the federal expertise and the
federal dollars.
Before he could develop a plan for achieving the 4 -foot
channel, Warren had to learn more about the upper
Mississippi River and he had to complete his survey. After
charging men under him to undertake the tributary surveys,
Warren began the upper Mississippi survey from the Rock
Island Rapids to Minneapolis himself. From this work,
Warren contended that in its natural state the Mississippi
River's navigation channel frequently changed and that the
Corps would have to survey the river each year until they
understood how it worked." In some reaches, Warren
reported, sandbars moved in waves along the channel bot-
tom, looking something like snowdrifts. A wave would
start at the head of the reach and begin moving down, even
when the current slowed. Another wave soon followed. As
the river fell, each wave formed a bar that acted like a small
dam. Behind the bar lay a deep pool of water. Just past the
crest, the channel quickly became deeper." Normally, the
river would begin cutting through the steep slope on the
back side of the bar and another bar would eventually begin
forming downstream of it. Without enough current, this
happened too slowly for navigation. When a series of bars
came in close succession, the river could become seriously
obstructed. In these reaches, Warren found that "the river
seems, as it were, lost, and indecisive which way to go and
the pilot is scarcely able to find the line of deepest water
even in daylight, and is unable to proceed at night with any
confidence."" The small pools behind the bars would play
an important part in Warren's strategy for navigation
improvement on the upper river.
Between 1866 and 1869, Warren completed 30 sur-
vey maps of the upper Mississippi River, at the scale of 2
inches to the mile. Ten sheets formed a continuous map of
the river from St. Anthony Falls to the mouth of the St.
Croix River. The remaining maps focused on problem reach-
es or detailed the river near a specific town." From these
maps and from what he would learn about early navigation
improvements, Warren began planning the 4 -foot channel
proj ect.
Warren asked private companies and local interests
what work they had done to improve the river's navigability.
He learned that Minneapolis and St. Anthony (the commu-
nity on the river's east bank that merged with Minneapolis
in 18 72) had funded the removal of boulders to encourage
steamboats to travel above St. Paul. At Guttenberg, Iowa, an
island split the river into two channels, one passing in front
of the city and the other running along the Wisconsin side.
Desiring to keep traffic flowing past their city, the citizens
had attempted to close the Wisconsin channel but had been
unsuccessful. Rafting companies and steamboat interests
had employed wing dams to scour the channel at trouble-
some bars. These "slight dams," Warren commented, had
been somewhat successful, "indicating a way of deepening
the low-water channel worthy of special attention." But
these measures had been only temporary; high water usual-
ly swept the dams away. Overall, Warren found that those
who had been using the river "evince a shrewd knowledge
of the action of running water and the means of temporarily
controlling it, gained by their constant experience and
observation."" Warren listened to these knowledgeable
sources, but came to his own conclusions.
Warren provided estimates for a variety of projects, in
his first annual report in 1867. Responding in part to
Minneapolis business and political interests, he requested
5235,665 to construct alock and dam at Meeker Island,
which lay between Minneapolis and St. Paul. If built, this
project would allow Minneapolis to become the head of nav-
igation. Without a lock and dam, the river above St. Paul
was too narrow, too shallow, too strewn with boulders and
the current too fast for steamboat navigation." To create a
safe and continuous 4 -foot channel for the river between St.
Paul and the Rock Island Rapids, Warren asked for 596,000
80
to acquire and operate two dredge and snag boats, 55,000
to construct an experimental closing dam at Prescott Island,
about 26 miles below St. Paul, and 55,000 for another
experimental closing dam for the Wacouta chute near Red
Wing, Minnesota."
Warren decided to deepen the upper Mississippi by
dredging. It was a method that had proven successful in
France and elsewhere.36 Mississippi River pilots had learned
that by running their paddle wheels over the crest of a bar,
they helped the river cut through it, allowing the flow from
the pool to deepen the cut just enough for the boat to pass.
As a result, Warren favored dredging. As long as the Corps
ran the dredges, it could limit the depth of the cut on a bar
and preserve much of the deeper pool behind it. "In view of
the hold which this method has taken upon the minds of
river men, and the difficulties, uncertainty, and expense
which attend the use of dams," Warren concluded, "I have
determined to recommend the employment of these dredg-
ing machines."" In 1867 the Corps initiated a program of
dredging sandbars, snagging, clearing overhanging trees and
removing sunken vessels to create the 4 -foot channel.
The 4 -foot project did not greatly alter the river's phys-
ical or ecological character and did not improve the river
much for navigation, but it initiated a series of navigation
projects that would do both. The Corps simply did not have
the funding, equipment, personnel or authority to make sig-
nificant and permanent changes. Midwesterners, however,
needed to transform the river, if they hoped to make it a
commercial thoroughfare.
Demanding a Deeper Channel
Railroad Monopolies • The Midwest's need to receive and
send out goods grew as rapidly as its population and agricul-
tural production. Railroads, more than the river, would
meet the region's need, but not without a price, a price
much too high for some. In 1854 the first two railroads
reached the Mississippi River: the Chicago and Rock Island
Railroad at Rock Island, Illinois, and the Chicago and Alton
at Alton, Illinois. In 1855 a railroad entered Galena.
81
Quincy and Cairo, Illinois, became railheads in 1856, and
East St. Louis, Illinois, and Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin, in
1857. La Crosse, Wisconsin, joined these cities, becoming
the terminus of the Milwaukee and La Crosse in 185 8. At
Rock Island in 1856, the Chicago and Rock Island became
the first railroad to cross the Mississippi. But the economic
panic of 185 7 and the Civil War ended further railroad
expansion across the Mississippi. Despite the growing men-
ace of the railroads, river traffic remained strong."'
Railroad expansion following the Civil War accelerated
the pace of the Midwest's unprecedented population and
agricultural growth. Railroad trackage in the United States
multiplied from 30,635 miles in 1860, to 52,914 in
1870, and 92,296 in 1880." Before the Civil War, only
the Rock Island Railroad had bridged the upper Mississippi
River from Illinois to Iowa. Between 1866 and 1869, three
more railroads crossed the river to Iowa, and by 1877, thir-
teen railroad bridges spanned the upper river (Figure 5).°
Railroads greatly increased the country's ability to move
commodities, and, yet, railroads would provoke and inflame
a shipping crisis. In doing so, they would contribute to the
drive for navigation improvement at the same time they
were throttling shipping on the river.
While steamboat traffic had remained strong before the
Civil War, steamboats had begun losing passengers and
grain to railroads. Early railheads on the upper river's east
bank fostered steamboat traffic, but they initiated its end as
well. With each new rail connection, steamboats made
shorter trips between ports. Instead of going to St. Louis or
New Orleans, a steamboat from St. Paul might unload at La
Crosse or Rock Island or at other railheads, and increasingly,
most river commerce became local.'
While the river had been hauling grain since the birth
of Midwestern agriculture, railroads held too many advan-
tages over the undeveloped waterways. Railroads moved
their freight quicker, giving their users greater flexibility in
responding to market changes. Rail lines were generally
shorter, more direct, and could reach deep into lands served
by no navigable rivers. Compatibility between rail lines
x
FIGURES. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railroad .Budge, Hastings, Mimi., 1885. By Hemy P. Bosse. Rock Island District, Cor ps of Engineers
made transshipment unnecessary. Trains ran when the river
was high or low; they ran when the cold of winter froze it;
for the most part, they ran throughout the year." Those
railroads that ran east to west—most importantly to
Chicago—took advantage of complementary markets.
Midwestern farmers sent grain to Chicago, and Chicago mer-
chants and eastern manufacturers sent their goods back on
the railroads. While railroads could send many cars in both
directions with full cargoes, barges delivering their com-
modities at St. Louis or New Orleans or points in between
too often returned empty.'
The Granger Movement • As railroads spread throughout
the upper Mississippi River valley and the Midwest, they
began monopolizing the shipping of bulk commodities,
especially grain. With river traffic failing and railroads
monopolizing the region's transportation, many farmers
and business interests believed they were facing a shipping
crisis. In response, farmers in the Midwest and throughout
the nation joined the first national farm movement, called
the Grange or Patrons of Husbandry. Grangers sought to
control railroad rates through state and federal regulation
and through improved navigation on the nation's rivers.
Formed in 1868 by Oliver Hudson Kelley, a Minnesota
farmer who had moved to Washington, D.C., to work as a
clerk in the Department of Agriculture, the Grange had
established nearly 1,400 chapters in 25 states by 1873
(Figure 6).11 The number of chapters multiplied to more
than 10,000 by the end of the year. Over the next year, the
82
Grange founded nearly 12,000 chapters and claimed over
858,000 members.
Solon J. Buck, who wrote the classic study of the
Grange, observed that, although avowedly nonpolitical, "the
phenomenal increase in the membership of the order during
18 73 and 1874 awakened the liveliest interest, and some-
times apprehension, among politicians throughout the
Union."' As a result, he says, "the New York Tribune, refer-
ring to the Grange, declared that "`within a few weeks it has
menaced the political equilibrium of the most steadfast
states. While the Grange refused to form a political party
or actively participate in the established parties, its mem-
bers did not. Farmers created third parties in states
throughout the country during the mid -1870s, winning sig-
nificant elections and threatening the established order.
Kelley and Grangers in the upper Mississippi River val-
FIGURE 6. Oliver Kelley, founding rnentber, Patrons of Husbandry or
the Grange. Minnesota Historical Society.
83
ley saw the river as an essential route to domestic and for-
eign markets. Demonstrating the Grange's early concern for
improving the Mississippi River, the state Grange conven-
tion of 1869 featured the river. Printed in the Minnesota
Monthly's July edition, the convention's preamble to its reso-
lutions declared:
The Mississippi River traverses for thousands of miles
the noblest agricultural regions of the earth, running
from North to South.... it is destined to become the most
popular region of the world, and its waters should forever
be keptfree and untrammelled and open to the use of
every citizen within the entire navigable length, and all
obstructions, whether na tural or of human device, are
like impediments to theprosperity of thepeople who till
the soil of the great valley.
In August 1870, Kelley left Minnesota by steamboat
for St. Louis to secure direct trade arrangements between
Minnesota and Missouri. During his trip, he fed the St. Paul
PioneerPress articles condemning railroads and the Chicago
Board of Trade and promoting waterway improvement. He
hoped to restore the dying river connection between St. Paul
and St. Louis. "The Mississippi and her tributaries are natu-
ral outlets for the west and northwest," Kelley insisted, "but
how little attention is given to their improvement"
Railroads, he charged, "control the river front in every town
on the river; their boats can land freight without paying
wharfage and people consider it all right" While railroads
had received huge land grants, steamboats had not.
"Railroads have got enough for the present...:' he conclud-
ed, calling on Congress to appropriate funding "for every
navigable stream in the West" and to `open the natural out-
lets free to all."" To restore river traffic, Kelley insisted that
the Mississippi needed grants like those given to railroads,
and the Grange had to establish an agent in St. Louis to buy
and sell Minnesota's products.
As with the drive for railroad legislation, the push for
waterway improvement was not just a farmers' movement.
St. Louis merchants were among the Mississippi River's
x
greatest advocates. Reeling from Chicago's increasing domi-
nance over the region's trade, they saw the river as their best
counteroffensive. In 1867, they held, according to one his-
torian, the most important navigation improvement conven-
tion before 18 73. "The keynote of the meeting was a deter-
mined effort to obtain federal money for the improvement
of western waterways so that they might be used as reliable
routes for cheap transportation.""' Cheap transportation,
delegates argued, would allow the United States to "monop-
olize the markets of the world:'ll
In May 18 73, cheap transportation advocates held
another convention in St. Louis—the Western Congressional
Convention. It drew national Senators and Representatives
from 22 states and the governors of Minnesota, Ohio,
Kansas, Missouri, and Virginia. The conference organizers'
goal was to impress upon these key political officials the
depth of the shipping crisis. The solution, they insisted, lay
in improving the nation's waterways, especially the
Mississippi River and its tributaries. Such improvements
were beyond the ability of the individual states and had to
be undertaken by the federal government, they declared."'
The Windom Committee • Spurred by the Granger move-
ment and navigation conventions—partly out of fear and
partly out of a genuine concern to help farmers and busi-
nesses—Minnesota Senator William Windom asked the
Senate to establish a committee to examine the transporta-
tion problem and recommend solutions to it. The threat of a
railroad monopoly, the commercial decline of the
Mississippi River and rising dissatisfaction with his
Republican party were of particular concern to Senator
Windom (Figure 7). Windom's hometown, Winona, lay on
the Mississippi River in southeastern Minnesota." Windom
first became a senator when Republican Daniel S. Norton
died in office in 1870 and Minnesota's governor appointed
Windom to fill the seat. Windom had already served in the
House for a decade. While the Minnesota legislature
appointed someone else to finish Norton's term, Windom
won the seat in 1871. He would become one of the Senate's
FIGURE 7. Navigation booster and Minnesota Senator, William
Windom. Photo by Brady. Minnesota Historical Society.
strongest advocates for railroad regulation and navigation
improvement."
The rapidly growing strength of the Granger movement
in Minnesota and the threat of railroad monopolies spurred
Windom to address the transportation issue with zeal. Led
by Ignatius Donnelly, Grange supporters had organized the
People's Anti -Monopoly party, "with a platform striking at
monopolies, advocating state railroad controls, and
denouncing postwar corruption...."" Recognizing the
Granger movement's growing strength and its discontent
with the Republican party's failure to deal with monopolies
and the farm crisis, Donnelly joined the movement in 1872.
As Anti -Monopoly parties threatened to undermine the
Republican party's dominance in the state and nationally,
Windom and other Republicans began working for railroad
84
reform and began seeking ways to solve the farm crisis."
As chairman of the Senate Select Committee on
Transportation to the Seaboard, Windom was in an especial-
ly good position to help both farmers and his party. In
December 1872, he had introduced a resolution to address
the transportation problem. And in a speech before the
Senate, he asserted that "it was `an admitted fact' that pres-
ent transportation facilities between the interior and the
seaboard were `totally inadequate: These transportation
networks," he charged, "were controlled by `powerful
monopolies who dictate their own terms to the people. The
burdens they impose upon both consumer and producer are
too grievous to be long endured."' " On March 26, 1873,
responding to Windom, the Grange and the transportation
crisis, the Senate directed Windom's committee to study the
problem. 16
On April 24, 1874, Windom's committee submitted
its report to the Senate. After reviewing various proposals,
the committee recommended that Congress regulate some
railroad operations and that it authorize an intense program
of waterway improvements. The "remarkable physical adap-
tation of our country for cheap and ample water communi-
cations," the committee concluded, "point unerringly to the
improvement of our great natural water -ways, and their con-
nection by canals, or by short freight -railway portages under
control of the government, as the obvious and certain solu-
tion of the problem of cheap transportation.""
Relying on the reports the Corps of Engineers submit-
ted, the committee noted that improvements on the
Mississippi River had been sporadic. No general plan had
been developed or implemented. The committee recom-
mended that Congress authorize surveys and get cost esti-
mates prepared as early as possible "in order to mature a
plan for the radical improvement of the river, and of all its
navigable tributaries.""' The committee suggested that the
Corps establish a channel of 4'/2 to 6 feet for the upper
Mississippi Rivers' To create a channel of these depths, the
committee acknowledged, would require constricting the
river with wing dams and closing dams."'
as
Together, the Grange, shippers and merchants, boosters
in river towns and the Windom committee persuaded
Congress to authorize the 4'/, -foot channel project. The
works built under the 4'/2400t channel project embody
these national movements and local efforts.
The Four and One -Half Foot Channel,
1878-1906
By authorizing the 41/2 -foot channel project, Congress
directed the Corps to remake the upper Mississippi. The
Engineers were to create a permanent, continuous naviga-
tion channel, 41/2 -feet deep at low-water, for the entire river
between St. Paul and the mouth of the Illinois River at
Alton. To do this, they would have to change the
Mississippi's landscape and environment. They would have
to eliminate the wide shallows and sandbars and the thou-
sands of little pools that Warren had once sought to pre-
serve. They would have to alter the pattern by which sand
and silt moved along the river bottom. They would have to
focus the river's current into one main channel and block
off the myriad side channels. The focus of Corps work
between 1878 and 1906, the 4'/2 -foot channel became the
first system -wide, intensive navigation improvement project
for the upper Mississippi River. It would alter the navigable
portion of the river through the MNRRA corridor dramati-
cally.
The Corps had experimented with channel constriction
in 18 74. As it had learned more about the upper
Mississippi River, the Corps had recognized the futility of
keeping the river navigable by dredging .61 In 18 74, when
the Montana could not dredge due to high water, the
Engineers refitted it with a pile driver and went to Pig's Eye
Island, five miles below St. Paul (Figure 8). The island divid-
ed the river, and the navigation channel sometimes ran on
the east side and sometimes on the west. Below the island,
no deep channel existed at low water. To eliminate the prob-
lem, the Engineers closed the upper end of the east channel.
They did so by driving two tiers of piles nine feet apart and
then filling between them with willow brush and placing
x
IPTUS-EYR DAR
S #moi IMOPrArtMf'., '96",
� �+
r
til
S
.f T
I" I I N I! It
ure the upper river's
landscape and ecology.
To achieve the '/z -
foot channel, the
Corps had to expand
upon the channel con-
striction experiments.
By narrowing the
river and thereby
increasing the main
channel's velocity, the
Corps hoped to scour
one uninterrupted
navigation channel
the length of the
upper river." Wing
dams, closing dams
and shore protection
required two simple
components: willow
saplings and rock.
The Engineers or their
contractors placed the
rock and brush in lay-
ers until a dam rose
above the water sur-
face to a level that
would guarantee a
FIGURE 8. Pigs Eye Island before and after closing dant construction. Corps of Engineers. minimum 4 '/z -foot
sacks of sand on top to weigh the brush down. Overall the
dam was 600 feet long and six to ten feet deep.62 From this
experimental dam, channel constriction would grow into a
comprehensive and expansive project that would reconfig-
channel (Figure 9)."
Alberta Kirchner Hill spent 19 summers (1898-1917)
with her father's fleet as they built the dams for the govern-
ment. Her father, Albert Kirchner, along with Jacob
Richtman, both from Fountain City, Wisconsin, became the
leading contractors for the Corps in wing dam construction.
From the building boat, Alberta Kirchner recalled, "... I
could even smell the delightfully blended odor of the willows
and of the creosoted marline twine with which the bundles
were held together. It came to me strongly every time the
86
men hoisted a swishing bundle of brush to their gunny -sack -
protected shoulders. ..."I' Once the willow mats had been
laid in the water, the workers would sink them with rock.
"No sooner had a barge of rocks been pulled up to the dam,"
Hill remembered, "than the symmetry of the load was
destroyed as the men began the routine of sinking the mat...
. From the quarterboats you could hear the big rocks hitting
each other, like a rapid-fire rage... as the mat went down
under the load ... a splashing began. The sound grew in
intensity as the mat sank lower and lower in the water.
The wing dams' success depended upon the main chan-
nel's volume and velocity. During the late summer or early
fall, when the Mississippi usually became a shallow, slow-
moving stream, the wing dams could not direct enough
water down the channel to scour it. Droughts had the same
effect, but could last an entire season. The many islands
dividing the river disbursed the little water available into
side channels and sloughs. As the experiments with closing
dams had shown, cutting off the side channels greatly
increased the main channel's flow. The river passed over the
closing dams when high, but for most of the year, the dams
directed water into the main channel, denying flow to the
river's side channels and backwaters (Figure 10).
While the river naturally eroded its banks, closing
dams and wing dams accelerated erosion by increasing the
channel's velocity and volume. Wing dams especially
caused bank erosion by forcing the river away from one
shore and against the other. At Dibble's Point, the shoreline
had eroded 15 to 20 feet in one year due to a wing dam
built at Prescott Island, near Prescott." To protect shores
from naturally eroding or from being undercut by the con -
FIG URE 9. Wing dam construction. Photo by Henry E Bosse. St. Paul District, Carps of Engineers.
87
x
FIG UBE 10. Channel constriction at Pine Bend, Minnesota, 1391. Photo by Henry E Bosse. St. Pail District, Corps of Engineers.
stricted channel, the Corps protected hundreds of miles of
shoreline with brush mats and rock.
A 1903-1905 Corps navigation map shows the river
ribbed with wing dams and closing dams and lined with
hundreds of miles of riprap. Wing and closing dam con-
struction began at Pike Island at the mouth of the
Minnesota River. By 1905, the Engineers had built about
340 wing and dosing dams from the Minnesota River to
the southern end of the MNRRA corridor below Hastings.
They had closed nearly all the side channels.
The Engineers did not build all the works depicted in
one area at the same time. They would build as many wing
dams, close as many side channels, and protect as much
shoreline as needed to establish a 4'/2 -foot channel_ Then,
they would move to the next troublesome reach. In newly
constricted reaches, the channel might be good for a season
or two and then become difficult again, due to the river's
natural tendencies or as a result of the improvement works
themselves. Where necessary, the Engineers would return
and add more wing dams, dosing dams and shore protec-
tion. The density of channel constriction works and the
88
degree to which they physically and ecologically changed
the river increased gradually over the project's history.
Dams at the Headwaters
The desire to improve navigation on the upper river affected
the river above the Twin Cities, as well. To further increase
the water available for navigation, Congress authorized the
Corps to construct six dams at the headwaters of the
Mississippi, in northern Minnesota, between 1880 and
1907. Warren had recommended that Congress fund a sur-
vey of the upper Mississippi River's headwaters and tribu-
taries in his 1869 report. In his next report, Warren had
suggested a system of 41 reservoirs for the St. Croix,
Chippewa, Wisconsin and Mississippi River basins.
Subsequent engineers reduced this number to six.
Millers at St. Anthony Falls especially pushed for reser-
voirs above the falls. William Washburn went so far as to
purchase land at one of the reservoir sites in anticipation of
a private or federal project there and later gave the land to
the government. The millers recognized that the release of
water from the reservoirs for navigation in the later summer
and fall would increase the flow of water to keep their mills
turning longer and more consistently.
Congress initially balked at the project's pork -barrel
appearance. In 1880, however, it finally authorized an
experimental dam for Lake Winnibigoshish and authorized
the remaining dams shortly afterwards. The Headwaters
project provided for construction of the Winnibigoshish
Dam in 1883-1884 and the completion of dams at Leech
Lake (1884), Pokegama Falls (1884), Pine River (1886),
Sandy Lake (1895), and Gull Lake (1912). In their 1895
Annual Report, the Engineers reported that releasing water
from the Headwaters reservoirs had successfully raised the
water level in the Twin Cities by 12 to 18 inches, helping
navigation interests and the millers. Twenty-seven river
miles downstream, at Hastings, they recorded a rise of about
one foot and at Red Wing about one-half foot. To steam-
boats, even half a foot was important. Below Red Wing,
water from the reservoirs had little effect."
89
The Meeker Island Lock and Dam
From Minneapolis' perspective, the channel improvement
works on the upper Mississippi River only benefitted its
principal rival—St. Paul—until Congress did something about
the rapids below St. Anthony Falls. Millers at St. Anthony
were profiting from the release of water from the
Headwaters Reservoirs, but Minneapolis civic and commer-
cial boosters wanted more than milling. They yearned to
make their city the head of navigation. So, commercial lead-
ers in Minneapolis, supported by the State of Minnesota,
sought federal support for navigation improvements in
1866. Their effort resulted in one of the most mysterious
and ill-fated projects on the upper river. One dam would be
blown up within 5 years of its completion and another
would have to be redesigned and the completed part rebuilt.
The project would permanently reshape the river between
Lock and Dam 1 (the Ford Dam) and St. Anthony Falls. It is
a story with local and national significance.
As early as 1850, Minneapolis business and civic lead-
ers had tried to convince shippers that steamboats could
reach the falls. To prove their point, they paid the steamer
Lamartine 5200 to journey from St. Paul to the cataract.
They also raised funds during the 1850s to remove boul-
ders and other obstacles6' Recognizing that the river's chal-
lenges required more than these futile measures, navigation
boosters began discussing alock and dam for the river above
St. Paul as early as 1852. Over the next five years, the
city's newspapers, civic leaders and the Territorial
Legislature called for locks and dams to carry the booming
steamboat trade to Minneapolis. In 1855, the St. Anthony
Express proposed building two locks and dams. In 185 8,
when Minnesota became a state, the new legislature sent a
petition to Congress requesting that the federal government
improve the river for navigation above St. Paul."
While Minneapolis navigation boosters focused on
shipping, others recognized the river's hydropower potential
between the falls and St. Paul. Bradley B. Meeker and
Dorilus Morrison formed the Mississippi River
Improvement and Manufacturing Company in 1857, with a
x
group of Minneapolis businessmen, to develop this poten-
tial. Playing on the desire of Minneapolis navigation boost-
ers, they proposed building a lock and dam between the two
cities to aid navigation and to secure the hydropower for
themselves."
Meeker, a territorial judge and local entrepreneur, and
Morrison, a St. Anthony Falls sawmill operator, lobbied for
and obtained permission from the Minnesota Territorial
Legislature to build their lock and dam near Meeker Island.
Gone now, the island lay some three miles below the falls,
in Minneapolis. Portending the coming conflict with
Minneapolis, St. Paul citizens criticized the project, as it
would steal from them their valuable position as the head of
navigation. As with so many projects, the Economic Panic
of 185 7 and the Civil War stalled the Mississippi River
Improvement and Manufacturing Company's plans, post-
poning the project and the intercity conflict."
Holding to their dream through the depression and the
war, Meeker and Morrison beseeched Congress for a land
grant to fund their project in 1865. Focusing on naviga-
tion, the Minnesota Legislature, in 1866, petitioned
Congress to authorize navigation improvements above St.
Paul and requested the land grant on behalf of Meeker's
company. The company needed the grant, the state contend-
ed, because the company's income from water power would
be limited by the "inexhaustible resources in this respect
above and on the falls" and because the company's state
charter required it to lock boats through free." Anticipating
opposition from the millers at St. Anthony, the state
claimed that the petition's principal purpose was to bring
steamboats to Minneapolis and that hydropower was "inci-
dental: " Meeker, himself, emphasized navigation. The
miller's "fear," he said, ""is another waterpower that might
result incidentally from our effort to get Boats to the Falls of
St. Anthony.""
Minneapolis navigation boosters clearly saw that
Meeker's project would extend navigation above St. Paul,
which was their primary reason for supporting it. In its
petition, the state stressed that boats had frequently landed
within two and one-half miles of downtown Minneapolis,
up until 185 7. But, as a result of the economic panic begin-
ning that year, a number of unprecedented droughts and the
Civil War, navigation, they brashly claimed, "had receded
some sixteen miles, to St. Paul, where all the freight des-
tined to these cities, (Minneapolis and St. Anthony) and the
vast regions north and west ... must break bulk and be car-
ried in wagons to their destination." A lock and dam, the
state contended, would extend navigation "to its natural and
proper terminus: 16
Acknowledging the obvious local appearance of its
request, the state touted the project's interregional benefits.
The best market for the Midwest's corn, flour, pork, and
beef, it claimed, was the South. And the Midwest needed the
South's cotton, rice, sugar, and molasses. Whatever prod-
ucts the Midwest came to manufacture. like woolen and cot-
ton fabrics, would find their chief market in the South and
Southwest. The Mississippi River, the state insisted, provid-
ed the natural link. Echoing the beliefs of their counter-
parts downstream, Minneapolis boosters pointed to the
divine purpose of their project. "Direct communication,"
they pleaded, "is both natural and necessary, and the all -
beneficent Creator has graciously anticipated the wants and
necessities of unborn millions in having given us exactly
such a continuous means of supply and exchange from the
Falls of St. Anthony to the Gulf of Mexico." The petition
even cited editorials from the St. Paul papers stressing the
importance of Minneapolis to the region's economy.
Finally, and recognizing the emerging power of rail-
roads, the state asserted that the river "is now and ever will
be and remain the great regulator and moderator of fares
and freights among the rival carriers of the commerce of the
west." Referring to the Civil War, the state implored
Congress to "recollect with what haste and facility the vari-
ous railroad lines combined to increase the cost of travel,
and double, and in some instances triple and quadruple, the
cost of transporting the produce of the west during the late
non -intercourse measures in the Lower Mississippi." The
river would bind the country together again."
90
Navigation boosters in Minneapolis failed, however, to
convince Congress of the importance of their project.
Congress rejected Meeker's request and the Minnesota
Legislature's petition for a land grant in support of a lock
and dam in 1866. It did, however, authorize the Corps of
Engineers to survey the reach between Fort Snelling and St.
Anthony Falls, along with its general survey of the upper
Mississippi River.
Warren brought new hope for the project, when, in his
1867 annual report, he requested $235,665 to construct a
lock and dam at Meeker Island." Warren engaged Franklin
Cook, a former employee of the Minneapolis Mill Company,
to undertake the survey. Cadwallader C. Washburn and his
brother William D., the Minneapolis Mill Company's owners
and two of the city's most powerful and prominent millers,
adamantly opposed locks and dams. As Cook had worked for
the Washburn, Meeker expected a negative report. Cook
completed his survey between 1866 and 1867 and, to
Meeker's surprise, recommended that a lock and dam be con-
structed at Meeker Island, with a 13 -foot lift." Cook's
report and lobbying by Representative Donnelly and Senator
Alexander Ramsey finally convinced Congress to give the
State of Minnesota a 200,000 -acre land grant to finance the
dam, rather than having the Corps build it.
On June 7, 1868, the Minneapolis Daily Tribune
claimed that the Meeker Island lock and dam would "trans-
fer the commercial prestige of this upper country from St.
Paul to the 'Magnet.""' St. Paul industrial boosters also
claimed victory. A day earlier, the St. Paul Daily Dispatch
had declared that the dam had given St. Paul "a water power
equal to St. Anthony," and would provide enough power "to
make St. Paul one of the largest manufacturing cities on the
continent."" Through a deal between Meeker and a number
of St. Paul businessmen, St. Paulites had gained control of
Meeker's company and would get the waterpower created by
the dam, even if Minneapolis and the state thought it over-
shadowed by St. Anthony Falls."'
On March 6, 1869, the state awarded the land grant to
the Mississippi River Improvement and Manufacturing
91
Company. It required the company to spend $25,000 on
the proj ect before February 1, 18 71. If the company failed
to do so, the state threatened to rescind the grant and issue
it to another company. Having accomplished nothing as the
deadline approached, the company spent $26,000 during
late 18 70 and early 18 71. It did not begin building the
project, focusing instead on a provision in the grant that
limited the company to selling no more than one section of
land within a township. As this requirement had proven
cumbersome, the company asked Congress to modify it to
allow for the sale of more sections within a single township.
To secure their objective, the company needed support from
businessmen in Minneapolis, and for that support,
Minneapolis interests won back control of the company. At
this point, Minneapolitans began fighting among them-
selves over the project."
Millers feared a competing water power so close to St.
Anthony Falls and believed that the project might jeopard-
ize federal funding for repair work at the falls. Due to the
milling operations at the falls, the cataract was in danger of
deteriorating into a series of rapids. Sawmill owners also
feared that they would not be able to continue dumping
sawdust into the river, as it would obstruct navigation, and
boom company operators did not want a dam obstructing
the lumber rafts they sent downriver. Some opponents
argued that it was the federal government's responsibility to
improve the river, not private interests subsidized by the
government. During its 1872 to 1873 session, Congress
temporarily ended debate over the project, when it refused
to amend the land grant "
In 1873, Congress lostpatience with the Mississippi
River Improvement and Manufacturing Company and appro-
priated $25,000 for the Corps to begin the project." But
Congress required the state to return the land grant before the
Corps could start. Eager to begin the project, Major Francis
Farquhar, the new St. Paul District commander, reported that
he had initiated a survey of the river and of the dam site.
Over the next year, he began developing plans, determining
that the Engineers could build one lock and dam with a 17-
x
foot lift. Further work on the project, he declared, had to wait
until the Engineers could take borings, which they could not
do until the state returned the grant. As the state failed to
return it, the Corps did not begin work Nevertheless,
Farquhar optimistically asked for $300,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1876.76 Disagreement over the grant
and haggling over land for the project, including the purchase
of Meeker Island, however, would delay the project for nearly
20 more years." St. Paul remained the head of navigation,
and the Corps focused its efforts downstream.
The lock and dam project hopelessly mired, the Corps,
during its 1890 survey, evaluated removing boulders and
rocks to encourage navigation."" Major Alexander
Mackenzie, the Rock Island District commander who had
taken over this part of the river with the change in funding
in 1888, suspected that Congress might authorize the
Corps to remove the boulders in lieu of building locks and
dams, even though it had authorized $25,000 to plan for a
lock and dam in 1873. He questioned the value of remov-
ing boulders, believing that the steep grade and rapid cur-
rent required locks and dams. As Mackenzie anticipated,
Congress, under pressure from Minneapolis to do some-
thing, provided $50,000 to the Corps to remove boulders,
which the Engineers did during the summer of 1890 and
in 1891. In 1892, Mackenzie again insisted that only
locks and dams could regularly entice steamboats above
Meeker Island; any other efforts, he charged, wasted time
and money."'
Signaling a possible break, the Chief of Engineers, on
February 15, 1893, directed Mackenzie "to prepare new
and exact estimates for locks and dams for this portion of
the river Mackenzie made the surveys, including bor-
ings, during the low-water season of 1893 and concluded
that the Corps would have to build two locks and dams to
bring navigation to the old steamboat landing below the
Washington Avenue Bridge. Lock and Dam 1 would have to
be placed above Minnehaha Creek and have a lift of 13.3
feet. Lock and Dam 2 (the Meeker Island Lock and Dam)
could then be placed about 2.9 miles upstream, below
Meeker Island, and would have a lift of 13.8 feet.
Mackenzie added that the Corps would have to build a third
lock and dam with a 10.1 -foot lift to bring navigation to St.
Anthony Falls and a fourth lock to bring navigation above
it. He estimated that Lock and Dam 1 would cost
$568,222 and that Lock and Dam 2 would cost $598,235.
Extending navigation above St. Anthony Falls with the
other two locks and dams would total $1,538,702'°
Accepting Mackenzie's arguments and under continual
pressure by navigation proponents in Minneapolis,
Congress authorized the "Five -Foot Project in Aid of
Navigation," in the River and Harbor Act of August 18,
1894. In this act, Congress directed the Corps to extend
navigation to the Washington Avenue Bridge by construct-
ing Lock and Dam 2." While it did not mention Lock and
Dam 1, Congress called for improving the river from near
the mouth of the Minnesota River to the Washington
Avenue Bridge, indicating that another lock and dam would
be built below Meeker Island. Following through on the
1894 act, Congress provided for the construction of Lock
and Dam 1 in the River and Harbor Act of March 3, 1899.
By the fall of 1906 the Engineers had completed most of
Lock and Dam 2, and on May 19, 1907, the Itura became
the first steamboat to pass through the lock (Figure 11). At
Lock and Dam 1, the Engineers had begun constructing the
lock.'' Few, if any, spectators watching the Itura paddle
through Lock 2 imagined that the new facility would be
destroyed within 5 years.
St. Paul suffered a double setback. Minneapolis had
captured title to the head of navigation, but the low dams
had eliminated St. Paul's hope for securing hydropower.
Why Congress authorized two low dams, instead of one
high dam that could have generated hydropower, is
unknown. The St. Paul District commander, Major Francis
R. Shunk, tried to explain the matter to Minneapolis Mayor
J. C. Haynes on February 17, 1909. "Now as to the duplica-
tion of locks and dams; two instead of one. Connected with
this matter is a secret history, upon which I proceed as dis-
creetly as maybe to cast alittle light. There is the city of
92
St. Paul, and there is the city of Minneapolis. For physical
reasons, a single lock and dam must lie entirely within the
limits of Minneapolis, or entirely within the limits of St.
Paul.... Enough said. There are two locks." Minneapolis
had somehow won the debate over building one or two
dams. While intense local issues had resulted in two dams,
an equally intense national debate would lead to a new proj-
ect for one.
Summary
By 1907, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Hastings and other river
cities, through their successful lobbying and through the
Corps, had changed the upper Mississippi River dramatical-
ly. Hundreds of wing dams and closing dams studded the
river's banks from St. Paul to St. Louis. Hundreds of miles
of riverbank had been secured with riprap. Five dams at the
Headwaters stored the winter's snow, holding it for the
summer and fall, when the millers at St. Anthony and the
steamboats below would need it. And Congress had author-
ized, that year, a sixth dam for the Headwaters, the one at
Gull Lake. A newly completed lock and dam and another
one under construction promised to make Minneapolis the
head of navigation. The river pioneers once forded with
their wagons and livestock no longer existed. Maybe, at a
few places, especially between St. Paul and Hastings, set-
tlers could have waded across on some persistent bar during
extremely low water. Congress, however, would soon
authorize new projects for the upper Mississippi River that
would make this impossible.
FIGURE 11. Meekerlslaud Lock and Darn underconstructiou in the
distance. 77ze river in the foreground has not yet been inundated by Lock
and Dam No. 1. Minnesota Historical Society.
93
t
ad
I
rF_
4
FIG URE 1. Loch and Dam No. 1 ander construction, 1916. St. Paul District, Corps of Engineers.
04 al.) te<<
Transforming the River II: Commerce, Navigation
Improvements and Hydroelectric Power, 1907-1963
twy May 19, 1907, when the Itura steamed
through the Meeker Island Lock and Dam, the
_ Mississippi River through the MNRRA corri-
dor had been altered in striking ways. Still, the river fol-
lowed its cycles. As the spring runoff waned, the river fell
and the wing dams and closing dams below the Minnesota
River's mouth directed the flow to the Mississippi's main
channel. As the river continued falling, mud flats extended
farther and farther out from the shores. If a drought
occurred, the river dropped so low that channel constric-
tion became ineffective and people could wade across the
river. At St. Anthony, the falls would slow to a trickle,
unless the Corps released water from the Headwaters
Reservoirs. Then the river might rise by a foot to a foot and
one-half. No navigation structures blocked or constricted
the river between St. Anthony Falls and the Crow River, and
through this reach the Mississippi's natural cycles were
more evident.
Between 1907 and 1963 most semblances of the nat-
ural river would disappear. A series of new locks and dams
would reshape the river's physical and ecological character.
In 1913 the Coon Rapids Dam created a 600 -acre pool,
with an eight -foot head against it, for hydroelectric power.
In 1917 the Corps completed Lock and Dam 1 (Figure 1)
and in 1930 Lock and Dam 2 at Hastings. The Corps
replaced the Lower Hydro Station Dam in 195 6 with the
95
Lower St. Anthony Falls Lock and Dam. And in 1963 the
Corps completed the Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock, stretch-
ing the 9 -foot channel and head of navigation 4.6 miles far-
ther upstream.
The river still rises to its natural level during floods but
cannot fall to its normal low water stages. No one can wade
across the Mississippi River from Minneapolis on down.
Only in two short reaches would this be possible today:
somewhere between the head of navigation and the Coon
Rapids Dam and above the Champlin Bridge, where the
impounding effects of the Coon Rapids Dam disappear. This
chapter looks at who built the dams and why. (Figure 2)
The 6 -Foot Channel
Despite the Corps' efforts with the 41/2400tchannel, river
traffic declined. By 1880 the heyday of steamboating had
passed. Railroads had taken most of the grain and passenger
traffic away, and by 1890 timber rafting remained the only
significant commerce.' Timber products dominated the
upper river's traffic from the 1870s to the first decade of
the twentieth century. Timber shipping, however, fell with
the white pine forests of western Wisconsin and northern
Minnesota. At its peak, between 1893 and 1894, the lum-
ber industry employed about 100 raft boats and 100
sawmills on the upper Mississippi River (Figures 3 and 4).
The number of sawmills dropped to 80 by 1900, 36 by
FIGURE 2. (Below) By 1963, locks and dams defined the Mississippi
through most of the MNRRA corridor. In only two small reaches, at the cor-
ridor's far northern end, could the riverfall to its natural law stages.
FIGURES. (Tap right) Timber raft and rafthoat near Wahasha Street
Bridge in St. Paul, 1878. Minnesota Historical Society.
FIGURE 4. (Bottom right) Stereoscopic view of C. A. Smith lumber mill
above St. Anthony Falls, 1885. Photo by Underwood and Underwood.
Minnesota Historical Society.
' Anoka
1903, and 1 by 1913. Raftboats followed a similar
decline. Of more than 100 raftboats plying the upper river
in 1893, 86 remained in 1900, 20 in 1906, and only four
in 1912.1 In 1915, the last lumber raft floated down the
St. Croix and Mississippi Rivers from Hudson, Wisconsin,
to Fort Madison, Iowa.
Timber's demise revealed a problem that had been
developing for nearly 50 years. The Mississippi had become
a nnr-rnmmodity river. As that commodity disappeared, the
lure as a transportation route became clear. It
clear in 1902 to railroad baron James J. Hill that
'or an end to navigation improvement. Hill's
rightened cities and business interests along the
idy suffering from the timber industry's decline
red the first sustained effort by Midwesterners for
navigation improvement.'
Navigation boosters met in Quincy,
Illinois. Acknowledging they had neg-
lected the river for 25 years, one boost-
er protested Hill's remarks, saying: "we
regard the Mississippi River of such
mighty value in our occupations and to
our respective communities that we do
EKa NLWW
notpropose to
have it slan-
dered, or permit
it to be neglect-
ed ...:'I To
push for the
new project,
they formed the
4'
t
e Band'
Hastings
vr�i4Wr.
Upper Mississippi River Improvement Association
(UMRIA).' Unlike the efforts behind the 4- and 4'b -foot
channel projects, 6 -foot channel boosters established a con-
certed movement to win approval for their project and pro-
posed to meet annually.
The UMRIA's task was daunting. While they tried to
excite merchants and farmers throughout the Midwest to
use the river, they failed. For the first two decades of the
new century, farmers enjoyed a period of prosperity so
strong some agricultural historians call these decades the
golden age of American agriculture.' Farmers and mer-
chants away from the river enjoyed moderate rail rates. So,
early on, neither group pushed for the 6 -foot channel.
Congress questioned the project. Rivers and
Harbors Committee member Joseph E. Ransdell, of A
Louisiana, explained the problem. Speaking to the M
1906 UMRIA convention, he reported that the A Congress had granted the committee an average of
S 19.25 million per year over the last decade.
Waterway boosters had projects before Congress
totaling 5500 million, and the Corps had fiJ
already approved these projects.
Consequently, he complained, "The work
given to us is that of elimination, to cut off
here, to slaughter there, to twist and to Al
squirm around the difficulty and to do a little quarrel-
ing too."' But the problem, he insisted, was not that there
97
were too many projects; rather, Congress did not place the
right priority on waterway development. Navigation proj-
ects, he argued, needed to be put on a par with other major
programs, such as the army, navy, post office and pensions.
Instead of S 19.5 million averaged over a number of years,
he called for an annual appropriation of S50 million.'
The National Context
If the UMRIA hoped to vie with hundreds of projects, total-
ing hundreds of millions of dollars, America's attitude
toward river and harbor spending would have to change.
The UMRIA could not do this on its own. Only a national
movement could generate the support needed to make
Congress and the American public alter their priorities.
Two such movements were under way. The first was a
national waterways movement, focused specifically on nav-
igation improvements. The second, the Progressive move-
ment, was far broader and encompassed many aspects of
American life, from business practices and urban govern-
ment to the most efficient use of the country's natural
resources.' Both movements reflected changes occurring in
the nation's attitude toward waterway development and
both movements are represented by structures in the
MNRRA corridor.
Paralleling the new and more rigorous review of
waterway legislation, a "remarkable reversal" occurred in
the public's attitude toward rivers and harbors projects
between 1895 and 1912. Such projects had been largely
ignored by the press before 1895, except for being criti-
cized as pork barrel. After 1895, they became "very much
in the news of the day." This time "powerful
national organizations of
x
and leading politicians, supported by the full might of the
press" backed the navigation movement."'
During the latter years of the nineteenth century and
early years of the twentieth century, the United States "wit-
nessed a new enthusiasm for the improvement of its navi-
gable streams. Communities throughout the country
seemed to catch a vision of the unlimited possibilities for
local economic growth which cheaper transportation could
create."" Strongly supported by urban merchants and man-
ufacturers, shippers fought to strengthen the Interstate
Commerce Commission's power to regulate railroad rates
and actively promoted inland navigation projects. As the
movement gained strength, "The interests of merchants and
manufacturers soon became merged with the larger inter-
ests of the entire community, as local and regional water-
way publicity groups and newspaper editors warned that
the future growth of the community itself depended on
cheaper transportation." Support for waterway improve-
ment grew so intense that it became an issue of "local patri-
otism." Many politicians recognized a windfall and eagerly
capitalized on this demand." One reason for the new atti-
tude was rail rates had begun rising."
The new enthusiasm reached the Mississippi River. "A
GREAT public movement has arisen in the Mississippi
Valley," W. J. McGee proclaimed. Born in Dubuque County,
Iowa, McGee would become President Roosevelt's principal
voice for multiple resource water development. The nation-
al navigation movement had begun, McGee said, a decade or
two before when unfair railroad practices drove the packet
boats out of business. The problem worsened as shipping
costs increased and shipping facilities for river traffic
decreased. As production from mines, factories and farms
mounted, the problem grew into a crisis. McGee contended
that "the discontent has grown into a movement akin to
revolt on the part of the millions of farmers, small manu-
facturers, and retail dealers in the interior." Placing the
movement in a sectional context, McGee argued that the
Midwest now demanded "recognition of the rights of the
interior as against those of the seaboard.
Evidencing a new interest in waterways, important
waterway organizations emerged during the first years of
the new century. One sought an intercoastal water route
from Boston to the Rio Grande River, in Texas. Navigation
boosters along the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers formed
the Lakes -to -the -Gulf Deep Water Association to call for a
deep channel from Lake Michigan, through the Illinois
River, to the Mississippi. And boosters from St. Louis to the
Twin Cities established the UMRIA. The National Rivers
and Harbors Congress, created by boosters from around the
country in 1901, attempted to unify these efforts."
After sputtering for several years, the Rivers and
Harbors Congress hosted a conference in Washington, D.C.,
on January 15 and 16, 1906. The Congress reorganized
and elected Rivers and Harbors Committee member Joseph
Ransdell as its president. UMRIA President Thomas
Wilkinson accepted a seat on the board of directors. The
organization's "object and purpose," he reported to the
1906 UMRIA meeting, was to teach people about the sig-
nificance of the country's waterways "and to create such a
strong public sentiment, in favor of larger and more regular
appropriations by Congress for river and harbors improve-
ment, that will induce Congress to appropriate, at least, 50
million dollars annually for that object, instead of the beg-
gardly amount now appropriated, ..." 16 Only a national
organization, he declared, could secure the funding needed
for waterway improvements. The UMRIA immediately
joined the Rivers and Harbors Congress, paying a S 100 fee.
Over the next two years, the Congress gained members
from 33 states and a membership of some 30,000.1' Its
members included " commercial, manufacturing, waterway
and kindred associations, commercial firms and public
spirited individual citizens.""' Farmers remained notably
absent from the list.
Demonstrating the national waterway movement's
political strength and popularity, members of Congress had
openly pushed for its rebirth. As Captain J. E Ellison, secre-
tary of the National Rivers and Harbors Congress, reported:
"The re -organization of the National Rivers and Harbors
98
Congress as it now exists, was by the direct request of more
than a majority of the Rivers and Harbors Committee of the
House of Representatives."" Chiefs of Engineers,
Secretaries of War and Presidents of the United States
would attend and speak at the meetings."" In what would
be a clear conflict of interest today, Representative Ransdell
had become its president and many other Representatives
and Senators sat on its board. Of the 1906 Rivers and
Harbors Congress meeting, McGee proclaimed: "It is safe to
say that during the past quarter century no other body of
delegates produced so deep an impression on the legislative
and executive branches of the Government."" More so than
the UMRIA, the Rivers and Harbors Congress would bring
the need for navigation improvements on the upper
Mississippi River to national attention.
The Progressive Movement • Paralleling the growing
strength of the national navigation movement, another far
broader movement was gaining momentum in America: the
Progressive movement. While it would not affect the 6 -foot
channel project effort as directly as the waterway move-
ment, it was critical to the context in which the effort
occurred. It also helped define the evolution of hydroelec-
tric power in America, and, consequently, the future of the
Meeker Island Lock and Dam, Lock and Dam 1, and the
Coon Rapids Dam.
Scholars disagree about the causes and agendas of the
Progressive movement, but they agree that between 1890
and 1920 something fundamental changed in American
society, and Americans responded in new and unique ways.
Whether in city slums or city halls, in the management of
corporations or the management of the federal government,
in the use of forests or waterways, Americans sought to
bring order to their rapidly changing lives through scientif-
ic
cientifis and technical rigor."" Conservationists within the
Progressive movement attempted to reshape how
Americans approached their natural resources.
Scholars also disagree over the national conservation
movement's dominant themes. Some have seen it as an
99
attempt by activists to stop big businesses from selfishly
taking the nation's natural resources. Historian Samuel
Hays, leading another school, suggests that "Conservation,
above all, was a scientific movement.... Its essence was
rational planning to promote efficient development and use
of all natural resources:'"' Progressive conservationists
wanted professionally trained foresters, geologists, econo-
mists and experts from other appropriate disciplines to
determine how the nation used its public resources. They
did not want these resources consumed through political
and economic manipulations that were inefficient and
wasteful. They did not object to big businesses using the
country's natural resources; they objected to unplanned and
wasteful consumption.
Beginning with the federal development of irrigation,
they initiated a broad campaign for the multiple use of nat-
ural resources, especially water resources. Waterways, they
insisted, could be used for hydroelectric power, flood con-
trol, navigation, and irrigation. Why build dams for navi-
gation, they asked, and not consider the hydroelectric
power potential? Some conservationists hoped to preserve
untainted large parts of the nation's wild and scenic areas,
but they were a small minority. A growing realization that
America's natural resources were finite motivated most
conservationists.
Hydroelectric Power • The development of hydroelectric
power awakened Americans to the multiple uses that the
country's rivers and streams could serve and directly affect-
ed projects on the upper Mississippi River. Hydroelectric
power represented a spectacular new power source, with
implications for national and regional economic develop-
ment. Whoever obtained the best sites stood to make mil-
lions of dollars and gain the economic clout to dictate the
growth of cities and regions. To Progressive conservation-
ists, hydroelectric power meant more than using waterways
to their fullest. It offered a way to pay for all waterway
projects but, if developed unwisely, it represented the waste
of a valuable natural resource.
x
By charging rent for the use of dam sites, conserva-
tionists hoped to finance navigation improvements without
appropriations from Congress. For this reason, Hays
argues, "Hydroelectric power provided the financial key to
the entire multiple -purpose plan."" Conservationists
charged that Congress had been giving away hydropower
sites for little or no fee and had been granting indefinite or
inordinately long leases for those sites. They argued that
the water power of a site belonged to the people of the
country, and those who developed it should pay a fee. As a
very few large firms had won many of the best sites, conser-
vationists worried that those firms would soon monopolize
the country's hydroelectric power. Conservationists tried
to establish a policy to remedy these problems."
Conservationists and their opponents generally agreed
that the government had the right to charge power compa-
nies for the use of government -built dams in navigable
rivers. Since the government had built the dam at the pub-
lic's expense, the public had the right to be reimbursed by a
company using the dam to generate power.11 Disagreement
came over sites in navigable rivers where the government
had not yet built a dam. In these cases, states' rights advo-
cates, power companies and the Corps argued that private
citizens or companies had the right to build a dam and
power plant and should not have to pay any fees. They
insisted that the state, not the federal government, had the
authority to establish fees or set time limits for the use of
such sites " Theodore Roosevelt and other leading conser-
vationists disagreed (Figure 5).
In 1903 Roosevelt sent a warning to Congress, when
he vetoed a bill granting a private company the right to
build a hydroelectric dam on the Tennessee River at Muscle
Shoals, Alabama. Observing that requests by individuals
and companies to build dams in navigable streams had
increased tremendously, he asked Congress to develop a
standard policy for reviewing and distributing grants to
hydroelectric power developers. The Muscle Shoals bill
would have given a grant without fair competition,
although it did provide for Corps review and for "reason-
FIGURES. President TheodoreRooseielt. Minnesota Historical Society.
able charges...."" Nevertheless, Congress continued to
approve projects with few requirements."
Responding in part to Roosevelt, but more so to deal
with the increasing volume of requests for hydropower
grants, Congress passed the General Dam Act of 1906. The
Act required that Congress approve each project and that
those receiving grants adhere to a limited set of conditions.
While the Act did not explicitly require fees or set time lim-
its, conservationists insisted that the act gave the Corps
authority to require both. Corps leaders, backed by
Secretary of War William H. Taft, held that the Act only
granted them the authority to evaluate dam projects for
their effect on navigation. Consequently, Roosevelt ordered
the Secretary of War and the Corps to accept his views. He
could not, however, convince Congress to back him."' The
feuding continued for the next 14 years and directly affect-
ed the development of hydroelectric power at Lock and Dam
1. Roosevelt and his conservationists had aroused the
100
American public to the issues surrounding the hydroelec-
tric power development and further stirred American
awareness about the use and development of water
resources.
Through their efforts, conservationists recognized the
need to maximize the benefits of the nation's waterways for
the American public. Given the growing popularity of the
national waterways movement, conservationists hoped to
capture the support of navigation boosters to make multi-
ple -purpose water planning a reality." They recognized
that most boosters cared only for their own projects, and
conservationists began an effort to broaden those interests.
W. J. McGee became one of the administration's most
active proponents of a multiple use program for the
nation's waterways and, according to Hays, the conserva-
tion movement's chief theorist. McGee helped found the
Geological Society of America and the National Geographic
Society, becoming its president from 1904 to 1905. He
became president of the American Anthropological Society
in 1911. McGee left the Bureau of Ethnology, in
Washington, D.C., in 1903 to head up the anthropological
exhibits for the St. Louis Exposition and became director of
the St. Louis Public Museum. While he was in St. Louis,
navigation improvement caught his attention."
McGee laid out his multiple use program for the
nation's rivers, especially the Mississippi, in a 1907 article
entitled "Our Great River." After a resounding endorsement
of navigation improvements, McGee pleaded with readers
to consider more than navigation. As a key prerequisite to
navigation improvements, the country had to reduce the
massive amounts of sediment flowing into the Mississippi
and its tributaries. To reduce the sediment load, states
within the watershed had to preserve their forests, and
farmers had to begin practicing soil conservation. And
before they began developing the Mississippi and its tribu-
taries for navigation, they had to consider urban water sup-
ply, hydroelectric power, irrigation, canals and reclamation.
The individual states and the federal government had to
work together to develop a comprehensive plan." The plan
101
would include all the related branches of science and would
treat the river as an interdependent system."
Together, the Progressive conservation movement and
the national navigation improvement campaign brought
waterway issues into the everyday life of Americans as never
before. In this context, Congress passed the Rivers and
Harbors Act of March 2, 1907, authorizing the 6 -foot chan-
nel proj ect, and residents of the Twin Cities would reconsid-
er the Meeker Island and Lock and Dam No. 1 projects.
Water Over the Dam
The Itura steamed into the new Meeker Island Lock on May
19, 1907, but as new as the lock was, history had passed it
by. Between 1894, when Congress authorized the Meeker
Island project, and 1907, when the Corps completed it,
hydroelectric power came of age. At the beginning of the
1890s, most Americans viewed hydropower as a curiosity,
but the opening of the Niagara Falls hydropower plant in
1894 changed this." Residents of the Twin Cities observed
the transition firsthand. In 1882 the Minnesota Brush
Electric Company opened the first hydroelectric power sta-
tion in the United States on Upton Island at St. Anthony
Falls. Although it had alimited generating capacity and
few customers ready to employ its power, the station her-
alded the coming of hydroelectricity. Between 1894 and
1895, the Minneapolis General Electric Company built its
Main Street Station at St. Anthony, and in 1897, the
Pillsbury -Washburn Company completed the Lower St.
Anthony Falls dam and hydroelectric plant, providing
power to Thomas Lowry's Minneapolis Street Railway
Company (Figure 6). These projects and successful long dis-
tance power transmission demonstrated the practicality
and value of hydroelectricity and allowed the power of the
falls to reach far beyond the river.
Combined with the national interest in conservation,
this awakening to hydroelectric power led residents and
business interests in the Twin Cities to question why they
had wanted two locks and dams immediately downstream
from St. Anthony Falls. Laying aside their longstanding
feud, they began working together to convince the Corps and
Congress that the project should be reviewed and revamped.
Congress, going through a similar awakening, and the
Roosevelt administration, with its strident emphasis on con-
servation, readily supported the change.36
In the River and Harbor Act of June 25, 1906,
Congress created a commission to examine the river's
hydropower potential between Minneapolis and St. Paul.
The commissioners held a preliminary meeting in the capi-
tal city on March 28, 1907, to study data in the Corps' St.
Paul District office and visit the sites. They did not meet
again until September 26, when they completed their report
and forwarded it to Alexander Mackenzie, now a brigadier
general and the Chief of Engineers."
Disappointing hydroelectric power boosters, the com-
missioners determined that the low head, or short fall, at
Locks and Dams 1 and 2 would not permit the economic
development of hydroelectric power." Someday, they specu-
lated, higher energy costs and demand from the Twin Cities'
growing population would make the power gained from
low -head dams more valuable. Then, the hydropower capac-
ity of the two sites would be worth capturing. Twenty to
25 years in the future, they suggested, the cities could even
consider building a single high dam downstream of Lock
and Dam No. 1." The Board's report reassured Minneapolis
that it would remain the head of navigation and that St.
Paul would not get hydropower.
The commission's report did not quash interest in
developing water power at the locks and dams. The river's
steep slope and narrow gorge at Lock and Dam 1, and the
fact that the site lay within the major metropolis on the
FIGURE 6. De la Rarre's "folly." Lower St. Anthony Falls Dain and
Hydroelectric Station, completed in 1897. St. Paul District, Corps of
Engineers. 77ee Twin City Rapid Transit Company steam pairerhouse is at
the far left. University of _Vinuesota Steamplaut is at the fir left.
upper Mississippi River above St. Louis, made it the ideal
undeveloped hydroelectric site on the river. And, just
before the commission's first meeting, Congress changed a
major premise that the commissioners failed to consider; it
authorized the 6 -foot channel project.
Locks and Dams 1 and 2 had been designed for a 5 -foot
channel, so the Engineers had to reassess the design of each.
Whatever they decided, the project's cost would increase.
Now the expense of starting over could be compared to the
102
cost of modifying the structures. And as the dams would
have to be one foot higher, their hydropower potential would
increase." Because of these changes and continued public
pressure for a high dam, Congress, in the River and Harbor
Act of March 3, 1909, authorized the Corps to examine the
projects' hydropower potential again. In the spring of 1909,
pending the outcome of this study, the Corps suspended
work on Lock and Dam No. 1. As of June 30, the Corps had
spent 51,149,453 on the two locks and dams.'
To undertake the new study, the Corps appointed a
board of engineers that included Majors Charles S. Riche,
Francis R. Shunk and Charles Bromwell. The board consid-
ered two issues. First, they analyzed whether the Corps
could easily and cheaply adapt the 5 -foot project to the 6 -
foot project. Second, they reevaluated the hydropower
capacity of the river between Minneapolis and St. Paul. The
board considered the navigation issue first and quickly con-
cluded that, with minor changes, the existing project would
provide an adequate 6 -foot channel."
Developing hydroelectric power raised more difficult
concerns. The board concurred with the first study that the
low dams could not generate power economically (even
with the additional foot of height created by the 6 -foot
channel project). Only a high dam would make hydroelec-
tric power economical, a high dam built at the Lock and
Dam No. 1 site.' By redesigning Dam No. 1 for a 30 -foot
raise, the Engineers estimated they could generate 15,000
horsepower."
To construct the new dam, the board considered two
options. The Corps could build the dam alone or it could
build the dam in partnership with a private or municipal
party. Recognizing the merits of a high dam, the board
noted that a single lock and dam would save operating and
maintenance costs, would require only one lockage, and in
providing a 9 -foot depth would not have to be modified
under future navigation projects. They also recognized that
the Corps could use the rent gained from the hydropower of
a high dam to construct and operate the new facility, and
the federal government would have an endless surplus of
103
Power. But holding to standard policy, the board deter-
mined that the Corps could not build a high dam alone, if
the reason for building it was only to capture the
hydropower.
After extolling the advantages of a high dam to
Minneapolis Mayor James C. Haynes, St. Paul District com-
mander Major Shank explained that "Now comes the diffi-
culty. The United States has no business to meddle with
water -power, and must confine its attention strictly to fea-
tures affecting navigation...."" If the Engineers built the
project alone, they would have to justify it for navigation.
Had the Corps not completed Lock and Dam No. 2 already,
the board declared, it could have recommended one, govern-
ment -built lock and dam. Since the two low dams would
secure the depth needed for navigation, it concluded that
some other party would have to pay the extra cost of build-
ing a high dam .16
On the morning of June 9, 1909, the board held a
public hearing in St. Paul to determine who might support
and finance the dam. Representatives from St. Paul and
Minneapolis attended and strongly favored the change. To
their surprise, the State of Minnesota also showed interest
in the project. To their dismay, private companies also
appeared and backed the high dam.' Interest by private
companies frightened the cities and became a key issue at
the meeting.
The Corps fueled worry over private development.
Board member Major Shank told representatives from the
cities that the board "would listen to proposals from out-
side interests to pay all extra cost necessary to raise the
dam to such a height as would produce desired power.
Hoping to get the hydropower generated by a high dam
cheaply, city and state representatives worried that the gov-
ernment would start a bidding war, and they "bitterly
denounced" the "attitude of the government in permitting
such a prospect.... "^'
Encouraged by the Corps' position, private companies
attended the public meeting. A. W. Leonard, manager of the
Minneapolis General Electric Company, reported that his
x
firm could submit a proposal within 60 days and would pay
the government the extra cost of constructing a high dam,
estimated at 5230,000. Paul Doty, representing the St.
Paul Gas Light Company, contended that a private enter-
prise could develop the waterpower better than the state or
municipalities. In response, representatives from the cities
insisted that the federal government should favor them,
because the water power was a natural resource that
belonged to the cities and the state. They asked the board to
grant them time to prepare a proposal, which would take
much more than 60 days."
Demonstrating their interest and their worry,
Minneapolis, St. Paul and the state met after the morning
session to discuss a strategy for developing the river's
hydropower potential. They formed a nine -person commis-
sion, with three members from each party, to prepare a pro-
posal to share in building a high dam. Constitutional
requirements, however, prevented them from offering a defi-
nite proposal until after the next legislative session in two
years. The state's constitution prohibited it from issuing
the bonds needed to build the project, and the city charters
of Minneapolis and St. Paul barred them from making
expenditures for such purposes." While the state's ability
to amend its constitution was in doubt, both cities planned
to revise their charters. The board, in submitting its report
to the Chief of Engineers, noted that "it is the opinion of
the mayors of the two cities, of representatives of the city
councils, and of all the representative citizens who spoke at
the hearing that there will be no difficulty in obtaining leg-
islative action modifying the charters at the next session of
the state legislature."" Both cities passed resolutions favor-
ing the projects'
After evaluating its options, the Corps' board dis-
missed working with a private company. It based this deci-
sion on the reaction of Minneapolis and St. Paul to private
development. The board believed it "abundantly evident"
that the two cities, which owned much of the land above
the dam site, would not relinquish it to a private company.
Proposing to work with a private company, the board con-
cluded, "would be equivalent to recommending against a
high dam ...."" The two cities would rather seethe power
go to waste, the board reported, than let a private firm
develop it."
Having eliminated construction by the federal govern-
ment alone or in concert with a private company, the board
elected to work with the Twin Cities to build the new high
dam. It believed that the cities would change their charters
because of the strong support displayed by the citizens and
governments of the two cities. In a dramatic turnabout,
Minneapolis and St. Paul agreed to split the cost of building
the new structure and to share the hydropower.
Minneapolis even agreed to advance St. Paul's share. On
the basis of this overwhelming interest, the board recom-
mended that Congress modify the navigation project to
raise Dam No. 1 to 30 feet."
W. L. Marshall, the new Chief of Engineers, endorsed
the board's recommendations but made an important
change. Contrary to the standard Corps position, he urged
Congress to fund the entire project. The "construction of
such a lock and dam by the Government is feasible, practi-
cable, and legal under existing conditions," he asserted."
Sharing the costs with a nonfederal partner, he warned, had
proven "conducive to friction and misunderstanding, and
often attended serious complications If the govern-
ment paid the full cost, he argued, then it could keep com-
plete control of the waterpoweL"
Marshall bolstered his position with other arguments.
Even though the Engineers had completed Lock and Dam
No. 2 and had finished much of Lock No. 1, he speculated
that Congress might authorize a deeper project in the near
future. The high dam would easily accommodate a project
of seven, eight or nine feet. While the new structure would
cost some 5230,000, he contended that the hydroelectric
power generated at the new dam would pay this cost and
supply power to other federal offices in the Twin Cities.
Once the Engineers built the power station, the govern-
ment, he proposed, could run it or lease it to a private com-
pany or municipality"
104
Although the board's report did not show it, at least
one of its members agreed with the Chief of Engineers.
Major Shunk believed that Congress should authorize the
Corps to build a high dam for navigation and to capture the
river's hydropower. Shunk even tried to convince business-
men in the Twin Cities to support the project. Like other
high dam proponents, Shunk argued that it would be easier
to operate, would save time, and could pay for itself. He
hoped that if the Twin Cities demonstrated enough demand
for the project Congress would authorize and fund it.
Displaying a deep-seated Progressive mentality, Shunk
insisted "the whole issue was not a legal concern, but a
moral matter.""" In a February 17, 1909, letter to Mayor
Haynes, Shunk complained that "There is something wrong
about partial measures and technically restricted vision.""
Officially, however, Shunk supported the position that the
federal government had the authority only to regulate navi-
gation and not to build or regulate hydroelectric power
dams or plants."z
On January 31, 1910, the board submitted its report
to the Chief of Engineers. Following Marshall's recommen-
dations, Congress called for a high dam in the 1910 River
and Harbor Act, "Provided, That in the making of leases for
water power a reasonable compensation shall be secured to
the United States ...."", Thus, the St. Paul District began
modifying Lock and Dam No. 1 with federal funding. To
ensure safe navigation above the new lock and dam, the
Engineers demolished the top five feet of the Meeker Island
Dam in 1912.
The Twin Cities could no longer gain direct control of
the waterpower, but they still could vie for leasing the
power. Congress had allowed the Corps to build only the
base for a hydropower station, not the station itself.
Section 12 of the 1912 River and Harbor Act granted the
Secretary of War the authority to "provide in the perma-
nent parts of any dam authorized at any time by Congress
for the improvement of navigation such foundations,
sluices, and other works, as may be considered desirable for
the future development of its water power.""^ It did not per-
105
mit the government to develop the water power. Before the
St. Paul District completed Lock and Dam 1, in 1917, a
debate over the federal government's role in hydroelectric
power development entangled the project. Consequently,
the power station's base would remain unused for more
than six years.
The National Debate Over
Hydroelectric Power
While Minneapolis and St. Paul tried to get hydroelectric
power at Lock and Dam 1, Congress wrestled with what the
federal government's role in overseeing water resource
development was, especially as it related to hydroelectric
power. It was an issue that deeply divided the country.
Lock and Dam 1 and the power station eventually built
upon it embody this debate.
To prepare a comprehensive plan for developing the
nation's waterways, President Roosevelt established the
Inland Waterways Commission on March 12, 1907.
Conceived of and headed by W. J. McGee, the Inland
Waterways Commission called for a multiple -purpose
approach and suggested that a single agency coordinate all
water resource projects. In December 1907, Senator Francis
G. Newlands introduced a bill to create such an agency. This
agency would have had the power to investigate water
resource problems, authorize projects, supervise construc-
tion, and coordinate the activities of all federal water
resource agencies. Roosevelt strongly endorsed the bill."5
Not surprisingly, Congress and the Corps opposed
Newlands' bill. The Corps generally resisted the multiple -
purpose approach, as it threatened the agency's role in
developing and managing waterways. Newlands' agency
would undermine much of the Corps' autonomy in select-
ing and building projects. To get the Corps and the War
Department to report favorably on the bill, Roosevelt again
ordered both to support him."
Many senators and representatives also rejected
Newlands' bill. Determining which waterway projects to
build and fund was an important and rewarding role for
x
Congress. Representative Theodore E. Burton, chair of the
House Rivers and Harbors Committee and a member of the
Inland Waterways Commission, opposed the separate
agency and introduced a different proposal. Unable to gath-
er enough support for Newlands' version, the Roosevelt
Administration approved Burton's. When Congress further
modified the bill, the Administration became disenchanted
with it. Although the House passed Newlands' bill on May
16, 1908, it failed in the Senate."
By 1913 Congress had stalled over the government's
role in developing waterways. Opponents of the multiple -
purpose approach had thwarted the program, and Roosevelt
conservationists had blocked unlimited leases at hydropow-
er sites for little or no rent. In 1908, Roosevelt had begun
vetoing hydropower projects that did not carry such terms."
His successor and old adversary on this issue, William H.
Taft, questioned this policy. But Henry L. Stimson, who
became Taft's Secretary of War in 1911, "was enthusiastic
over the possibilities of using revenue from water power to
construct multiple -purpose river works .1161
In 1912 Stimson convinced Taft to veto the Coosa
Dam project in Alabama, because it did not provide for a
rental fee. In response, Alabama Senator John Bankhead
blocked a proposal by the Taft administration to develop
hydropower on the Connecticut River that would have
established a standard policy for hydropower development.
Asa result, the government became deadlocked. "This
impasse," historian Philip Scarpino contends, "brought a
hiatus to hydroelectric development in navigable rivers, . .
:''° Not until Congress passed the Water Power Act of
1920 did it establish a policy for national hydropower
development, and not until then could the St. Paul District
begin considering propositions to build a hydroelectric
plant at Dam No. 1."
Following the Act's passage, Minneapolis and St. Paul,
the Northern States Power Company, and the University of
Minnesota submitted proposals for building a power plant
at the site, but the Federal Power Commission, which had
been created by the Federal Power Act, rejected ihem.'Z hi
1923 the commission finally accepted a proposal backed by
the City of St. Paul and submitted by the Ford Motor
Company. Ford completed the hydroelectric station in
1924, supplying power to its new truck plant on the bluff
above, to the lock and dam, and to others (Figure 7). Finally,
60 years after being first proposed, Minneapolis had its lock
and dam and St. Paul its hydropower.
In an era when conservation became a fad, destroying a
new lock and dam seemed unconscionable. Many people
questioned why Congress had authorized two dams rather
than one and tried to place blame on one party or another.
In a 1910 University of Minnesota thesis on Lock and Dam
No. 1, George W. Jevne and William D. Timperley charged
that Congress rejected the first bill for a high dam, in 1894,
`"on the grounds that power development was beyond the
scope of the project—waterway improvement"" Ina similar
thesis, three University of Minnesota engineering students
repeated this charge and blamed the two -dam project on the
rivalry between Minneapolis and St. Paul." Historian
Lucile Kane contends that "The lock and dam built near
Meeker Island proved to be an embarrassment to the govern-
ment—a `shocking blunder' some called it" This "blunder,"
she says, "weighed heavily on the minds of the engineers
responsible for the decision."" There is no evidence to sup-
port this contention, however.
Major Shunk also faulted intercity politics and defend-
ed the Corps. In his February 17, 1909, letter to Mayor
Haynes, Shunk, after along explanation of how Congress
and the Corps made rigorous scientific decisions about how
best to select and build water resource projects, could only
explain the building of two locks and dams in the Twin
Cities by saying "such things happen in countries where
people have votes.11
1
6 As the Corps had been proposing two
or more dams since G. K. Warren recommended a second
dam in 1868, the control of those who wanted only low
dams must have held sway for a long time.
While a "secret history" may lurk behind the decision
to build two structures, the players in this history did not
recognize the broad national trends that enveloped them.
106
FIGURE 7. Lock and Dain No. 1 with Ford Hydroelectric Power Plant.
Federal law only allowed the Corps to build the base. Ford completed the
hydroelectric plant in 1924. St. Paul District, Corps of Engineers.
The rivalry between Minneapolis and St. Paul and between Meeker Island Lock and Dam, symbolize these important
the navigation boosters and the millers cannot be overem- local and national debates.
phasized, but it must be placed in a national context. The
feuding had delayed the project long enough for hydroelec-
tric power to come of age and for the conservation move-
ment to gain momentum in America_ The desire of local
hydropower boosters to capture the river's power so it
would not go to waste—a desire reflected in American socie-
ty of the early twentieth century—led Congress to revamp
the project, even though it had spent more than a million
dollars on it. Building the hydroelectric plant also became
entwined in a national debate. Thus, the plant and the lock
and dam, as well as the sometimes visible remains of the
107
Lock and Dam No. 2, Hastings
As of 1925 the Mississippi River between St. Paul and
Hastings remained the most troublesome reach for naviga-
tion. Responding to boosters, Congress authorized a survey
of the river from St. Paul to the head of Lake Pepin, in the
x
River and Harbor Act of March 3, 1925." The Corps was to
determine whether locks and dams were necessary to make
the river navigable above the lake and review the status of
river commerce.
The Corps' report, known as House Document 583,
presents a sobering picture of where shipping stood in
1925. "With the exception of an occasional excursion
steamer," the report noted, "the only commercial line oper-
ating on the upper Mississippi River to the Twin Cities is
the River Transit Co., organized in 1922." It provided only
irregular service." Twenty-three railroads, grouped into
nine systems, including five lines to Chicago, four to
Duluth, four to the Pacific Coast and six to the South,
served the Twin Cities. Railroads, the Corps flatly stated,
adequately served the Twin Cities and would continue to for
a long time. "An increase in river transportation," the
Engineers determined, "must come from competition with
well -organized railway service or from new business which
cheaper transportation will bring to the territory.""
In its preliminary examination and survey, the Corps
broke the river into three reaches. The first ran from Lock
and Dam No. 1 to downtown St. Paul. Here, the Engineers
reported that they had nearly completed the 6 -foot channel.
The controlling depth in 1925, however, was only 3.7 feet.
The Corps maintained it could have dredged the river to a
five-foot depth but did not need to since no traffic used this
reach. A second reach extended from Hastings to the head
of Lake Pepin. Here the Corps decided that it could easily
establish the 6 -foot channel by channel constriction and
dredging. But in the middle reach, from downtown St. Paul
to Hastings, the Engineers were far from completing the 6 -
foot channel and recognized that it would be impossible to
do so with wing dams, closing dams and dredging."'
Since Congress had authorized the 6 -foot project in
1907, the Corps had undertaken little workbetween
Hastings and St. Paul. In fact, nearly all the constriction
works hadbeen builtbefore 1896. Still, the Engineers
reported, the reach contained about 300 wing and closing
dams. The Engineers estimated that there was "an average
of 10 per mile" and declared that the river between St. Paul
and Hastings was "probably the most completely regulated
stretch of river in the country." Still, the river remained
extremely shallow"
Dredging, the Engineers acknowledged, could keep the
channel open only temporarily but at a cost to navigation
at St. Paul and Lock and Dam 1. They reported that, "As a
consequence [of dredging] the low-water surface at St. Paul
has been lowered about 1.5 feet."" The lower water surface
reduced the amount of water over the sill or entry to Lock
and Dam 1 below the design depth. Any further dredging,
they warned, would make matters worse at St. Paul and
Lock and Dam 1. In other words, the Corps had to dredge
the channel below St. Paul so much that it lowered the
water level at St. Paul. They realized that if they dredged
the river enough to maintain a 6 -foot channel down to
Hastings, they would lose a 6 -foot channel at St. Paul.
Considering this problem and with little traffic using the
river, the Corps had conducted no dredging in this section
during 1925. At the end of the season, the low water
depth was only three feet. By dredging, the Engineers
insisted, they could increase the depth to four feet; still,
this was two feet below the required 6 -foot channel."
On the basis of its experience and growing demand for
a navigable channel, the Corps recommended a lock and
dam at Hastings. They estimated the cost at 53,780,310.
Congress, the Engineers maintained, should consider the
new structure part of the 6 -foot channel project. Since
channel constriction alone could not create a 6 -foot chan-
nel, and dredging too much lowered the water surface from
downtown St. Paul up to Lock and Dam 1, it became clear
that a lock and dam was necessary. As the only large
metropolis on the upper river above St. Louis, the Twin
Cities provided the justification for the whole effort; all the
work below the cities meant little if the navigable channel
ended 30 miles downstream."'
Accepting the Corps' arguments and lobbying by local
boosters, Congress authorized Lock and Dam No. 2 at
Hastings in the River and Harbor Act of January 27, 1927.
108
Congress did not immediately fund the project, however.
Consequently, the Upper Mississippi Barge Line Company, an
organization that had formed to restore commerce to the
upper river, loaned 530,000 to the Corps to undertake the
preliminary surveys, design work and borings. Finally, on
May 22, 1928, Congress provided funds and ordered the
Corps to begin construction. The St Paul
District let a contract to begin
work on October 16,
1928. Although the
District did not
complete Lock
and Dam No. 2
until
November 30,
1930. the first
barges, pushed
by the towboat
S. S. Thorpe,
locked through on
June 27 (Figure 8).
The reservoir
Dam No. 2, comms
nel project. Under this project, the Corps constructed 23
locks and dams from just above Red Wing, Minnesota, to
Alton, Illinois, during the 1930s. All the locks and dams
on the upper Mississippi River are now part of this project.
Upper and Lower St. Anthony Falls joined the system in
1956 and 1963, respectively. Lock and Dam No. 3 at Red
Wing (completed in 193 8) creates a reservoir that extends
up to the Hastings lock and dam and, therefore, defines the
river's landscape in the southernmost end of the MNRRA
corridor. For these reasons, we need to briefly examine the
history of the 9 -foot channel project.
Despite all the Corps' work on the
and 6 -foot channel proj-
472-
ects, virtually no through
traffic moved between
. Paul and St.
Louis by 1918.
As the region's
need for a
diverse trans-
portation sys-
tem had
grown, its ship-
ping options had
clined, creating a
sortation crisis.
ar shortages, the
opening in 1914
2, has permanently changed the landscape
and ecology of the Mississippi River from Hastings to Lock
and Dam No. 1. While the river can rise to its historic high
stages, it cannot fall to its natural low levels. The wing
dams that once studded the river now lie submerged, indi-
cated only by telltale ripples on the water's surface. For 52
years these simple dams had increasingly defined the river's
physical and ecological character. They still funnel water
down the main channel, but the vast sandbars that had once
been trapped between them are gone or no longer visible.
The river may look more natural without the wing dams,
but it is equally artificial, equally a human artifact.
The 9 -Foot Channel
Six days after the first towboat and barges passed through
Lock and Dam No. 2, Congress authorized the 9 -foot chan-
109
ana several interstate commerce
Commission decisions combined with channel constric-
tion's failure to erect, Midwesterners declared, an "economic
barrier" around their region. Although the Engineers had
built thousands of wing dams and had closed many of the
river's side channels, they had been unable to create a
dependable navigation channel. All too frequently,
droughts and floods made the channel impassable. Rail car
FIGURE S. First lockage at Lock and Dam No. 2, Hastings. June 27,
1930. St. Paul District, Carps of Engineers.
x
shortages, occurring in 1906-07, during World War I, and
in 1921, caused acute, short-term shipping crises, and
pointed out the Midwest's dependence on railroads U6
The Panama Canal's opening in 1914 redefined the
Midwest's transportation problems. While railroad car short-
ages had been infrequent, the Panama Canal created a prob-
lem that promised to become steadily worse. Economically,
the Panama Canal moved the East and West coasts closer to
each other while moving the Midwest farther away from both
coasts. Businesses could ship goods from New York to San
Francisco through the Panama Canal cheaper than
Midwesterners could ship goods to either coast by rail."
The transportation crisis climaxed with the Interstate
Commerce Commission's (ICC) decision in the Indiana Rate
Case of 1922 and the subsequent decisions that upheld it.
On October 22, 1921, the Public Service Commission of
Indiana and others challenged the Midwest's railroad rate
structure. For unfair reasons, they argued, railroads operat-
ing out of Illinois and cities along the west bank of the
Mississippi River in Missouri and Iowa charged lower rates
than railroads running out of Indiana_ Railroads running
along the river charged lower rates because a 1909 decision
by the ICC had upheld the lower rates based upon the poten-
tial and reality of waterway competition. In the Indiana
Rate Case, the ICC reversed this decision. Now, it stated,
"Water competition on the Mississippi River north of St.
Louis is no longer recognized as a controlling force but is
little more than potential.""" In effect, the commission
declared the Midwest landlocked. On February 14, 1922,
the ICC ordered railroads operating along the river to raise
their rates, leading to a 100 per cent or greater rise in some
Midwestern shipping rates."' Appeals by the defendants and
waterway advocates delayed the decision's implementation
until June 1, 1925.
In response to the growing transportation crisis,
Midwestern business and navigation boosters initiated anoth-
er movement to revive navigation, a movement that sur-
passed all previous movements. Between 1925 and 1930,
they fought to restore commerce and to persuade Congress to
authorize a new project for the river, one that would allow the
river to truly compete with railroads. It would draw support
from the largest and smallest businesses in the valley, from
most of its cities, from the Midwest's principal farm organiza-
tions, and from the major political parties.
An editorial in the May 12, 1928, St. Paul Pioneer
Press, entitled `An Inland Empire's Need," captures the
region's sentiment best:
In common with the impulses of all ambitious peoples, the
Northwest's aspirations forgrowth, forprosperity, for
power, find expression in demand for ready access to the
sea. With its millions of population, its rich resources, and
its unlimited possibilities for commercial growth, this
region is like a giant, tied just beyond reach of a noblerdes-
tiny, straining at his chains. We are landlocked, a
marooned interior, shut in by the barriers of costly overland
carriage, to and from the common highway to the world's
markets, the sea."
Responding to this movement, Congress included the 9 -
foot channel project in the 1930 River and Harbor Act" The
Corps built the locks and dams during the Great Depression,
providing labor for thousands of unemployed workers. By
1938 the St. Paul District had completed Lock and Dam No.
3, and the Corps would finish the whole project by 1940.
On the basis of their representation of New Era and
Great Depression history, Locks and Dams 3 through 26 have
been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places. Although Lock and Dam No. 3 is outside MNRRA's
boundaries, its reservoir defines the river's landscape and
ecosystems in that part of the pool within the corridor's
boundaries. To interpret the history, landscape and ecology
of this part of the corridor requires an understanding of the
national significance of the 9 -foot channel project.
Fulfilling the Dream: St. Anthony Falls
Upper Harbor Project
Navigation advocates in Minneapolis, watching the 9 -foot
channel project under construction below, recognized that
with two more locks and dams they could make their city
110
the head of navigation. Anxious to fulfill the dream they
had held since the 1850s, Minneapolis navigation support-
ers and their Congressional delegation pushed hard to have
the project extended. On August 26, 1937, Congress, with
insistent lobbying by Minnesota Senator Henrik Shipstead,
granted their wish by enacting the Upper Minneapolis
Harbor Development Project. Minneapolis agreed to con-
tribute S 1,744,000 to the project for bridge and utility
modifications and purchasing land.
The project called for building the Lower St. Anthony
Falls Lock and Dam, the Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock,
dredging, and modifying bridges and utilities. The project
would extend the head of navigation—the farthest upriver
barges and tows could be sure of a 9 -foot channel—by 4.6
miles. World War II, complex economic and engineering
studies and land acquisition delayed construction until
1948, when the Corps began dredging for a 9 -foot channel.
Because of the area's fragile geology—made evident by
the Eastman Tunnel fiasco (see Chapter 6)—and the density
of urban development, the Corps had to devise an innova-
tive design and unique construction methods. In 1939 the
Corps built a l to 50 scale model of the project site from
Hennepin Avenue to the Washington Avenue Bridge at the
St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory at the University of
Minnesota.
Work began on the lower lock and dam during the
summer of 1950. To build the Lower St. Anthony Falls
project, the Corps removed the existing dam completed by
the Pillsbury -Washburn Company in 1897. The new dam
tied into the old hydropower station (Figure 9). The
Engineers planned to build the project in four years, but
because of foundation problems and large floods in 1951
and 1952, it took seven years, opening in 1956.
On November 12, 1949, the Corps broke ground for
FIGURE 9. Lower St. Anthony Falls Lock and Dara under construction,
1956. St. Paul District, Corps of Engineers.
111
112
\1
113
work on the upper lock. This lock, at 49.2 feet, has the high-
est lift of any lock on the Mississippi River. On September
21,1963, the towboat Savage, pushing a barge loaded with
cast-iron pipe, became the first to pass through the lock
(Figure 10). Barges and tows could now move from the
heart of Minneapolis to the Gulf of Mexico. Minneapolis had
fulfilled a dream imagined over 110 years earlier. 12
Coon Rapids Dam
Like the other dams on the Mississippi in the MNRRA corri-
dor, the Coon Rapids Dam redefined the river's upstream
landscape and ecology. Its history—the political, social and
economic contexts in which it was conceived of and
built—tells important local, regional and national stories.
Hydroelectric power developers began considering a dam
and electric generating station at Coon Rapids (or Coon
Creek Rapids as it was originally known) as early as August
1898. A survey was under way and advocates hoped that
the new proj ect would begin by the next year. Thirteen
years passed, however, before Congress approved the project
and another two before construction began.
William de la Barre, the eminent mastermind of
hydropower development at St. Anthony Falls, reviewed the
Coon Rapids Dam design for H. M. Byllesby & Company.
Overall, de la Barre liked the plans and site location. He
concluded that there was no reason why "this water power
project should not be carried to a successful completion,
and become one of the permanent sources of power for this
part of the country.'"
As construction became imminent, the Anoka County
Union Herald excitedly reported that engineers and "a crew
of several hundred laborers are coming from New York and
other places" to build the dam. The paper expected 1,000
workers. When they began arriving, the Northern
Mississippi Power Company (a Byllesby subsidiary) estab-
lished a camp, a "little city," on the Mississippi's east bank
FIGUREI0. Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock under construction, 1961.
St. Paul District, Corps of Engineers
x
in 1913. "Streets were laid out, a store, clubhouse, hospi-
tal, office buildings, school, dormitories, new houses, car-
penters shops and storehouses were built" As the city met
and exceeded the prediction of 1,000 workers, the company
added a movie theater, dance hall and billiard parlor.'
Then on November 26, 1913, the Union Herald
announced that the St. Anthony Falls Commercial Club was
pressing Congress for a lock in the dam. The Commercial
Clubs of St. Cloud and Anoka also backed the lock idea_ The
lock, potentially, would extend navigation 70 miles
upstream. While the dam was already under construction,
Congress, as part of its effort to define the role of the feder-
al government in hydroelectric power development in navi-
gable waters, had mandated that dams built in navigable
waters have locks. A lock would have to be built at the
power company's expense, an estimated $150,000J5
Minnesota Representative George R. Smith presented the
case for the lock to the Secretary of the Interior and Congress.
W. B. Boardman, of the Minneapolis Real Estate Board,
claimed that "This water passage would tap much of the rich-
est territory in the state and would make it possible eventual-
ly to transport iron ore in barges from the range to
Minneapolis:' He thought that the addition of one or two
more dams upriver would extend navigation to Brainerd. The
ore, he predicted, would lead to the growth of smelting and
steel industries in the Twin Cities J6 Boardman's hopes and
those of the commercial clubs promoting navigation were
dashed by Lieutenant Colonel Charles Potter, the St. Paul
District commander. Potter declared the river above Coon
Rapids would not be navigable for at least two to five years.
Therefore, the power company did not need to build a lock."
The way clear, the company pressed the large crew day
and night. They poured 42,000 cubic yards of concrete and
over 800 carloads of crushed rock into the project. They
built a brick powerhouse on the east side "and fitted [it]
with the most modern machinery for development of elec-
tricity." By late 1914, the facility was ready to generate
power (Figure 11).11 The fixed -crest dam created a 600 -acre
pool that extends seven miles upstream to the Champlin
Bridge in Champlin. The pool provides a head of eight feet
at the dam but gradually thins to the river's natural eleva-
tion upstream from the Champlin Bridge.
Once the company completed the project, most of the
workers left, and the city that had grown up around it was
torn down. The project had not been completed without
incident. A local account of the project relates that, "The
Father of Waters was harnessed to do the work of man, in
spite of strikes, flood waters and even a riot."
Because of increasing maintenance costs and the limit-
ed profit generated by the facility, Northern States Power
Company (NSP) decided to dose the facility in 1966. In
1969 NSP donated the dam and land around it to the
Hennepin County Regional Park District. Now Hennepin
and Anoka Counties manage the Coon Rapids Dam Regional
Park on their respective sides of the river. By 1995 high
water and ice had severely damaged the old dam, and the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources condemned
the structure. After a series of public meetings, the dam
was torn out. As the dam's original foundation was still
good, a new dam, completed in 1997, was built on top of it.
NSP removed the powerhouse, which has not been replaced.
While no structures associated with the old dam
remain, the dam area and the construction site associated
with it merit interpretation as part of the early history of
hydroelectric power development in Minnesota and the coun-
try. The site provides a fascinating look into the social and
political history of hydroelectric development in Minnesota.
Navigation and hydropower projects in the MNRRA
corridor, from the mid -nineteenth century to the present,
have defined the river's physical and ecological character.
They have shaped the corridor's economic history, and they
have determined how cities in the corridor use the river,
whether for the intended purposes or not. Some projects,
like channel constriction and the locks and dams, are part
of national and regional stories, yet they have their local
stories too. And local projects, such as the Coon Rapids
Dam and the Meeker Island Lock and Dam, relate to nation-
al issues, debates and movements.
114
FIGURE 11. Coon Rapids Dam and Power Plant, 1928. Photo by Pant Hamilton. Minnesota Historical Society.
115
FIGURE 1. ReconstrnctingSt. Anthony Falls. Artist., Peter Gni Clausen, 1869. Minnesota Historical Society.
Olt, tem 6 -
St. Anthony Falls: Timber, Flour and Electricity
o place anchors the MNRRA corridor's signif-
icance like St. Anthony Falls. No place in
the corridor can match its regional, national,
even international significance. Geologically, it is unique.
St. Anthony Falls is the only major falls on the upper
Mississippi River. Historically, its visitors and commenta-
tors comprise a who's who of European and American
exploration: Father Louis Hennepin, Jonathan Carver, and
Zebulon Pike, to name a few. Economically, it created a city
with no peer west of Chicago to the Rock Mountains and
south to St. Louis. It gave birth to the saw milling and flour
milling industries that became the leading producers of
their commodities in the United States and the world.
Minneapolis would be the nation's flour capital for 50
years. Technologically, the falls produced the first commer-
cial hydroelectric central plant in the country. The St.
Anthony Falls area boasts two National Historic Landmarks
— the Pillsbury A Mill and the Washburn A Mill — and, the
Great Northern Railway Bridge, a National Engineering
Landmark. For these reasons, St. Anthony Falls merits a
special look. (Figure 1.)
Geology
Millers at St. Anthony Falls thought themselves blessed by
the Mississippi River's geology. As detailed in Chapter 1,
the riverbed above the falls is made of a thick mantle of
117
hard Platteville limestone. The limestone covers a veneer of
shale and mixed sandstone. Beneath these lies a deep
deposit of soft St. Peter sandstone. Millers drove shafts
through the limestone and shale and then easily excavated
their tailraces to the toe of the falls. What they considered
a blessing, however, they almost destroyed.
The same geology admired by the millers allowed the
falls to retreat upriver. Imagine standing on the bluffs over-
looking the Mississippi valley near downtown St. Paul about
12,000 years ago. You would be drenched by the spray and
deafened by the roar of an immense waterfall. It measured
some 2,700 feet across and stood 175 feet high. The melt -
waters from the colossal glacial Lake Agassiz, lying in north-
western Minnesota and in southern Canada, thundered over
it. As the water boiled back at the soft sandstone, it under-
mined the limestone riverbed. Soon, the unsupported lime-
stone broke off, and the falls receded upstream, and the
process began again. By 1680, when Father Hennepin
became the first European to see the falls, it lay roughly
1,500 feet downstream from its present location.
Native American History
We know little about the Native Americans' relationship to
the falls over the last 12,000 years. (Figure 2.) Few arti-
facts telling of their presence have been found. Some fluted
points (Clovis and Folsom) and unfluted lanceolate spear
9
FIGURE 2. Owalmeeuah ("falling water"), one ofat least several
Dakota namesgiven to the falls that Father Louis Hennepin would rename
St. Anthony. Lithograph. Hennann J. Meyer. St. Paul District, Corps of
Engineers.
points (Plano) found along the river demonstrate that Native area by the late eighteenth century and early nineteenth cen-
Americans visited the corridor as early as the Paleo-Indian tury, the Dakota remained dominant around the falls.'
era (see Chapter 2). Where they viewed the falls from or George Catlin, who visited the cataract in 1835, depicts the
where they might have portaged around it probably changed
from decade to decade, and, at times, from year to year, as
the falls retreated. The potential for archeological sites asso-
ciated with the falls, therefore, exists along the entire route
of its migration.'
When Europeans arrived, the Dakota commanded the
area, although the Chippewa ventured down the Mississippi
to attack the Dakota. From Hennepin's 1680 account, we
know the Dakota used the Mississippi as a route for hunting
and warfare. While the Chippewa occupied the Headwaters
Chippewa portaging around it. The Chippewa had visited
Fort Snelling.
Native Americans probably had many names for the
falls, names describing its character. We know the
Chippewa used Kakabikah (the severed rock) and Kichi-
Kakabika (the great severed rock) for the fractured limestone
blocks that littered the area below the falls. The Dakota
called the falls Minirara (curling water), O-Wa-Mni
(whirlpool), Owahmenah (falling water), and Halla Tanka
(big waterfall).'
Although the details are sketchy and Hennepin's
account is suspect, we know the falls possessed energy, spiri-
tuality and history for the Dakota. In 1680, as his party
was portaging around the falls, Hennepin saw a Dakota man
who had climbed an oak tree near the falls and was "weep -
118
ing bitterly...:' The man was praying to Oanktehi, who
resided below the falls and was, according to Hennepin, the
spirit of waters and evil. Hennepin writes that the man
"had a beaver robe dressed neatly, whitened inside, and dec-
orated with porcupine quills, and was offering it in sacrifice
to this cataract, which is terrifying and admirable." During
his prayer, the man pleaded: "`You, who are a spirit, grant
that our tribe pass by here tranquilly without mishap.
Grant that we may kill many buffaloes, destroy our ene-
mies, and bring here captives, some of whom we will sacri-
fice to YOU.""
In the 1817 account of his expedition, Major Stephen
Long tells the story of Dark Day or Ampato Sapa, a Dakota
woman who killed herself and her two children after her
husband took a second wife. Her husband watching, she
plunged over the falls in a canoe with their children. Her
spirit was said to haunt the falls and Spirit Island.' We can-
not know what aspects of these accounts are fact, what the
Dakota really told early explorers, or why they told it to
them. But the legends indicate that the falls undoubtedly
possessed many stories and traditions for the Dakota.
The falls also served as a source of a special clay.
During his 1820 expedition, Henry Rowe Schoolcraft
observed that the Dakota collected a "brownish red" day
from "close under the sheet of the principal column of
water, ..:. They used the clay to paint their baskets and
canoes. Schoolcraft described the clay as being "an alumi-
nous substance very much mixed with iron pyrites in a state
of decomposition, and penetrated with vegetable juices."
From Schoolcraft's account, it is not clear whether the
Dakota mixed vegetable juices with the clay or if the day
appeared this way naturally. The Dakota, he judgementally
wrote, "pretend that it is renewed when taken away. The
Dakota, of course, were not pretending; they believed that
some spirit at the falls supplied the day. How many stories,
legends, traditions, ceremonies and spirits the Dakota,
Chippewa or other Native American Indians had for the
falls, we cannot begin to guess.
Some Dakota bands lived around the falls or not too far
119
away when the early explorers and settlers arrived. Cloud
Man had a village (Eatonville) at Lake Calhoun and occa-
sionally camped at the falls in the summer. Good Road's
band of about 10 tipis sometimes stayed near what is now
downtown Minneapolis. We also know that the Dakota
tapped the sugar maples on Nicollet Island.' Kaposia, both
the old and the new (1830s-1854), lay downriver near
Dayton Bluff.
Chaotic Majesty
Seeing St. Anthony Falls today, it is hard to imagine what it
looked like in its natural state. The locks and dams, the con-
crete spillway, the two overflow spillways, the bridges, the
buildings, the power lines and poles, and the miscellaneous
clutter obscure what the falls was like, challenging our abil-
ity to imagine its pristine character. Water sliding over the
spillway or slipping through turbines bears no resemblance
to the way water broke raucously over the fractured lime-
stone long ago. Fortunately, European and American explor-
ers, government officials and early tourists left descriptions
of the natural falls. To them, it was a geologic marvel and a
geographic anchor. The accounts they penned are important
not just for what they tell about the falls. The people them-
selves were important figures participating in the process of
exploration, trade, and settlement. (Figure 3.)
Most early visitors felt a need to compare St. Anthony
to Niagara and other falls, weighing St. Anthony's quality
and importance by standards that did not fit. In 1680
Hennepin estimated the falls plunged 40 to 60 feet. Twenty
years later, Jean Penicaut, the second explorer to leave a
description, agreed with the higher figure. Both exaggerat-
ed. In 1766 Carver judged the height to be about 29 feet.
Cutting its stature even more, Zebulon Pike calculated that
the falls dropped only 16'/2 feet. While the cataract had
migrated upstream between visits, this cannot account for
the gap between Hennepin's and Pike's numbers.
More than likely Hennepin and Penicaut exaggerated
and miscalculated. Carver and others suggest a reason.
Carver explained that the rapids below the falls "`render the
descent considerably greater, so that when viewed at a dis-
tance, they appear much higher than they really are...: 'll,
In 1817 Long expanded on this observation. He figured the
vertical fall at 16'h feet, but, he reported, the rapids began
several hundred yards above the falls and continued for
•`ate '�'1 yi-� - e
eight miles below. Relying on Pike's estimate, he noted that
from the beginning of the rapids to about 4,030 feet down
to the "portage road" the river fell about 58 feet. With this
estimate, the total drop from the beginning to the end of the
rapids approached 75 feet.' If Hennepin and others includ-
ed part of the rapids in their estimates, they may not have
been so far off.
St. Anthony Falls disappointed those who compared it
to other cataracts. Hennepin began the comparison game,
remarking that the height of St. Anthony "`doth not come
near that of Niagara.""' Pike, having read earlier descrip-
tions and seeing the falls at low water, was unimpressed
when he passed going upstream." Even more critical,
painter and explorer George Catlin derided the falls as
FIGURE 3. St. Anthony Falls' last days. Although dated 1853, this
engraving by Seth Eastman does not show the darn built by Franklin
Steele in 1848 that ran from the east bank to Nicallet Island. The west
side dam would he completed in 1857. The saw and grist mills built by
soldiers from Ft. Snelling in the early 1820s are visible at the left. Artist.
Seth Eastman. Engraving courtesy of David Wiggins.
"`pygmy in size to Niagra. '11 While some left disappointed,
most departed with respect, admiration and praise.
St. Anthony Falls did not need a great plunge to make
it impressive. Its unique geology provided the rough canvas
over which the water flowed to create an image most found
captivating. Sharp and jagged, St. Anthony's leading edge
dispersed the Mississippi into a myriad of falls over which
the water sometimes dropped in clear sheets. The jumble of
limestone slabs that had toppled from the falls kicked the
water in all directions. The forested islands—Nicollet,
Hennepin, Spirit, Upton, and Cataract—divided the river,
adding to the complex flow of water in, around, over and
120
down from the falls. All these features combined to offer a
spectacle that overwhelmed most, if not all, visitors. Even if
Hennepin thought St. Anthony small compared to Niagara,
he found that the water pouring over the falls was "`terrible,
and hath something in it very astonishing."' And Carver,
despite estimating the falls to be 20 to 30 feet shorter than
Hennepin, remarked that "... I was greatly pleased and sur-
prised, when I approached this astonishing work of nature. .
He raved that "`a more pleasing and picturesque view
cannot, I believe, be found throughout the universe."' 13
Carver further expands our image of the falls. Two
small islands, he wrote, lay below the falls. One was Spirit
Island. About an acre in size, it possessed "several oak
[cedar] frees on which are a vast many eagles' nests." The
reason for the eagles' nests, he explained, was "the great
numbers of fish that is killd [sic] in attempting to get up and
down the falls." Eagles swooping through the mists of St.
Anthony to clutch fish trying to migrate above the falls may
be hard for people to imagine since migrating fish can no
longer get above Lock and Dam No. 1 and some of the other
dams below. Even Pike changed his mind about the falls.
When he returned down the Mississippi River at high water,
he wrote, "`the appearance is much more sublime, as the
great quantity of spray which in clear weather reflects from
some positions the colors of the rainbow, and when the sky
is overcast, covers the falls in gloom and chaotic majesty.""'
Visiting the falls in 1820, Henry R. Schoolcraft also
thought St. Anthony less awesome than Niagara. Still, he
found it possessed a unique beauty. It had, he observed, "a
simplicity of character which is very pleasing." Employing
the language of his day to characterize alandscape, he com-
mented: "We see nothing in the view which may not be con-
sidered either rude or picturesque, and perhaps there are
few scenes in the natural topography of our country, where
these features are blended with more harmony and effect.""
The landscape's transition around the falls also struck
Schoolcraft. Above the falls, he observed, the prairie came
up to the river.16 Below the falls the river fell into the gorge
that would characterize its path down to Fort Snelling,
121
before entering the valley through which it coursed for hun-
dreds of miles.
Picturesque landscapes exuded a rough and irregular
character. By their scale, sublime landscapes evoked a sense
of danger or astonishment. St. Anthony provided both." Lt.
James E. Colhoun captured the sense of astonishment, scale,
and roughness presented by the falls. A member of Stephen
Long's second expedition, he visited the falls in July 182 3.
"... I confess," Colhoun admitted, "I was at first disappoint-
ed from the difficulty of embracing the whole at once. I
thought the islands and the piles of rocks in front rather
caused unpleasant obstruction of the view than lent savage
grandeur to the scene. But they possess a peculiarity; the
sheet of water, furnishing every variety of cataract in shape
and shade, continues unrent, though alternately salient and
retiring, sometimes many feet" Revealing how shallow the
river could be, Colhoun waded across it a few yards above
the falls. While the river was never above his thigh, he
admitted the current would have carried him over the falls
had he slipped."`
Giacomo Beltrami, an Italian romantic and traveler
who accompanied Long's 1823 expedition, waxed more elo-
quent. Writing to his wife, he gushed, "What a new scene
presents itself to my eyes, my dear Madam! How shall I
bring it before you without the aid of either painting or
poetry?"" Resting on a knoll about one-half mile from the
falls he, nevertheless, tried.
... I see.... two great masses of water unite at the foot
of an island which they encircle, and whose majestic
trees deck them with the loveliest hues, in which all the
magicplay of light and shade are reflected on their bril-
liant surface. From this point they rush down a rapid
descent about two hundred feet long, and, breaking
against the scattered rocks which obstruct theirpassage,
they spray up and dash together in a thousand varied
forms. They then fall into a traverse basin, in the form of
a cradle, and are urged upwards by the farce ofgravita-
tion against the side of a precipice, which seems to stop
them a moment only to enerease their violence with
x
which fling themselves down a depth of twenty feet. The
rocks against which these great volumes of water dash,
throw them back in white foam and glittering spray;
then, plunging into the cavities which this mightyfall as
hollowed, they rush forth again in tumultuous waves,
and once more break against a great mass of sandstone
forming little island in the midst of theirbed, on which
two thick maples spread their shady branches."'
Adding to the aura of St. Anthony Falls was the sound
created by water breaking over the falls and bursting
through the jumbled limestone boulders. In 1700 Penicaut
said the falls roared like "`thunder rolling in the air.""'
Carver claimed he could hear the falls from 15 miles away."
More astonishing, George W. Featherstonhaugh, a British -
born geologist who visited the falls in 1835, insisted he
heard the falls from almost 30 miles away." On the evening
of September 10, while making camp not far above the
mouth of the St. Croix River, he reported hearing a "deep
throbbing sound coming at intervals from a great distance,.
Asking his men about it, they told him it came from St.
Anthony Falls." "... I retired to my tent rather late,"
Featherstonhaugh confided to his journal, "listening to the
throbbing sound of the cataract until I fell asleep."" While
such accounts seem absurd, people dearly heard the falls
from far away. With all the noise in our world today, it is
hard to imagine the quiet of the surrounding area or the
force of the falling water that would have allowed anyone to
hear the falls from such a distance. Up close, the noise must
have been deafening.
Sound came not only from the falls. On the evening of
July 17, 1817, Long stayed just below the cataract. "The
place we camped last night," he wrote, "needed no embell-
ishments to render it romantic in the highest degree." The
bluffs, he estimated, rose about 100 feet high and were cov-
ered with vegetation. "A few yards below us," he continued,
"was a beautiful cascade of fine spring water, pouring down
from a projecting precipice about one hundred feet high.""
The river rushed by and St. Anthony was visible upstream.
Together, he exclaimed, "The murmuring of the cascade, the
roaring of the river, and the thunder of the cataract, all con-
tributed to make the scene the most interesting and magnifi-
cent of any I ever before witnessed.""
French scientist, Joseph N. Nicollet visited the falls in
1838 and put many of the elements together. To him,
"with the noisy boiling of its waters, rebounding in jets
from the accumulated debris at its foot, its ascending
vapors, and the long and verdant island that separates the
two portions of the falls with the solitary rocky island that
stands in front altogether," the falls created "a grand and
imposing spectacle...."" Having led government expedi-
tions on the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers to map their
watersheds, Nicollet had seen plenty of rivers.
The descriptions of St. Anthony's natural character
expanded following the visits of these explorers and travel-
ers. Their writings and the advent of steamboat navigation
on the upper Mississippi River in 1823 gave rise to the
"fashionable tour," as wealthy easterners ventured to see the
river and the falls. Writers, artists, and tourists also jour-
neyed to the falls and left their visual and written accounts,
adding to and embellishing upon St. Anthony's grandeur, a
grandeur that would soon disappear.
Working the Falls
The increasing numbers of settlers and squatters around
Fort Snelling may have appreciated St. Anthony's beauty,
but they anxiously waited to capture the energy and the eco-
nomic promise it offered. As early as 1819, Lt. Colonel
Henry Leavenworth recognized the falls' hydropower poten-
tial. To support the fort's construction and operation,
Leavenworth suggested building saw and grist mills at St.
Anthony. His successor, Colonel Josiah Snelling, built the
mills and two barracks on the west bank between 1821 and
1823. The mills presaged the future of St. Anthony, for
much of its fame would come from the milling of timber
and flour. These commodities, along with hydroelectric
power, would largely define the falls' legacy and physical
character.
122
Other than Fort Snelling's mills and associated build-
ings, the falls remained largely natural until 1847. Small
changes had taken place around the mills. By 183 3 soldiers
had built a farmhouse and stables and grazed some 200
head of cattle nearby. But private development at St.
Anthony was not yet possible, since the land around the
falls lay inside Fort Snelling's military reservation. The
Pike cession extended for nine miles along both sides of the
Mississippi River above the fort. Nevertheless, 15 7 squat-
ters had settled on the reservation by October 183 7. Based
on the frontier tradition of preemption, the squatters hoped
to get first choice to lands within the reservation. Under
preemption, settlers who had established a claim on the
land prior to its official sale had the first opportunity to
purchase the land they occupied. living on land next to the
falls could give a squatter the rights to the hydropower
based on another tradition, that of riparian rights, which
held that the person occupying the land next to a body of
water had the right to the water passing by their land."
In 1837 the territorial governor negotiated treaties
with the Dakota and Chippewa that excited the squatters.
Ratified in 183 8, the treaties gave the U.S. government title
to the land between the St. Croix and Mississippi Rivers.
This should have excluded the land within the Pike cession,
but just prior to the treaties, Joseph Plympton, Fort
Snelling's commandant, had undertaken the first detailed
survey of the fort's boundary. Hoping to establish his pre-
emption rights over all others, Plympton deliberately
excluded the falls' eastern shore from the military reserva-
tion (although the Pike cession had clearly included it).
This opened the eastern shore to settlement, once the United
States had acquired title to it from the Dakota_ The 183 7
treaty provided the title."
News that treaties had been ratified arrived on July 15,
1838, with the steamboat Palmyra. Commandant
Plympton only had to stake his claim next to St. Anthony to
complete his plan. But, during the middle of the night, a
young entrepreneur named Franklin Steele beat him to the
site. When the commandant's men arrived the next morn -
123
Ing, Steele was already entrenched (Figure 4).
Born in Pennsylvania, the 25 -year old Steele was a
storekeeper at Fort Snelling and part owner of the St. Croix
Falls Lumber Company. He would become the founder of
the milling industry at St. Anthony. Since the east side (the
town of St. Anthony) would become part of Minneapolis, he
FIGURE 4. Franklin Steele, thefotniderafcommercial timber milling
at St. Anthony Falls. Katie, The Falls of St_ Anthmry.
can be considered a contributing founder of that city as
well. Other squatters quickly established their claims to the
lands east of the river. The west side, however, would not
become available officially until 1856."
Timber • As of 1838, Steele had most of what he needed to
put St. Anthony Falls' tremendous power to work. In timber
he had a natural resource sufficient to ensure the falls' ener-
gy would be fully employed, at least for as long as he could
imagine. From St. Anthony to the Mississippi's headwaters
and beyond, conifers and hardwoods shaded 70 percent of
x
what would become Minnesota. The Mississippi and its
tributaries provided the transportation routes needed to
deliver the raw material to the power source and to ship the
finished products to local, regional and national markets.
But Steele still needed two important elements: official title
to the land and capital. For these, Steele would have to wait
nine years, until 1847, before he could begin to realize his
ambitions."
Steele might have begun milling sooner if he could
have found the money, but the money was tied to the title.
When Steele met with the representative of two potential
eastern financiers, the representative questioned the securi-
ty of Steele's preemption claim. The 1837 Dakota treaty
gave the United States title, but the United States had not
yet put the land up for public sale. What if the government
rejected Steele's claims and let someone else buy the land?
The investors would loose their money. Despite the
investors' worries, Steele persuaded them to join his ven-
ture in July 184 7. First, however, the investors sent a lum-
ber surveyor into Minnesota's pineries to determine how
much timber the pineries held and to assess the navigability
of the Mississippi and its tributaries for floating logs. The
surveyor dispelled the investors' fears, reporting that the
timber was "`almost inexhaustible."' Steele finally got an
agreement. The financiers committed S 12,000 for a nine -
tenths interest in the property. Not until March 1848,
however, did Steele receive the funds. On May 8, 1848,
President James K. Polk finally declared the first land sales
in what would become Minnesota, and Steele officially
acquired his claim on September 8, 184 8. On part of his
land Steele platted the town site of St. Anthony."
Trusting that the money and title would come soon,
Steele had begun developing his land, initiating the demise
of the natural falls. In July 1847 he built a mess hall, car-
pentry and blacksmith shops, stables, and a bunkhouse. In
October his crews began work on a dam, cutting logs on the
Rum River and floating them to a boom at the Rum's
mouth. Although the boom broke on November 1 and the
logs escaped, Steele's workers cut hardwoods on Nicollet
Island and brought timber from the St. Croix mills to com-
plete the dam and sawmill in 1848.'
The dam lay a short distance above the falls on the east
side. Nicollet and Hennepin Islands divided the river into
two channels just above the falls. The dam blocked the east
channel, "running from the shore to a point twenty feet
above the head of Hennepin Island and then to the foot of
Nicollet Island." Secured to the limestone riverbed, the dam
extended for some 700 feet and stood 16 feet high.
Founded on a base 40 feet wide, it tapered to 12 feet at the
top. By the end of 1848, two up-and-down saws operated
on the new dam. The millpond upstream held the logs until
ready, and a 50 -foot -wide platform in front of the mill
stored the cut lumber."
Steele's dam and mill heralded the end of an epoch and
the beginning of a new era for St. Anthony Falls. During
the epoch, which had lasted from the retreat of the glaciers
until 1847, natural forces defined the falls' physical appear-
ance, the sounds it made, and the rate and path of its retreat.
After 184 7 the site and sounds of the natural falls rapidly
disappeared, and human actions defined its physical charac-
ter and the rate of its retreat. New sounds reached visitors
approaching the falls. The dam also heralded a new era for
the new territory's forests and prairies, as the timber
milling spurred the clear -cutting of Minnesota's forests and
as flour milling would soon fuel the plowing of the prairies
and the planting of countless wheat fields.
Steele sent logging crews into the north woods near the
mouth of the Crow Wing River on December 1, 1847, to
fell logs for the mill. His representatives negotiated with
Chief Hole -in -the -Day of the Chippewa for permission to cut
the timber. The chief agreed, for the price of 50 cents per
tree. By March, Steele's men had sawed some 1.5 million
board feet of timber. That spring and many springs after,
logs bobbed downriver to the mills at St. Anthony to feed
the booming need for houses and commercial buildings.
This first season, however, the mill did not begin cutting
until September 1, 1848. Steele sold the lumber as fast as
he sawed it. 16
124
From 1849 to 1852 the number of sawmills increased
from one to four, and daily production grew from 15,000
board feet to 50,000. By 1855 the daily output had
jumped to 100,000 board feet and the yearly output to
12,000,000. Much of the lumber floated downstream to
St. Louis, although the burgeoning communities at the falls
and at St. Paul demanded more and more."
Steele's success intensified interest in the falls' west
side. Would-be lumber barons gazed over the river, knowing
that whoever grabbed the land on the west would control
half the power. The federal government, however, had
refused to lease or sell the old Fort Snelling mills or any
land on the west side to private citizens. While Plympton's
cartographic license and the 183 7 treaties had opened the
east to settlement, the west side remained squarely within
the Fort Snelling military reservation.
Nevertheless, in 1849, two individuals gained a
foothold on the western shore. Robert Smith, an Alton,
Illinois, businessman, and a representative in Congress,
requested a five-year lease on the Fort Snelling mills and on
a house built near them. His plan, he claimed, was to live in
the house and grind flour for local use. Fort Snelling's com-
mandant complained that Smith was conniving to gain con-
trol of milling on the west side. Although the War
Department had denied others, Smith secured the lease.
Smith was not a complete outsider. He had purchased land
in St. Paul, and some thought he should be Minnesota's first
territorial governor."
Later in 1849 Franklin Steele suggested to John H.
Stevens, a friend, that Stevens request 160 acres above
Smith. Steele's idea was that Stevens propose to ferry troops
and supplies for the newly built Fort Ripley in northern
Minnesota in exchange. The ploy worked, and during the
winter of 1849 to 1850, Stevens built the first permanent
home in what would become Minneapolis"
Then, in the summer of 1851, the government negoti-
ated the Treaties of Traverse des Sioux with the Sisseton
and Wahpetons and the Treaty of Mendota with the
Mdewakantons and Wahpekutes, under which the Dakota
125
ceded nearly all their lands in Minnesota_' In 1852
Congress passed a bill removing 26,023 acres from the
34,000 -acre military reserve, including the area around St.
Anthony Falls. While these actions did not officially open
the west side to settlement, they were enough to encourage a
rush by squatters. By 1854 some 300 squatters inhabited
the west side. Finally in 185 5, Congress amended the
1852 Act that removed land from the military reserve and
recognized the squatters' preemption rights. Squatters liv-
ing on the west side could now buy the land they claimed.
New settlers hurried across the river, and beginning in
1855, the government started selling the land. By 1856
the west side's population had jumped to 1,555.'
In 1856 the west and east side interests formed consol-
idated companies to manage their power and obtained per-
petual charters from the Minnesota territorial legislature.
Smith, joined by 11 others who had staked claims to the
west side waterpower, formed the Minneapolis Mill
Company. The following year, Dorilus Morrison, one of the
most important partners, convinced his cousin Cadwallader
C. (or C. C.) Washburn, from Maine, to join the company,
and C. C. then persuaded his brother William D. Washburn
to join the firm in 1857. By 1865 the Washburns,
Morrison and Smith owned the company outright.
Morrison and the two Washburns would build St. Anthony
into the nation's leading milling center, but their interests
went beyond milling. Morrison would serve as Mayor of
Minneapolis in 186 7 and become a state senator. C. C.
Washburn (who left Maine in 1839, moved to Iowa,
Illinois, and finally Wisconsin) made La Crosse his perma-
nent home after 1861. Wisconsin elected him to Congress
and as their governor. William Washburn served in the
Minnesota legislature and in Congress." (Figure 5.)
Across the river, Steele and his partners created the St.
Anthony Falls Water Power Company in 185 6. Steele's
partners included three New York financiers: John E A.
Sanford, Frederick C. Gebhard, and Thomas E. Davis. In
1868, after years of financial problems, the St. Anthony
firm reorganized. The new board and officers included men
whose names would become well known in the history of
Minneapolis and the state: John Pillsbury, Richard and
Samuel Chute, Sumner Farnham, and Frederick
Butterfield.'
In 1856, with the Minneapolis Mill Company ready to
develop the west side, the two companies had to divide the
water. Consequently, the Minneapolis Mill Company built a
dam out into the river and then angled it to a point
upstream to meet the dam constructed by the St. Anthony
Company. Together the dams created an inverted V in the
river that directed water to the mills on either side. This
left the center of the falls dry and exposed during low water
and contributed to the deterioration of the central falls.
Finished in 1857, the new dam established the basic shape
of the falls upstream of the spillway (nearly the shape it has
today). While Steele's dam and mills had begun transform-
ing the east side, the new structure (the first full dam on the
FIGURE S. St. Anthany Falls, 1359. Minnesota Historical Society.
river) completed the transformation of the falls, especially
once the Minneapolis Mill Company began erecting mills on
their new dam."
The dam created the infrastructure needed to capture
the falls' power. But Steele's St. Anthony Falls Water Power
Company struggled to expand its milling operations. Poor
management, difficult relations with its eastern financiers,
and bad timing thwarted the company's efforts. The same
year the two companies completed the dam, America fell
into a depression. In 1861, before the St. Anthony firm
could recover, the Civil War began, arresting the company's
plans. For years, the company did little to expand its
milling capacity. The St.
Anthony Company did sup-
port the development of
mills on Hennepin Island
and along the east bank, but
it had to use ropes and
wheels to transfer power at
the falls to these mills and to
operations on Nicollet
Island. The rope system,
however, worked best near
the falls."
On the west side, the
Minneapolis Mill Company's
unified management and
financial stability allowed it
to invest its property, despite
the depression. The compa-
ny modeled its operating
system after renowned
Massachusetts milling cen-
ters such as Lowell, Holyoke,
and Lawrence. They hired Charles Bigelow, an engineer
from Lawrence, to design their system. The plan would
expand the company's direct power capability away from the
falls. It called for building a central canal to divert water
from above the falls to the multiple head races of mills built
126
along the canal. Construction began on the new system in
1857 and continued despite the economic depression.
Workers broke through the limestone cap and removed the
soft sandstone for a canal that was 14 feet deep, 50 feet
wide, and 215 feet long. The company extended and deep-
ened it in later years. The canal system included turbine or
wheel pits, a labyrinth of underground tunnels, head races
and tail races, and an open canal. Together the system ran
for three miles. By 1869 the west side produced twice as
much lumber as the east 16
With its canal system, the west side's production and
population expanded dramatically before the Civil War. The
east side mills, limited to ropes and pulleys, had stagnated.
In 1866 or 1867, the St. Anthony Company tried to build a
canal system of its own into the east bank. But after digging
several hundred feet, workers ran into a large cave. Since
constructing a canal through the cave would have cost too
much, the St. Anthony Falls Mill Company gave up. The
geology that had given birth to the milling industry was
holding it back now on the east side.'
Based on the Minneapolis Mill Company's success and
on the sputtering output from the St. Anthony Company,
lumber milling became vital to Minneapolis (which joined
with St. Anthony in 1872). Beginning with Steele's 1848
lumber mill, timber commanded production at the falls.
The annual output grew from about 12 million board feet
in 1856 to about 90 million in 1869. The mills on the
east and west rows (the side-by-side mills built on platforms
out over the falls) accounted for much of this. Six mills
stood on the east side (five on the row and one on Hennepin
Island). Between 1858 and 1869, Joel Bassett, Morrison,
William D. Washburn and others built eight mills on the
west side row, patterned after those in the eastern United
States. In all, 18 lumber mills operated at St. Anthony by
1869, with 18 different owners (Figure 6). But in 1869
and 1870, disasters threatened production."
Saving St. Anthony • A scheme developed by William W.
Eastman and John L. Merriam to expand milling above the
127
falls caused the first industrial calamity. Eastman and
Merriam bought Nicollet Island in 1865, including its
waterpower rights. They then accused the millers at the
falls of taking their water. To avoid a protracted legal battle,
the millers compromised. They agreed to let Eastman and
FIGURE 6. West side Platform mills, about 1868. Photo by jocoby.
Minnesota Historical Society.
Merriam build a mill on Nicollet Island and run a tailrace to
it from the toe of the falls. On September 7, 1868, the two
entrepreneurs began excavating their tailrace. By October
4, 1869, their workers had tunneled through 2,000 feet of
sandstone, under the limestone riverbed. The tunnel ran
from the edge of the falls, under Hennepin Island, to the toe
of Nicollet Island. That morning, the workers discovered
water leaking and then pouring into the tunnel's upper end.
The water quickly ate away the soft sandstone. Within
hours, the six -foot -square tunnel grew into a cavern up to
90 feet wide and 161h feet deep. The next morning, the
limestone riverbed collapsed. A large whirlpool formed,
x
sucking in everything nearby and spitting it out the tunnel.
(Figure 7.)
Immediately word spread that the falls was going out.
One witness recalled that "proprietors of stores hastened to
the falls, taking their clerks with them; bakers deserted
their ovens, lumbermen were ordered from the mills, bar-
bers left their customers unshorn; mechanics dropped their
tools; lawyers shut up their books or stopped pleading in
the courts; physicians abandoned their offices.""
Responding to the emergency, volunteers built a large raft
and floated it over the whirlpool. They piled on dirt, rocks
and debris until it sank and plugged the hole, but another
whirlpool appeared. The volunteers built more rafts and
sank them over the new break. By the afternoon, they
inspected their work and celebrated "the triumph of human
skill and brain power over the dumb force of nature."
FIGURE 7. Eastman Tunnel collapse, Hennepin Island, 1869.
Minnesota Historical Society.
Nature took exception. As people scrambled off, the river
devoured the feeble structures. One local newspaper
exclaimed that the whirlpool "tossed huge logs as though
they were mere whitlings," standing them on end "as if in
sport" and swallowed them."
Residents of Minneapolis and St. Anthony and the
millers knew they could not stop the falls from eroding. So
they turned to the Corps of Engineers, which had estab-
lished a regional office in St. Paul in August of 18 66. The
Corps examined the falls in November 1869 but had no
money and no clear authority to help. Then, on July 11,
1870, Congress gave the Corps 550,000 to preserve the
falls. Without the falls, local citizens had argued, the river
above Minneapolis would become a shallow, unnavigable
rapids. To save navigation above the falls (and milling), the
Corps began working at St. Anthony on August 9, 18 70.
For three years the river foiled the efforts of the Corps,
the millers, and local citizens. They tried to plug holes and
line the tunnel with concrete. But the water kept finding
new ways under the limestone, scouring new tunnels and
cavities, and the falls continued to erode. After a detailed
survey of the river above the falls, the Engineers learned
that the limestone cap ended less than 1,000 feet above the
cataract. Water was seeping under the cap and eating its
way through the sandstone. Unless they stopped this, water
would undercut the remaining limestone, and the falls'
12,000 -year journey would end. Emphasizing the futility
of their efforts, a flood swept through a cofferdam on the
west side of Nicollet Island on April 15, 1873, opening a
gap 150 feet wide. Water poured into the tunnel, drowning
one man and destroying large parts of the repair work.
Recognizing that they could not save the falls by plug-
ging the leaks, the Corps convened a special board of engi-
neers at St. Anthony Falls on April 14, 18 74. The board
made three recommendations:1) direct some water to the
center of the falls to keep it from drying out; 2) build a new
apron to protect the edge of the falls; and, most importantly,
3) build a massive wall under the limestone from one side of
the river to the other. Everyone agreed.
128
On July 9, 1874, the Corps began building the wall.
First they excavated a 75 -foot -deep vertical shaft on
Hennepin Island. Next they dug a horizontal tunnel four
feet wide and six feet high just below the limestone. Then
workers began digging out a space for the concrete wall. In
places, the wall would extend 39 feet below the limestone,
which varied from 11 to 25 feet thick Above the limestone
lay the sand and the muck and the river. (Figure 8.)
Building the wall was not easy. Quicksand, flooding,
and continuing collapses threatened the workers. Despite
these problems, the Corps completed the wall by November
1876. It extended 1,850 feet and contained nearly 15,000
cubic yards of concrete. When the Engineers finished the
wall, the Minneapolis Tribune reported that "This artificial
fortress is to stand guard for ages and defy the floods," and
that the wall would "... Eclipse Nature and Hold Up the
Mississippi River."" The great wall stabilized the falls and
ensured that both Minneapolis and its milling industry
would continue to expand. The wall is still in place, under
the limestone cap at St. Anthony Falls, still helping to pre-
vent the falls from eroding.
After completing the wall, the Corps secured the rest of
the falls. Between 1876 and 1880, the Corps completed the
apron over the falls. They built the
two low dams above the falls to
maintain a safe water level over the
limestone. They constructed a
sluiceway to carry logs over the
falls. And, finally, the Corps filled
all the tunnels and cavities under
the limestone, with some 22,329
cubic yards of gravel.''
The second calamity struck
one year after the Eastman tunnel = , r I . r Ye r .w
collapsed. During the evening of
October 20, 1870, an employee of
FIGURE 8. Eastman Tunnel disaster
and repair work. St. Paul District.
129
the St. Anthony Company's east side mills tried to fill a lit
kerosene lantern. It exploded and set fire to the entire row
of mills, burning them down and crippling the dam.
Uninsured, the St. Anthony Falls Water Power Company
could not afford to rebuild and sold the dam's five water-
power sites.12
The Lumber Mills Leave • Despite the disasters, lumber
milling remained central to the city's economy. By the end
of 1878, the new owners had rebuilt the east side mills on a
new dam midway down Hennepin Island. And by 1880 the
mills on the east side row and Farnham and Lovejoy's mill
on Hennepin Island surpassed the west side. East side mills
accounted for 94,977,595 board feet of the qty's total tim-
ber output of 179,585,182. In 1870 the annual value of
timber products milled in Minneapolis equaled $1.73 mil-
lion and led the city in product value. By 1880 the annual
value of the city's lumber products had swelled to $2.74 mil-
lion, but had fallen to second in the value of output behind
flour. Still, lumber remained the city's largest employers'
Umber milling, however, was on its way out, not as an
industry important to Minneapolis, but as an industry
based upon waterpower at the falls. A number of factors
contributed. Most importantly, steam offered an economic,
alternative power source. Some sawmills had converted to
steam power as early as the 1850s and 1860s. Since they
could burn their scraps for fuel, timber millers stood to ben-
efit from the shift to steam more than most industries.
o
L r �
9i
owd
06
P i
ftm. FrL4- r w !'
Using steam gave the industry greater flexibility to choose
where to mill their timber. It gave them the opportunity to
acquire more land for lumber storage and better access to
railroads on which to ship their finished products. Since
the millers still needed to be near the Mississippi River,
where boom companies captured their logs floating down
from Minnesota's northern forests, they moved to north
Minneapolis and founded a new milling center.
At the same time, flour millers began pushing for more
of the falls' power. In 18 76 the Minneapolis Mill Company
decided not to renew the sawmill leases and by 1880 had
bought out the sawmill owners. The company produced
lumber for a while, but in 1887, removed the last two lum-
ber mills. Also that year, fire again destroyed the east side
sawmill row. By 1890 Bassett's sawmill, at the head of the
canal, was the only sawmill on the west side. In 1895,
y however, Bassett's mill burned and with it went waterpow-
z
o ered lumber production at the falls. Begun in 1848, timber
F
x milling had lasted for almost 50 years.'
o By 1880 the new sawmilling center in north
w Minneapolis produced 32,608,000 board feet of lumber.
W Nine years later, it supported eleven sawmills. And in
1899, the steam -powered mills of north Minneapolis would
make the city the nation's leading sawmilling center for the
next six years. But lumber production quickly declined
thereafter. The great log drives ended a decade later and the
logging era in Minnesota closed."
Flour
While lumber mills initially yoked the falls, flour would
become its master. In 1849 Robert Smith had been granted
a lease on the Fort Snelling mills, arguing specifically that
he wanted to make flour. But Smith did little. So when
Richard Rogers built a small grist and flour mill on the east
side in 1851, it was an important event. The 32 bushels
brought to the mill in 1853 yielded the "`largest grist ever
ground at the falls.""' For flour production to expand, how-
ever, grain production and the region's transportation sys-
tem had to develop.
Like the lumber millers, flour producers had the river
as their power source. But the similarities ended here.
Lumber millers had a ready -to -harvest crop in the region's
native forests, and they could rely on streams and rivers to
deliver their raw material. Trees were an ancient crop, wait-
ing, so the timber barons thought, to be harvested. Wheat
and other cereals required that someone break the land,
plant crops and harvest them, and get the product to St.
Anthony. To the settlers rushing into Minnesota and the
Dakotas wheat represented a quick cash crop, and they soon
provided the grain needed to spur flour milling at St.
Anthony. Despite the economic Panic of 1857 and the Civil
War, wheat production in Minnesota climbed from about
1,400 bushels in 1850 to 2.2 million bushels in 1860 and
soared to 18.9 million by 18 70."
While the Mississippi and its tributaries provided the
transportation system upon which loggers funneled their
harvest to St. Anthony, farmers in western and southwest-
ern Minnesota and the Dakotas needed a different and more
reliable method to deliver their grain to the falls. The
tremendous railroad expansion following the Civil War
brought the immigrants needed to till the soil and the
means to transport their crops to the millers.
Flour milling grew even faster than timber milling at
the falls. In 1859 the Cataract Mill became the first com-
mercial flour mill on the west side. Seven new mills, plus
the old Fort Snelling mill, stood along the Minneapolis Mill
Company's canal 12 years later. Chief among the new mills
was C. C. Washburn's six -story mill, built of limestone
along the west side canal in 1866. Four more flour mills
operated on the east side. Drawing on the growing wheat
harvests and railroad network, these mills helped boost
Minnesota's flour production from 30,000 barrels in 1860
to 256,100 in 1869." (Figure 9.)
Despite this rapid growth of flour milling, the flour
produced at St. Anthony Falls, while healthy, was considered
inferior. Mills from other areas used soft winter wheat that
yielded a fine, pure, white flour. Minnesota's spring wheat
had a harder layer near the husk than winter wheat and
130
then process the middlings to remove the bran. The result-
ing flour was line and white and considered the best in the
world for bread making. During the 18 70s, the
Minneapolis millers began using the new method and soon
perfected it using porcelain and steel rollers, which did not
FIGURE9. Flour mills along the ivest side canal, 1885. Minnesota
Historical Society.
required faster grinding. The high grinding speed produced
so much heat that it browned the flour. Together, the hard
inner layer and the bran formed a by-product the millers
called the middlings. Millers often ground the middlings to
make a second grade of flour, which, while nutritious, most
bakers shunned."
During the 1860s, however, millers in southern
Minnesota developed a new process that, when combined
with the other factors favoring St. Anthony, would catapult
its millers and its flour to national and international fame.
The new technique relied on finer millstones that ran at a
slower speed. This process generated less heat and did not
discolor the flour. Also, the new method did not crush the
husk and hard inner layer (or middlings) as much, so they
could be separated more easily from the flour. Millers could
131
leave specks in the flour.
By 1870 flour
milling was ready to take
off at the falls. Between
1870 and 1880,
Minnesota's wheat pro-
duction nearly doubled,
from 18.9 million
bushels to 34.6 million,
and the millers moved
quickly to use it.60 As of
1869 the west side canal
had only eight mills
along it, but between
1870 and 1876. millers
crowded in ten new ones.
Minneapolis was poised
to surpass St. Louis as the
nation's leading milling
center. But on May 2,
18 78, the Washburn A
Mill exploded, killing 18 men. The explosion and ensuing
fire destroyed "one-third of the city's milling capacity, as
well as lumberyards, planing mills, a machine shop, a
wheat -storage elevator, a railroad roundhouse, and a num-
ber of nearby residences."" Undaunted, the millers quickly
rebuilt the district. By the end of 1878, 17 mills produced
flour on the west side, led by a new Washburn A Mill. In
1880.22 flour mills stood on the west side.62
On the east side, the growth of flour milling was limit-
ed by fires, the Eastman tunnel collapse and the lack of a
waterpower canal. Millers had lost three mills on Hennepin
Island. The Summit mill crumbled during a second cave-in
of the tunnel, in 18 70, and two years later the Island and
x
Farmers (River) mills burned. The St. Anthony mill burned
in 18 71. Compensating for these losses, millers built two
new mills during the decade: the Phoenix and North Star.
But the east side still lagged far behind the west."
To get wheat, millers had to vie with other cities,
including Milwaukee, St. Louis and Chicago. Competing
mills sent agents throughout the Midwest to secure commit
ments from farmers for their grain. To counter this intru-
sion into what the Minneapolis millers saw as their hinter-
land, they initially formed a loosely organized buying pool
and then, in 1876, formed the Minneapolis Millers
Association. Copying their competitors, the pool sent
agents into the countryside, oversaw the grading and pric-
ing of wheat, and distributed the wheat among the mills.
While the pool increased the millers' control over
wheat, it angered farmers. That anger flared during the
Granger movement and led Ignatius Donnelly to challenge
William Washburn for the U.S. Senate in 1878. What
farmers saw as the association's abuses eventually gave rise
to the Equity Cooperative Exchange, and the Equity gave
rise to a farmers' cooperative movement that spread
throughout the country" The Equity established the
nation's first terminal elevator built by a farmers' coopera-
tive on the Mississippi's east bank in St. Paul.
As the flour millers organized to capture the region's
grain, they also began consolidating their holdings at St.
Anthony. By 18 74 Charles A. Pillsbury and Company
owned five mills and in 18 79, Washburn, Crosby and
Company owned three. With their eight mills, the two
companies could produce over half of the city's flour."
The consolidations, the Minneapolis Millers
Association, the new mills, the middlings purifier, and the
state's surging wheat production combined to make
Minneapolis the nation's top milling city in 1880, a title it
would not yield for 50 years. Between 1870 and 1880,
the value of the flour millers' products rose from
$1,125,215 to $20,502,305, contributingby 1880
"almost two-thirds of Minneapolis' entire value in manufac-
tures."" During the decade, flour production grew from
193,000 barrels annually to 2,051,840. Flour production
helped boost the overall output from the falls to new levels.
The total value of goods produced by Minneapolis and
St. Anthony in 1870 was $6.8 million. By 1880 this fig-
ure had jumped to almost $30 million. Overall, waterpow-
ered mills contributed some three-quarters of the total value
of goods. Together, lumber and flour directly employed
1,722 people. Adding the industries that emerged directly
and indirectly from the two staples, the falls gave work to
much of the city's population. As of 1880 Minneapolis
ranked first in the nation in flour production, third in lum-
ber, and twentieth in value of manufactured output. Its
population had grown from 18,079 in 1870 to 46,887
and had surpassed St. Paul by more than 4,000. It had no
equal north of St. Louis and west of Chicago to the Rocky
Mountains. In the West, only Kansas City and San
Francisco were bigger."
Events during the 1880s ensured that St. Anthony
Falls held and extended its lead as the nation's and some-
times the world's leading flour producer. Under pressure
from the booming flour industry and taking advantage of
the opportunities offered by steam power, the sawmills were
leaving the falls by the decade's end, making more room for
flour mills. Adding to the falls' flour output, the east side
finally provided some competition for the west. Millers on
the east side had been bridled by their failure to expand the
direct use of waterpower. They had attempted to build a
canal system like that on the west side, but had run into a
cavern. Eastman had tried to bring direct waterpower to
Nicollet Island and nearly destroyed the falls.
Success finally came in 1881. The year before, the St.
Paul, Minneapolis, and Manitoba Railway Company, of
which James J. Hill was a stockholder and general manager,
bought the St. Anthony Company for $425,000. Also in
1880, the C. A. Pillsbury Company decided to build a huge
new mill on the east side. To power it, the company had to
overcome the geology that had prevented earlier attempts.
Between 1880 and 1881, Pillsbury erected his Pillsbury A
Mill and built a 450 -foot -long canal under Main Street to
132
feed water to it. The limestone structure reached seven sto-
ries high and, for a short time, became the world's largest
flour mill. The new mill produced almost twice as much
flour as the Washburn A Mill and about one-third the maxi-
mum flour output of the entire west side. While the
Pillsbury A Mill's initial production equaled some 4,000
barrels per day, the complex grew to cover two blocks and
its daily production reached 17,000 barrels per day, enough
to yield a 56 -mile long row of 25 -pound flour sacks.b"
While Hill hoped to make milling on the east side suc-
cessful, his primary interest in acquiring the mill company
was to connect the east and west sides with a railroad. To
accomplish this, Hill built the Great Northern stone arch
bridge, completing it in 1883. Two years later, he finished
a depot to go with it. With his new bridge and railroad con-
nection, Hill was able to deliver even more wheat to the
milling district, and he left a monument that is a National
Historic Engineering Landmark (Figure 10).11
The trend in consolidation begun in the 1870s contin-
ued. In 1876, 17 companies had operated 20 mills in
Minneapolis, but only four companies had produced 87 per-
cent of the city's flour. In 1889, following a national trend
to milling consolidation, the Pillsbury -Washburn Company,
the nation's first large milling corporation, bought out the
Minneapolis Mill and St. Anthony companies. For the first
time, the mills on the east and west sides came under uni-
fied ownership. By the early 1900s, three companies
accounted for 97 percent of the city's flour output.'°
Flour production at the falls continued to surge after
Minneapolis became the nation's top flour producer. Flour
production rose from about two million barrels in 1880 to
just over six million in 1889, even though the number of
mills declined from 25 to 22. But the millers increasingly
turned to steam power and, soon, to hydroelectric power.
Milling production grew from 13,694,895 barrels in
1908 to 18,541,650 in 1916. After 1916, however, pro-
duction began to decline. "Milling -in -bond," made possible
by the 1897 Dingley Tariff, allowed millers to important
Canadian grain duty free, if they exported the flour made
133
from it. Since millers along the eastern Great Lakes received
Canadian grain by huge ships, they prospered more than
those at St. Anthony. Increasing freight rates and outdated
mill operations also hampered the millers at St. Anthony.
By 1930 production at the falls dropped to10,797,194,
and Buffalo, New York, became the nation's leading produc-
er, with just over 11 million bushels. By 1960 flour pro-
duction at St. Anthony fell to 5,471,456 barrels."
Hydroelectric Power
St. Anthony Falls gained national attention in 1880 as the
country's leading flour producer, and two years later it again
achieved national recognition. In 1882, as steam power
allowed the lumber mills to move away from St. Anthony,
and more and more flour mills switched to steam, the falls
gave birth to a new power source, a source that would
replace direct drive waterpower and steam. Electricity
would allow the falls' power to flow well beyond the
cataract. Even before businesses at the falls had access to
hydroelectric power, they began using electricity. In 1881
.�;
FIGURE 10. JarnesJ. Hill's GreatNortheru, StoueArchBridge, 1334.
Photo by Charles A. Tenney. Minnesota Historical Society.
9
the Pillsbury A Mill purchased an individual, electric power
plant and installed lights, possibly becoming the first mill
in the world to do so. But large-scale hydroelectric genera-
tion from the falls would quickly replace the individual
plants.
In 1881 William Washburn, Joel Bassett, Sumner
Farnham, and James Lovejoy joined other Minneapolis busi-
nessmen (Otis A. Pray, Loren Fletcher, and C. M. Loring) to
form the Minnesota Electric Light and Electric Motive Power
Company, which they soon renamed the Minnesota Brush
Electric Company. They acquired land on Upton Island from
Dorilus Morrison and built a small central power station
with five Brush arc -light generators (Figure 11). They ran
lines to bars and businesses on Washington Avenue and on
the evening of September 5, 1882, lit them with electricity
generated by the first hydroelectric power central station in
the United States. Given the spread and impact of hydroelec-
tric power central stations on the economy and environment
of the country, this was a nationally significant event."
As the Minnesota Brush Electric Company began gen-
erating electric power, it tried to expand the number of
users. One of the company's first goals was to provide
street lighting for Minneapolis. To do this, they had to
prove that electric lighting worked, and they had to over-
come the opposition of the gas light providers, who were
not willing to step aside. To demonstrate the effectiveness
of electric lighting, the company erected a 25 7 -foot tower,
called the mast, at Bridge Square and suspended eight arc
lamps from it. On February 28, 1883, as hundreds of peo-
ple watched, the company turned the lamps on. This
demonstration and another a few days later convinced
many that electricity would replace gas. By the end of
1885, 232 electric street lamps glowed in Minneapolis."
�• r� '�'r�.Sri. AUC
rE-:1i3
t Lwin. H 3•L'l
P:J _LLL J1
1 I
{j riCA4 ��:•� i ` _
�• P TCG • •J{-'/f.'I �'�i f, -k 1 ���'.•_ t
^t,� •:t vtF[r� tti �. TAIL i2S_
Ls12L—;F:T
TuaF
.- cL- _I -H- E!kL•11-I dot .-A d1CH "I
1 2 - L�yar- '�sl-I PSL .'f•}SGWI'Cv
L7:._ v et %A '!'v -Rr L•�rL•_
111y FT :+SL - •"MP T -Ci C
j•
FIGURE 11. The first commercial hydroelectric central plant in the
country, 1882. St. Paul District, Carps of Engineers.
Locally the Minnesota Brush Electric Company
demonstrated the potential of hydroelectricity. And in
1894, when the Niagara Falls hydroelectric power plant
went on line, it showed Americans that hydroelectricity
was more than a curiosity; it had come of age.' By the turn
of the century, hydroelectric power companies perfected
their ability to transmit electricity over long distances,
134
spurring the spread of hydroelectric plants.
St. Anthony Falls stayed at the forefront of hydroelec-
tric power generation. In 1894 the Pillsbury -Washburn
Company leased 20 mill powers to the Minneapolis General
Electric Company, and over the next two years, the company
built its Main Street Station. And inl895, William dela
Barre, the genius behind the development of waterpower at
St. Anthony Falls, began building the Lower Dam and
Hydropower Station, about 2,200 feet below the falls. As
the project took shape, some chided it as "De la Barre's
Folly." But once it was completed, Charles Pillsbury claimed
it was one of the "`greatest engineering feats of the present
century."' The Electrical Engineer suggested that "`in scope
and character;" only the Niagra facility surpassed it. The
new power station provided electricity to the streetcars of
the Twin City Rapid Transit Company. De la Barre also con-
vinced the Pillsbury -Washburn Company to let him build
the Hennepin Island Plant near the Main Street Station,
between 1906 and 1908."
De la Barre had come to Minneapolis in 1878 and was
hired by the Minneapolis Mill Company in 1883 (Figure 12).
Until he died in 193 6, he made extracting the falls' maxi-
mum power potential his passion. At Franklin Steele's orig-
inal dam, the head—the distance the water fell from above
the dam to below it—totaled only eight feet. By 1889 de la
Barre had elevated the average head to 36 feet and later
raised it to 45 feet.
Under de la Barre's direction, the working capacity of
turbines at the falls increased from 13,000 horsepower in
the 1880s to 55,068 horsepower by 1908. Overall, the
hydroelectric plants accounted for about 25,000 horsepow-
er, the flour mills another 24,000 and the City of
Minneapolis, North Star Woolen Mills Company, and others
the remainder. 16 In 1923 Northern States Power bought the
hydroelectric power company firms from Pillsbury Flour
Mills. By 1960, when construction on the Upper St.
Anthony Falls Lock and Dam cut off the west side water-
power canal, all the mills at St. Anthony Falls had shifted
from direct hydropower to hydroelectricity.
135
Other Industries
Many other industries grew up at the falls, either feeding
off the mills or trying to employ the waterpower towards
ends other than timber and flour milling or hydroelectric
power. Foundries and machine shops repaired and con-
structed railroad cars and engines, made steam engines,
ornamental iron, farm implements, and milling equipment.
Others hoped to produce paper at the falls. A paper mill
was among the earliest industries to tap the falls' power.
Built on Nicollet Island in 18 5 9, the mill initially produced
much of Minnesota's printing paper. Another paper mill
FIGURE 12. William de la Barre, the mastermind of leydiopower devel-
opment at St. Anthany Falls. Kane, The Falls of St. Anthony.
x
was established on the west side in 1866-1867. Iron and
paper industries, however, failed to grow at the falls.
Some entrepreneurs, hoping to recreate New England's
success, had looked to Lowell and other northeastern
milling centers as their model, not only for the west side's
production system but for the commodities they should pro-
duce. Like New England, they expected the falls to support a
booming textile industry. They thought it only natural that
Southern cotton should move up the Mississippi River and
their finished products would move down it. By the mid -
1860s two textile mills manufactured flannel, cassimere,
scarves and yarn. Two carding mills opened during the
same time, one on each side. In 1870 Dorilus Morrison
joined other business interests to build the Minneapolis
Cotton Manufacturing Company. At first it produced only
seamless flour bags but moved into wagon covers, duck for
tents, and awnings. In 1881, however, the mill closed."
Despite expectations, only one textile mill prospered at
St. Anthony Falls: the North Star Woolen Mill, which W. W.
Eastman and Paris Gibson founded in 1864. Although it
went bankrupt in 1876, the Minneapolis Mill Company
bought it, and it subsequently produced textiles up to the
1940s. The mill produced cassimere, flannel, scarves, and
yarn, but became renowned for its blankets. At the 18 76
Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia, the company won
the highest prize for product quality."'
Summary
From ancient times when Native Americans frequented St.
Anthony Falls for reasons we can only guess, to today, the
falls has been a geologic marvel and a geographic landmark
It has attracted those who sought the blessing of its spirits,
the majesty of its natural beauty, and the energy of its falling
waters. If the historic accounts provide any indication, its
natural beauty and power made it a place of deep spirituality
for Native Americans of many different tribes for thousands
of years. The same beauty and power made the falls a nation-
al and international attraction, the destination of writers,
painters and tourists. That energy gave St. Anthony national
recognition and international fame for its timber, flour and
hydroelectric production. While the falls is still important
for its energy, more and more people are returning to admire
its power in other ways, ways more akin to much earlier
times. This has only become possible since milling at the
falls died and opened the falls to new uses.
Minneapolis not only lost its title as the nation's flour
capital in 1930, it began removing many of the mills that
had made it famous. In 1931 alone, at least seven mills
came down, followed by several more during the decade.
136
By 195 6 only the Pillsbury A Mill remained on the east
side, and the company blocked off the headrace, which had
been so hard to get, and shifted the mill to hydroelectric
Power.
As the Corps completed work on the Lower and Upper
St. Anthony Falls Locks and Dams (fulfilling Minneapolis'
vision of becoming the head of navigation), more of the mill
district's historic fabric disappeared. To build the lower
lock and dam, the Corps had to remove the 189 7 dam built
for the lower hydropower station by de la Barre. In 1960
137
the Corps filled the west side canal, and the gatehouse at its
head was taken down. In 1965 the Washburn A Mill pro-
duced its last flour and ended flour production on the west
side. As part of its construction of the upper lock, the Corps
filled over the old tailraces that had run from the mills
along the canal to the river. (With the city's development of
Mill Ruins Park, the mill races have again been exposed.) As
"urban renewal" took hold in the 1950s and 1960s, more
of the west side mills were torn down. The sixties also
brought the birth and growth of historic preservation.
Without an active milling industry and with a new interest
in the falls, the opportunities to get near the cataract and
interpret its history are now being realized." (Figure 13.)
FIGURE 13. Rediscovering the roots. Mill Ruins Park, Minneapolis.
■ � 4•'° � ICY
°�'IisY� Fi YT
�i
�
-cr
The Patterns of Agriculture, Commerce, Industry
and Transportation
rom canoes carrying furs to steel barges bear-
tjking the grain of multinational corporations,
economic activities and transportation sys-
tems have shaped the MNRRA corridor. They have defined
the pace and scope of change to the valley's landscape and
ecosystems. They have defined how people see and relate to
the river. They have done so, however, within the frame-
work of ancient landforms. Geology dictated that St. Paul
began as the head of navigation and that St. Anthony Falls
give rise to the mills of Minneapolis. The floodplain valley
from the Minnesota River's mouth to Ravenna Township,
the confining gorge between the Minnesota River and St.
Anthony, and the prairie river above St. Anthony encour-
aged or restricted business and transportation. The MNRRA
corridor's history and the significance of historic sites tied
to business and transportation must be understood, then, as
the integration of human and nonhuman factors. (Figure 1)
This chapter provides an overview of the MNRRA corri-
dor's economic and transportation history—other than navi-
gation improvements—from the end of the fur trade to the
1950s. Roads, railroads, bridges and highways and the cor-
ridor's economic development are inseparably tied.
Transportation systems have often determined the relation-
ship of communities to the river. As canoes and steamboats
drew people to the river, roads and railroads pulled them
away. This chapter illustrates processes critical to the birth
and growth of the corridor's communities.
139
Business Development
Sites representing commerce and industry in the MNRRA
corridor are of at least three distinct types: those directly
tied to the Mississippi River, those related to businesses
with direct ties, and those unrelated to the river. Sites in
the first two categories characterized the river during the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. During the late
nineteenth century and especially during the early twenti-
eth century, sites located along the river had less and less
direct or indirect relation to it.
Economic development sometimes linked the MNRRA
corridor's cities and at other times separated them. For
example, fur trading gave cities from Hastings to Dayton a
common river heritage. As cities relied less on the river,
however, their economic histories diverged. Changes in the
transportation systems were in part responsible, for trans-
portation often determined the nature of commercial devel-
opment and the relation of that development to the river.
Railroads used the river valley's flat grade at St. Paul and
below for their tracks and in doing so enticed businesses to
the valley. Those businesses, however, focused on railroads,
not the river. The river did retain one important economic
function. It offered a way to dispose of wastes quickly and
cheaply, which drew some industries to its banks.
x
Timber • Lmnber milling replaced the fur trade as a key eco-
nomic core around which many communities developed.
Like the fur trade, timber milling created a shared historical
context for cities in the MNRRA corridor. Most settlements
had at least one lumber mill. The story of these mills and
their role in building the river's communities is often over-
shadowed by milling at St. Anthony Falls.'
Lumber millers depended on the river and its tributar-
ies to deliver logs and to power their mills. Some located
facilities near the mouth of small tributaries, where they
built dams to capture the hydropower. The Rum River at
Anoka, Rice Creek in Fridley, Ehn Creek in Champlin,
Shingle Creek in Minneapolis, and the Vermillion River in
Hastings all had mills. Most acquired their first mills dur-
ing the 1850s and 1860s. Dayton (1856), Anoka (1854),
Champlin (1867), Brooklyn (1859-60), St. Paul (1845,
1850), Nininger (1854, 1856 and 1857) and Hastings
(1855) all boasted sawmills during their early years. While
most of these mills succumbed to fire, they were so impor-
tant that they were quickly rebuilt.'
Timber milling was vital to most communities emerg-
ing along the river during the mid to late nineteenth centu-
ry. The mills employed hundreds of people in gathering,
sorting, sawing and finishing logs into boards, shingles, and
other products. "Logging and river driving gave employ-
ment to the male population of Anoka and Ramsey for many
years," writes Jean James in her booklet, The history of
Ramsey.' In 18 72, W. D. Washburn & Co. built a large
steam sawmill in Anoka that employed 125 men. In addi-
tion to their own milling operations, communities through-
out the corridor witnessed the annual herding of logs down
the Mississippi and its tributaries.' (Figure 2)
The lumber cut at these mills spurred other businesses
and construction booms in many of the corridor's communi-
ties. Lumber had immediate and demanding local markets.
In 1854 in Anoka, says Albert Goodrich, "Nobody waited
for lumber to dry, and the man who could get green boards
or slabs enough to build a shanty before cold weather set in
counted himself lucky."'
VEE!
ro0��7}—Fr�ns}m
By the late 1800s, many small lumber mills had
closed and north Minneapolis was growing into the nation's
leading lumber producer. The Mississippi River
Commission (MRC) maps, the most detailed maps made of
the river in the nineteenth century, illustrate the impor-
tance of timber from St. Anthony Falls to north
Minneapolis. Beginning at river mile 866, or immediately
below where the Coon Rapids Dam is now, an 1898 MRC
map shows a lumber boom projecting upstream from an
island (Island 215 on the map). Not quite two river miles
downstream, another boom points upstream from Little
Casey Island (now part of Banfill Island). By river mile
864, just above the head of Durnham Island in Brooklyn
Center, the number of booms and cribs used to direct and
sort timber becomes continuous down to St. Anthony Falls.
Just above Minneapolis, multiple crib and boom systems
line the river, four or five next to each other at times.6
110
;.4rL _
FIGURE 2. The lumber industry in Minneapolis. Mississippi River
Commission Map, 1895. Note lumberyards and log booms above St.
Anthony Falls. St. Paul District, Corps of Engineers.
Lumber mills and yards dominate the Mississippi's east and,
especially, west banks from St. Anthony Falls north to near
the Minneapolis city limits. The MRC maps dearly show
the extent to which lumber had become king in north
Minneapolis by the mid -1890s.' (Figure 3)
Cities below Minneapolis also supported sawmills.
William Dugas built the first sawmill in St. Paul in 1844,
although it did not begin operating until 1845, three years
ahead of Franklin Steele's mill at St. Anthony Falls. Dugas,
for some reason, could not find enough customers and had a
FIGURE 3. Log drivers sort out a logjam above St. Anthony Falls,
1881. Photo by Michael Nowack. Minnesota Historical Society.
141
difficult time getting logs. For these reasons his mill failed
within the year. On November 14, 1850, the state's first
steam sawmill began operating at St. Paul's lower landing.
And when John S. Prince came to St. Paul in 1854 to man-
age the properties of Pierre Chouteau, Jr. & Co. fur trading
company, the holdings included the Rotary Mill. Prince ran
the mill until it burned on May 22, 1868. St. Paul's mills
generally served the local market and were gone by the turn
of the century."
Further downriver, Nininger and Hastings drew on the
pineries of northern Minnesota and the maple -basswood for-
est known as the Big Woods. Hastings also had the
Vermillion River, which provided hydropower for milling.
The first lumber mill at Hastings was built in 1855. Like
the mills at the northern end, the mills at Hastings pro-
duced or supplied other companies with the lumber to make
shingles, sashes, doors, blinds, furniture, wagons and car-
riages. By providing the lumber for construction and other
industries, Hastings' sawmills, like those in St. Paul,
Minneapolis and above, established an important economic
base for the city.'
Quarries, Bricks and Lime Kilns • Lumber was not the only
building material supported or supplied by the Mississippi.
The valley's limestone bluffs, gravel beds, and clay deposits
attracted millers, construction companies and the Corps of
Engineers. Early millers at St. Anthony quarried limestone
from Spirit Island and other islands at the falls to build
their mills. They also mined it from the bluffs around the
x
falls. The Corps quarried the bluffs for rock to build wing
dams and to armor the river's banks. Corps draftsman and
photographer Henry Bosse photographed one such quarry
near Cherokee Heights, across from downtown St. Paul
(Figure 4), and another at Riverside Park in Minneapolis.
The 1895 MRC chart for Minneapolis shows at least 13
quarries between St. Anthony Falls and the Lake Street
Bridge. Construction companies mined the bluffs, islands
and floodplain from above St. Anthony to Hastings for rock
and gravel. Although the quarried bluffs may appear natu-
ral today, they represent an important way in which
humans have sculpted the landscape of the Mississippi
River valley through the Twin Cities. '°
Throughout the river valley, clay deposits presented
the opportunity for brick making. Fires, which nearly all
the MNRRA corridor's communities experienced during the
late nineteenth century, spurred the creation of brick com-
panies. When a fire destroyed a large part of Anoka in
1884, brick, as a fireproof material,
became popular. Just down-
stream, Coon Rapids
became a busy -
brick-
mak-
r.r
i
ing town. Several brick companies had opened around Coon
Rapids before the fire, and at least three brickyards eventu-
ally located on Coon Creek in Coon Rapids. All three lay
just outside the corridor, but as with many brickyards, they
influenced construction within the corridor. Many build-
ings in the northern corridor are or were undoubtedly made
of bricks produced at these yards. One brick plant, the
Minnesota Clay Company, had 72 acres of clay deposits and
a pit more than 13 0 feet deep. "This brick plant," claims
local historian Leslie GiIlund, "was one of the most modern
and well-equipped in the country, .... " (Figure 5)
Other cities in the corridor had brickyards as well.
Edward Neill, in his history of Hennepin County, noted that
"brick clay" lay along the river in north
Minneapolis. In 1876
Morrison's brickyard
began using this
clay,
FIGURE 4.
Bluff top stave
r:
quarry, Cherokee
Heights, looking tovard dowu-
town St. Pau1,1885. Photo byHernyE
Bosse. Rock Island District, Corps of Engineers.
112
FIGURE S. Baking bricks. Frank A. Johnson brickyard,
Fiftieth and Lyndale, Minneapolis, near tire Mississippi River,
1904. Minnesota Historical Society.
employing about 20 men and four mills to grind it. The
company produced 1.8 million bricks in 1880, most of
which went to Minneapolis. Another brickyard, run by
Johnson and Berg, also employed about 20 men and had
four mills for grinding the clay. This yard and the others
made a light-colored brick which, Neill reports, was typical
of the area. Weithoff's brickyard, the third in north
Minneapolis, had only two machines and eight men and
turned out about 600,000 bricks annually. In St. Paul, the
Twin City Brick company used clay from Pickerel Lake, in
the Mississippi River's floodplain, during the first half of
the 20th century. Hastings also possessed clay deposits and
brickyards. You can still see evidence of these operations
in the old brick homes and businesses in the corridor's
communities. 12
The Grey Cloud Lime Kiln represents a rare type of
industrial site associated with building materials and agri-
143
culture. Located on the Grey Cloud Channel, in a
Mississippi backwater, this National Register site is, accord-
ing to Cottage Grove historian Robert Vogel, "a kind of
industrial fossil that provides us with important dues as to
early settlement and development in the Grey Cloud area,
where limestone quarrying has played a small but impor-
tant part in the local economy since the middle of the 19th
century."" Used from about 1873 to 1902, the kiln
burned limestone to yield quicklime, which builders used
as mortar and farmers used for fertilizer. Vogel believes
that most of the kiln's output went for fertilizer.
Measuring some 20 feet square at its base, the kiln stood
x
about 35 feet high and had walls four feet thick. Wood for
the kiln's furnace came from the surrounding river bottoms
and uplands. The bluffs supplied the limestone. Vogel
thinks that the reservoir created by Lock and Dam No. 2 has
flooded some of the old quarries, but others could lie near
the kiln. More limestone kilns probably existed in the
MNRRA corridor, but we know almost nothing about them.
As the Grey Cloud Lime Kiln shows, such kilns contributed
to changes in the Mississippi's landscape, by quarrying the
bluffs and taking trees from the bottomlands and bluffs.
Demand for fertilizer from the kiln tells us something
about early agricultural methods.'
Agriculture • Agriculture and related activities quickly
joined lumber milling as the foundation of economic
growth in the MNRRA corridor. The Minnesota Historical
Society divides its context statement for agriculture into
two periods. (The Historical Society's context statements
serve as a basis for evaluating the National Register signifi-
cance of potentially historic sites.) The first period, called
"Early Agriculture and River Settlement," lasted from 1840
to 1870. The Treaties of 1837, 1851 and 1855 with the
Dakota and Ojibwa officially opened Minnesota to settle-
ment and agriculture. The creation of the Minnesota
Territory in 1849, statehood in 1858, and the Homestead
Act of 1862 spurred both. The Historical Society context
statement says that agriculture during this period was pri-
marily for subsistence, although wheat was becoming a
cash crop. Most communities at this time lay along rivers.
"Many of the towns became centers for agricultural product
processing facilities, such as flour and sorghum mills and
breweries, typically small operations that catered to a local
market"" The Historical Society's context statement is gen-
erally true for the MNRRA corridor, but in many ways, com-
munities in the corridor were ahead of the rest of the state.
The Minnesota Historical Society defines the second
period of agriculture as "Railroads and Agricultural
Development (18 70 - 1940)." The production, transporta-
tion, and processing of agricultural products characterized
this period. Family farms were the typical unit of produc-
tion. Towns that lay along railroads became shipping points
and supply and service centers for surrounding agricultural
communities. Grain elevators, processing facilities, ware-
houses, the grain exchange, flour milling, and brewing grew
from the focus on agriculture. Flour milling and brewing
fostered many small companies, some of which blossomed
into national giants. All the corridor's early communities
supported businesses dependent upon agriculture. Some
were part of industries that occurred throughout the corri-
dor and others were unique to one or two communities. 16
Although the Historical Society's context statement
suggests that pioneer farmers in Minnesota focused on sub-
sistence farming from 1840 to 1870, this was not always
so in the MNRRA corridor, where many farmers moved
quickly from subsistence farming to producing for local,
regional and national markets. As they did, they experi-
mented with a variety of crops, livestock production and
dairy farming.
Jean Baptiste Fairbault, a trader who had located above
St. Paul by 1805, became the first to grow wheat in
Minnesota, when he planted it on an island at the conflu-
ence of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers. Not until the
late 1850s, however, would wheat take off. Despite the
Economic Panic of 18 5 7 and the Civil War, the wheat har-
vest in Minnesota climbed from about 1,400 bushels in
1850 to 2.2 million bushels in 1860 and jumped to 18.9
million by 1870. Between 1870 and 1880, Minnesota's
wheat crop nearly doubled, from 18.9 million bushels to
34.6 million. A drop in wheat prices after 1877, however,
led farmers to diversify. They tried new crops, livestock pro-
duction and dairy farming. The new crops and other agri-
cultural activities spurred more new businesses."
Early farmers experimented with a variety of crops and
livestock In 1847, William Noot, one of the first pioneers
in Anoka County, settled just below Kings Island, about a
mile above the Rum River's mouth. Shortly after, he planted
corn and beans on the island. About the same time, a
Captain Folsom bought the Rum River fur trade post and
114
grew the first potato crop. Showing that a farmer could
reap a great profit on the frontier, Folsom cut enough hay in
1848 to make about 56,000. He sold it to the owners of
horse or oxcart teams that brought supplies to the
Winnebago, whom the U.S. government had relocated to
Long Prairie. In about 1854, another early settler, James C.
Frost, milked the first cow in Anoka. Since milk was such a
rarity, he shared it with his neighbors.
Wheat became the dominant crop in Anoka County
before the Economic Panic of 1857, after which wheat
prices plummeted, forcing farmers to raise other crops and
livestock In 1859 potatoes and corn became most impor-
tant, and, according to Albert Goodrich, in his history of
Anoka County, the high prices for wool convinced many
farmers to raise sheep the next year. Wool production and
potato harvests in Anoka County grew between 1860 and
1870. When potatoes suffered from the Colorado beetle or
potato bug in 1866 and for the next couple of years, the
potato crop declined. In response, farmers began what was
probably the first use of pesticides in the county. They
applied a substance called "Paris Green." While it worked,
many feared it poisoned the potatoes. By 18 79, despite the
beetles and the pesticide, the county's potato harvest had
grown to 68,000 bushels. While high, this was well
behind the 121,000 bushels of corn and 94,000 bushels of
wheat harvested in the county. As the depression that had
begun in 1877 receded, farmers returned to wheat."
Potato production received a boost in the mid -1880s
when Reuel L. Hall opened a potato starch factory on the
Rum River in Anoka_ In 1886, after failing to get eastern
starch makers interested in his venture, Hall joined with a
"monied friend," C. E Leland, to build the largest potato
starch factory in the United States and the first west of the
Mississippi River. Despite the county's large potato crop, it
was nowhere near enough for the huge factory, which
remained largely unused for two years. After the third year,
however, potato output increased, and the plant went into
full production. The potato harvest in Anoka County leaped
from the 68,000 bushels in 1879 to 421,000 in 1889
145
and 717,000 in 1899. Hall went on to build plants in
Monticello, North Branch and Harris, Minnesota. His suc-
cess, Goodrich contends, led to the building of some 20
potato starch plants west of the Mississippi by the early
twentieth century. One of these factories, the Diamond
Starch Company, opened in Hastings in a former warehouse
near the waterfront and produced starch from 1889 to
1898. Goodrich notes that Anoka County potatoes became
known for their eating quality and were shipped to every
state in the union."
Cottage Grove and Hastings prospered from their agri-
cultural activities also. As early as 1855, Cottage Grove
had some 20 to 30 farms. The primary crop, as in Anoka
County and wherever settlers had begun tilling the land,
became wheat. From the 1840s to the 18 70s, wheat domi-
nated. When wheat prices fell after 1877, farmers around
Cottage Grove turned to corn, soybeans, raising cattle and
horses, and dairy farming.Z°
Cottage Grove historian Robert Vogel makes an impor-
tant point about dairy farming. It grew after 1880, he
observes, because farmers in Cottage Grove were near the
Twin Cities, the largest market for dairy products in the
region. So, as the nonagricultural population grew, the
demand for farm products, especially products that could
spoil quickly, increased dramatically in the immediate area,
allowing farmers near and within Minneapolis and St. Paul
to specialize.'
Farming also began around Hastings in the early
1850s. Wheat and other grains became important to
Hastings' economy for at least two reasons: flour milling
and shipping. The storage, handling, and processing of
grain has been "a constant activity along Hastings' river
frontage since the 1850s," says Carole Zellie, in her study
of historic contexts for Hastings.ZZ The post built by Alexis
and Henry Bailly in 1853 began this history, as it became a
warehouse to store goods, including sacked grain, for ship-
ping on steamboats. During the next decade, entrepreneurs
in Hastings built many more warehouses to accommodate
the region's booming grain production. By 1859 Hastings
x
ranked second only to Winona in wheat shipping. In 1863
warehouses in Hastings stored some 500,000 bushels of
wheat. Hastings drew on a hinterland that extended 60
miles to the west, and early farmers in this region brought
their grain by oxcart to the river town for distribution to
local, regional and national markets. When railroads
entered Hastings in 1868, they built grain elevators to cap-
ture the shipping of agricultural products.23
Farmers around Hastings, as in other communities,
had to diversify due to cyclical economic depressions. By
the 18 70s and 18 80s cattle raising and dairy farming had
become important. Local entrepreneurs soon built cream-
eries, like the Golden Star Creamery near Hastings' levee, to
make butter, cheese and ice cream.
St. Paul and Minneapolis, of course, also became
important grain processing and handling centers. The sto-
ries of these businesses in the two cities are discussed
extensively in Chapters 4 and 5 on navigation, in Chapter 6
on flour milling at St. Anthony Falls, and in the account of
railroad expansion later in this chapter.
The 1895 and 1898 Mississippi River Commission
(MRC) maps for the corridor provide a snapshot of farming
in the corridor at the end of the nineteenth century.
Although no one has found the key to the MRC maps, hatch
marks indicate where agricultural fields lay. Farmers plant-
ed up to the river from Dayton down to the northern limits
of Minneapolis. From the north Minneapolis lumberyards
to the Lake Street Bridge, urban development had taken
over. Land below the Lake Street Bridge down to Lilydale
(the upriver edge of St. Paul's urban growth) was more
rural, and farms tended to be farther back from the bluff
edge. Pike Island and some of the floodplain lands in this
reach had small farms. Below St. Paul, where the floodplain
widened, farms again approached the bluff edge in places
and farmers tilled patches of the floodplain itself, including
the larger islands, like Grey Cloud. We do not know exactly
what farmers grew on their lands in the MNRRA corridor,
but the context provided above offers some clues."
Flour Milling • St. Anthony Falls dominated flour milling
in the MNRRA corridor, but, like timber milling, flour
milling was important to communities above and below the
falls as well. Flour mills were among the earliest business-
es in many MNRRA communities. When owners of a mill
in Anoka completed it on February 1, 1855, local pioneers
had not yet grown enough wheat to supply it. So the own-
ers imported 6,000 bushels from Iowa and Wisconsin.
Although fire soon destroyed the mill, the owners quickly
rebuilt it."
Flour milling grew rapidly in communities above and
below St. Anthony Falls and became important to their eco-
nomic development. Hastings acquired flour mills in the
1850s and Samuel S. Eaton completed a flour mill in
Nininger in 185 8. Eaton began constructing the mill in
18 5 7 by cutting away 50 feet of a bluff to make room for
his machinery. Crystal Lake (northwestern Minneapolis)
had a flour mill by 1859 on Shingle Creek In 1860 Frank
Weitzel built a flour mill in Dayton and fourteen years later
erected a new mill. A later owner put on a 20- by 50 -foot
addition, and, by 1905, it had become "a first-class
Merchant and Custom mill, with a reputation second to
none."26 Twenty-six men worked at the mill. A flour mill
opened in Champlin by1867. And John Banfil, a native of
Vermont, first came to St. Paul and in 1849 moved to Rice
Creek in Fridley (Manomin), where he built a hotel and
mill. By 1881 St. Paul had seven flour mills, including at
least one in Phalen Creek and another near the Wabasha
Street Bridge (Figure 6).27
The millers at St. Anthony Falls recognized the value
of mill sites upriver. In 1880 the Washburn Mill Company
built the Lincoln Flouring Mill on the Rum River in Anoka,
with a capacity of 600 barrels per day. Although it burned
in a great conflagration on August 16, 1884, the company
immediately rebuilt it. By the turn of the century, its out-
put had grown to 1,600 barrels per day."
The history of flour milling in the MNRRA corridor is
essential to understanding how its communities developed.
Along with the fur trade and lumber milling, flour milling
146
r- k
+ � T =•fir• ' - - — r
r y r � � •���� '• _.'fix•__ � � -•'+`f -I
R M.ILI
pv
mp
I, 1'
ri
7
Iii
I
'III
LL
IW7AW
,T:_
IL
r pop
s I —
b6.
-+.i�:nl _
x
underlay the economic growth of most of the corridor's
towns and cities. These businesses provided the first
employment and first capital that allowed other businesses
to grow. While many of the early mills are gone, the sites
and their history can be interpreted.
Grain Marketing • As Minnesota's grain production
increased, as its flour milling grew, and as railroads estab-
lished the means to market huge quantities of grain nation-
ally and internationally, entrepreneurs saw the opportunity
to control grain buying, selling and shipping. Two men
dominated the industry by the start of the twentieth centu-
ry: William Wallace Cargill and Frank Hutchinson Peavey.
They both located in Minneapolis in 1884 and "ensured
that it would become the world's leading grain exchange
center."" Cargill established a warehouse and offices in
Minneapolis, and Peavey moved his headquarters to
Minneapolis after the Minneapolis Millers Association
became his largest buyer. Both became members of the
Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce. Joined by the flour
millers and other grain merchants, Peavey and Cargill
helped the Minneapolis Chamber control grain trading in
the Midwest. By 1890 Cargill owned 71 grain elevators,
and by the beginning of the twentieth century, Peavey
owned 18 terminal facilities with 26 million bushels of
storage capacity in Minneapolis. "Peavey," says historian
Jerome Tewton, "revolutionized the role of the grain
middleman.""
As grain merchants in Minneapolis strengthened their
grip on the marketing of the region's grain, farmers began to
protest. The Equity Cooperative Exchange became one of
several farm organizations created during the early years of
the twentieth century to challenge the grain traders. Started
in Minneapolis in 1908 and incorporated under the laws of
North Dakota in 1911, the Equity first directed its atten-
tion to the marketing of spring wheat, and challenged the
Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce. The Equity and other
critics accused the Chamber of monopolistic practices,
including the rigging of prices and commissions against
farmers. The Federal Trade Commission estimated that 70
percent of the grain grown in the region between 1912 and
1917 funneled through the city. The Equity believed it
needed to organize an alternative terminal marketing firm
and possibly build a terminal elevator to guarantee fair
prices. As the Equity gained strength, the Chamber fought
back. In October 1912, the Chamber refused to allow its
members to trade with groups or individuals it believed
unfairly criticized the organization.
In 1914 the Equity moved its offices from Minneapolis
to St. Paul, where the city had promised free land along the
upper levee for building a terminal grain elevator, and estab-
lished its own grain exchange. The Equity quickly began
building its new elevator on the upper levee, between
Chestnut and Sherman Streets. The location provided access
to rail lines and to the river. The Equity broke ground in
1915 and completed the new building in 1917. At the ded-
ication ceremony, Equity's President, J. M. Anderson, bap-
tized the building with river water, hoping that the river
would again become a factor in grain shipping.
The Chamber rejected the idea that St. Paul could estab-
148
lish a grain exchange and terminal facilities. In 1917 the
Chamber asserted that it was "utterly ridiculous" that "this
milling industry, linseed oil industry and terminal elevator
industry, can be transported to St. Paul by the establishment
of a small pretended grain exchange or selling agency....""
To farmers, however, their own elevator in St. Paul repre-
sented independence.
As the navigation history told in Chapter 5 shows,
commerce did not come back to the river, and navigation
boosters began the movement that led to the 9 -foot channel
project. In 1927, as part of its effort to encourage the
return of river traffic, St. Paul approved an expansion of the
old Equity elevator. The new addition included a 22,000 -
bushel, concrete elevator, a sack house and aloading dock
(Figure 7). Today, these buildings are the only remains of
the original Equity complex, but they are rare and valuable
assets for telling the history of grain trading, farm protest
FIGURE 7. Fanners' Union Grain Terminal Association complex, 19 55.
The St. Paul Municipal Grain Elevator and Sack House lie in the forefrout
of the complex at the eight. Minnesota Historical Society.
149
and river shipping in the MNRRA corridor, in Minnesota
and in the nation. 12
In 1938, 121 cooperatives from Minnesota, the
Dakotas, and Montana, including the Farmers' Union,
formed the Grain Terminal Association (GTA), allowing the
Farmers' Union to expand its market. The Federal govern-
ment's completion of the 9 -foot channel in the Mississippi
in 1940 aided this expansion. By the end of the 1940s,
roadway movement of grain was increasing as well, prompt-
ing terminal elevators to upgrade their truck -handling facil-
ities. As one historian noted, "This meant huge expendi-
tures by the GTA for improving their facility at St. Paul on
the river.""
Many improvements occurred at the St. Paul elevator
complex during the 1950s. In 1951, the Farmers' Union
Grain Terminal Association added a truck scale and dump,
and in 1955 they expanded the truck dump and added a car
dump, a headhouse on top of the original bins, and an office
building."
By the 1950s, farm cooperatives were common. "The
radicalism of 1916," said historian Robert Morlan, "is in
large measure the accepted practice of today."36 Although
it could not replace Minneapolis as a grain trading center, it
did become the first cooperatively -owned terminal elevator
in the country. St. Paul's 1931 addition to the elevator,
the Municipal Grain Terminal, fulfilled two historically
significant roles. First, it was part of the regional campaign,
supported by businessmen, politicians, and farmers, to
improve facilities on the Upper Mississippi as an impetus
to barge traffic. Second, it represented St. Paul's determina-
tion to compete with Minneapolis as a regional grain termi-
nal center.
Stockyards • Just as some entrepreneurs saw an opportunity
to consolidate the marketing of grain in the Twin Cities,
others thought the same could be done for livestock. A. B.
Stickney, President of the Minnesota and Northwestern
Railroad (later the Chicago -Great Western), recognized the
potential for stockyards in the Twin Cities area. Minnesota
x
had the pasturage and grain to feed cattle. Proponents of
stockyards estimated that railroads carried some 75,000
western rattle through St. Paul to Chicago each fall, and
Twin Cities residents ate the beef from about this many cat-
tle each year. The Twin Cities had several small stockyards,
but these mostly fed cattle on their way to Chicago. Rather
than watch western cattle go to Chicago, Stickney wanted to
establish a large stockyard and slaughterhouse in St. Paul."
In April 1886 Stickney acted quickly to realize his
vision. He engaged a number of potential investors, includ-
ing James J. Hill. Needing cattle, he went to a cattlemen's
convention in Montana to sell his idea. He argued that it
would be 400 miles shorter to St. Paul than to Chicago. The
shorter trip would cost less and reduce injuries to and
"shrinkage" of the livestock. Stickney believed that the
Twin Cities and the region to the west and north could con-
sume much of Montana's cattle. On May 3, 1886, Stickney
hosted a meeting of business interests in St. Paul and invit-
ed a representative from the western cattle ranchers. Hill
then invited the investors and a representative of the west-
ern cattle ranchers to his farm in North Oaks. Now commit-
ted to the enterprise, Stickney acquired options on land in
South St. Paul. He chose the site for its location near his
railroad and because of its proximity to the Mississippi,
which could take the stockyards' waste downriver, away
from St. Paul. Convinced he had secured what he needed,
Stickney began marketing rattle by the end of the year. "3
The stockyards drew meat -packing plants and related
industries to South St. Paul. According to Jerome Tewton,
in his article "The Business of Agriculture," "The stockyard
company provided the facilities and services (food, water,
pens, veterinarians, animal managers) for selling and buying
livestock Commission merchants handled sales for a set
fee; their task was to strike the best possible price for the
producer."" The stockyards received 5,831 rail cars of live-
stock the first year, and in Januaryl888 the first packing
plant opened. For their first ten years the yards struggled.
By 1900, however, meat -packing ranked as Minnesota's
fourth leading industry by value of product"
The stockyards and the Twin Cities railroad network
that centered on it helped South St. Paul become a regional
livestock center. Swift, Armour, Cudahy, and Wilson, four
of the nation's five leading meat packers, established plants
in South St. Paul. "Meat -packing," according to historian
Kirk Jeffrey, "enjoyed more rapid growth than did any other
major Minnesota industry in the first two decades of the
century."" Swift and Company started in 1897. Armour &
Company opened a S 14 million plant in South St. Paul in
1919, creating thousands of jobs. Both companies may
have chosen the Mississippi site due to the availability of
cheap, clean ice. Cudahy, a major Chicago meat packer,
came in 1925 and remained a large employer until its plant
closed in 1952. Thirty-six firms worked at the stockyards
during its heyday following World War II. By the 1960s,
the stockyards and associated operations began declining, as
the business decentralized. By the 1980s only seven com-
mission firms remained. 12 (Figure 8)
Brewing • Brewing is another river industry in the MNRRA
corridor that can be traced to Minnesota's territorial days.
It is also an industry that gave rise to nationally recognized
products. Unlike the other industries, breweries employed
the river valley's geology in a unique way. To make beer,
brewers needed knowledge of the process, good water, bar-
ley, malt and hops, and they needed a place to store their
product. Minnesota's lands could produce the barley, malt
and hops, and fresh water was abundant. From St. Anthony
Falls downstream, the Mississippi River valley's geology
provided for storage. The soft St. Peter Sandstone bluffs
along this reach allowed brewers to excavate tunnels deep
under the bluffs to cool and age their beer. Minnesota and
the Twin Cities also provided a heavy concentration of
German immigrants who enjoyed beer and who had the
know-how needed for brewing. In 1887 Minnesota had
112 breweries and ranked fifth nationally in beer produc-
tion but only twentieth in population. A dozen breweries
were in St. Paul, "the number one brewing center in the
state," but Minneapolis and Hastings also had breweries.'
iso
Nationally, Americans had been making beer since the
colonial era, but production took off in the mid -1800s, and
the number of breweries increased around the country.
After pasteurization was perfected in 18 75, bottled beer
became popular and beer bottling a common industry. By
1900 refrigerated railcars allowed brewers to distribute
their beer widely."
In Minnesota, brewing began in St. Paul, and St. Paul
would dominate the state's beer production. Most St. Paul
brewers were German immigrants who started their busi-
nesses soon after arriving. One of these immigrants,
Anthony Yoerg, opened the first brewery in St. Paul in
1848 (a year before Minnesota became a territory).
Although he initially located on the east side of downtown,
in 18 71, Yoerg moved his brewery to the west side bluffs at
Ohio Street, two blocks south of what is Water Street today.
Here he built a large stone brewery and excavated nearly a
mile of caves for cooling his beer.
Determined to become a major brewer, he designed a
-fir _r.r t
FIGURE 8. Cattle pen, South St. Paul Stockyards, 1930. Photo by Peter
Schanvang. Minnesota Historical Society. By this time, four of the nation's
five leading meatpacking companies had lcoated at tire stockyards.
151
x
steam -powered plant capable of producing 50 barrels per day.
He was selling 20,000 barrels per year by 1881 and 35,000
by 1891, making him one of the state's largest brewers.
Using the label "Yoerg's Cave Aged Beer," Yoerg's successors
kept the business going through all the depressions and
through Prohibition (19 19 to 1933). Not until 1952 did
the brewery close. The only remains as of 1981 were the
brewery's cave and foundation at the bottom of Ohio Street."
In 1853 Martin Bruggermann established what was
probably the second brewery in St. Paul, in a house near the
intersection of Smith and Kellogg Boulevard. After the
brewery burned, he moved to Sixth and Pleasant, where he
built a stone building. Then, in 1872, he moved to the west
side bluffs near Wabasha Street, just 150 yards from Yoerg.
For more than 25 years he made beer at this site and stored
it in caves excavated into the bluff. In 1900 he sold the
brewery, and in 1905 it closed. As with Yoerg's brewery, the
principal remnants of Bruggermann's plant are the caves."
Another brewery, called the North Mississippi
Company, opened in 1853. Built on top of the bluffs near
present-day Shepard Road and Drake Street in the West
Seventh Street neighborhood, it was destroyed by fire.
Frederick and William Banholzer reconstructed it, and made
it into one of the more successful breweries in St. Paul by
the 1880s. The Banholzers dug caves that extended a half
mile deep and had many chambers. But within a year after
William died, in 1897, the business dosed.'
Three more breweries opened in St. Paul in 1855, two
of which would give birth to the state's largest breweries
and to nationally recognized beers. Until purchased by
Frederick Emmert in 1866, the City Brewery, near Eagle and
Exchange Streets in Uppertown, remained a small operation.
By the 1880s, however, Emmert built it into a well-known
brewery capable of producing 6,000 barrels per year. He
used a nearby sandstone hill for storage. Emmert died in
1889 and left the business to his sons. They had different
interests, however, and sold the brewery to Theodore Hamm
in 1901. Happy to be rid of a competitor, Hamm used the
old brewery for storage."
Hamm began his career at Phalen Creek The creek,
with its sandstone cliffs and once fresh water, became home
to at least four breweries. One of the four, the Pittsburgh
Brewery, started in 1860 by Andrew T. Keller, was on the
east bank, at the intersection of Greenbrier and Minnehaha.
Four years later Keller sold it to Hamm, who would make it
into the largest brewery west of Chicago. By 18 78 Hamm
had boosted production from 500 barrels per year to
5,000. By 1882 the plant's output had jumped to 26,000
barrels. In 1903, after his father's death, William Hamm
ran the brewery until his own death in 19 31. Under
William Hamm, the brewery became a national leader.'
Christopher Stahhuan, who opened his Cave Brewery
on July 5, 1855, excavated one of the most elaborate stor-
age systems on the river. Locating his brewery on Fort
Road, at the far west end of the city at that time, he excavat-
ed three levels of caves a mile deep into the sandstone
bluffs. Having come to St. Paul with only a few dollars, he
created what would become, from at least 1876 to 1879,
the largest brewery in the state. By the mid -1880s he was
producing 40,000 barrels per year but had fallen behind
Hamm and others. Stahhnan died of tuberculosis in 1883,
and by 1894 all three sons, who had taken over the busi-
ness, succumbed to it as well. As a result, the brewery went
bankrupt in 1897. Another firm owned it for three years,
and then the Jacob Schmidt Company—formerly the North
Star Brewery—bought it in 1900.111
Schmidt did not found the North Star Brewery but
would make it into a nationally recognized company. The
North Star Brewery was the third company to begin in
1855. Two men, named Drewery and Scotten, opened it in
two small buildings and used a cave at Daytons Bluff. In
18 79 Reinhold Koch took control and built the company
into the second largest brewery west of Chicago by the
1880s, but in 1884 Schmidt bought out Koch. Fifteen
years later Schmidt changed the name to the Jacob Schmidt
Brewing Company. When the plant burned in 1900,
Schmidt moved to the Stahhuan facility, which he complete-
ly renovated and expanded. The new brewery could produce
1S2
200,000 barrels per year. Jacob Schmidt died in 1911 and
left the business to his daughter, Maria, and his son-in-law,
Adolph Bremer. Bremer's brother, Otto, an executive with
the National German American Bank of St. Paul, joined the
company shortly after. When Adolf died in 1939, Otto ran
the company until 1951 and then sold it to the Pfeiffer
Brewing Company. Other breweries existed in St. Paul at
various times, but those discussed above were among the
most important."
Minneapolis had a dozen breweries near the riverfront
by the late nineteenth century. Built in 1850, John Orth's
brewery was the first and was located where the old Grain
Belt Brewery now stands. By 1880 Minneapolis counted
four breweries. Two operated on the west side river flats, or
Bohemian Flats, near the University of Minnesota's West
Bank. "These two breweries," says archaeologist Scott
Anfinson, "dominated the landscape of the river flats into
the early twentieth century." Both emploved people living
in Bohemian Mats. Orth's Brewery and the Germania
Brewery were the other two breweries in Minneapolis. In
1891 the four companies merged to form the Minneapolis
Brewing and Malting Company, which the next year built
the Grain Belt Brewery." (Figure 9)
Prohibition and consolidation led to a dramatic
decline in the number of breweries in Minnesota. In 1900
the state had 50 fewer breweries than it did 20 years earli-
er, and by the start of Prohibition in 1919, only 51 brew-
eries remained (down from the 112 in 1887). The Steffan-
Kuenzel Brewery in Hastings became a casualty of
Prohibition. Founded in 1885 on Ramsey Street on the
levee, it operated up to 1919. The brewers who survived
Prohibition did so by bottling pop and other drinks."
Brewing sites are important for the local and national
stories they represent. The history of brewing involves the
stories of early immigrants, particularly Germans, and how
their ethnic origins influenced the development of beer
making. This history leads into the political and social
aspects of Prohibition nationally and locally. Many German
immigrants chose the Democratic Party for its stance
against Prohibition. Caves that once stored beer became
hideouts for illicit clubs, defying Prohibition.
FIGURE 9. Menllerand
Heinrick'sBrewery, at
lower levee atfoot of
Fourth Street,
Minneapolis, 1880.
Minnesota Historical
Society.
x
Although little has been written about it, natural and
human -made caves also have been used to store cheese and
grow mushrooms. The cool, dark cave climate was ideal for
both of these products, as well as beer.'
Transportation and Economic
Development
Transportation modes often determined the nature and
extent of business development in the MNRRA corridor and
the relationship of the river's communities to the
Mississippi River. Fur traders used canoes, piroques and
keelboats and depended upon the Mississippi and its tribu-
taries to receive their trade goods and take furs out. The
craft traveled almost as easily above the St. Anthony Falls as
below it. Fur traders located their posts near the river, to
limit how far they had to carry their goods and furs. As
cities in the area grew and as the area's transportation sys-
tem evolved, new transportation systems replaced the river
and fewer and fewer people considered the Mississippi cen-
tral to their lives.
Steamboats maintained the corridor's tie to the river.
Although few in number, steamboats plied the river above
the falls. By the summer of 1849, an American Fur
Company steamboat worked above falls. It made several
trips delivering flour to the company's post upriver but also
carried passengers and supplies. In May of 1850, another
steamboat, the Governor Ramsey, completed a voyage to Sauk
Rapids. Possibly on this voyage, the steamer carried settlers
to Itasca Village (later Ramsey), which would establish a
steamboat landing. In 1855 low water stranded the steam-
boat H. M. Rice at Anoka, and the town temporarily used it
for church services."
Railroads replaced steamboats more quickly above the
falls than below. By 1881 steamboat navigation above the
falls had become irregular, at best. This was undoubtedly
because the river above the falls was often shallow and
received little navigation improvement work. And other
than Minneapolis, steamers operating above the falls did not
have access to large ports from which to acquire and deliver
passengers and freight, which were essential if steamboats
hoped to compete with railroads. While some steamboats
may have paddled on the river above St. Anthony after
1881, not many did so and they did not last long."
Ferries • Even after railroads expanded through the MNRRA
corridor, ferries provided the primary way across the
Mississippi River until bridges were built. Entrepreneurs
began operating ferries at the earliest settlements. Lt. E. K.
Smith's map of the Ft. Snelling area in 1837 and 1838
shows Brown's Ferry running from Camp Coldwater to
Brown's grog shop across the river. In the fall of 1848 or
spring of 1849, Antoine Robert, who owned the fur trade
post at the mouth of the Rum River, established a rowboat
ferry at Anoka_ Antoine's brother, Louis Robert, later
acquired the Rum River post and began running a swing
1S4
FIGURE I0. Paint Douglas Ferry, aboutfaurmiles south ofHastings,
1902. Minnesota Historical Society. Ais was one of the earliest and
longest runningferries in the MNRRA corridor.
ferry big enough to carry a team of horses or oxen across the
Rum. One of his largest customers was Borup & Oakes,
who sent their Red River Oxcart supply trains across the
river. On September 11, 1855, the Ehn Creek and Anoka
Ferry Company made its first trip.
Several well-known Minnesota pioneers received grants
to run ferries in St. Paul in 1850. James M. and Isaac N.
Goodhue acquired charters to run a ferry at the lower land-
ing, and John R. hvine won a charter to operate one from
the upper landing. Daniel E Brawley also received a charter
to operate a ferry from the upper levee to West St. Paul in
1852. The ferries plied the river until 1859, when the
155
Wabasha Street Bridge opened. John Goodspeed started a
ferry at Fridley by 1854, and the Truax and Anderson ferry
ran from 1883 to 1887 at St. Paul Park. In the latter year,
the Rock Island Railway Company built a combined railroad
and pedestrian bridge over the Mississippi at St. Paul Park,
ending the ferry's service."
Ferries at both ends of the MNRRA corridor lasted up to
the end of nineteenth century. One of the earliest and
longest lasting ferries operated at Hastings. Started in 1854
by William Felton, it brought Wisconsin farmers and their
produce to the growing storage and shipping facilities at
Hastings. The ferry remained active until the Spiral Bridge
was built in 1895. One of the last ferries in the MNRRA
corridor may have been at Dayton. It is the only ferry indi-
cated on the Mississippi River Commission map that
includes Dayton, which dates to 1898. Ferries helped pro-
long direct contact with the river, but the increasing number
of roads and railroads would begin drawing people away."'
(Figure 10)
Roads • The U.S. government built the first wagon road
through the MNRRA corridor, after Congress approved
540,000 for military roads in the Minnesota Territory in
about 1850. One road, which ran from Point Douglas, at
the St. Croix River's mouth, along the east bank to Fort
Ripley, received S 10,000. The road traveled the entire
length of the MNRRA corridor. James Simpson conducted
the survey for The Military Road, as most people called it, in
1851, and the federal government started construction the
next year. In 1852 the builders pushed the road to Itasca
Village (Ramsey). The Red River Oxcarts quickly employed it
in their j ourney between the Twin Cities and the Red River
Valley. In 1855 some 300 oxcarts passed over the road on
their way to St. Paul. Other military roads constructed in
the 1850s included the Mendota—Wabasha Road (St. Paul to
La Crosse Road) and the Ellis and Hastings Roads'
The Topographical Engineers, a branch that temporari-
ly split from the Corps of Engineers in 1831, surveyed and
built the military roads. To cross streams and rivers, they
x
erected some of the first bridges in the MNRRA corridor. In
1852 they built bridges over Coon and Rice Creeks and one
over the Rum River at the current location of the Main
Street Bridge in Anoka. As soon as the government made
the crossing site known, plans for the town began.60 At
Cottage Grove, the military road also influenced the devel-
opment of the town. "Old Cottage Grove Village," states
Vogel, "grew up where the Military Road crossed the trail
leading from Grey Cloud Island to Stillwater."61 The govern-
ment erected the first bridge across the Vermillion River, a
covered bridge, in 1856. The bridge remained in use until
1888 and was replaced in 1898.62
Roads and bridges began the process of taking people
away from the Mississippi River. While the early roads par-
alleled the river, they were often far enough back that the
sights and sounds of the river faded. Hotels and stores
began locating along the roads, not the river. Bridges carried
people over the river; no longer did they have to get down by
it so they could touch and smell it.
Railroads • Railroads transformed the MNRRA corridor and
its inhabitants' relationship to the Mississippi most dramat-
ically. Railroad development in Minnesota provides a good
example of the speed and coverage with which railroads
expanded in the Midwest. On June 28, 1862, crowded with
local dignitaries, Minnesota's the first train steamed along
the first railroad from St. Paul to St. Anthony. Only a year
and one-half later, on December 6, the St. Paul and Pacific
reached Fridley and six days later Anoka. By the end of the
Civil War, railroads had laid tracks from Minneapolis 50
miles southward toward Fairbault. By the beginning of the
next decade, lines extended outward from Minneapolis some
65 miles northwest to St. Cloud and more than 125 miles
to west Benson. A line begun in 1868 and completed in
18 70 connected the Twin Cities and Duluth, providing
another outlet to the Atlantic Ocean. Railroads made two
important connections with Chicago. In 1868 the
Milwaukee and St. Paul completed a line from Chicago
through Prairie du Chien and southern Minnesota to the
Twin Cities, and in 18 70 the Minnesota Central Railway
Company opened a line also running through southern
Minnesota connecting the Twin Cities with Chicago via a
line through Iowa .61
By 1900 railroads linked the Twin Cities to much of
Minnesota and most of the nation. Two transcontinental
lines crossed Minnesota before 1900. On September 8,
1888, the Northern Pacific finished the first transcontinen-
tal railroad, running through Minnesota from Moorhead to
the Twin Cities. In June 1893 the St. Paul, Minneapolis and
Manitoba opened the second transcontinental railroad. The
new railroad connected Minneapolis and St. Paul to Seattle,
Great Falls, Grand Forks, and other cities."
The 1895 and 1898 Mississippi River Commission
maps clearly reveal the extent to which railroads had taken
over lands near the river in St. Paul and Minneapolis. From
Minneapolis north to Ramsey, the Northern Pacific and the
Great Northern Railroads ran parallel to each other along the
east side. The railroad tracks lay, for the most part, outside
the MNRRA corridor. On the west side, from the mouth of
Shingle Creek in north Minneapolis up to Dayton, no rail-
roads ran near the river. Beginning in north Minneapolis,
however, railroads began to converge on the milling district.
They included the St. Paul and Duluth; Minneapolis, St. Paul
and Sault Ste. Marie; Great Northern; Northern Pacific; and
Chicago, Milwaukee, and St. Paul (short line). Large railroad
yards lay on the west side just above Nicollet Island and
across from the Lower Lock and Dam. The railroad lines dis-
persed below St. Anthony but converged again in St. Paul.
The railroads crowding into St. Paul included the Chicago,
Burlington & Northern; Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul;
Chicago Great Western; and Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis &
Omaha. Near the mouth of Phalen Creek, a huge railroad
yard occupied the creek's former valley.
Downriver from St. Paul, the railroads fanned out. The
Chicago Great Western Railroad crossed under the Robert
Street Bridge, over the Mississippi and ran below the west
side bluffs past South St. Paul, until coursing away from the
river to the west above Pine Bend. The Chicago, Milwaukee,
156
and St. Paul and the Chicago, Burlington & Northern rail-
roads left the railyard in downtown St. Paul, side by side,
until diverging at Newport. The Chicago, Burlington &
Northern continued along the east side bluff. The two rail-
roads converged again several miles above Hastings. But
opposite Hastings, the Chicago, Milwaukee, and St. Paul
crossed into the city and headed downriver on the west side.
The Chicago, Burlington & Northern continued down the
west as well. From the Minnesota River into St. Paul and then
downriver to Hastings, railroads that ran in the floodplain
and near the bluffs were in what is now the MNRRA corridor.
Overall, railroads altered the corridor's physical character lit-
tle outside the milling district and downtown St. Paul."
Railroads quickly undermined the river's importance
for transportation. Towns began growing up around their
rail connections rather than their tie to the river. Symbolic
of this change, Fridley is named Fridley Park Station on the
1898 Mississippi River Commission map and was immedi-
ately adjacent to the Great Northern and Northern Pacific
Railroad."
Paul Hesterman, in "The Mississippi and St. Paul," pro-
vides the most comprehensive description of railroad expan-
sion and its impact on the economy of a city in the MNRRA
corridor. He also examines the effect of railroads on the
city's landscape and its relationship to the river. Overall,
Hesterman offers a model that could be used for other cities
in the corridor."
St. Paul, like most cities, encouraged and promoted rail-
road development, which hastened the river's demise as a
central element in the city's success and identity. St. Paul
sold bonds to subsidize early rail development. As railroads
filled in the floodplain and located their tracks and stations
there, warehouse and transfer businesses quickly followed.
Facilities built by James J. Hill and steamboat magnate
Commodore William Davidson relied on steamboat traffic,
but as railroads captured the passengers and commodities
once carried on steamboats, the warehouses, transfer build-
ings and other businesses located along the railroads had lit-
tle to do with the river.
ts7
Between 1875 and 1920, St. Paulbecame a "Rail
City." Railroads and the facilities and businesses built to
accommodate them dominated riverfront development.
"Rails," Hesterman asserts, "dictated industrial location,
and industrial development within the river valley often
had more to do with the railroads than the river."" The
same held for commercial development. `By 1920,"
Hesterman concludes, "the river probably was less impor-
tant to St. Paul than at any time before or since.... the
riverfront that once had been the vibrant heart of the city
had become the back alley of rail depots and rail -oriented
industries, crowded by trackage, inaccessible and undesir-
able. Pollution made the river itself offensive to the eye and
nose."" To varying degrees, the same can be said for many
towns in the corridor.
Railroads took over the floodplain in St. Paul, because
of the floodplain's low, even grade. Railroads began build-
ing into the wetland created by the mouths of Phalen Creek
and Trout Brook as early as the 1860s, where nearly 200
years earlier the Dakota had landed with Hennepin and his
French companions. Railroads steadily filled in the wetland
and pushed the Mississippi riverbank outward. They cut
back Dayton Bluff to make more room for tracks, destroy-
ing much of Carver's Cave. The lower landing became a rail-
road terminal, and the Union Depot was built and rebuilt in
1880, 1884 and 1915. The Minnesota Valley Railroad laid
tracks in the floodplain at the upper landing and businesses
began building around it. Between the upper and lower
landing, the bluff bulged out toward the river, separating
the two. So the railroads cut the bluff back and filled in
toward the river. Other railroads built up and down the val-
ley, filling more of the floodplain and further shaving back
the bluffs."' (Figure 11)
Overall, some of the most dramatic landscape changes
in the MNRRA corridor have occurred at St. Paul. By the
early 1900s, railroads had already altered the old riverbed,
the bluffs, and the original streams that flowed into the
Mississippi. During the 1920s and 1930s, the city began
developing Holman Field on Lamprey Lake, which had been
one of the river's largest backwaters in the metropolitan
area. Although the field still floods during high water, the
ecosystem qualities have largely disappeared. A high levee
system has barred the river from the rest of its floodplain
across from downtown St. Paul. The city built Shepard and
Warner Roads out into the riverbed, continuing the process
begun by early railroads and settlers. And St. Paul constant-
ly supported business development in the floodplain.
Public subsidies, as much as economic demand, Hesterman
asserts, are responsible for the development of the St. Paul
riverfront. Economic interests, he stresses, had used the
city government as a tool to transform the riverfront since
the city's beginnings, and not just downtown. The city, for
example, persuaded the Ford Motor Company to locate
above Lock and Dam No. 1 by yielding its claim to hydro-
electric power to the company."
The completion of Lock and Dam No. 2 at Hastings,
followed by the opening of the entire nine -foot channel
below St. Paul in 1940, also transformed the city's land-
scape. While railroads had kicked river -related activities
out of the St. Paul riverfront, the 9 -foot channel brought
FIGURE 11. Railroads and low water undermined the Mississippi River
as a commercial navigation route before locks and dams. Taken in 1931,
this photograph captures the river immediatelyprior to the flooding of
Pool 2. Photo by St. Paul Daily News. Minnesota Historical Society.
1S8
them back. Large terminals, like Terminal No. 1, Red Rock
and Southport, have restored St. Paul's navigation heritage.
Barge fleeting and repair operations along the downtown
riverbanks dearly characterize St. Paul as a river town in
ways that harken back to the steamboat days."
Streetcars to Cars and Trucks • Commuter trains, streetcars
and trolleys began running through the MNRRA corridor in
the early twentieth century, redefining the spatial relation-
ship between work and home and between people and the
river. They promoted urban and suburban expansion away
from central cities and away from the river. Businesses and
neighborhoods began locating along the lines.
By the early 1900s, the Twin Cities possessed "One of
the nations' model streetcar systems ... The Lower
Hydro Station below St. Anthony Falls, completed in 1897,
helped this happen, by providing electricity to the streetcars
of the Twin City Rapid Transit Company. In 1913 a street-
car company completed tracks up to the Coon Rapids Dam,
supplying workers and materials for the dam's construction.
Although the cars initially ran on gas engines, by 1914 the
company converted to electricity and pushed the line to
Anoka. The streetcars ran regularly until about 193 9. Also
in 1914, the St. Paul Southern Electric Railway completed
tracks to Hastings. The train ran from Hastings, through
Pine Bend and Inver Grove, to St. Paul in about an hour. By
the 1920s, however, cars and trucks began replacing street-
cars, horses, buggies, and wagons. As World War II started,
only the Twin Cities still operated their streetcars.11
Cars and trucks accelerated urban and suburban expan-
sion away from the river. The Great Depression delayed the
impact of automobiles, but when a new economic boom
began in 1946, most households acquired cars. Automobile
registrations grew from some 2,500 in 1905 to about
747,000 in 1940 and 2.4 million in 1983. After 1950
the suburbs and businesses outside the city center began to
mature. Between 1920 and 1970 the urban population
grew from about 840,000 to nearly two million. By 1980
an 800 -square -mile outer city surrounded the pre -1920
159
metropolis, which had covered about 50 square miles. The
metropolitan area's growing population and surging
reliance on cars and trucks meant the road system had to
expand dramatically. Freeway construction began in the
1950s. Once the focus of the area's residents, the river had
become lost in a landscape it gave birth to. As the metropol-
itan population grew, houses, businesses and roads crept
into more and more of the land within the MNRRA corridor.
Less and less land remained or appeared natural.
Bridges • As communities in the MNRRA corridor expanded
on the early military roads and as railroads pushed lines
through the valley, a growing number of bridges spanned
the Mississippi River. Bridges changed the flow of traffic
and commerce for the communities they connected and
influenced the transportation patterns, demography and
economy of the area.
The Mississippi River Commission maps show the
nature and extent of bridges across the Mississippi by the
end of the nineteenth century. Bridges followed the settle-
ment pattern. From the Minneapolis city limits down to St.
Paul, 20 bridges stitched the riverbanks together, equally
divided between railroad and wagon bridges. From north to
south, the wagon bridges included those at Twentieth,
Plymouth, Hennepin, Tenth, Washington, Franklin, Lake,
Smith (High), Wabasha and Robert. The railroad bridges
served a number of different lines.
Only three bridges crossed the Mississippi below the
Robert Street Bridge down to Hastings. An 1887 railroad
swing bridge crossed from near Inver Grove Heights to just
below Newport. This bridge also served pedestrians. The
remaining two bridges jumped the river at Hastings. One was
a railroad bridge and the other the famous spiral bridge.76
No bridges spanned the Mississippi River between the
Twentieth Avenue Bridge in Minneapolis and the Ferry
Street Bridge in Anoka (Figure 12). As the Ferry Street
Bridge is at about river mile 871.5 and the Twentieth
Avenue Bridge is near river mile 855.5, no bridge was avail-
able for a distance of some 16 miles. Above Anoka, only
x
the ferry at Ramsey provided a way across the Mississippi."
People in Minneapolis and St. Paul did not have to travel far
to cross the river, although going on foot, by horse or in a
wagon was not so quick as today. Above or below the Twin
Cities, they had a long journey, unless they lived near one of
the few bridges in these reaches.
Residents of Nininger devised one of the most creative
bridges. According to the Emigrant Aid Journal of February
10, 185 8, men from the town cut out a slab of ice nearly
one- half acre in size and floated it down to their crossing
site, where they lodged it against opposing banks. The
bridge allowed loggers to cut wood on an island near
Nininger and stack it along the bank to sell to steamboats
the next spring."'
Many bridges merit
individual discussion and
are National Register listed
or eligible. Many are gone,
like the Hastings Spiral
Bridge, the original High
Bridge and the first bridge
over the Mississippi River,
the suspension bridge erect-
ed by Minneapolis and St.
Anthony in 1854. The High
Bridge opened in 1888 and
was replaced in 1987. The
Carnegie Keystone Bridge
Company delivered the origi-
nal High Bridge in one mil-
lion pieces, with a 388 -page
manual. In 1859 the
Wabasha Bridge became the
first to cross the Mississippi
from St. Paul to Dakota
County. Fortunately, not all
the historic bridges are gone.
The original Robert Street
Bridge was completed in
1885 and replaced in 1926 by the now historic, arched,
Robert Street Bridge. That same year another concrete arch
bridge—the Mendota Bridge—opened. It was, at 4,119 feet,
the longest concrete arch bridge in the world."
Summary
One goal of this chapter was to provide the context in
which businesses developed in the MNRRA corridor, rather
160
than to produce a list of all the different businesses.
Another goal was to show how transportation affected the
relationship of businesses and the area's residents to the
river. Each new transportation method redefined that rela-
tionship. Navigation interests, railroads and road builders
all transformed the river or its valley to accommodate their
ends. Urban population growth, tied to these evolving
transportation systems, meant that a smaller and smaller
percentage of the metropolitan area's inhabitants thought
about the river during their daily activities. Today, howev-
er, more and more people recognize the many amenities the
Mississippi offers and are coming back to the river. They
are interested in the river's history, its role in the develop-
ment of the metropolitan area, and the businesses and
transportation systems that underlay the area's evolution.
They are looking for transportation routes that take them to
the river, rather than away from it.
FIGURE 12. Mississippi River Bridge atAnoka, Minnesota, 1905.
Minnesota Historical Society. Ferries remained important longer at the
AINRRA corridor's southern and northern ends, where feiv bridges existed.
161
FIGURE I. Urbauriver. Minneapolis skyliueover the Mississippi River gorge.
Settlement and Urban Residential Development
Along the River, 1841-1950
Patrick Nunnally • University of Minnesota
his chapter focuses on the process of urban
growth in the MNRRA corridor, examining
what towns began where, when and why. It
discusses residential settlement patterns but does not detail
the commercial and industrial patterns that formed the eco-
nomic basis for population expansion and contraction.'
This is not a history of every community, every riverfront
neighborhood, along the MNRRA corridor, and it is not an
academic urban history. Urban history in the MNRRA corri-
dor is intimately tied to the history presented in foregoing
chapters. Geology and geography, the Native American pres-
ence, exploration and early military objectives, navigation
improvements and economic activities all played a role in
determining where towns located, how fast they grew, how
they related to the river and how that relation changed over
time. The information presented here draws on those sto-
ries. (Figure 1.)
Town formation in the MNRRA corridor began soon
after settlers came to the upper Mississippi valley in the
early 1800s. Between 1820 and 1945 dozens of settle-
ments grew up in the MNRRA corridor. Today, these com-
munities can be understood as having evolved in one of
three patterns: towns and cities that formed in the nine-
teenth century and have endured as distinct urban areas (for
example, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Hastings, Anoka, and South
St. Paul); nineteenth century settlements that stagnated for a
163
time and then grew up as suburbs in the expanding metro-
politan area (such as Mendota, Fridley, Champlin, and
Cottage Grove); and urban areas that formed in the subur-
ban expansion following World War II (for example, Coon
Rapids and St. Paul Park).
The present municipalities in the MNRRA corridor are
listed in Table 8. 1, according to the pattern in which they
formed. The first column includes cities that established a
central economic and population presence in the nineteenth
century (all but one, South St. Paul, pre -date the railroad
era) and have maintained a distinct downtown commercial
district and sense of "municipal place" throughout the
twentieth century. The second column includes population
centers that reached a peak of regional importance in the
nineteenth century, went through a period of stagnation but
retain a distinctive "municipal place" in the greater metro-
politan region today. Despite their spatial and political
independence today, these communities exist largely as sub-
urbs within the larger region. The third column is the most
heterogeneous collection. Generally, it includes places that
achieved a substantial population and regional presence
only after World War II and the subsequent suburban trans-
formation of much of the MNRRA corridor. Most were
farming areas, organized as townships. However, this
grouping also includes the township of Nininger, which had
a brief but memorable life as a distinct community.2
x
164
The formation and
Table
development of towns in
URBAN CENTERS
the MNRRA corridor fits
roughly into three periods,
Enduring Urban Centers
defined by transportation
Anoka
Hastings
modes—river, railroad and
areas that engulfed previous small towns such as Anoka,
Minneapolis
automobile—and the con-
melding them to the suburban network around Minneapolis
St. Paul
comitantatterns of urban
p
and St. Paul. A parallel development is the creation of post
South St. Paul
settlement. During the era
war suburbs on land that had previously been agricultural.
19th Century
of river transportation,
Cities are made up of numerous communities, and St.
Population
towns developed at many
Paul and Minneapolis have long had communities along
Centers that are
now suburbs
laces throw hout the cor
p g
their riverfronts. Even as the cities grew in size and area,
within the
ridor. Between 1841,
until they merged into a modern metropolitan region, peo-
metropolitan area
when St. Paul was estab-
ple lived in small communities along the river. Some of
Dayton
lished, and 1862, when
these, such as the Upper Levee and the West Side Flats in St.
Champlin
Cottage Grove
the railroad connected St.
Paul and the Bohemian Flats area of Minneapolis, were
Fridley
Paul and Minneapolis,
neighborhoods of squatters and others living on the mar -
Mendota
there wererobabl y more
gins
gins of society, in the poorest, most flood prone, and least
Newport
Richfield'
named towns than at any
desirable areas of the riverfront. Other neighborhoods,
other time. As railroads
notably the Highwood section of St. Paul, were designed as
Population Centers that
expanded, some towns
picturesque suburbs full of curving streets and with a rail
emerged in the 20th
century (some may have
blossomed into railroad
connection to the city. Finally, there are residential areas
briefly been population
hubs and others withered
within the study corridor, such as the Macalester-
centers, then declined)
when the railroads
Groveland/Highland Park neighborhoods in St. Paul, where
Brooklyn Center
bypassed them. Durin g
development has seemingly had little to do with the river.
Brooklyn Park
Coon Rapids
the last four decades of the
Crystal-
nineteenth centmy,both
River Transportation Era (1820-1862)
Denmark Township
Grey Cloud Township
St. Paul and Minneapolis
This section describes the principal population centers dur-
Inver Grove Heights
witnessed spectacular pop-
ing the period that the river dominated transportation and
Lilvdale
ulation leaps, as they
follows with a brief account of settlement patterns in the
MaplcAvood
Mendota Heights
became regional railroad
corridor outside the population centers. The relation of
Nininger Township
centers. By the end of
towns to the river varied markedly, depending on their loca-
Raverma Township
World War II, railroads
tion. Above St. Paul and especially above St. Anthony Falls,
Ramsev
Rosemounthad
peaked, and automo-
the river was not widely used for commercial navigation,
St. Paul Park
bile use, which had begun
although small steamboats plied the river above
as early as the 1920s,
Minneapolis during the mid to late nineteenth century.
'Not in MXRRA now.
boomed in theost-war
p
Each community, however, depended on the river, whether
years. This gave rise to
to transport people, goods, or raw materials, such as lumber.
expanded metropolitan
Writing in 1893 about St. Anthony, Isaac Atwater could
have been speaking for any community in the region prior
to the mid -1860s when he stated, "it is interesting now to
recall how the river then dominated the town. It was every-
thing. Every enterprise depended for its vitality on what
the river could do for it."'
164
The river transportation era in urban development
began with the start of construction on Fort Snelling in
1820 and the subsequent founding of the American Fur
Company post at Mendota in the 1820s. Traders erected
seasonal posts at other locations in the corridor, but it was
the mid -1830s before any permanent settlement took root.
Prior to 1835, settlements clustered along the river were
either military (Fort Snelling) or commercial (the fur post at
Mendota). Commercial and military establishments
brought people into a relatively confined space, but neither
could be understood as cities. The Treaty of 183 7 opened
the east bank of the Mississippi, and within five years com-
munities grew up at St. Paul and Cottage Grove. Urban
growth received a burst of energy with the founding of St.
Paulin 1841.
Settlement concentrated around Fort Snelling and St.
Paul until the early 1850s, when a combination of factors
led to widespread settlement throughout the corridor. The
Treaties at Mendota and Traverse des Sioux in 1851 opened
the west bank of the Mississippi to settlement, and the bur-
geoning steamboat trade brought thousands of settlers
annually to Minnesota. As a result, new towns grew up at
Anoka (1852), Hastings (1852) and Minneapolis (1854), as
did towns that lasted for only a short while (Nininger and
Pine Bend, for example). (Figure 2.)
S
:.
_
'4w
4r a
A.. Alk
Y ,
� f
a
FIGURE 2. PanoramicMaPafAnoka,1869. American Memory Project, Library of Congress.
165
x
The Civil War and the Dakota Conflict of 1862 stalled
new settlement in the early 1860s, but following the war,
the population boomed and railroads spread across the
region. The balance of the nineteenth century saw spectacu-
lar growth in short bursts within Minneapolis and St. Paul
and steady growth throughout the portions of the corridor
connected by railroad. Other places, such as the towns of
Nininger and Pine Bend in Dakota County, were bypassed by
the railroad and, as a consequence, died out by the end of
the 1860s.
Throughout the river transportation period, residential
settlement in concentrations that could be called urban was
tightly focused at particular points along the river. St.
Paul's town center ranged for several blocks on either side of
the Upper and Lower Landings, but the rest of the present
St. Paul riverfront was either unsettled or claimed by isolat-
ed farmers. The same pattern essentially held true upriver,
with stretches of sparsely settled land separating
Minneapolis and St. Anthony from upriver settlements such
as Anoka and the duster around Banfil's Tavern that would
eventually become Fridley. These towns, as well as places
like Hastings, remained relatively small centers during this
period, established where the shore provided some natural
amenity.
Much of the shoreline, according to early accounts,
either was marshy and unsuitable for settlement or featured
high bluffs facing the river. Places where small rivers or
creeks joined the Mississippi provided natural settlement
spots, as did, of course, the falls at St. Anthony.
Concentrations of settlement during this period catered to
the new farmers coming into the territory as well as to the
lumbermen and traders. The settlements developed more or
less according to the natural features of a particular location
and the drive and initiative of the town's proprietors.
St. Paul can justly be called the first urban center in the
MNRRA corridor. Legitimate settlement could begin only
after the Dakota ceded their lands east of the Mississippi in
the 1837 treaty. Some pioneers settled as early as the
1830s on sites across from the fort and as far north as the
present Lake Street Bridge area. St. Paul started as a settle-
ment just downstream from Fort Snelling, when officers in
charge of that installation cleared it of non-military person-
nel in 1837. In 1837 and 1838 many of these refugees had
settled near a marshy area just downstream from present St.
Paul. This collection of domiciles was alternatively named
for its topography ("Grand Marais" or Great Marsh) or for its
best known inhabitant, Pierre "Pig's Eye" Parrant, a popular
whiskey seller.
By 1841 more intentional settlers had joined the
whiskey sellers and refugees from Fort Snelling and other
settlements, and the community had moved to the bluff
between the upper and lower landing. That same year,
Father Lucien Galtier, a Catholic priest who had been sent
from the Diocese of Dubuque to minister to the fur traders
and growing community in the vicinity of Mendota, estab-
lished a chapel on the bluff and named it for Saint Paul. The
name stuck, and the community grew quickly and assumed
regional importance as the closest landing to Fort Snelling,
as well as the head of steamboat navigation on the
Mississippi. When the Territory of Minnesota was estab-
lished in 1849, St. Paul was one of three population cen-
ters. By the time Minnesota achieved statehood in 185 8, it
was chosen as the capital over the lumbering center at
Stillwater and the milling and waterpower concentration at
St. Anthony and Minneapolis.'
As St. Paul grew, settlement centered in three distinct
areas, each with its own character and economic founda-
tion. The so-called Lower Landing grew up just upstream of
the marsh where Trout Creek and Phalen Creek entered the
Mississippi. This area was the best natural steamboat land-
ing in the settlement that was located outside the military
reservation. The Upper Landing developed less than a mile
upstream, below the current Irvine Park neighborhood.
John Irvine began cutting timber for steamboats, as he and
other settlers engaged in some small-scale shaping of the
riverfront in order to create a levee and landing in this vicin-
ity. The third area concentrated along the road that ran over
the bluff separating the Upper and Lower Landings. This
166
road, which became known as Third Street when the town
was platted in 1847, became the first commercial center of
St. Paul. Bench Street, which snaked down the bluff, and a
set of stairs connected Third Street to the Lower Landing.
There were, of course, isolated houses, farms, trading
posts, and whiskey shops located throughout the valley.
Residential development grew up on the bluff downstream
of the Phalen/Trout Creek lowlands as well, with Lyman
Dayton establishing early plats on the bluff that still bears
his name. All this settlement had visible impact on the
landscape, as architectural historian Larry Millett, among
others, has noted, "To make room for the growing city,
ravines and bottom lands were filled, hills leveled, lakes
drained, streams diverted, and bluffs shaved away."'
St. Paul was organized as a village on November 1,
1849, and incorporated as a city on March 4, 1854.6 As a
frontier town at the head of navigation in a rapidly expand-
ing region, St. Paul's growth was explosive. Contemporary
accounts from the middle 1850s document streets swarm-
ing with people unloaded from the several steamboats a
week that arrived from downriver. Would-be settlers were
warned to bring camping supplies, as a room or a house
was not to be had for any price in the city. Although St.
Paul never became a sawmilling center like Minneapolis or
Stillwater, six sawmills grew up along the St. Paul riverfront
to satisfy local needs. The economic contraction of 1857
stopped a period of tremendous growth, as it practically
eliminated credit and made the already scarce hard currency
more difficult to find. Industry in St. Paul during this peri-
od remained in its infancy. No railroads or associated facili-
ties developed during this period, and St. Paul lacked the
waterpower to attract industry, as at St. Anthony Falls.
The village of St. Anthony started on the east side of
the river, near the sites claimed by Franklin Steele for their
industrial potential, as soon as the land was opened to set-
tlement in 1838. A store and sawmill were constructed on
the east bank of the river in 1847-1848, and St. Anthony
"boomed" with the establishment of the Minnesota
Territory in 1849 and the opening of a suspension bridge,
in 1855, to the settlement that became Minneapolis.'
(Figure 3.)
St. Anthony was incorporated as a city on March 3,
1855, and a township was organized for the surrounding
territory on May 11, 1858. The location saw a number of
plats and names, however, including St. Anthony Falls
Village (platted as part of Ramsey County in 1849 and a
part of that county until March 4, 1856), and St. Anthony
City, platted in 1848-1849 and more popularly known as
" Cheevertown."" " Cheeverstown," or "Cheever's Landing,"
was named for William Cheever, a New York native gifted
FIGURE 3. Village of St. Anthony, 1851, frons downstream.
Minnesota Historical Society.
0
x
with frontier entrepreneurship and a wry sense of humor.
According to Atwater, Cheever acquired land below the
University of Minnesota, "where he subsequently erected a
farmhouse, and built an observatory on the high bank, over
the entrance of which he placed the legend, `Pay your dime
and climb."" Some settlers reached the falls by stagecoach,
although some did make it up the gorge on steamboats to
Cheever's Landing."' Throughout the 1850s tourists from
the South came to the Windsor House in St. Anthony for a
respite from the sultry southern summers. It is probable
that at least some of these travelers on the "fashionable
tour" disembarked at Cheever's Landing rather than arriv-
ing by stage from St. Paul. The place took on a different
aspect in winter, when, as Atwater later remembered it, "the
Mississippi, its [St. Anthony's] only medium of connection
with the outside world, was a dreary, trackless barrier of ice
and snow.""
Minneapolis was founded by Colonel John H. Stevens,
who operated a ferry above St. Anthony Falls. Stevens built
the first house west of the Mississippi in this area in 1849.
Platting for the town began in 1854, with the town govern-
ment inaugurated on July 20, 1858. The city was incorpo-
rated on March 6, 1866. Among the most notable addi-
tions to the city (it did not achieve its present spatial extent
until 1927) was the village of St. Anthony on February 28,
18 72. The name "Minneapolis," combining "minne" from
the Dakota for "water" and the Greek word "polis" for
"city," apparently first appeared in print in November 1852.
Charles Hoag, the reputed originator of the name, took it to
George D. Bowman, editor of the St. Anthony Express, who
publicized it."
The riverfront in St. Anthony and Minneapolis was a
mixture of residential, industrial and commercial land use.
Housing appeared on Nicollet Island as early as the 1840s.
In later periods, as riverfront land became more valuable,
industrial uses crowded out all residential use, except in
particularly undesirable areas such as Bohemian Flats.
Unless buried by later activities, very little may remain
from the earliest decades of development, particularly from
the residential districts that lined the river until the rail-
roads and expanding mills pushed them out."
In 1850 Henry Bailly established Hastings, even
though there had been no treaty relinquishing Indian title
to land west of the Mississippi. Until the treaty could be rat-
ified by the U.S. Senate (which would not take place until
1852), there could be no legal occupancy except by licensed
fur traders. Knowing the potential of this site at the falls of
the Vermillion River and its juncture with the Mississippi,
Bailly obtained a fur traders' license and set up a post. The
area had been known as "Oliver's Grove (sometimes erro-
neously shortened to "Olive Grove"), because Lt. William G.
Oliver had stopped here when ice forced him ashore as he
ascended the river in the fall of 1819.'
Once settlement started, the village grew rapidly. The
first year of permanent settlement was 1853, and the follow-
ing year entrepreneurs started a hotel, blacksmith shop, ferry,
and established a wharf on the levee for shipping farm prod-
ucts. After its founders drew lots, the town received its name
from the middle name of Henry Hastings Sibley, one of the
leading citizens of territorial Minnesota. In 1855-1856,
milling of flour and lumber began, using the power from the
Vermillion River. According to Neill, 1856 marked the high
point in this period of rapid growth. Between the opening of
navigation and July 1, 73 stone and frame houses were con-
structed, along with 100 temporary structures. There was
certainly the population to fill these buildings; the winter
1855-1856 census counted 1,918 people in Hastings, up
from 650 the year before and a twentyfold increase over the
1854 population of about 100." (Figure 4.)
In 1851 settlers established permanent housing and
other improvements at Anoka, a former fur trading post
near the junction of the Mississippi and Rum Rivers. The
name "anoka" apparently derives from a Dakota term for
"on both sides" and refers to the settlement's location on
both sides of the Rum River at its junction with the
Mississippi.16 Brothers named Peter and Francis Patoille
established a trading post at the point where a 15 -foot drop
in the Rum necessitated a portage on early trading routes.
168
FIGURE 4. Hastings, 1850. Minnesota HistodcaiSociety.
In 1851 Henry M. Rice and his brother Orrin made perma-
nent improvements, which by 1853 included a store and
houses on the river's east side. A dam and sawmill soon fol
lowed, and in the mid -1850s the government built a bridge
across the Rum. A flour mill was built at Anoka in 1854,
and growing mill development throughout the 1860s
attracted the attention of Minneapolis miller W. D.
Washburn, who bought the complex around 1870."
Fridley has one of the more unusual political histories
of any town in the corridor. John Banfil, the first state audi
for and the first postmaster in this part of the state, estab-
lished a tavern near the mouth of Rice Creek around 1848.
A year later, Henry M. Rice became interested in the site and
began farming nearby. The area was originally designated
Manomin County by the territorial legislature in 1857. In
18 70 residents petitioned to be added to Anoka County as a
township, retaining the name Manomin, derived from the
Ojibwa term for "wild rice." It received its present name
only in 1879, for Abram McCormick Fridley. It remained
169
largely agricultural throughout this period."'
The town of Mendota is thought of by some as "the
birthplace of Minnesota." Henry Sibley's stone house here,
built in 1835, became a gathering place for politicians,
artists, scientists, and adventurers. The settlement began as
a commercial venture by the American Fur Company's
Duncan Campbell, and became the central trading post for
the region. Alexis Bailly, Sr., had charge of the post until
1834, when Sibley arrived." As distinctive as Mendota's
history to about 1850 is, its subsequent story is less well
known. In 1866 the railroad came through town, establish-
ing an alternative transportation mode between the
Minnesota River Valley and St. Paul and, for all practical pur-
poses, eliminating Mendota's role as a regional trade center.
x
Grey Cloud Township lies on the east side of the
Mississippi, just south of Cottage Grove. Grey Cloud is an
island named for Mahkpia-hoto-win (Grey Cloud Woman), a
significant Dakota woman from the fur trade era. Her hus-
band, Hazen Mooers, operated a trading post on the island
for a time, and it has been the site of sporadic native settle-
ment and planned cities."'
The city of Nininger, the site of which was in present-
day Nininger Township, is one of the most celebrated mid -
nineteenth century towns in Minnesota. Nininger attracted
considerable attention from investors as far away as Chicago
and New York City. The city was platted in 1856 and
named for John Nininger, brother-in-law to Governor
Alexander Ramsey and friend of the politician, author, and
orator Ignatius Donnelly. Nininger and his associates
"talked up" the city to the point that it had nearly 1,000
residents when incorporated in 185 8. The booming com-
munity claimed seven to eight merchants, three to four
blacksmiths and wagon shops, a plow factory, a sash and
door factory, six saloons, three hotels, a drugstore, a physi-
cian and an unusually large assortment of lawyers and real
estate dealers. By 1880, however, its population had
declined to just 239, a loss attributed in part to the fact that
the railroad bypassed the town and took regional growth to
other cities (such as Hastings) and partly to the scarcity of
hard currency on the frontier. These causes made Nininger
only the most spectacular of the "boom and bust" cities in
Minnesota's early years, or, as one writer put it, "The period
of Nininger's founding and growth is an interesting, but not
altogether unique, story.""
The historic settlement pattern in Denmark Township,
located in Washington County at the juncture of the
Mississippi and St. Croix Rivers, resembles that of Nininger
in some important respects, in that both are the locations of
failed early cities. The causes of their demise are substan-
tially the same—failure to attract a rail line and thus keep
up with regional transportation patterns—but the partim-
lars are different in important ways. The settlement center
for Denmark Township was Point Douglas, settled in 1839
and named for Illinois Senator Stephen A. Douglas, but not
formally platted until 10 years later. The post office estab-
lished at that site in July 1840 was the oldest in Minnesota
outside Fort Snelling. The village was an important early
regional center "at that time and for a number of years the
depot where all supplies were purchased for the interior."""
Like its downstream neighbor Hastings, Point Douglas
became the location of both sawmills and gristmills, a ferry
across the Mississippi River, and a hotel. As late as 1881,
Point Douglas warehouses still held in excess of 100,000
bushels of grain, but the town did not develop the diverse
commercial base that sustained Hastings."3 Much of the
Point Douglas site lies outside MNRRA's boundary, but
archeological and historic research is necessary to determine
if a portion lies within the boundary.
Railroad Era (1862-1940s)
The railroad era comes with the emergence and then domi-
nance of the railroad as the transportation system that
served the Twin Cities area. After the first railroad line in
Minnesota connected St. Paul and Minneapolis in 1862, the
new transportation mode quickly expanded and took over
the region's economy and defined its geographic develop-
ment. The impact of the railroad's coming can hardly be
overstated. It changed both form and function of particular
spaces. St. Paul's Lowertown, for example, transformed
from a wealthy residential neighborhood to the city's ware-
house area, as the Lower Landing entered its prime period as
a transfer point for goods onto rail cars headed for the
prairies. Likewise, railroads filled the valley of Trout and
Phalen Creeks to raise the rail bed out of the floodplain and
afford trains an easier ascent up the slope north of the river.
As Nininger, bypassed by the railroad, withered and
slowly died off as a population center, the rail transportation
to Chicago spurred the 1886 creation of South St. Paul as a
stockyard town. In fact, the story of South St. Paul maybe
seen as a microcosm of this period's developments. Although
located on the Mississippi, the river was a secondary factor in
the city's development and transportation network. Cattle
170
came in and meat went out by rail. Meat processors did,
however, employ the river to carry away animal wastes.
At the beginning of the railroad era, the population dis-
tribution within the corridor was centered in the cities of
Minneapolis and St. Paul. Minneapolis in 1865 was home
to approximately 4,700 people, while St. Paul's population
stood at approximately 13,000." The railroad era saw
these two cities grow explosively, in a series of "booms" fol-
lowed by periods of relative stability. Between 1865 and
1880, Minneapolis grew from 4,700 to 47,000, while St.
Paul's population tripled to more than 41,000. By 1900,
St. Paul had quadrupled again to 163,000, while
Minneapolis had grown even faster to 202,000."
With the establishment of railroads, land uses along
urban riverfronts changed dramatically, as industrial and
commercial uses replaced residential land uses. In part, this
was a matter of economics: riverfront land became too valu-
able for housing. In part, it was a matter of aesthetics: river -
front land was too dose to dangerous and dirty industrial
developments for all but the very poorest inhabitants. And,
in part, the transition was a measure of the growing central-
ization of regional transportation patterns on the railroad.
By the turn of the century, river navigation (other than tim-
ber) had all but ceased, and railroads were carrying passen-
gers and freight from Minneapolis and St. Paul to destina-
tions all over the region.
In addition to altering land use patterns in existing
urban areas, the development of rail networks throughout
Minnesota served to centralize the population. Hamlets off
the rail alignment withered, disappeared or moved to more
favorable locations on the new lines. Moreover, the develop-
ment of shops and other ancillary functions in some cities
and towns guaranteed a certain level of employment and
economic development. The result was the elimination of
numerous small hamlets along the river and the concentra-
tion of population and economic resources in fewer places.
Within the city of Minneapolis, river -oriented residen-
tial development concentrated in three areas and emerged at
different times. The "Gateway Residential Complex" at the
171
west end of the Hennepin Avenue Bridge grew up with the
emergence of Minneapolis in the 1850s.26 It was moved out
by the 1880s, as railroads and other industrial land uses
came to dominate the riverfront at the falls. Joseph
Stipanovich has written that Poles lived along the riverfront
in northeast Minneapolis and that residential districts
emerged along the river in north Minneapolis, as workers
moved close to their places of employment in the sawmills."
The most romanticized community along the river -
front in Minneapolis was `Bohemian Flats," located on the
river bottom flats below the University of Minnesota West
Bank campus (Figure 6, following page). The flats communi-
ty emerged in the 1880s and existed until the city cleared
the land of residences in the early 1930s. Many in this
neighborhood subsisted on wages earned at nearby brew-
eries, liberally supplemented by gathering lumber and logs
that had washed over the falls from the dozens of sawmills
upstream (Figure 5). According to Millett, a skilled gatherer
could pull in as much as 300 cords of wood in a good year.
Although termed "bohemian," in fact, people of many
nationalities lived in the small collection of wooden houses
FIGURE 5. Gathering wood at Bohemian Flats, 1887. Minnesota
Historical Society.
"Ir
Is
r` •a
r
_ F a
r
2
1
• _ � , �,,,• • e.. e 1 777 Ys.„. � a .-: �.` �' �, .. -
173
along dirt streets running parallel to the river. Regular.
s
spring floods kept investment in larger buildings to a mini -
1
mum, although the flats still boasted a church, a store and
other nonresidential buildings. The St. Anthony Water
Power Company owned the land at Bohemian Flats and in
the 1880s rented house lots for S 12 per year. Z"
With 1,200 people by 1900, Bohemian Flats probably
ranked as the largest river flats settlement in the MNRRA
corridor, including the Italian neighborhood on the Upper
Levee in St. Paul and the community of, first, Jewish and,
later, Latin American residents on St. Paul's West Side. All
these communities shared a common history and spatial
arrangement. Home to the poorest and most recent of the
area's immigrant populations, they typically featured small
wooden houses, board fences, cows, some stores, saloons,
perhaps a brick apartment building (where investors felt the
floods would not harm them) and quite often a church. The
river flats settlements grew most rapidly during the region-
al population and economic boom of the 1880s. By and
large, these settlements disappeared with various urban
renewal schemes after World War II. Minneapolis cleared
most of Bohemian Flats during the 1930s, when it began
plans for a municipal barge docking facility on the site. Not
until 1963, however, did the last resident vacate the flats,
allowing it to become a coal terminal .21
The railroad period saw a mixed pattern of residential
development away from the downtown center in
Minneapolis. For the most part, however, the riverfront
upstream from St. Anthony Falls was industrialized by the
1890s." Rising land prices pushed out even prosperous
owners with large houses. Immediately around the falls, the
land use conversion was total. Nicollet Island became the
site of fashionable homes beginning in the 18 70s, but grad-
ually the island became separated into distinct industrial,
commercial, and residential zones. Industrial development
completely replaced the large houses along the bluffs on the
river's west side, just below the falls, by the 1880s."
FIGURE 6. Bohemian Flats, 1880. Minnesota Historical Society.
x
Further downstream from the falls, residential develop-
ment assumed a middle class look Beginning in the 1880s,
at the suggestion of the renowned landscape architect
H.W.S. Cleveland, the Minneapolis Park Board began buying
tracts of land along the river between Riverside Park (near
the present University of Minnesota West Bank campus) and
Minnehaha Park to the south." The presence of parkland,
coupled with the topographical pattern that put the river at
the bottom of a 100 -foot gorge, helped create an attractive
neighborhood. This area, comprising the present Seward,
Longfellow, and Cedar -Riverside neighborhoods on the west
side of the river, remains poorly understood in terms of its
precise historical development.
A number of distinct river communities also developed
within St. Paul during the late nineteenth and early twenti-
eth centuries. The Upper Levee and West Side Flats both
solidified and expanded during this period, as earlier scat-
tered settlement saw a large population influx in the 1880s
(Figure 7)." Both of these communities originated as squat-
ter settlements on land unattractive to anyone who could
afford to live elsewhere. In contrast, the Donnelley atlas of
1892 shows platted subdivisions in the Highwood area,
with curving streets indicating either a steep bluff or an
intent for a picturesque suburban enclave. Although full
development of Highwood would only come after World
War II, its origins as a settlement began as a railroad -era
amenity suburb that took advantage of the views offered
from the bluffs south of downtown St. Paul and from the
Dayton Bluff neighborhood.' Farther north along the river
in St. Paul, near the border with Minneapolis, the Merriam
Park neighborhood became established. Like Highwood and
Reserve Township immediately to the south, Merriam Park
was annexed by the city in 18 8 7, bringing St. Paul approxi-
mately to its current spatial extent. Reserve Township, cur-
rently the St. Paul neighborhoods of Macalester-Groveland
and Highland Park, was organized in 1858 but remained
largely farmland until the 1950s."
Writing in 1875, St. Paul historian J. Fletcher
Williams summarized St. Paul's evolving relation to the
FIGURE 7. Little Italy on the Upper Levee, St. Paul, 1908. Minnesota
Historical Society.
river: "of late years, the opening of navigation has ceased to
be of any importance or interest. Our railroads have
changed all that." St. Paul early established a rail connec-
tion to the Minnesota River valley and from there to the
opening wheat fields of the Red River Valley and the
Dakotas.36 This period saw other changes in St. Paul's rela-
tion to the river as well. Dr. Justus Ohage purchased Harriet
Island (government lot 6) from 20 landowners and con-
veyed it to the city in 1900 for public recreation. At
Harriet Island's opening on June 9, 1900, the 40 -acre
island had paths, two pavilions, and a bathhouse. In 1929
the island and its facilities were transferred to the St. Paul
Parks Department, and subsequent work on the island by
Depression -era public relief crews included the construction
of the existing pavilion, designed by St. Paul's city architect
Clarence W. Wigington."
174
Atlases of Minneapolis and St. Paul, which began to be
published more systematically in the 1880s, give a some-
times -misleading picture of residential growth during this
period. Often riverfront areas are shown as platted, when
in fact housing was not built until much later. For example,
Crosby Farm, located on the floodplain below present-day
Highland Park in St. Paul, was platted in 10 -acre lots early
in the twentieth century, although the farm had very little
non-farm development at the time it was made part of the
city's park system in the 1950s."
During the railroad era, land use and residential pat-
terns became more economically and socially stratified.
Industry took over much riverfront, particularly near the
downtowns of St. Paul and Minneapolis. With industry
came noise, disagreeable smells, and danger, to add to the
seasonal threat from floods. Historian Larry Millett
describes the resulting class separation:
The hierarchy of altitude was especially strong in the
Twin Cities in the late nineteenth century. While the
175
rich resided in their mansions on Summit Hill in St. Paul
and Lawry Hill in Minneapolis, the poorestTwin Citians
were tucked away (out of sight and mind) in deep holes
like Swede Hollow or on the floodplain below the river
bluffs. Isolated from the city by barriers of language, cul-
ture, and geography, these enclaves were often identified
with a particular ethnic group, although most were actu-
ally quite diverse in their makeup."
Historical geographers David Lanegran and Paul
Donald Hesterman argue that the river assumed a double
character to area residents during this period. For the
wealthy, who could afford to move uphill away from the
grime and danger, the river became an aesthetic amenity,
with river views a large part of the attractiveness of places
such as St. Paul's Summit Avenue. Yet areas close to the
river grew unattractive and became the home of the city's
poorest residents. Enclaves such as Nicollet Island in
Minneapolis, where an upper middle class community flour
ished in the midst of the chaos of the St. Anthony Falls
industrial area, seemed the exception to the rule. The rela-
tive isolation of the island, perched on a limestone shelf out
of the reach of all but the highest floodwaters, may have
contributed to its anomalous position."'
Outside the major cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis,
several fairly distinctive patterns began to emerge. Some
locations did not adapt to the new transportation system
and declined during this period. Some places that had early
assumed regional prominence retained some importance but
began to be overshadowed by Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Hastings serves as a prime example of this pattern. Other
places, such as Richfield (which once bordered on the river)
and Newport, assumed a distinctive importance in relation
to the central cities, often as vacation spots. Yet other cities,
such as the industrial town of South St. Paul, emerged dur-
ing this period as a direct response to the new railroad trans-
portation pattern.
Edward Duffield Neill's History of Dakota County and
the City of Hastings (1881) provides a vivid sketch of
9
Hastings at that point in its history. Hastings certainly
impressed Neill (or whoever was actually conducting the
research on the town; see endnote 2), as it had attained a
population of some 4,000 within three decades of its estab-
lishment. The city had an air of enduring permanence; as
the writer noted, "It appears to the eye as if having been
endowed with perpetual prosperity and as if having always
existed in the same form as today ... it is a type of western
achievement."' Impressive though that achievement may
have been, the writer felt that it could have been greater: "It
is scarcely doubtful, that that city (Hastings) would have
had a much greater growth without them (railroads). 112
Thus, within 50 years of the first permanent American set-
tlement in the MNRRA corridor, new transportation systems
were creating "winners" and "losers" among the region's
communities as they vied for prominence.
Some places in the MNRRA corridor that grew up dur-
ing the last third of the nineteenth century achieved their
greatest visibility as satellites of the larger cities. Richfield,
a farming township that had been established in 1858 with
the rest of the corridor west of the river, became a tourist
attraction in the 1880s. Hotels, landscaped gardens, a new
railroad depot (the "Princess Depot") and pleasure drives all
lined the vicinity of the river near its junction with
Minnehaha Creek. Now part of the city of Minneapolis, the
area surrounding Minnehaha Falls became a formally desig-
nated park in 1885.' There was a different impetus for
growth in what is now the community of Newport.
Originally the site of a mission to the Dakota (1837-42), a
railway village called Red Rock grew up there in the 1860s.
In 1869 the village became the site of summer religious
revivals held by the Red Rock Camp Meeting Association, an
affiliate of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Red Rock
derived its name from a five -foot -long red rock, painted with
stripes and venerated by the Dakota during their residence
in the area. The rock was formerly on the bank of the river;
it was moved in the early twentieth century to a point near
the railroad station."
Railroads, by allowing the rapid transport of freshly
cut meat, made South St. Paul one of the winners. Alpheus
Beede Stickney of St. Paul formed the Minnesota and
Northwestern Railroad to establish a line between St. Paul
and Iowa, which would then connect to lines running to
Chicago. When the line opened in 1885, the trip between
St. Paul and Chicago was reduced to 13 hours, 30 minutes.
The railroad and the river location just downstream from
St. Paul were an important part of the marketing of "South
Park," as the residential development was initially called.
Dakota County gave land for industry, particularly car
shops for the railroad. With James J. Hill as one of his back-
ers, Stickney incorporated the St. Paul Union Stockyards on
June 30, 1886, with the stockyards to be built on 260
swampy riverfront acres that needed to be filled before con-
struction could take place. Separating from West St. Paul
Township, South St. Paul was formed in 1887 and saw a
period of rapid growth in the 1890s, as its stockyards
expanded to include meat processing and slaughterhouses."
The Modern River
Automobiles increasingly defined the urban and suburban
landscape after World War II. Since the general end date for
this study is about 1950, this era is not examined in depth.
The central purpose of this study has been to provide the
context for sites that could merit inclusion in the National
Register. Unless sites are of exceptional significance, they
must be older than 50 years to be listed on the Register.
This means that most properties constructed after the early
1950s are not yet eligible." Nevertheless, a few comments
are in order. (Figure 8.)
After World War II, the fabric of urban settlement in
the river corridor underwent significant change, as the com-
bination of growing population and developing regional
highway systems pushed population rapidly away from the
central cities. This development, popularly characterized as
"sprawl," was responsible for the conversion of farm coun-
try in places such as Coon Rapids into acres of suburban
development. At the same time, the residential pattern that
Lanegran and Martin call "suburban in city" filled in the
176
FIGURE 8. East River Road, Fridley, 194 S. Thje Northern Pump Paul become the effective head of navigation until the
Company is the large building complex. Minneapolis Star Journal
Tribune Photograph, Minnesata Historical Society.
Highwood and Highland Park sections of St. Paul, complet-
ing the residential urban growth within the city limits of
the area's largest cities.'
Urban development in the MNRRA corridor represents
many processes. Where cities began, how quickly and fully
they developed, and their relation to the river varied in
important ways. Some cities began as river towns, some as
railroad towns and others as suburban communities. Some
feature all three types of development. The MNRRA corri-
dor's communities possess sites and structures that repre-
sent each era, each type of growth. These sites offer an
opportunity to educate residents and visitors about the
area's urban development.
Geology, geography, Native American history, the deci-
sions of explorers and traders, and the focus on a variety of
economic activities all played a role in how the MNRRA cor-
ridor's cities formed and grew. St. Anthony Falls and the
gorge downstream helped make Minneapolis the nation's
leading flour and timber milling center and dictated that St.
177
1960s. Native American occupation of lands east and west
of the river determined where and how fast settlers moved
into the area. Zebulon Pike's 1805 decision to acquire the
Fort Snelling reservation determined urban development in
and around the reserve for decades, and the federal govern-
ment still occupies lands acquired by Pike. Early settlement
along the river and the river's nearly level, floodplain grade
drew railroads. The railroads then began altering the
processes of urban development, as the streetcar and auto-
mobile would do subsequently.
The Twin Cities metropolitan area is the largest urban
center between Chicago and Denver. Urban development in
the metropolitan river corridor is significant not only
regionally but nationally. The history of industrialization,
transportation, settlement and evolving economies is
indicative of the Area's uniqueness and illustrative of broad-
er regional and national processes.
FIGURE 1. Coutemplating the river. Wingdams below Niuinger, rySinu., 1891. Photo by HeuryE Bosse. Nininger lies just above Hastings, on the west
side of the Mississippi River.
Novel and Familiar Places
he Dakota warriors who beached their
canoes at the mouth of Phalen Creek,
Of below Daytons Bluff, in 1680, added
another story to a deeply storied place. They landed in the
shadow of ancient Native American burials on the bluff
above and just upstream of the future village site of
Kaposia, which their descendants would inhabit over a
century later. Their French captives heralded the coming
of Europeans, the impending transformation of the river
and the addition of many more stories. Neither the
Dakota nor the French could have imagined the fill, build-
ings, mills, railroad yards, and roads that would obliterate
Phalen Creek.
Hundreds of places that harbor stories as rich and
deep lie throughout the MNRRA corridor. When identified,
preserved and interpreted, they possess the power to evoke
a sense of romance and adventure, disgust and regret,
amazement and community pride. They are places with
the ability to teach children and adults about how the envi-
ronment, landscape and economy of the place in which
they live or are just visiting came to be, about what has
been lost and what has been gained. They are places that
define the identity of many communities within the
MNRRA corridor. This study has identified many such
places, but many others remain to be discovered and have
their stories told.
179
Mis-Placed
People care most about places they can relate to.
Unfortunately, too many people have forgotten what their
connection to historic sites within the corridor is, or have
not had the opportunity to learn about them. Some people
may be new residents, from some other city, state or country.
Or, the people who had the direct connection may have
passed away long ago. The more historically distant a place
or event is, the harder people may find it to connect to that
place. They cannot feel the sense of place people who once
lived there felt. In many cases direct connection is no longer
possible. No jobs for log drivers remain. The water -powered
flour and timber mills are gone, as are the Dakota villages,
the natural river and the natural falls. People today cannot
imagine the anticipation and excitement generated by the
arrival of the first steamboat at Hastings or St. Paul or
Anoka in the 1850s. (Granted, the more ancient a place is,
the more romantic or mysterious many people find it.) The
challenge today is to recover a sense of place, a sense of con-
tinuity. The evaluation, preservation and interpretation of
historic sites and places offer a way to meet this challenge.
Recovering a Sense of Place
For residents of the Twin Cities metropolitan area, the
MNRRA corridor is like a big, old house. It has many famil-
iar rooms that they visit often and know intimately. Other
x
rooms they do not know as well. Some contain deep closets
that they have never explored. Some hide old trunks, treas-
ure chests, that they have yet to open. Each one reveals
more about the people who have lived in the house. The
smells each one emits, the texture of old clothes, the sight
of tattered pictures of people they know, though much
younger, and people whose names and faces are a mystery
give them a deeper appreciation of the place they call home.
The sounds of an old record (if they can find a place to play
it) bring alive the voices and culture of another time. Their
place is more than they knew it to be, and they value it
more. By their association with the contents of each trunk,
they are more than they thought they were.
The MNRRA corridor holds places with stories that can
evoke all the senses. Imagine the sights and sounds of the
glacial River Warren as it plummeted over its limestone bed
in St. Paul some 12,000 years ago. People can see that lime-
stone strewn along the valley floor or hanging at the bluff
tops through much of the valley below St. Anthony Falls.
They can walk up and touch it. They can crumble in their
hands the fragile St. Peter Sandstone that underlies the lime-
stone and allowed the falls to retreat. They may not want to
imagine the smell of a river so rancid a person would bury
her nose in her coat when passing by. Yet by remembering,
they may commit themselves to making the Mississippi
River cleaner and healthier. Try to imagine the river "free
from everything that would render it impure, either to the
sight or taste," as Stephen Long described it in 1817.'
People can learn to appreciate what a place meant to
someone long ago, and in doing so discover that a place
holds a richer and deeper meaning than they had thought.
David Glassberg, in his article "Public History and the
Study of Memory," suggests that `By and large tourists look
for novelty in a landscape, what is not back home, whereas
local residents look at the landscape as a web of memory
sites and social interactions. 112
Historic sites and landscapes
in the MNRRA corridor possess the novelty to reward
tourists for leaving their armchairs and the continuity to
ground residents new and old.
Glassberg contends that "History offers ways ... to ori-
ent oneself in the environment." Different types of historic
sites, he says, "connect stories of past events to a particular
present environment"' He uses environment in the broad-
est sense, meaning one's surroundings. For people sitting
on the riverbank anywhere along the corridor, the environ-
ment they see is far different from that which existed one
hundred years ago (Figure 1). Residents and visitors are sur-
prised to learn that their predecessors could wade across the
Mississippi during low water. The idea of a steamboat with
a draft of only 24 inches grinding on a gravel bar near St.
Paul or Zebulon Pike walking his boats up the shallow,
frigid, October river above St. Anthony Falls seems far-
fetched. They see the river rise during floods, but they do
not comprehend how the dams keep it from falling to its
natural low-water stage. People have forgotten why naviga-
tion boosters pressed so hard to change the river. And they
may not understand what has been lost and what has been
gained. Understanding historic sites and their historical
contexts is not just about neat places; it is about under-
standing how we got to where we are today.
Place stories reveal how the area's relationship to the
river has changed over the centuries. As the relationship
between the Mississippi River and its inhabitants evolved,
people treated it differently, and their concern for how they
treated it changed. To the Dakota, the river was a highway
and a source of natural resources, which they did not take
for granted. The river and places along it (the Red Rock and
St. Anthony Falls, for example) possessed spirits they prayed
to. Steamboat pilots offered their own prayers to a river
they believed had superhighway potential, if adequately
transformed. Lumber and flour millers valued the river as a
transportation route and for the waterpower offered, and
not just at St. Anthony Falls but throughout the corridor.
Transforming the river's physical and ecological character
was unquestionably good to them. To railroad builders, the
river valley offered a level grade but little more. People
began turning their backs to the river. It became a conven-
ient gutter for their mounting quantities of personal and
180
industrial wastes. As people fouled the river, they tried to
get even farther away. The beaches and bathhouses at
Harriet Island closed. Few could stand the stench assaulting
them if they tried to boat on the river, and some found it dif-
ficult to drive near it. To the residents of little Italy, the
West Side, Bohemian Flats and other floodplain communi-
ties, the polluted river meant cheap land. They stayed by it,
weaving new stories. When Locks and Dams 1 and 2
stopped the pollution from flowing away, St. Paul became
the first city on the Mississippi River to build a sewage
treatment plant (on the village site of Kaposia). As the
water has improved, people have turned to face the river
again. A new view of the river is evolving, and the river's
history is playing an important role.
Glassberg believes that the river's history can help "fes -
idents and visitors alike to see what ordinarily cannot be
seen: both memories attached to places and the larger social
and economic processes that shaped how the places were
made."' Here Glassberg is referring to the historic context
of a place. Because it would be impossible for this study to
detail the individual history of each historically important
place, the focus has been on the historic contexts within
which many places in the MNRRA corridor gain their histor-
ical significance. The Mississippi River we see, hear, touch,
smell and taste (many Twin Cities residents drink river
water from their taps) is defined by past social and econom-
ic processes and by the people caught up in those processes.
This is true of the land along the river as well.
This historic resources study reveals the great variety
and depth of historic places within the corridor. It is just a
beginning. Communicating the stories of those places to
the corridor's visitors and residents in a way that helps
them connect to the river is an important and challenging
task. Identifying and preserving important historic sites
and places so that the National Park Service and others can
interpret them is equally important and challenging. As
Congress found and as this study has reinforced, the
MNRRA corridor holds many "nationally significant" his-
torical and cultural resources. Because of their significance,
181
Congress declared that "There is a national interest in the
preservation, protection, and enhancement of these
resources for the benefit of the people of the United States."'
Through research, management and protection of historic
resources, and with interpretation, the National Park
Service can help MNRRA communities better celebrate their
unique and common heritage and share that heritage with
regional, national and even international audiences.
FIGURE 2. Detail, Wingdamsbelow Nininger, Minn., 1891. By Henry
E Bosse. St. Paul District, Carps ofEugiueers.
557016_Book_r 8/5/03 8:26 AM Page 182
Government Documents
City of St. Paul Records. Permit Applications. St. Paul City Hall.
U. S. Congress, House. Congressional Record. Vol. 36, pt. 3, 1903
U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers. Annual Reports ofthe ChiefofEngineers.
Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1876-1940.
War Department, Office ofthe Chief of Engineers. Circular No. 14, April 4,
1905. National Archives and Records Administration, Record Croup 77,
Entry 103, Box 1408, F 58362, vol. 36, pt. 3, (1903).
U.S. Congress, House. Survey of Upper Mississippi River. 39th Congress, 2d
secs. Ex. Doc. No. 58.
U.S. Congress, House. Survey ofthe UpperMississippi. 40th Cong. 2d sess.
Exec. Doc. No. 247.
U.S.Congress. House_ Mississippi RiverbetweenMissouri RiverandSt. Pard,
Minn. 59th Cong., 2nd sess., H. lloc. 341.
U.S. Congress, House_ Use of Surplus Waterl'7owingoverGovemmentllamin
Mississippi Riverbetween St. Paul and Minneapolis, Minn. 60th Cong., 1st
sess., Doc. No. 218..
U.S. Congress, House_ Mississippi River, St. Paul to Minneapolis, Minn. 61st
Cong., 2d sess., H. Doc. 741.
U.S. Congress, House_ "An Act To authorize the Creat Northern Development
Company to construct a dam across the Mississippi River from a point in
Hennepin County to a point in Anoka County, Minnesota." 61st Cong., 3rd
sess., Chapter 12.
U.S. Congress, House. Laws ofthe United States Relating to the Improvement of
Rivers andHarbors. 62nd Cong., 3d sess., Doc No. 1491, vol.1
( Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1913). How many volumes?
Ask Jean Schmidt.
U.S. Congress, House, Laws of the United States Relating to the Improvement
of Rivers and Harbors, v. 2, 62nd Cong., 3d sess., Doc. No. 1491,
( Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1913), p. 704.
U.S. Congress, House. Mississippi RiverfromMinneapolis tolike Repin. Report
from the Chief ofEngineers on Preliminary Examination and Survey of
Mississippi Riverfrom Minneapolis to lake Pepin, with a View to Improvement by
the Construction oflocksand Dams. 69th Cong. 2d sess., DocmncntNo. 583.
Section 701.(a) Findings, Public Law 100-696, November 18, 1988, 102
Stat 45 99, Title VII -Mississippi National River and Recreation Area.
Mississippi River Commission (MRC). "Detail Map of the Upper Mississippi
River from Minneapolis, Minnesota, to Lake Itasca, in Seventy Eight Sheets,
from Surveys 1898- 1904."
Mississippi River Commission (MRC), "Detail. Map ofthe Upper Mississippi
River from the Mouth ofthe Ohio River to Minneapolis, Minnesota, in Eighty -
Nine Sheets."
Mississippi River Coordinating Commission and National Park Service,
Comprehensive Management Plan, (May 1995).
Newspapers
Anoka County Union Herald
Minneapolis tribune
St PaulPioneerl%ss
UpperMississippi River -Bulletin
n
Books, Articles & Manuscripts
Adams, John S. and Barbara L VanOrasek. Minneapolis-St.1'ard. people,
Place, and Publiclife. Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota
Press, 1993.
Anfinson, John O. "The Secret History of the Mississippi's Earliest Locks and
Dams." Minnesota History 54:6 (Summer 1995):254-67.
. Henry Bosse's Views ofthe UpperMississippi River. St. Paul,
Minnesota: St. Paul District, Corps of Engineer, March 1996. 28 pp.
Anfinson, Scott E "Archaeology of the Central. Minneapolis Riverfront " Her
Minnesota Archaeologist, 48:1-2 and 49:1-2 (1989 and 1990).
Anderson, Cary Clayton. Kinsmen ofAnotherKind, Dakota -White Relations in
the Upper Mississippi Valley, 1650-1862. Lincoln: University of Nebraska
Press, 1984; St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society, 1997.
Atwater, Isaac, Ed. History ofthe City ofMinneapolis. New York: Munsell &
Co., 1893.
Babcock, Willoughby M. Jr. "Sioux Villages in Minnesota prior to 183 7."
Minnesota Archaeologist 12 (October, 1945):126-46.
Balaban, Nancy H. and Howard C. Hobbs, Eds. GeologicAthis of Dakota
County, Minnesota. St. Paul: University of Minnesota, Minnesota Geological
Survey, 1990.
Barns, William D. "Oliver Hudson Kelley and the Genesis of the Grange A
Reappraisal." Agricultural History 41 Only 1967):229-42.
Barry, E. J. "Water Transportation and Grain Marketing." In American
Cooperation, 1961 Washington DC: American Institute for Cooperation,
1961, pp. 365-67.
Birk,DouglasA. "Grey Cloud: An Archaeological Approach" the Minnesota
Archaeologist32 (1973): 1-2.
Bleed,Petcr. TheArchaeologyofPetagaPoint. Hiel4eceramicComponent.
Minnesota prehistoric Archaeology Series. St. Paul: Minnesota Historical
Society, 1969.
Blegen, Theodore. Minnesota, AHistory ofthe State. Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 1975, 1963.
Borchert, John ct. al. Legacy ofMinneapolis: preservation Amid Change.
Bloomington, Minnesota: Voyageur, 1983.
Brac•men, John, Robert H. Bremner, and David Brody, Eds. Change and
Continuity in twentieth CenturyAnrerica: the 1920's. Columbus: Ohio State
University Press, 1968.
Brick, Greg. "St. Paul Underground -What Happened to Fountain Cave -the Real
Birthplace of St. Paul?" Ramsey County History 29:4 ( Winter, 199 5):4-15
Brneggermann, Cary J. "Beer Capital of the State - St. Paul's Historic Family
Breweries." Ramsey County History 16:2 (1981): 3-15.
Buck, Solon J. A Study ofAgricultural Organization and Its political, Economic
and Social Manifestations, 1870-1880. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1933.
Burnley, Charles T. "Case of the Vanishing Historic Site or What Happened to
Carver's Cave?" Ramsey County History 4:2 (Fall, 1967): 8-12.
Carroll, Jane. "Dams and Damagcs: The Ojibway, the United States, and the
Mississippi Headwaters Reservoirs." Minnesota History (Spring, 1990):2-15.
Case, John H. "Historical Notes of Grey Cloud Island and Its Vicinity."
Minnesota Historical Society Collections v. 15 (1915): 371-3 78.
182
557016_Book_r 8/5/03 8:26 AM Page 183
Clark, Clifford E. Jr., Ed. Minnesota in a Century of Change: Hie State and Its
People Since 1900. St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1989.
Clayton, L. Pleistocene Geology ofthe SuperiorRegion. Wisconsin,
Information Circular No. 46 (Madison: Wisconsin Geological and Natural
History Survey, 1984).
Clements, Ke•ndrickA. "Herbert Hoover and Conservation," American
Historical Review 89 (February 1984): 67-88.
Cooper, John Milton Jr. Pivotal Decades: the United States, 1900-1920. New
York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1990.
Cooper, W. S. "'the history of the upper Mississippi River in late Wisconsin and
postglacial time. Minnesota Geological Survey Bulletin 26 (193 5). 116 pp.
Crouton, William. Nature's Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West. New York:
W. W. Norton & Company, 1991.
Corder, David L. Curtice's RevisedAtlis ofthe City of St Pard. St. Paul,
Minnesota: H.M. Smyth Printing Co., 1908.
Daly, Capt. "Nate" [Nathan]. Backs and Rails: Incidents in tire Life ofa
Minnesota Pioneer. Walker, Minnesota: the Cass County Pioneer, 1931.
Dixon, Frank Haigh. AliafficHistory ofthe Mississippi RiverSystem.
National Waterways Commission. DocumentNo. ll (Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1909).
Dobncy, Frederick J. River -Engineers, ofthe Middle Mississippi. A History ofthe
St. Louis District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1978.
Dodd, Donald B. and Dodd, Wynelle S. Historical Statistics ofthe United
States, 1790-1970. 1heMidwest. The University of Alabama Press, 1973.
Donnelley, Reuben H. Donnelley's Atlas ofthe City of St Paul, Minnesota. 2
vols. Chicago: The Corporation, 1892.
Federal Writers' Project, Works Progress Administration, Minnesota. the
Bohemian flats. St. Paul, Minnesota: Minnesota Historical Society,1986;
first published Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1941.
"Flooding and Untimely Thaws Test Contractors' Mettle on River Job,"
Construction Bulletin (March 6, 19 52):36-41.
Folwell, William Watts. AHistory ofMinnesota. 4 vols. 1. Rev. Ed. St. Paul:
Minnesota Historical Society, 1956-69; third printing, 1979.
Franks, C. L. "Inland Waterways Advocate, Col. George C. Lambert, Dics:
Among Pioneers to Back Channel in Upper Mississippi" Upper Mississippi
River -Bulletin 3:3 (March 1934):1.
Cates, CharicsM., Ed. Five Fur ltadersofthe Northwest. Minnesota Historical
Society Press, 1965.
Gibbon, Guy E. TheSheffield Site: An Oneota Site on the St Croix River
Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology Series No. 11 St. Paul: Minnesota
Historical Society, 1973.
Gibbon, Guy, and C. A. H. Caine_ "'the Middle to late Woodland'fransition in
Eastern Minnesota." Midcontlnentallonmal ofArchaeology 5:1(1980):5 7-72.
Classberg, David. "Public History and the Study of Memory." The Public
Historian 18:2 (Spring 1996): 7-23.
Goodrich, Albert M. History of Anoka County and tire lbwns of Champlin and
Hayton in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Minneapolis: Hennepin Publishing
Co., 1905. Reprinted by Anoka Bicentennial Commission, 19 76.
Goth, Dorothy Ed., St. Paullark'sHeritage.AHistory ofSaintlaull'arkonlhe
Mississippi, 1887-1895. Cottage Grove, Minnesota: Inky Fingers Press, 1985.
183
Guelcher, Leslie A. The History ofNininger... More lhanlustaDream."
Stillwater, Minnesota: Croixsidc Press, 1982.
Hall, Steve. Fort Snelling: Colossus ofthe Wilderness. St. Paul: Minnesota
Historical Society Press, 1987.
Haller, Lisa, Ivelise Brasch, Gary Phelps, and Bill Walston. "Crossings." Over
the Years 31:1(Dakota County Historical Society, September 1991):1-25.
Hartsough, Mildred. From Canoe to Steel Barge. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 1934.
Days, Samuel. Conservation and the Gospel ofEffwlency: the IWgressive
Conservation Movement, 1890-1920. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 1959.
Havighurst, Walter. Upper -Mississippi, AWillerness Saga. New York: Farrar,
& Rinehart; New York: J. J. tittle and Ives Company, 1944.
Hennepin, Louis. FatherlouisHennepin'sDescription oflouisiana, Newly
Discovered tothe Southwest ofNewFrance by Order ofthe King. Minneapolis
The University of Minnesota Press, 1938.
Hestennan, Paul Donald. "'the Mississippi and St. Paul: Change is a Constant
for River and the City that Shaped It "Ramsey County History 21:1(1986): 3-
22.
Hill, Alberta Kirchner. "Out With the Fleet on the Upper Mississippi, 18 98-
19 17." Minnesota History (September, 1961):283-97.
Holmquist, June Drerming, Ed. They Chose Minnesota: A Survey ofthe State's
Ethnic Groups. St. Paul, Minnesota: Minnesota Historical Society Press,
1981.
Hoops, Richard. ARiverofGrain: the Evolution of Commercial Navigation on
the Upper -Mississippi River. Madison: University of Wisconsin Madison,
College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Research Report, R3584.
Hoover, Herbert. "'the Improvement of Our Mid -West Waterways." the
Annals oftheAmericanAcademy 135 (January 1928):15-24.
Hull-Walski, Deborah A. and Frank Walski. `'fhere's Trouble a -Brewin': The
Brewing and Bottling Industries at Harpers Ferry, West Virginia." Historical
Archaeology (1994): 106-21.
Jenks, A. E. "Minnesota's Brown's Valley Man and Associated Burial Artifacts.'
MemoirsoftheAmericanAntliropologicalAssociation. No.49(1937).
Jensen, John O. "Gently Down the Stream: An Inquiry into the History of
Transportation on the Northern Mississippi River and the Potential for
Submerged Cultural Resources," Wisconsin Archeologist 73:1-2 (March-Junc,
1992): 61-110.
Johnson, Elden and P S.Taylor. Spring Lake Archcology: the Lee Mill Cave.
Science Bulletin No. 3, part 2. St. Paul., Minucsota: fhe Science Museum of
the St. Paul Institute, 1956.
. Spring Lake Archeology: the. Sorg Site. Science Bulletin No. 3, part 3
St. Paul., Minnesota: The Science Museum of the St. Paul Institute, 1959.
. The Prehistoric Peoples of Minnesota. Minnesota Prehistoric
Archaeology Series No. 3. St. Paul.: Minnesota Historical. Society, 1988;
revised third edition.
Johnson, Elden, Ed. Aspects of Upper Great lakesAnthropology: Iapers in
Honor ofLkoydA.Wilford. Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology Series. No. 11
St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society, 1974.
Johnson, Leland. Engineers on the Twin Rivers. AHistory ofthe Nashville
District. Nashville: U.S. Army Engineer District, Nashville, 19 78.
557016_Book_r 8/5/03 8:26 AM Page 184 -
Kane, Lucile M. "Rivalry for a River, the Twin Cities and the Mississippi."
Minnesota History 37:8 (December, 1961):309-23.
. 17zePal&ofSt.Anthony:lheWateditllthatBuiltMinneapolis. St.Paul
Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1987; originally published as the
WaterfallthatRuiltaCity: Hie Falls of St. Anthony in Minneapolis, 1966.
Kane, Lucile M., June D. Holmquist, and Carolyn Gilman, Eds. 1heNorthern
Expeditions ofSteyhen H. Long, thelournals off BI 7 and 1823 and Related
Documents. St. Paul: Minnesota Historical. Society Press, 1978.
Kane, Lucile M. and Alan Ominsky. Twin Cities: Apictorial History of Saint
paulandMinneapolis. St.Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1983.
Keating, William H. Narrative of an Expedition to the Source ofthe St. Peter's
River, Lake Winnepeek, lake ofthe Woods, &c; performed in the Year 1823 by
tine Order ofthe Don. 1. C. Calhoun, Secretary of War, under the Command of
Stephen H. Long, U.S.TE., 2 vols. Minneapolis: Koss and Haines, 1959.
Keegan, W. E Ed. Emergent Horticultural Economics of the Eastern
Woodlands. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 7
Carbondale Southern Illinois University, 1987.
Keen, K. L. and L. C. K. Shane_ "A Continuous Record of Holocene Eolian
Activity and Vegetation Change at Lake Ann, East-Central Minnesota'
Geological Society ofAmerica Bulletin 102 (1990):1646-165 7.
Kerwin, Jerome G. Federal Wmer-PowerLegislation. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1926.
Knox, James C. and D. M. Mickelson, Eds. Late Quaternary Environments of
Wisconsin. Madison: Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, 1974
Kunz, Virginia Brainard. The Mississippi and St. Paul, A short history ofthe
city's ISOyearlove affair with its river. St. Paul., Minnesota: The Ramsey
County Historical Society, 1987.
Lass, William E. Minnesota, AHistory. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1998;
1st edition 1977.
Leverett, Frank. "Moraines and Shorelines of the Lake Superior Basin."
United States Geological Survey Professional Paper (1929). 72 pp.
Leverett, Frank and Frederick W. Sardeson. "Surface formations and agricul-
tural conditions of the south half on Minnesota." Minnesota Geological Survey
Bulletin 14. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1919.
Martin, Jlldith A. and David Lanegran. Where We Live. the Residential
Districts ofMinneapolisand Saintlaul. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Published
by the University of Minnesota Press in association with the Center for Urban
and Regional Affairs, University of Minnesota, 1983.
Martin, L. thephysicalgeographyofWisconsin.Wisconsin Geological and
Natural. History Survey Bulletin 36 Madison, Wisconsin, 1932; second edition.
McGee, W. J. "The Conservation of Natural Resources," Proceedings ofthe
Mississippi Valley Historical Association for the Year 1909-1910, 3 (Cedar
Rapids, Iowa, 1911):361-379.
Merchant, Carolyn, Ed. Major Problems in American Environmental History.
Lexington, Massachusetts: D.C. Heath and Company, 1993.
Merrick, George Byron. Old Times on the UpperMississippi. 1heRecollections
ofa Steamboatl'ilotfrom 1854 to 1863. St. Paul: Minnesota Historical.
Society Press, 1987.
Merritt, Raymond H. Creativity, Conflict & Controversy: AHistory ofthe St
Pard District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington: U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1979.
. Dee Corps, the Environment, and the UpperMississippi RiverRasin.
Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1984.
n
Meyer, Roy W. History ofthe Santee Sioux: United States Indian Policy on Trial.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1967; reprinted 1980.
Michlovic, Michael G. "The Archaeology of the Canning Site." Minnesota
Archaeologist45:1 (1986): 3-36.
Millett, Larry. Lost Twin Cities. St Paul., Minnesota: Minnesota Historical
Society Press, 1992.
Mitchell, Barbara A. Hemisphere Field Services, Inc., "A History of the St.
Paul Municipal Grain Elevator and Sack House." Prepared for the MN RRA as
part of the Historic Resources Study.
Minnesota Geological Survey. Field trip guidebookfor the Upper Mississippi
Valley: Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin. Guidebook Series No. 15. St. Pati:
University of Minnesota, 1987.
Attracts, H. D. and L D. Lehr. A Terrestrial Record of Laurentide Ice Sheet
Reorganization during Heinrich Events. (In press).
Morlan, Robert L. PoliticallrairieFire -The Nonpartisan League, 1915-1922.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1955.
Mott, Mildred. "The Relationship of Historic IndianTribes to Archaeological
Manifestations in Iowa. lowalourreal of History and politics 36:3
(1938):227-314.
Mullin, Francis. "The St. Anthony Falls Navigation Project "proceedings ofthe
American Society of Civil Engineers 89:CO1(March , 1963): 1-18.
Myers, William Starr Ed. The Siatelapersand OtherPubllcWritings ofHerbert
Hoover. 2 vols. Carden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, Doran & company, inc., 1934.
Neill, Edward D. Rev. History of Hennepin County and the City of Minneapolis,
Including Explorers and Pionecrs of Minnesota, and Outlines ofthe History of
Minnesota, by]. Fletcher Williams. Minneapolis, Minnesota: North Star
Publishing Company, 1881.
. History of Ramsey County and the City ofSt. pard. Minneapolis,
Minnesota: North Star Publishing, 1881.
. History of Dakota County and the City of Hastings.Minneapolis,
Minnesota: North Star Publishing, 1881.
. History ofthe UpperMississippi Valley. Minneapolis, Minnesota: North
Star Publishing, 1881.
. "St. Paul and Its Environs." Minnesota History 30(1940):204-219.
Nelson, Martin. "Nine Foot Channel Extension Above St. Anthony Eads." the
Minnesota Engineei-Oune 1960): 6-9.
Parker, John., Ed. lhelournals oflonathan Carver -and Related Documents,
1766-1770. St. Paul, Minnesota: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1976.
Paxson, Frederic L. "Railroads of the Old Northwest, before the Civil War."
Transactions ofthe Wisconsin Academy ofSelences, Arts and Letters 17 (1914):
243-74.
Petersen, William J. "Captains and Cargoes of Early Upper Mississippi
Steamboats." Wisconsin Magazine ofHfstory13(1929-30):224-40.
. Steamboating on the UpperMississippi. Iowa City, Iowa:Doc State
Historical Society of Iowa, 1968.
Pill Zebulon. Sources ofthe Mississippi and the Western Louisiana lirrritory.
Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, Inc. 1966; from Zebulon Pike,
An Account of Expeditions to the Sources ofthe Mississippi, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania: C. & A. Conrad, & Co., 1810.
Pinchot, Gifford. 1heFightforConservation. Seattle, University of
Washington Press 1967; New York: Doubleday, Page & company, 1910.
184
557016_Book_r 8/5/03 8:26 AM Page 185 -
Porter, S. C., Ed. The Late Pleistocene. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
'fester, John K. Minnesota's Natural Heritage, An Ecologicall'erspective.
Press, 1983.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1995.
Upper Mississippi River Improvement Association. Proceedings of the Upper
Turckian, K. K Ed. Late Cenozoicglacial ages. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale
Mississippi RiverinrprovementAssociationConvention. 1902-1917.
University Press, 1971.
Prosser, Richard S. Rails to the North Star. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Dillon
'fwcct, Roald. "A History of Navigation Improvements on the Kock Island
Press, 1966.
Rapids: The Background of Locks and Dam 15." Rock Island, Illinois: U.S.
Army, Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District, April 1980. 15pp.
Quick, Herbert. American Inland Waterways, Their -Relation to Railway
Ransportation and to the National Weyaw; Their Creation, Restoration and
. History ofRansportation on the UpperMississippi & Illinois Rivers.
Maintenance. New York: C. P Putnam's Sons, 1909.
Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1983.
Refsell, Oscar N. "The Farmers'Elevator Movement L. Journalofilolitical.
AHistory ofthe Rock lslandDistrict,U.S.Army,Corps ofEngineers,
Econonry 2l (November 1914): 872-895.
1866-1983. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1984.
Salisbury Robert S. William Windom, Apostle oflbsitiveGovernment. New
Upham,Warnn. The Glacial LakeAgassiz.Geological Society ofAmerica
York: University Press of America, 1993.
Monograph 25 Washington: Government Printing Office, 1895.
Saloutos, Theodore. "'the Rise of the Equity Cooperative Exchange." The
"Kaposia, Indian Town; Once Stood on Site of St. Paul's Depot,
Mississippi Valley Historical Review 32:1(]rme 1945):31-62.
Archaeological Finds." St Paull'ioneerfress, (August 12, 1919), Sec. 2,p.
12.
Sardeson, Frederick W. "Fossils in the St. Peter Sandstone." Minnesota
Academy of Natural SciencesRulletin 3 (1892).
Wcdcl, Mildred M. "Peering at the loway Indians Through the Mist of Time
1630 - circa 1700." Journal ofthe Iowa Archaeological Society 33 (1986):1-
. Minneapolis-St.laulPolio. Geological Atlas of the United States, Folio
74.
201 Washington, D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey, 1916.
Wicbe, Robert H. The SearchforOrder,, 1877-1920. New York: Hill and
Searpino, Philip V. Great River. AnEnvironmental History ofthe Upper
Wang, 1967.
Mississippi, 1890-1950. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1985.
WBford,IloydA. "'the La Moil le Rock Shelter." The Minnesota Archaeologist
Sch1csicr,K.H.,Ed. Plains Indians, A.D.500-1500:TM1ee ArchaeologicalPostof
19:2 (1954):17-24.
Historic Groups. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1994.
Williams,J.Fletcher. AHistory ofthe City ofSaintloulto1875. SLPaul:
Shidcler, James H. Farm Crisis, 1919-23. Los Angeles: University of
Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1983; first published in 1876 by the.
California Press, 1957.
Minnesota Historical Society as volume 4 of the Collections of the Minnesota
Historical Society.
Schonberger, Harold B. Transportation to the Seaboard.: The Communication
Revolution and/American Foreign Policy, 1860-1900. Westport, Connecticut:
Winchell, Newton H. Geology of Minnesota: Minnesota. Geological and
Greenwood Publishing Corporation, 1971.
Natural . History Survey, Final. Report, 6 vols. Minneapolis, Minnesota:
Johnson, Smith & Harrison, state printers, 1884-1901.
Shallat, Todd. Structures in the Stream, Water, Science, and the Rise ofthe U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers. Austin: University of Texas, 1994.
Wirth, Theodore. Minneapolis park system, 1883-1944: retrospective
glimpses into the history ofthe Board ofl'ark Commissioners of Minneapolis,
Shay, C.1. Theltasca Bison Kill Site: An EcologicalAnalysis. St. Paul:
Minnesota, and the city's park, parkway and playground system. Presented at
Minnesota Historical Society, 1971.
the annual meeting of the Board of Park Commissioners, July 16, 1945.
Minneapolis, Minnesota: Minneapolis, Board of Park Commissioners, 1945.
Shipper, Lester. " Steamboating on the Upper Mississippi after the Civil War:
A Mississippi Magnate." Mississippi Valley Historical Review 6:4 (March
Wonziak, John S. Ed. Historic Lifestyles in the Upper Mississippi River Valley.
1920): 470-502.
New York: University Press of America, 1983.
Sims, P K. and G. B. Morey, Eds. Geology ofMinnesota: A Centennial Volume.
Woods, Thomas A. Knights ofthe Plow. Oliver Kelly and the Origins ofthe
Minnesota Geological Survey. St. Paul: University of Minnesota, 1972.
Grange in Republican Ideology. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1991.
SmallcT,, E. V. "'the Deep Waterways Problem." Forum SIX (Aug. 1895): 746-
Wright, Herbert E. Jr., Ed. Late Quaternary Environments ofthe United States.
752.
2 vols. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983.
Snow, Franklin. "Waterways as Highways." North American Review 227 (May
"History of the Mississippi River below St. Paul:' In Pleistocene evolu-
1929): 592-98.
tion ofthe UpperMississippi Valley. Minnesota Geological Survey. St. Paul:
University of Minnesota, 1985.
Spector, Janet D. What this awl means. feminist archaeology ata Wahpeton
Dakota village. St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1993.
Zmuberge, J. H. "'the lakes of Minnesota:'fhcir origin and classification.'
Minnesota Geological Survey Bulletin 35. Minneapolis: University of
Sfipanovich, Joseph. City ofLakes:An Illustrated History ofMinneapolis.
Minnesota Press, 1952.
Woodland Hills, California: Windsor Publications, 1982.
Swain, Donald C. Federal conservation Policy, 1921-1933. Berkley and Los
Unpublished Materials
Angeles: University of California Press, 1963.
Beckjord, Walter C., Ralph M. Davies, and Lester H. Gatsby. "A Study of
Swanson, Lynn and Gary N. Meyer, Eds. Geologic Atlas of Washington
Proposed Water Power Development at U. S. Lock and Dam No. 1, Mississippi
County, Minnesota. Minnesota Geological Survey. St. Paul: University of
River between St. Paul and Minneapolis." Thesis, University of Minnesota,
Minnesota, 1990.
Minneapolis, 1909.
185
557016_Book_r 8/5/03 8:26 AM Page 186 -
Bnmct, Patrick James. "'the. Corps of Enginecrs and Navigation Improvement
on the Channel of the Upper Mississippi River to 1939 . Masters thesis,
University of Texas, Austin, 1977.
Conard, Rebecca. "'the Conservation Movement in Iowa, 185 7-1942."
National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form,
Iowa State Historic Preservation Office, 1991.
Dobbs, Clark A. " Oneota Settlement Patterns in the Blue Earth River Valley."
Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1984.
. "Outline of Historic Contexts for the Prehistoric Period (Ca. 12,000
B.P. - A.D. 1700)." Minnesota History in Sites and Structures: A
Comprehensive Planning Series. Reports of Investigation No. 37. Prepared
for the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul. Minneapolis:
Institute for MinnesotaArcracology 1988.
. "Historic Context Outlines: The Contact Period Contests (Ca. 1630
A.D. - 1820 A.D.)," Minnesota History in Sites and Structures: A
Comprehensive. Planning Series. Reports of Investigation No. 3 7. Prepared
for the Minnesota State Historic preservation Office, St. Paul. Minneapolis:
Institute for Minnesota Archaeology, 1988.
Dobbs Clark A. and H. D. Mooers. A phase I archaeological and gcomorpho-
logica.lstudy of lake Pepin and the upper reaches of Navigation pool 4.
Upper Mississippi River, Institute for Minnesota Archaeology. Reports of
Investigations No. 44. prepared for the St. Paul District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, 1991.
Florin, Frank. "late Palco-Indians of Minnesota and Vegetation Changes from
10, 500-8,000 BE" 2 vols. Master's thesis, University of Minnesota,
Minneapolis, 1996.
Gillund, Ltslic Randels. "Coon Rapids, a fine city by a dam site: history of Coon
Rapids, Minnesota, 1849-1984." Minnesota Historical Society Collections.
Gjerde, Jon. "Historical Resources Evaluation, St. Paul District Locks and
Dams on the Mississippi River and Two Structures at St. Anthony Falls."
Unpublished Report. St. Paul, Minnesota: St. Paul District, Corps of
Engineers, September 1983.
Clewwc, Lois. South St. Paul Centennial, 1887-1987. South St. Paul(?):
Dakota County Historical Society, 1987.
. AThe History oflnverGrove Heights, Minnesota's Tteasure, 1858-
1990. City of Inver Grove Heights, 1990.
Heritage Education Project. `"fhc Grey Cloud Lime Kiln." Heritage Site File.
Cottage Grove and Newport, Minnesota, nd.
Hesterman, Paul Donald. Interests, Values, and Pnblicl'oHcy foran Urban
River. AHistory ofDeveloputentAlong the Mississippi River in Saintl aul,
Minnesota. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minncapolis,1985.
Higginbottom, D. K. "An Inventory of Fluted Projectile Points from
Minnesota." A paper presented at the 54th Annual Plains Conference, Iowa
City, Iowa, 1996.
Hoffman, B. W. and J. E. Myster. Data Recovery Investigation of the St. Croix
River Access Site, 21 WA49: A Multicomponent Woodland and Archaic
Habitation Site. 2 vols. St. Paul: Archaeology Departrucnt, Minnesota
Historical Society, 1993.
Hybben, Robert and Jeffrey Hess. "Historic American Engineering Record,
Equity Cooperative Exchange Grain Elevator Complex:' Unpublished docu-
ments prepared for the City of St. Paul. December 1989.
Jalbert, A., David E Overstreet, and John D. Richards. Cultural Resources
Inventory of the Upper Mississippi River, St. Anthony Falls to Pool 10,
Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota. Reports of Investigations No. 384.
Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center, Inc.,
1996. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District.
n
James, Jean. `"fhc history of Ramsey / researched, written and published as a
Bicentennial project in 1976." [City of Ramsey, Minnesota, (1976)].
Minnesota Historical Society Collections.
Jenson, P S. `fhc Bremer Village. and Mound Site Masters thesis, Department
of Anthropology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 19 59.
Jevne, George. W. and William D. Timperlcy. "Study of Proposed Water Power
Development at U.S. Lock and Dam No. 1, Mississippi River Between St. Paul
and Minneapolis." Thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1910.
Malik, R., and K. Bakken. Archaeological Data Recovery at the Bradbury Brook
Site, 21ML42, Mille Lacs County Minnesota. St. Paul: Archaeology
Department, Minnesota Historical Society, 1993. Prepared for the Minnesota
Department of Transportation, St. Paul.
Mallam, K. C. The. Iowa Effigy Mound Manifestation: An Interpretative Model.
Report No. 9, Office of the State Archaeologist, Iowa City, 1976.
Matsch, C. L. "Pleistocene geology of the St. Paul Park and Prescott quadran-
gles." M.S. thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1962.
Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, "Historic Context: Early
Agriculture and River Settlement (1840-18 70)." (nd).
Minnesota State Historic preservation Office, "Historic Context: Railroads and
Agricultural Development (1870 -1940)." (nd).
Mooers, H. D. "Quaternary history and ice dynamics of the St. Croix phase of
Late Wisconsin glaciation, central Minnesota." Ph.D. dissertation, University
of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1988.
Perk(, B. E. "King Coulee (21 W B 56): A Stratified, MultiComponentSite on
lake Pepin, Wabasha County, Minnesota." Master's thesis, University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1996.
Pross, Edward L. "A History of Rivers and Harbors Bills, 1866-1933," Ph.D.
dissertation, Ohio State University, 1938.
Reynolds, Susan Pommering. "Dakota County Multiple. Resource. Nomination
(Draft)." June 1979.
St. Anthony Falls Historic District. National Register of Historic Places, National
Register of Historic Places Inventory -Nomination Form, Approved 1971.
St. Anthony Falls Historic District. National Register of Historic Places,
National Register of Historic Places Inventory - Nomination Form,
Continuation Sheet.
"St. Paul Union Stockyards, Centennial Year 1886-1986."Minnesota
Historical Society Collections (1986).
Shane, O.C. "Radiocarbon Assays of Bone from the Browns Valley Skeleton.'
Final report to the Minnesota Historical. Society for contract 90-C2443
(1991).
Vogel, Robert C. "Cottage Grove History: A Palimpsest " Heritage. Education
Project, Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation, City of Cottage Grove,
1997.
Walters, John. A History of Harriet Island." Unpublished typescript, Division
of Archives and Manuscripts, Minnesota Historical Society St. Paul.
Withrow, Randy E., Elden Johnson, and Mary Whelan. The Schilling Site
(21 WAD, Cottage Grove, Minnesota. Prepared for the Advisory Committee on
Historic Preservation, Cottage Grove, Minnesota, 1987.
Zcllic, Carole. The Mississippi and St. laul. APlanning Study oflnterpretive
potentials. Unpublished report prepared for the Ramsey County Historical
Society and the National Endowment for the Humanities, 1988.
186
557016_Book_r 8/5/03 8:26 AM Page 187 -
. "Hastings' Historic Contexts, Final Report." Submitted to the.
Hastings Heritage Preservation Commission and the City of Hastings.
Landscape Research, July 31, 1993.
Archival Collections and Sources
Coon Rapids Dam, Visitor Center, historical files.
Minnesota Historical Society Collections.
Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office files.
National Archives and Records Administration, Record Group 77.
St. Pan i. District, Corps of Engineers, historical. files.
Personal Communication
Anfinson Scott E Personal Communication. Minnesota Historical Society
(April 2000).
McGuire, Charles. Personal communication, Mississippi National River and
Recreation Area, (Spring 2000).
Wiggins, David. Personal Communication, St. Anthony Falls Heritage Zone,
Minnesota Historical Society (April 2000).
187
1"n't/izo tPv�
Preface
1 Father LouisHennepin's Description oflouisiana, Newly Discovered to the
Southwest ofNewFrance by Order of the King, Translated from the original by
Marion E. Cross, with an introduction by Grace Lee Nute_ (Published for the.
Minnesota Society of Colonial Dames of America, The University of Minnesota
Press, 1938), pp. 90, 94, 104, 114, 117; William Watts Folwell., AHistory of
Minnesota, vol. 1, (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society 1956, third printing
1979), pp. 27-30; William Lass, Minnesota,AHistory, pp. 59-60.
2 Section 701.(a) Findings, Public Law 100-696, November 18, 1988, 102
Stat 45 99, Title VII - Mississippi National River and Recreation Area.
3 Mississippi River Coordinating Commission and National Park Service,
Comprehensive Management Plan, (May 1995), pp. 7-9.
4 "Railroads, Power Dam Figuure. in Coon Rapids Early History" Anoka County
Union Centennial, September, 1965, Hennepin Parks, Coon Rapids Dam, his-
toric files, Anoka County Union Herald, September, 1965.
5 Lucile M. Kane, 1helolls of St Anthony: the Waterfall thatEuilt
Minneapolis, (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1987; originally
published as the Waterfall thatBuilt a City: the Falls of St Anthony in
Minneapolis, 1966), uses this as her title for Chapter 1, see p. 1.
Chapter 1
1 Newton H. Winehell, Geology of Minnesota: Minnesota Geologicaland
Natural History Survey, Final Report, v. 2, (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Johnson,
Smith & Harrison, state. printers, 1888).
2 Warren Upham, 1he Glacial lakeAgossiz, Geological Society of America
Monograph 25, 658 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1896).
3 Frank Leverett and Frederick W. Sardeson, "Surface formations and agricul-
tural conditions of the south half of Minnesota," Minnesota Geological Survey
Bulletin 14, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1919).
4 Frank Leverett, "Moraines and Shorelines ofthe Lake Superior Basin,"
United States Geological Survey Professional Paper, (1929), 72 pp.
5 Frederick W. Sardeson, "Fossils in the St. Peter Sandstone," Minnesota
Academy ofNatural Sciences Bulletin, v. 3, (1892), pp. 318-19.
6 Frederick W. Sardeson, Minneapolis St. Paul Folio: U. S. Geological Survey
Atlas, Folio 201, (1916).
7M. Stuvier, "Evidence for variation of atmospheric C-14 content in the late
Quaternary," in K. K. Thrclaan, ed., Late Cenozoicglacial ages (New Haven,
Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1971), pp. 57-70.
8 W S. Cooper, `"The history of the upper Mississippi River in late Wisconsin
and postglacial tine," Minnesota Geological Survey Bulletin 26, (193 5),116 pp.
9 H. C. Hobbs, "Quaternary geology of southeastern Minnesota," in Field trip
guidebookforthe UpperMississippi Valley: Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin,
Minnesota Geological Survey, Guidebook Series No. 15, (St. Paul: University
of Minnesota, 1987), p. 161.
10 C. L. Matsch, "Pleistocene geology of the St. Paul Park and Prescott quad-
rangles," (M.S. thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1962).
11 L H. Mossler, `Bedrock geology," Plate 2 in N. H. Balaban and H. C. Hobbs,
eds., Geologic Atlas of Dakota County, County Atlas Series G6, Minnesota
Geological Survey, (St. Paul University of Minnesota, 1990).
12 K. V. Babe and L. M. Could, "Glacial geology of the Dakota County area
Minnesota Geological Society ofAmerica Bulletin, v. 65, (195 4) pp. 769-92.
13 L. Martin, the physicalgeography of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and
Natural History Survey Bulletin 36, (Madison, 1932, second edition), 608 pp.
14 Herbert E. Wright, Jr., "History of the Mississippi River below St. Paul," in
Pleistocene evolution ofthe UpperMississippi Valley, Minnesota Geological
Survey, University of Minnesota, St. Paul (1985).
15 James C. Knox and W. C. Johnson, "Late Quaternary alluviation in the
Driftless Area of southwestern Wisconsin," in James C. Knox and D. M.
Mickelson, eds., Late Quaternary Environments ofWisconsin (Madison:
Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, 1974), pp. 134-62.
16 Herbert E. Wright, Jr., "Quaternary History of Minnesota," in P K. Sims,
and G. B. Morey, eds., Geology ofMinnesota: A Centennial Volume, Minnesota
Geological Survey, (St. Paul: University of Minnesota, 1972), pp. 515-47.
17 D. M. Mickelson, Lee Clayton, D. S. Fullerton, and H. W. Borns, Jr., "The
Late Wisconsin glacialrecord of the Laurentide Ice Sheet in the United
States," in S. C. Porter, ed., The Late Pleistocene, vol. 2, pp. 3-3 7,
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983).
18 H. D. Mooers, "Quaternary history and ice dynamics of the St. Croix phase
of late Wisconsin glaciation, central Minnesota," (Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1988).
19 H. D. Mooers, and L D. Lehr, A terrestrial record oflaurentide Ice Sheet reor-
ganization du ri ng Heinrich events, (in press).
20 L. Clayton, Pleistocene Geology ofthe Superior Region, Wisconsin,
Information Circular No. 46, (Madison: Wisconsin Geological and Natural.
History Survey, 1984).
21 G. N. Meyer, R. W. Baker, and C. L Patterson, " Surficial geology," Plate 3 in
L. Swanson, and G. N. Meyer, eds., Geologic Atlas of Washington County,
County Atlas Series C-5, Minnesota Geological Survey (St. Paul: University of
Minnesota, 1990).
22 L H. Zumberge, the lakes ofMinnesota: ]heir origin and classification.
Bulletin 35, Minnesota Geological Survey, (Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 1952).
23 Ibid.
24 L C. Knox, "Response of river systems to Holocene climates," in Herbert E.
Wright, Jr., ed., late Quaternary Environments ofthe United States, Vol. 1
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983), pp. 26-41.
25 Clark A. Dobbs and H. D. Mooers, A phase] archaeological andgeomorphoing-
ical study oflakePepin and the upper reaches ofNavigation Pool 4, Upper
Mississippi River, Institute forMinnesota Archaeology, Reports of Irwestigations
No. 44, Prepared for the St. Paul District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1991).
26 Mississippi River Commission (MRC), "Detail Map of the Upper
Mississippi River from the Mouth of the Ohio River to Minneapolis,
Minnesota, in Eighty Nine Sheets."
Chapter 2
1 This discussion is structured using historic contexts for the precontact and
early contact periods developed for the Minnesota State Historic Preservation
Office. Unless otherwise noted, information presented here has been drawn
from these contexts and other important sources on regional Native American
history. Clark A. Dobbs, "Outline of Historic Contexts for the Prehistoric
Period (Ca. 12,000 B.Y. - A.D. 1700)," a document in the. series Minnesota
History in Sites and Structures. A Comprehensive planning Series. Reports of
Investigation No. 37, prepared for the Minnesota State Historic Preservation
Office, St. Paul (Minneapolis: Institute for Minnesota Archaeology, 1988);
ClarkA. Dobbs, "Historic Context Outlines: The Contact Period Contexts (Ca.
1630 A.D. -1820 A.D.)," a document in the series Minnesota History in Sites
and Structures: A Comprehensive Planning Series, Reports of Investigation No.
3 7, prepared for the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul
188
(Minneapolis: Institute for Minnesota Archaeology, 1988); Elden Johnson, the
prehistoric Peoples ofMinnesota, Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology Series No.
3 (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society, 1988; revised 3rd edition); A. Jalbcrt
,David E Overstreet, and John D. Richards, Cultural Resources Inventory of
the Upper Mississippi River, St. Anthony Falls to Pool 10, Wisconsin, Iowa,
and Minnesota, Reports of Investigations No. 384 (Milwaukee, Wisconsin:
Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center, Inc., 1996), prepared for the U. S.
Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District.
2T. Webb, HI, E. L Cushing, and Herb E. Wright, Jr., "Holocene Changes in the.
Vegetation of the Midwest," in H. E. Wright, Jr., ed., late Quaternary
Environments of the United States, Volume 2:1he Holocene (Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 1983), pp. 142-65.
3 Precontact history is generally measured in years before present (B.1) rather
than in calendar years. In this system, "present" is set at 19 50.
4 "Projectile point" is a term used to classify arrowheads, darts, or spearheads
generally fashioned out of stone, but sometimes out of wood, bone, or copper.
Because projectile point forms differed over time and space, archaeologists can
use them to date and distinguish between archaeological cultures. Often, espe-
cially dining the earliest periods of Native American history, projectile points
are the means archaeologists have to accomplish these aims.
5 D. IC Higginbottom, "An Inventory of Fluted Projectile Points from
Minnesota," a paper presented at the 54th Annual Plains Conference, Iowa
City, Iowa, 1996.
6 J. Stdidning, `"The Preceramic Archaeology of Northern Minnesota," in Elden
Johnson, cd., Aspects of Upper GreatLakesAnthropology: Papers in Honor of
Lloyd A. Wilford, Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology Series, No. 11 (St. Paul:
Minnesota Historical Society, 1974), pp. 64-73.
7 A. E. Jenks, "Minnesota's Brown's Valley Man and Associated Burial
Artifacts," Memoirs of theAmericanAnthropologicalAssociation No. 49 (193 7);
K. Malik and K. Bakken, "Archaeological. Data Recovery at the Brad bury Brook
Site, 21ML42, Mille Lacs County, Minnesota," (St. Paul Archaeology
Department, Minnesota Historical Society, 1993), prepared for the Minnesota
Department of Transportation, St. Paul.
8 O. C. Shane, "Radiocarbon Assays of Bonc from the Browns Valley Skeleton,"
final report to the Minnesota Historical Society for contract 90-C2443
(1991); Malik and Bakken, `Bradbury Brook Site."
9 Frank Florin, "Late Palco-Indians of Minnesota and Vegetation Changes from
10,500-8,000 BP," 2 vols. (Master's thesis, University of Minnesota,
Minneapolis, 1996).
10 Ibid, Jr. 191.
11 Carole Zcdlic, 1heMississippi and St. Paul. APlanning Study oflnterpretive
potentials, prepared for the Ramscy Coemty Historical Society (1988).
12 K. L. Keen, L. C. K. Shane, A Continuous Record of Holocene Eolian
Activity and Vegetation Change at Lake Ann, East-Central Minnesota,"
Geological Society ofAmerica Bulletin 102 (1990):1646-165 7.
13 C. T. Shay, Theltasca Bison Kill Site. An EcologicalAnalysis (St. Paul
Minnesota Historical Society, (1971); Michael G. Mich lovic, "'the Archaeology
of the Canning Site," Minnesota Archaeologist 45:1(1986): 3-36.
141 BI cid, IheArchaeology ofl'etaga Point 1he14eceramic Component, Minnesota
Prehistoric Archaeology Series (St. Paul Minnesota Historical Society, 1969).
15 B. W. Hoffman and J. E. Myster, Hata Recovery lnvestigation ofthe St. Croix
River -Access Site, 21 WA49: AMulticomponent Woodland and Archaic
Habitation Site, 2 vols. (St. Paul.: Archaeology Department, Minnesota
Historical Society, 1993).
16 Elden Johnson and P. S. Taylor, Spring lake Archeology: The lee Mill Cave,
Science Bulletin No. 3, part 2, (St. Paul, Minnesota: The Science Museum of the.
St. Paullnstitutc, 1956).
189
17 B. E. Perk(., "King Coulee (21 W B 56): A Stratified, MultiComponentSite
on lake Pepin, Wabasha County, Minnesota," (Master's thesis, University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1996).
18 Johnson and Taylor, Spring LakeArcheology.
19 the advent of pottery provides archaeologists with anew means of dating
and distinguishing between archaeological cultures. As with projectile points,
the form, composition, and decoration of pottery vary over time and space.
20 Lloyd A. Wilford, "'the La Moille Kock Shelter," 1heMinnesota
Archaeologist 19:2 (1954):17-24.
21 Randy E. Withrow, Elden Johnson, and Mary Whelan, The Schilling Site
(21 WA 1), Cottage Grove, Minnesota (prepared for the Advisory Committee on
Historic Preservation, Cottage Grove, Minnesota, 1987).
22 Elden Johnson, SpringlakeArcheology: The Sorg Site, Science Bulletin No.
3, part 3, (St. Paul, Minnesota: the Science Museum of the St. Paul Institute,
1959).
23 Guy Gibbon, and C. A. H. Caine, "'the Middle. to Late Woodland'lransition in
EasternMimaesota," MidcontinentallonmalofArckaeology5:1(1980):57-72.
24 C. M. Arzigian, `"fhe Emergence of Hortictiltural. Economics in
Southwestern Wisconsin," in W. F. Keegan, cd., Emergent Horticultural
Economies of the Eastern Woodlands, Center for Archaeological. Investigations,
Occasional Paper No. 7, (Carbondale Southern Illinois University, 1987), pp.
217-42,
25 Gibbon and Caine, "The Middle to late Woodland."
26 R. C. Mal lam, lhelowa Effigy Mound Manifestation: An Interpretative
Model, Report No. 9, Office of the State Archaeologist, Iowa City (1976).
27 Johnson, The Sorg Site; E S. Jenson, "'the Bremer Village and Mound Site.
(Master's thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1959).
28 Guy E. Gibbon, the Sheffield Site: An Oneota Site on the St Croix River,
Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology Series No. 11, (St. Paul: Minnesota
Historical Society, 1973).
29 Mildred M. Wedel, "Peering at the loway Indians Through the Mist of Time
1630 - circa 1700,"Journal of thelowa Archaeological Society 33 (1986):1-74.
30 Mildred Mott, "'the Relationship of Historic IndianTribes to Archaeological
Mauffestations in Iowa," lowaloumal ofHistary and lafitics 36:3 (1938):22 7-
314; Clark A. Dobbs, "Oncota Settlement Patterns in the Blue Earth River
Val ley" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1984).
31 Roy W. Meyer, History of the Santee Sioux: United States Indian Policy on
Iiia( (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1967).
32 Janet D. Spector, What this awl means: feminist archaeology ata Wahpeton
Dakota village (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical. Society Press, 1993).
Chapter 3
1 William Watts Folwell, AHistory ofMinnesota, vol. 1, (St. Paul: Minnesota
Historical Society, 1956, third printing 1979), pp. 1,4-7; William Lass,
Minnesota, AHistory, (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1998; 1st edition
1977), Jr. 56.
2 Folwell, Minnesota, Jr. 13; Lass, Minnesota, A History, pp. 56-57.
3 Folwell, Minnesota, pp. 16-18.1he new governor-general of New France,
Louis de. Baude, comte de Frontcnac, "the greatest figure in Canadian history"
would send Marquette. and Joliet off on their journey. Folwell, Minnesota, Jr.
19; Lass, Minnesota, A History, Jr. 5 8.
4 Folwell, Minnesota, pp. 22-23; Lass, Minnesota, AHistory, pp. 5 8-5 9
F4
5 Lentis Hennepin, Father LouisHennepin'sDescription oflouisiana, Newly
Discovered to the Southwest ofNewFranceby Order of theKing, (Minneapolis: The
University of Minnesota Press, 1938), pp. 94,104; Folwc(1, Minnesota, pp. 27-29.
6 Hennepin, Description oflordsiana, pp. 90,114,117; Falwell, Minnesota, p. 30.
7 Folwell, Minnesota, p. 30; Lass, Minnesota, AHistory, pp. 59-60.
8 Hennepin, Description oflouisiana, p. 117.
91bid., p.118.
10 Folwell., Minnesota, pp. 3 7-39.
11 Gary Clayton Anderson, Kinsmen ofAnotherKind, Dakota -White Relations
in the Upper Mississippi Valley, 1650-1862, (Lincoln: University of Nebraska
Press, 1984), p. 23.
12 Folwell, Minnesota, pp. 3 6-41; lass, Minnesota, A History, p. 60.
13 Folwell, Minnesota, pp. 44-52; lass, Minnesota, A History, pp. 63, 65.
14 lass, Minnesota, A History, p. 41.
15 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 23-25.
16 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 26-27; problems with the Chippewa stories of tak-
ing away the woodlands from the Dakota, pp. 47-48; on the myth of the Sioux
defeat, see p. 48.
17 Ibid., p. 53.
18 Ibid., pp. 25-26.
19 Lass, Minnesota,AHistory, p.43
20 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 66-67; Folwell, Minnesota, p. 53; John Parker, ed.,
lhelournals oflonathan CarverandRelated Documents, 1766-1770, (St. Paul,
Minnesota: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1976), pp. 8-9.
21 lass, Minnesota, A History, p. 71.
22 Parker, Carver, pp. 90-91.
23 Ibid., pp. 92-94.
24 Ibid., pp. 115-17,120.
25 Ibid., pp. 117-18.
26 Only a short time before, he says, the Chippewa had sent a belt and beaver
blanket seeking peace. Ibid., p. 116.
27 Anderson, Kinsmen, p. 73.
28 Peter Pond, `"Phe Narrative of Peter Pand," in Charles M. Cates, cd., FiveFur
ltaders of the Northwest (Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1965), pp. 44-46;
on Carver's goals, see Parker, Carver, pp. 7-15.
29 Pond, "Narrative," pp. 4 7-50; Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 63-64.
30 Falwell, Minnesota, pp. 67-68.
31 Lass, Minnesota, A History, p. 82; Anderson, Kinsmen, p. 79; Roy W. Meyer,
History of the Santee Sioux: United States Indian Policy on 1iiaL, (Lincoln:
University of Nebraska Press, 1967; reprinted 1980), p. 24.
32 Zebulon Pike, Sources of theMississippi and the Western Louisiana Territory,
(Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, Inc., 1966; from Zebulon Pike,
An Account of Expeditions to the Sources ofthe Mississippi, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania: C. & A. Conrad, & Co., 1810), pp. 1, 14, 22-24.
33 Ibid., pp. 23-24.
34 Ibid., pp. 24-26; Meyer, Santee, pp. 25-26; Anderson, Kinsmen, p. 80. Le
Fils de Pinchow or Pinichon was the leader of a village up the Minnesota
River that had once been headed by Wabasha. Wabasha had left this vil lage. to
go to the Mississippi River. Meyer, Santee, p. 25.
35 Pike, Son rcesoftheMississippi,p.24
36 Ibid., pp. 29-30; quote p. 30.
371bid., pp. 30, 93-94; quote p. 93.
38 Ibid., p. 28.
39 Ibid., p. 93; see pp. 92-93 for full. statement.
40 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 84-85.
41 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 87-91; Lass, Minnesota, AHistory, p. 83.
42 On page 79, Anderson, Kinsmen, says that the tribe "had undergone con-
siderable change over the two decades since Rinse's visit:' Then, on page 81,
he says that overall the. eastern Sioux population and lifestyle remained
essentially the same between the time of Pond and Ainsc and Pike. This cap-
tures the dile,nema many Native American historians faced. They had to
acknowledge that important changes occurred as a result of European and
American expansion, and yet, important parts of the Native American way of
life stayed the. same.
43 Pond, "Narrative," pp. 44, 56.
44 Pond, "Narrative," p. 56; Anderson, Kinsmen, p. 79.
45 Anderson, Kinsmen, quote p. 81, see. pp. 80-81.
46 Lass, Minnesota, A History, p. 84.
47 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 92-95.
48 The account of Long's effort to beat Pike comes from William H. Keating's
narrative of Long's 1823 expedition. See William H. Keating, Narrative ofan
Expedition to the Source of the St. Peter's River, Lake Winnepeek, lake of the
Woods, &5 performed in the Year 1823 by the Order of the Hon. 1. C. Calhoun,
Seeretwy ofWat rain rthe Command of Stephen H. Long, US.TE., p.297.
49 Lucile M. Kane, June. D. Holmquist, and Carolyn Gilman, edited, the
Northern Expeditions of Stephen H. Long, theloumals of 1817 and 1823 and
Related Documents, (St. Paul.: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 19 78), p. 66.
50 Keating, Narrative, pp. 297-98.
51 Kane, Northern Expeditions, pp. 65-67; quote. p. 66.
52 Ibid., p. 67.
53 Kane, Northern Expeditions, pp. 67-68, 69. For an account of what hap-
pened to Carver's Cave, see Charles T. Burnley, "Case of the Vanishing
Historic Site or What Happened to Carver's Cave?" Ramsey County History
4:2 (Fall, 1967):8-12.
54 Keating, Narrative, p.300
55 Kane, Northern Expeditions, pp. 68-69, quote, p. 68. For an in-depth his-
tory of Fountain Cave, see Greg Brick, "St. Paul Underground -What
Happened to Fountain CavetheReal Birthplace of St. Paul?" Ramsey County
History 29:4 (Winter, 1995):4-15.
56 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 95-96, see footnote 68 on O'Fallon's account.
571bid., pp. 96-98.
190
58 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 99, 101-02; Lass, Minnesota, A History, Jr. 84;
Folwell, Minnesota, Jr. 140.
59 Folwell, Minnesota, pp. 138-40; Lass, Minnesota, A History, Jr. 86; Steve
Hall, Fort Snelling:. Colossus of the Wilderness, (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical.
Society Press, 1987).
60 Anderson, Kinsmen, p. 101.
61 Ibid., pp. 103-04.
62 Keating, Narrative, pp. 302-03.
63 Anderson, Kinsmen, Jr. 106 ; Gary Clayton Anderson, Little Crow, Spokesman
for the Sioux, (St. Paul Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1986), Jr. 27.
64 Anderson, Little Crow, pp. 25-26; Willoughby M. Babcock, Jr., "Sioux
Villages in Minnesota prior to 1837," Minnesota Archaeologist 12 (October,
1945):136.
65 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 107-10, 130; Idem., Little Crow, Jr. 29.
66 Quoted in Anderson, Kinsmen, Jr. 128.
67 Anderson, Kinsmen, Chapter 7; Babcock, "Sioux Villages," p. 137.
68 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 155, 15 8.
69 Ibid., pp. 159-60, 162, 165-66, 174-76.
70 Babcock, "Sioux Villages," p. 137, argues that those who say Kaposia
moved after the 1837 treaty are wrong. "faliafcrro's list of 1834," he.
insists, "shows this chief [Wakinyantankal as head of the Kaposia band,
`West of the Mississippi and 9 miles below Fort Snelling."' Furthermore, he.
contends, ` fhe Taliaferro list of 1834, however, reinforced by his similar
locating of the band on his manuscript map of 1835, prove conclusively
that the removal took place prior to 1834." Although he writes after
Babcock, Anderson, Little Crow, pp. 30, 32, suggests that Little Crow III
(Wakinyantanka or Big Thunder) moved Kaposia across the river in 1838 as a
result of the 1837 treaty.
71 Anderson, Little Crow, Jr. 56.
72 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 180-82; 184-87; Idem., Little Crow, pp. 60-61.
73 Anderson, Little Crow, Jr. 61.
74 Ibid., Jr. 62.
75 Anderson, Little Crow, pp. 61-63 ; Idem., Kinsmen, pp. 187-89.
76 Anderson, Kinsmen, p. 189; Idem., Little Crow, p. 64.
77 Anderson, Little Crow, pp. 65, 66; Idem., Kinsmen, pp. 189-90.
78 Anderson, Little Crow, pp. 66-67; Idem., Kinsmen, pp. 192-94.
79 Anderson, Little Crow, pp. 69-75.
Chapter 4
1 David A. Lanegran and Anne Mosher Sheridan, `"Phe European Settlement
of the Upper Mississippi River Valley: Cairo, Illinois, to Lake Itasca,
Minnesota -1540 to 1860," in John S. Wozniak ed., Historic Lifestyles in the
Upper -Mississippi River Valley, (New York: University Press of America,
1983), pp. 23-2 5; Twect, A History of the Rock Island District, U.S. Army,
Corps of Engineers, 1866-1983, (Washington: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1984), Jr. 39; William J. Petersen, Steamboatingon the Upper
Mississippi, (Iowa City: The State Historical Society of Iowa, 1968), pp. 206-
09,209, 246; William J. Petersen, "Captains and Cargoes of Early Upper
Mississippi Steamboats," Wisconsin Magazine of History 13 (192930):227-
191
32; Mildred Hartsough, From Canoe to Steel Barge, (Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 1934), pp. 65-66; Koald'fwcct, "A History of Navigation
Improvements on the Kock Island Rapids," (Kock Island District, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, April 1980):2; John O. Jensen, "Gently Down the Stream:
An Ingnfry into the History of Transportation on the Northern Mississippi
River and the Potential for Submerged Cultural Resources," Wisconsin
Archeologist 73:1-2 (March-Junc, 1992):71, says that only about 20 boats
were operating above Galena before 1847. Military supplies and furs would
dominate the much smaller steamboat trade. above Galena.
2 George Byron Merrick, Old Times on the Upper -Mississippi. The Recollections
ofa Steamboatpilotfrom 1854 to 1863, Appendix B, Opening of Navigation
at St. Paul, 1844-1862, (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1987),
Jr. 295. Merrick lists the number or arrivals and the number of boats at St.
Paul for each of these years. His figures for arrivals differ slightly from those
of Dixon in Tabic 2.1. He lists 99 boats counting for 965 arrivals in 185 7
and 62 boats as accounting for the 1,090 arrivals in 1858.
3 Hartsough, Canoe, Jr. 103.
41bid., pp. 101-2.
5 Merrick, Old Times, Jr. 162, says that "From 18 52 to 18 5 7 there were not
boats enough to carry the people who were flocking into the newly -opened
farmers' and hmrbcrmans' paradise."
6 Roald'fwect, History of Transportation on the Upper Mississippi &Illinois
Rivers, ( Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1983),21-22;
Petersen, "Captains and Cargoes," 228, 234-38; Hartsough, Canoe, 74-75.
Some easterners came to take. the "fashionable tour:' Arriving in St. Louis or
at other railheads on the river's cast bank, these excursionists traveled
upstream, sometimes to St. Anthony Falls, imbibing the rivers beauty (see
the above references). Walter Havighurst, Upper -Mississippi, AWilderness
Saga, (New York: Farrar & Rinehart; New York: L J. Little and Ives Company,
1944), Jr. 166; Hartsough, Canoe, pp. 106-7.
7 Tweet, "History of Transportation on the Upper Mississippi and Illinois
Rivers," p. 22.
8 Frederick L llobncy, River Engineers of the Middle Mississippi. AHistory of
the St. Louis District, U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers, (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1978), p. 33.
9 Donald B. Dodd and Wyncdlc S. Dodd, Historical Statistics of the United
States, 1790-1970. Vol. H The Midwest, (The University of Alabama Press,
1973), pp. 2, 10, 22, 46.
10 Petersen, "Captains," Jr. 23 5; Tweet, "History of Transportation on the.
Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers," pp. 21-22.
11 Todd ShallaI, Structures in the Stream, Water, Science, and the Rise ofthe
U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers, (Austin: University of Texas, 1994), Jr. 141.
12 Pike, Sources ofthe Mississippi, Jr. 24; Keating, Narrative ofan Expedition,
Jr. 297.
13 Havighurst, A Wilderness Saga, Jr. 249; Merrick, Old'fimcs, p. 232.
14 U.S. Arany, Corps of Engineers, Annual Report of the Chief ofEngineers,
1872, ( Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1876-1940), Jr. 309.
Annual Report, 1881, Jr. 2746.
15 Annual Report, 1877, Jr. 528
16 Merrick, Old Times, Jr. 15.
17 Ibid., pp. 18-19,29-30.
18 Ibid., Jr. 35.
19 Ibid., pp. xii-xiii, 35, 80, 83,240
20 Ibid., pp. 93, 95.
21 Merrick, Old Times, p. 100; Havighurst, A Wilderness Saga, p. 158, says
that early steamboating was "a triumph of men more than machines," and, Jr.
159, that "piloting was not so much a trade as a mirade."
22 Capt. "Nate" [Nathan] Daly, Racks and Rails: Incidents in thelafeofa
Minnesota pioneer, ( Walker, Minnesota: Cass County Pioneer, 1931), Jr. 18.
Havighurst, A Wilderness Saga, p. 161.
23 Shortly after the glaciers withdrew from southern Minnesota some
10,000 years ago, St. Anthony Falls stretched across the river valley near
downtown St. Paul. A thick limestone mantle formed the. riverbed. Just
below this mantle lay a soft sandstone layer. As water and ice eroded the
sandstone out from underneath the limestone at the edge of the falls, the
limestone broke off in large slabs, and the falls receded.
24 Edward L. Pross, "A History of Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Bills,
1866-1933:'Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1938, Jr. 44.
25 U.S. Congress, House, laws of the United States Relating to the.
Improvement of Rivers and Harbors, vol. 1, 62nd Cong., 3d sess., lloc. No.
1491, ( Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office,1913), pp. 152-53.
26 Raymond Merritt, Creativity, Conflict & Controversy: A History ofthe St.
1 aulllistrict, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ( Washington: U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1979); Roald Twect, AHistory of Rock Island District,
( Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1984), pp. 67-68; Duties for
the middle Mississippi stayed with the Office of Western huprovements in
Cincinnati until 1873, when St. Louis became the new office for the middle
river; see Dobncy, River -Engineers, pp. 44-45.
27 Annual Report, 1867, p. 262
28 U.S. Congress, House, "Survey of Upper Mississippi River," 39th Congress,
2d sess., House Ex. Doc. No. 5 8, pp. 17-18.
29 Ibid., p. 18.
30 Annual Report, 18 75, Part 2, Vol. 2, Appendix CC, "Reports on
Transportation Routes to the Seaboard," p. 455.
31 U.S. Congress, House, "Survey of Upper Mississippi River, Letter from the.
Secretary of War in answer to a resolution of the House, of December 20,
1866, transmitting report of the Chief of Engineers, with General Warren's
report of the surveys of the Upper Mississippi river and its tributaries," 39th
Congress, 2d Session, Ex. Doc. No. 58, Jr. 5.
32 John O. Anfinson, "The Secret History of the Mississippi's Earliest Locks
and Dams," Minnesota History 54:6 (Summer 1995):254-67.
33 Annual Report, 1867, p. 260.
34 House Ex. Doc. No. 58, "Survey of Upper Mississippi River," Jr. 25.
35 Ibid., p. 27
36 Frank Haigh Dixon, A 17afcHistory ofthe Mississippi River System,
National Waterways Commission, Document No. 11, (Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1909), pp. 29-30; Frederic L. Paxson,
`Railroads of the Old Northwest, before the Civil War, Transactions ofthe
Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and letters 17 (1914):257-60, 269-71.
William Cronon, Nature's Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West (New York:
W. W. Norton & Company, 1991), p. 296, says that the first railroad to reach
the Mississippi River was the Chicago, Alton and St. Lentis in 18 52-5 3.
However, Paxson, whom he cites, shows that the railroad completed tracks
from Alton to Springfield, Illinois, in 1852, and then from Springfield to
Chicago, via a roundabout route, in 18 53, but did not have the line in opera-
tion until 1854. Gary E Browne, `"The Railroads: Te urinals and Nexus
Points in the Upper Mississippi Valley," (in John S. Wozniak ed., Historic
lifestyles in the Upper Mississippi River Valley, (New York: University Press of
America, 1983), Jr. 84, says the first railroad reached the Mississippi River at
Bock Island on February 22, 1854. Petersen, Steamboating, Jr. 298, also rec-
ognizes the railroad at Bock Island as the first to mach the river.
37 Frederic Paxson, American Frontier, 1763-1893, (Chicago:lhe. Riverside.
Press, 1924),p. 517.
38 Contrary to most histories that fallow Dixon, A liafficHistory, Jr. 48, in
saying that there were thirteen bridges across the Mississippi River by 1880,
Patrick Bremet, "The Corps of Engineer; and Navigation Improvements on the
Channel of Upper Mississippi River to 1939," Master's Thesis, (Austin,
University of Teras, 1977), p. 46, says that there were fourteen bridges across
the river by 1877, and he lists them.
39 Lester Shipper, "Steamboating on the Upper Mississippi after the Civil War:
A Mississippi Magnate," Mississippi Valley Historical Ke view 6:4 (March
1920):496; Dixon, A 1RaffwHistory, p. 49; Hartsough, Canoe, pp. 84-85, 91.
40 Hartsough, Canoe, pp. 196-97, 19 9;fwcet, History ofl'ransportation, 38-39.
41 Hartsough, Canoe, pp. 197, 203.
42 Solon J. Buck, GrangerMovement, A Study of Agricultural Organization and
Its 1'olirical, Economic and Social Manifestations, 1870-1880, (Cambridge
Harvard University Press, 1933), pp. 40-42; William D. Barns, "Oliver
Hudson Kelley and the Genesis of the Grange: A Reappraisal," Agricultural
History 41 Duly 1967):229-30. Throughout his article (pp. 229-42), Barns
addresses three issues concerning Kelley. First, did Kelley get the idea for the.
Grange on his trip through the South? Second, was the idea of the Grange real-
ly his? And, did Kelley want to make. the Grange into the radical organization
it became dewing the early 1870s, or did events force the Grange that way?
Barns credits Kelley with founding the Grange, recognizing the rate of others,
particularly of Miss Carrie Hall, Kelley's niece. Barns also argues that Kelley
came away from his southern trip with the idea for the Grange, and that Kelley
had a more radical organization in mind from the outset than Buck and other
historians admit. Thomas A. Woods, Knights ofthe plow. Oliver Kelley and the
Origins ofthe Grange in Republican Ideology, (Ames: Iowa State University
Press, 1991), Chapters 7 and 8, supports and greatly expands on Barns' argu-
ment that Kelley actively pushed economic and politicalsolutions and/or tac-
itly approved while others did so.
43 Buck, Granger -Movement, p. 108.
44 Ibid., pp. 108-9.
45 Woods, Knights, pp. 138-39.
46 Harold B. Schonberger, Ransportation to the Seaboard. The Communication
Revolution andAmerican Foreign Policy, 1860-1900, ( Westport, Connecticut:
Greenwood Publishing Corporation, 1971), Jr. 21.
47 Ibid., p. 22.
48 St.louisHemocrat, May 14 and 15, 1873.
49 Woods, Knights, p. 141.
50 Blegen, Minnesota,A History ofthe State, (Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 1975, 1963), p. 290.
51 Ibid., Jr. 293. While stillin his twenties, Donnelly had become Minnesota's
lieutenant governor. He moved on to represent Minnesota in the U.S. House for
6 years as a Republican. But in 1868, he quarreled with Minnesota's senior
Republican leader, Alexander Ramsey, and failed to get reelected.
52 Woods, Knights, pp. 148, 151-52, 155; Schonbcrger, ltansportation to the
Seaboard, pp. ix-xix, 3-30; Robert S. Salisbury William Windom,Apostle oflosirive
Government, (New York: University Press of America, 1993), pp. 123-24.
53 Salisbury, William Windom, p. 113.
54 The Senate also considered a warning from Republican President Ulysses
Grant. Well aware of the agrarian unrest, he had warned the Senate. that, "this
192
issue. would inevitably be forced on the Exec. branch.... [and] suggested that
the Congress study the problem and find a solution." Windom, Select
Committee, p. 7; Schonberger, Transportation to the Seaboard, p. 29.
55 Windom, Select Committee, p. 243.
56 Ibid., p. 213.
571bid., p. 24 3;The. Select Committee recommended a depth of 5 feet at low
water for St. Paul to St. Locus. p. 213.
58 Ibid., p. 211.
59 In 1872, Captain J. Throclmuorton argued that while wing dams would
probably not work for the tipper river, closing dams would. Annual Report,
1872, pp. 309-10.
60 Annual Report, 1875, p. 302. The Caffrey may have done some work with
closing dams earlier. In his report for the 1871 season, Captain Wm.
Hillhouse reported that the Cajfrey's work had included 1,600 feet of wing
dams. He does not provide a location for this work and there is no mention of
it in later reports, however. Annual Report 1872, p. 310.
61 Before 1906, the important pro blew of the arrangement was largely left to
the judgment of local engineers. As cited in U. S. Congress, House, letter -from
the Secretary of War, Ransmitting, with a lettcrfrom the Chief ofEngineers
Report ofEstimateforSix-FootChannel in the MississippiRiverbetween the
MissouriRiverand St. Paul, Minn., 59th Cong., 2nd sess., H. Doc. No. 341,
pp. 14-15:
the mhe has been to place them, in straight reaches, five -sevenths of the
proposed channel width apart,, in curved reaches, one-halfon the concave
sides and the full width on the convex sides. Assistant Engineer W.A.
Thompson gives a rule which is betteradapted to the present project (the
6 footchannel), in which he places the dams in straight reaches thefull
channel width apart, increasing the space 25 percent on the convex side
and diminishing it 25 per cent on the concave side, depending on the
degree ofcurvature. Wings should be pointed upstream at Ute following
angles: 105N to I ION, in straight reaches, I 00 to 102N in concave,
90N to I OON in convex, and they should be so located where practicable,
that theiraxes prolonged would meet in tire center of the channel.
62 For wing dams, the suggested proportion of brush to rock was two to one,
although where the current was strong, the ratio might increase to a ratio of
three or four portions of brush for every one of rock. H. Doc. No. 341, p. 14;
Annual Report, 1879, p. 111, see figures 1, 2, and 3 and Plate 3.
63 Alberta Kirchner Hit 1, "Out With the Fleet," Minnesota History,
(1961):286.
64 Hill, "Out With the Fleet," p. 291.
65 Annual Report, 1880, p. 1495.
66 Annual Report, 1895, pp. 2103-04; Annual Report, 1869, p. 237; Annual
Report, 1901, p. 2309; Raymond H. Merritt, The Corps, the Environment, and
the Uppet-MississippiltiverRasin, (Washington: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1984), p. 1; Merritt, Creativity, pp. 68-74; Jane Carroll, "Dams and
Damages: The Ojibway, the United States, and the Mississippi Headwaters
Reservoirs," Minnesota History, (Spring, 1990):4-5.
6 7 Lucile M. Kane, `Rivalry for a River: the Twin Cities and the Mississippi,
Minnesota History 37:8 (December 1961):309-23. 310-11.
68 Ibid., pp. 310-12.
69 Ibid., p. 311.
70 Merritt, Creativity, 140; Lucile M. Kane, Thelalls of St. Anthony. The
Waterfall that Built Minneapolis, (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press,
1987), pp. 92-93; Kane, `Rivalry," pp. 311-12; Kane adds that during these
years Meeker had sought to get the required completion date extended. This
also caused some delay.
193
71 U.S. Congress, House, Survey of the Uppet-Mississippi River, Excv. Doc. 58,
39th Cong., 2d sess., p. 46; Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 92-93; Kane, "Rivalry," p. 312.
72 H. Exec. Doc. 58, pp. 45-46.
73 Kane, St. Anthony, p. 93.
74 House Ex. Doc. 58, p. 45.
75 Ibid., p. 47.
76 Anfinson, "Secret History" Minnesota History 54:6 (Summer 1995):254-67.
77 Annual Reports, 1867, pp. 259, 262;1aws of the United States, pp., 155-56;
H. Exec. lloc. 58, pp. 30, 50-52. In his next report to the Chief e f Engineers,
Warren stated that new surveys showed that the Corps would have to build a sec-
ond lock and dam, locating it near the month of Minnchaha Creek, about one-
half mile below Lock and Ham No. 1; see U.S. Congress, House, Survey ofthe
Upper -Mississippi River, Exec. Doc. 247, 40th Cong., 2d sess., p. 9.
78 Kane, "Rivalry" pp. 312-15, quote from p. 315; Kane, St. Anthony, p. 94.
79 Kane, `Rivalry" p. 316.
80 Ibid. The St. Paul businessmen included William E. McNair, Eugene M.
Wilson, Wil Liam S. King, Edward Murphy, and Isaac Atwater. Meeker, Kane
says, retained some shares of the company for himself, as did his friends.
81 Ibid., pp. 318-19. Opponents to the amendment included waterpower
magnates William D. Washburn and Richard Chute_ Allied with them were
sawmill operators and boom company operators William W. Eastman, John
Martin, Stunner W. Farnham, James A. Lovejoy, and Joel B. Bassett. Support
for the project came from the company's stockholders, navigation boosters and
city business leaders. Kane, St. Anthony, p. 96, points out that the state never
transferred the grant to the company.
82 Kane, `Rivalry" pp. 319-320; Kane, St. Anthony, p. 96. In 1869, a tunnel
from the toe of the falls to Nicollet Island collapsed just below the island. Due
to the collapse of this tunnel, St. Anthony Falls was in danger of eroding away.
The Corps of Engineers was working on a project to save the falls.
83 Kane, "Rivalry," p. 322, suggests that the federal government recognized its
obligation for improving navigation in 18 73 by authorizing $2 5,000 for the.
project. Merritt, Creativity, p. 141, says that "When it appeared that the.
Mississippi River Improvement and Manufacturing Company would not be
able to resolve its internal conflicts, Congress decided to give the project over
to the Corps of Engineers." Neither author discusses who pushed Congress to
authorize the project.
84 Annual Report, 1873, p. 411; Annual Report, 1874, p. 287
85 Merritt, Creativity, p. 141.
86 Annual Report, 1891, p. 2154; Mackenzie, Annual Report, 1890, p. 2034,
reported that the Corps had completed several examinations of the area over
the last year, "in company with the Minneapolis representatives of the river
interests."
87 Annual Report, 1890, p. 2034; Annual Report, 1892, pp. 1780-81. In
June and July of 1891, Mackenzie carried out even more "accurate surveys" of
most of the river from the Minneapolis steamboat warehouse to the Short line
bridge. below Meeker Island and of select areas down to the Minnesota River;
see Annual Report, 1891, p. 2 15 4.
88 Annual Report, 1894, pp. 1682-83; U.S. Congress, Senate,"Constnmtion
of Locks and Dams in the Mississippi River," 53d Cong., 2d sess., Exec. Doc.
No. 109, pp. 7-8.
89 U.S. Congress, House, laws of the United States Rehatingta thelmprovement
of Rivers am/Harbors, vol. 2, 62nd Cong., 3d sess., Doc. No. 1491,
( Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1913), p. 704. Kane, St.
Anthony, p. 175, says "Deprived of the navigation facilities they coveted, per -
suasive Minncapolitans continued to urge the federal government to act.
United States army engineers responded in 1894 by announcing plans for
two locks and dams ...:' This misplaces the authority for authorizing the
project with the Corps instead of Congress and makes the Corps a proactive
proponent of the project, which she docs not demonstrate they were.
Granted, Mackenzie repeatedly called for locks and dams. Kane jumps to the
construction of Lock and Dam 2, without discussing who made the final
push for the. project.
90 Annual Report, 1908, pp. 530, 1649-50; Annual Report, 1907, pp.
1578-79.
91 Major Frauds K. Shook to Minneapolis Mayor J. C. Haynes, February 17,.
1909. St. Paul District records, St. Paul., Minnesota.
Chapter 5
1 Grain traffic through the lies Moines Rapids Canaland at St. Louis during
the late nineteenth century illustrates the decline of the freight trade on the
upper river. In 1879 and 1880 over two million bushels of grain passed
through the canal., but it only registered 400,000 bushels at the end of the
decade and less than 56,000 bushels after 1895. See Frank H. Dixon, A
1tafc History of the Mississippi River System, National Waterways
Commission, Document No. 11(Washington,D.C.: Government Printing
Office, 1909), P. 51.
2 Annual Reports, 1892-1909.
3 Philip V. Scarping Great River. An Environmental History of the Upper
Mississippi, 1890-1950 (Columbia: University ofMissouri Press, 1985), Jr.
3 7, says that towns along the river formed the Upper Mississippi River
Improvement Association due to the loss of timber related businesses. They
hoped that by reviving the river they could revive their sinking economics.
4 Upper Mississippi River Improvement Association, Proceedings of the Upper
Mississippi RiverlmprovementAssoeiation Convention Held at Quincy, Illinois,
November 12-13, 1902 (Quincy, Illinois, n.d.), pp. 6, 8-9.
5 Ibid., p. 73
6 Gilbert C. Fite, `"the Farmer's Dilemma, 1919-1929," in John Bracmen,
Robert H. Bremner, and David Brody, ed., Change and Continuity in Twentieth
CenturyAmerica: the 1920's(Colnmbus: Ohio State University Press, 1968),
p. 6 7; James H. Shidcler, Farm Crisis, 1919-23 (Los Angeles: University of
California Press, 1957),p.4.
7 Upper Mississippi River Improvement Association, Proceedings of the.
Upper Mississippi River Improvement Association held in Minneapolis,
Minn., October 10 and 11, 1906 (Quincy, Illinois: McMcin Printing
Company), p. 69.
81bid., pp. 66-68.
9 Samuel Hays, Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency: the Progressive
Conservation Movement, 1890-1920 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 1959); Rebecca Conard, "'the Conservation Movement in Iowa, 185 7-
1942," National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property
Documentation Form, Iowa State Historic Preservation Office (1991), E-2-6;
W.J. McGee, "'the Conservation of Natural Resources," Proceedings ofthe
Mississippi Valley Historical Association for the Year -1909-1910, 3 (Cedar
Rapids, Iowa, 1911), pp. 361-79; Gifford Pinchot, 1heFightforConservation
(Seattle University of Washington Press, 1967; New York: Doubleday, Page &
Company, 1910); Carolyn Merchant, ed., Majorlroblenes in Environmental
History (Lexington, Massachusetts, 1993), Chaps. 9-11; Kendrick A.
Clements, "Herbert Hoover and Conservation," American Historical Review
89 (February 1984):85-86.
10 Pross, "Appropriation Bills," p. 139. On railroads having reduced their
rates as far as possible. see E. V. Smalley, "'the Deep Waterways Problem,"
Forum, XIX (Aug., 1895):746-52.
11 Hays, Conservation, p. 91.
12 Ibid., pp. 91-92.
13 Ibid., p. 92.
14 McGee, "Our Great River," p. 85 76.
15 Hays, Conservation, pp. 92-94.
16 UMRIAlroceedings, 1907, Jr. 16.
17 Ibid., pp. 16, 80.
18 Ibid., Jr. 79.
19 Ibid., p. 77; letter read to the convention from Captain L E Ellison,
secretary of the National Rivers and Harbors Congress.
20 Pross, "Appropriation Bills," pp. 131-32.
21 McGee, "Om Great River," World's Work (February 13, 1907), p. 85 77.
22 Robert H. Wicbe, the Search forOrder,, 1877-1920 (New York: Hill. and
Wang, 1967); John Milton Cooper, Jr., pivota I Decades. the United States,
1900-1920 (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1990).
23 Hays, Conservation, p. 2.
24 Hays, Conservation, p. 114.
25 Jerome G. Kerwin, Federal Water -power Legislation (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1926), pp. 8-11, 82-83, 111-25.
26 War Hepartinent, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Circular No. 14, Apra.
4, 1905, National Archives and Records Administration, Record Group 77,
Entry 103, Box 1408, F 58362, pp. 2-3; Congressional Record, 1903, Vol.
36, pt. 3, Jr. 3072; Kerwin, Water-l'ower, p. 79.
27 War Department, Circular No. 14, p. 3; Kerwin, Water-1'ower, pp. 82-84.
28 Congressional Record, 1903, pp. 3071-72. A Representative from
Alabama argued that the charges were reasonable, while Representative
Theodore Burton of Ohio argued that they were minimal. Burton defended
the President's veto, arguing that it gave an extremely valuable resource to a
small group of individuals for their exclusive use. Without a set policy, he
cautioned, Congress would appear to engage in favoritism to those who
received grants. Seep. 3072.
29 In 1904, at Hales Baron the Tennessee River, Congress required the.
Corps to build the lock but made. the Chattanooga Tennessee River Power
Company pay for the dam. The company received the power at no charge and
won a 99 -year lase. In 1905, the Keokuk and Hamilton Water Power
Company obtained a grant to build a power dam on the upper Mississippi
River at Keokuk, Iowa. Hem, the Corps determined that the lies Moines
Rapids canal served navigation needs and the company had to build the dam
and lock at its own expense. Leland Johnson, Engineers on the Twin Rivers.
AHistory ofthe Nashville District Corps of Engineers, United States Army
(Nashville, Tennessee: U.S. Army Engineer District, Nashville, 1978), pp.
163-64; Scarping Great River, pp. 23-24. W. L. Marshall, the Chiefed
Engineers, may have recommended that the Corps build all of Lock and Dam
No. 1 to avoid problems that arose over agreements at sites like these.
30 Kerwin, Waterilinver, pp. 111-14; Kerwin, Jr. 117, says that Roosevelt, in
his 1908 veto of a project on the Rainy River, in Minnesota, admitted that
"there is a sharp conflict of judgement as to whether this general act empow-
ers the War Department to fix a charge and set a time limit. All grounds for
such doubts," he contended, "should be removed henceforth by the insertion
in every act granting such a permit of words adequate to show that a time
limit and a charge to be paid to the Government are among the interests of
the United States which should be protected through conditions and stipula-
tions to be approved either by the War Department, or, as I think would be.
194
preferable, by the Interior Heparhatent." Hays, Conservation, pp. 117-19.
31 Scarpino, GreatRiver, p. 62; Hays, Conservation, p. 90-91, 100.
32 Hays, Conservation, pp. 90,102-03.
33 McGee, "Our Great River," pp. 8580-83.
34 Ibid., p. 85 79.
35 Scarping Great River, p. 22.
36 Kane, St.Anthony Palls, pp.134,151, 154. Why the Twin Cities
changed their position on the project deserves much more research.
36 U.S. Congress, House, UseofSurplus WaterFlowingoverGovemmentUam
in Mississippi Riverbetween St. 1 aul and Minneapolis, Minn., 60th Cong., 1st
sess., lloc. No. 218, pp. 2, 6. Mackenzie, after serving as the Kock Island
District Engineer from 1879 to 1895, became the Chief of Engineers on
January 23, 1904. The commissioners were Major W. V. Judson from the.
Corps of Engineers, J. E. Woodwell from the Trcascuy Department, and Major
Amos W. Kimball from the Quartermaster Corps.
37 Ibid., p. 3. While the head at this site varied from 10.2 feet at low water
to 4.0 feet at high stages, the high stages lasted longer than usual., due to the.
Minnesota River, which entered the Mississippi about two miles downstream
and backed water up to Lock and Dam No. 1.
38 Ibid., pp. 218,4-6
39 Merritt, Creativity, p. 142. Merritt argues that Minneapolis and St. Paul.
officials haggled over the placement of Lock and Dam No. 1 and that high
water hampered its start. `Business interests in Minneapolis and St. Paul,"
he. contends, "used the delay to press for a larger dam that would generate
electrical power." He does not say who these interests were.
40 Laws of the United States, v. 2, 1343; Annual Report, 1909, p. 5 61
41 U.S. Congress, House, Mississippi River, St.1aul to Minneapolis, Minn.,
61st Cong., 2d sess., H. lloc 741, p. 5. The board proposed using flash-
boards—wooden boards attached to the dam's surface to raise the height of
Dam No. 2 to provide for a 6 -foot channel. At Lock and Dam No. 1, they pro-
posed raising the height of the dam by one foot and adding an auxiliary lock
below Lock and Dam No. 1 for extreme low-water situations. The Board of
Engineers for Rivers and Harbors concurred with the first recommendation
but disagreed with the second. Bather than building another lock, it suggest-
ed that the Corps lower the already completed floor by the necessary depth;
see. pp. 5, 14.
42 Ibid., pp. 5-6. Placing the dam farther upstream would have required a
lower dam because of the. new Pillsbury Washburn hydroelectric station and
dam at Lower St. Anthony Falls. They decided against building it farther
downstream because it would have flooded the Minuchaha Creek gorge,
which, the board noted, was `one of the natural attractions of the city of
Minneapolis.'
43 Ibid., p. 6.
44 Major Francis R. Shank to Minneapolis Mayor J. C. Haynes, February 17,
1909, St. Paul. District records, St. Paul, Minnesota.
45 Ibid
46 Minneapolis liibune, June 9, 1909, p. l; H. Doc. 741, p. S. Representatives
from the University of Minnesota had met a party from St. Paul. and
Minneapolis at Lock and Dam No. 1 the day before. At this encounter, the
two cities learned of the University's interest in the hydroelectric power of
the high dam.
47 Minneapolis liibune, June 9, 1909, p. 1.
48 St. 1'aulpioneerpress, June 10, 1909, p. 4.
195
49 Minneapolis Itibune, June 10, 1909, p. 2; St. 1 aulpioneerl'ress, Jame 10,
1909, p. 4; H. Doc. 741, p. S.
50 H. Doc. 741, p. 8; St. 1'aulpioneerl4ess, June 10, 1909, p. 4; Kane,
"Rivalry" p. 321.
51 H. Doc., 741, p. 8.
52 Ibid., pp. 8-9.
53 Ibid., p. 7
54 Ibid., p. 8. In contrast to this position by the board, the Minneapolis
Tribune, June 10, 1909, p. 4, reported that those present at the June 9 public
meeting voted to go on record as favoring the building of the high dam,
whether accomplished by the state, the cities or a private interest.
55 H. Doc. 741, pp. 8-9, 12-13. The board eliminated the State of Minnesota
from consideration because it believed that the state's constitution was not
likely to be amended to allow it to engage in such a project. The Minneapolis
resolution included hydropower for the University of Minnesota.
56 Ibid., p. 3
57Ibid., pp. 3-4. Hays, Conservation, p. 114, presents information that
would explain Marshall's decision. Hays relates that when some members of
the Inland Waterways Commission suggested that private parties pay the cost
of the hydropower portion of a navigation dam, "the Corps of Engineers and
many in Congress objected that this would give rise to conflicts in operation
and administration ...." As a result, Hays says, the commission decided that
the federal government would pay the construction costs and lease the. power.
The question at Lock and Dam No. 1 was not simply whether the government
would pay all or part of the cost to make hydroelectric power possible_ The
fact that the Engineers had completed much of the authorized navigation
project put the Corps in the position of redoing the project specifically to
accommodate hydropower development. See Hays, pp. 109 and 215, for
General Mackenzie's position on this issue.
58 H. Doc. 741, p. 3.
59 Merritt, Creativity, p. 144; Merritt, p. 145, adds that while Shunk recog-
nized that the Corps had no authority to develop hydropower, he believed that
this "was just a case of legislative oversight ...." Given the debate over the
government's role in hydroelectric power development, it was not simply a
matter of legislative oversight but of national disagreement over federal
hydropower development.
60 Strunk to Haynes, February 17, 1909
61 Merritt, Creativity, pp. 144-45.
62 River and Harbor Act, June 25, 1910, laws of the United States, v. 2,
pp. 1419-20; Annual Report, 1910, pp. 1799-1800.
63 River and Harbor Act, July 25, 1912, Laws of the United States, v. 2,
pp. 1564-65.
64 Hays, Conservation, pp. 102-10
65 Ibid., pp. 108-12
66 Ibid., pp. 109-14. In 1917 Congress approved Newlands' bill., but many
changes called for in the bill had already been made, undermining its signifi-
cance. See also Donald C.Swain, Federal Conservation lblicy,1921-1933
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1963), p. 98.
6 7 As noted earlier, Congress, in the River and Harbor Act of 1910, laws of
the United States, v 2, pp. 1419-20, provided for "reasonable compensation"
from a hydroelectric power (case at Lock and Dam No. 1; Annual Report,
1910, pp. 1799-1800.
68 Hays, Conservation, p.119
69 Scarpino, Great River, p. 65.
70 Hays, Conservation, pp. 115-21. Hays says that the 1920 act represented
a compromise between conservationists and their opponents. While it per-
mitted hydroelectric power development, it separated water power from other
water related development. This essentially ended hopes for the multiple -pm -
pose. approach for over a decade_ Swain, Federal Conservation Policy, pp. 111-
21, notes that the act also created a Federal Power Commission (FPC) and for-
malized federalregulation of hydmclectric power development. The act gave
the FPC jurisdiction over all water power sites on navigable streams, the
authority to grant 50yearlicenses and to regulate electrical rates and servic-
es. "Most important," Swain, p. 113, argues, `the commission received
authority to require that projects be planned in accordance with a `compre-
hensive scheme of improve•rne ut and utilization for the purposes of naviga-
tion, of waterpower development, and of other beneficial uses.. ..' Swain
criticizes the commission, however, for being ineffective.
71 Merritt, Creativity, p. 146. Hydroelectric power development at Lock and
Dam No. 1 became. the Federal Power Commission's Project No. 3 62.
72 George W. Jcvne. and William ll. Timperley, "Study of Proposed Water
Power Development at U.S. Lock and Dam No. 1, Mississippi River Between
St. Paul and Minneapolis," ('Thesis, University of Minnesota, 1910), p. 1; Jon
Cjerde, "Historical Resources Evaluation, St. Paul District Locks and Danis on
the Mississippi River and Two Structures at St. Anthony Falls, unpublished,
for St. Paxil District, Corps of Engineers," (September 1983), p. 84.
73 Walter C. Beckjord, Ralph M. Davies, Lester H. Gatsby, "A Study of
Proposed Water Power Development at U. S. Lock and Dam No. 1, Mississippi
River between St. Paul. and Minneapolis," (Thesis, University of Minnesota,
1909), pp. 1-2. This thesis and the previous one by Jevne and Timperley were
written as the University of Minnesota was considering how it might use the
hydroelectric power generated at a high dam.
74 Kane, `Rivalry" p. 322.
75 Shook to Haynes, February 17, 1909; U.S. Congress, House, "Survey of
the Upper Mississippi River," Exec. Doc. 247, 40th Cong., 2d sess., p. 9.
76 Twin Cities businesses had taken a greater interest in freight rates as rail-
roads had begun to raise their rates. "Under the spur of increasing railroad
freight rates, there has developed amongst the business men of the Twin
Cities in the past few months a real interest in the revival of river traffic."
This may refer to the fact that the decision in the Indiana Rate Case was to
take effect inl925. U.S. Congress, House, MississippiRiverfrom Minneapolis
to lake Pepin. Reportfromthe ChiefofEngineersonNeliminaryExamination
and Survey ofMississippi Riverfrom Minneapolis to lake Pepin, with a View to
Improvement by the Construction oftocks and Dams, 69th Cong., 2d sess.,
Doc. No. 583, p. 19.
77 Ibid., p. 19.
78 Ibid., p. 17.
79 Ibid., pp. 14-15.
80 Ibid., p. 14.
81 Ibid.
82 Ibid., pp. 14-15.
83 Ibid., pp. 23, 48.
84 Merritt,Crcativity, p.195; Richard Hoops, ARiverofGrain:theEvolution
of Commercial Navigation on the UpperMississippiRiver(Madisow University
of Wisconsin -Madison, College of Agricult ral and Life Sciences Research
Report,R3584,n.d.), pp. 56-57.
85 Herbert Quick, American Inland Waterways,lheirRelation to Railway
transportation and to the National Welfare; lheirCreation, Restoration and
Maintenance (New York, 1909), p. 77. The 1920s farm crisis made farm
organizations and farm equipment manufacturers some of the strongest sup-
porters of navigation improvements during this decade.
86 Roald Tweet, History of Transportation, p. 77; Herbert Hoover, "'the
Improvement of Ouur Mid -West Waterways," 1heAnnals of theAmerican
Academy 135 (January 1928), pp. 15-24; Idem., "Address at Louisville,
Kentucky, October 23, 1929, in celebration of the Completion of the Nine -
foot Channel of the Ohio River....", William Starr Myers, ed., the State
Papers and Other Public Writings ofHerhertHoover, vol. I (Carden City, N. Y.:
Donblcday, Doran & Company, Inc., 1934), pp. 116-22; Franklin Snow,
"Waterways as Highways," North American Review 22 7 (May 1929):592.
87 Public Service Commission of Indiana Et Al. v Atchison, Topeka & Santa
Fe Railway Company, Interstate Commerce Commission Reports, Decisions of
the Interstate Commerce Commission of the United States, v 66, no. 11388,
(January to March, 1922), 520, 512-22; ibid., v. 88, no. 11388, (February
to April, 1924), 709-24; ibid., v. 88, no. 13671, 728-42.
88 Ibid., v 66, no. 11388, p. 522
89 St. PaulPioneerNess, "An Inland Empire's Need," (May 12, 1928).
90 Hoops, "A River of Crain," argues that a small clique of men pushed the.
9 -foot channelproject through and that it was a pork barrel. project. One
must consider his argmme•nt carefully, but he emdercstimates the power,
depth and expanse of the movement. Given the great interest and popular
support for this project, it transcended simple pork barrel. projects.
91 Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 154, 174-76; Clarence Buedning, "A Review of the.
Construction of the St. Anthony Falls Project," (St. Paul District, Records:
1962); Francis Mullin, "'the St. Anthony Falls Navigation Project,"
Proceedings of theAnreriean Society of Civil Engineers 89:CO1(March,
1963):1-18; Martin Nelson, "Nine -Foot Channel Extension Above St.
Anthony Falls," 1heMinnesota Engineer (Jemc, 1960):6-9; "Flooding and
Untimely Thaws Test Contractors' Mettle on River Job," Construction Bulletin
(March 6, 195206-41.
92 Letter from H. M. Byllesby & Company, Insurance Exchange Building,
Chicago, Illinois, from William de la Barre, written at the Minneapolis, Ce al.
Electric Office, Hennepin Parks, Coon Rapids Dam, historic files.
93 `Railroads, Power Dam Figure in Coon Rapids Early History," Anoka
County Union Centennial, September, 1965, Hennepin Parks, Coon Rapids
Dam, historic files, Anoka County Union Herald, September, 1965.
94 Hennepin Parks, Coon Rapids Dam, historic files, Anoka County Union
Herald, November 26, 1913. The article had originally been printed in the.
Minneapolis liibune. See U.S. Congress, House, "An Act To an theorize the.
Creat Northern Development Company to construct a dam across the
Mississippi River from a point in Hennepin County to a point in Anoka
County, Minnesota," 61st Cong., 3rd sess., Chapter 12, p. 893. The act
specifically stated that the company had to build the dam and power plant in
accordance with the Water Power acts ofhme 21, 1906, and hme 23, 1910.
95 Hennepin Parks, Coon Rapids Dam, historic files, Anoka County Union
Herald, November26, 1913.
96 Hennepin Parks, Coon Rapids Dam, historic files, Anoka County Union
Herald, December 17, 1913.
97 `Railroads, Powcrllam Figmc. in Coon Rapids Early History," Anoka
County Union Centennial, September, 1965, Hennepin Parks, Coon Rapids
Dam, historic files, Anoka County Union Herald.
98 Ibid.
Chapter 6
1 Scott E Anfinson, "Archaeology of the Central Minneapolis Waterfront,
Part 1: Historical Overview and Archaeological Potentials," The Minnesota
Archaeologist 48:1-2, (1989):17-20.
196
21bid., p. 19.
3 Anfinson, "Archaeology," p. 19; Kane, St. Anthony, It 2; Dave Wiggins, St.
Anthony Falls Heritage Zone, personal communication (April 27, 2000).
4 Hennepin, Description of Louisiana, p. 117
5 Stephen H. Long, Voyage in a Six -Oared Skiff to the Falls ofSaintAnthony in
1817 by Major Stephen H. Long, topographical Engineer, United States Army,
Collections of the Minnesota Historical Society, vol. H (St. Paul., Minnesota:
Minnesota Historical Socicty, 1889 (facsimile copy printed 1997)), pp. 37-40;
Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 2-3; in footnote 5, p. 19 7, she says them are many ver-
sions of this story and lists some.
6 Henry Rowe Schoolcraft, Havels through the Northwestern Regions of the
United States (Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, Inc., p. 291, from
Henry Rowe School craft, Norio tivelournal of Havels through the Northwestern
Regions of the United States Extenelingfrom Detroit through the Great Chain of
American lakes, to the Sources of the Mississippi River, I'eifon weed as a Member of
the Expedition under Governor Cass, in the Year 1820 (Albany, Ncw York: E. &
E. Hosford, 1821).
7 Anfinson, "Archaeology," pp. 19-20; see Figure 5, p. 21.
8 Kane, St. Anthony, p. 3.
9 Long, Voyage, pp. 3 5-36. Long acknowledged that he did not have an
instrument to measure the fall exactly.
10 Kane, St. Anthony, p. 2.
11 Pike, Sources of the Mississippi, pp. 92-93.
12 Kane, St. Anthony, p. 9.
13 Ibid., quotes pp. 2, 3, and 4 respectively
14 Carole Zellic, "The Voice of Nature, Geographic Features and Landscape
Change. at St. Anthony Falls:'A report prepared for the Saint Anthony Falls
Heritage Board, by landscape Research, St. Paul, Minnesota, October 1989, p. 8;
Dave Wiggins (St. Anthony Fabs Heritage Zone) suggests that the trees on Spirit
Island were cedar rather than oak. Personal communication (April. 27, 2000).
15 Schoolcraft, Havels, p. 289; Zel he, "Voice of Nature," p. 9.
16 Schoolcraft, Havels, p. 290.
17 Zellic, "Voice of Nature," pp. 8-9
18 the Journal. of James E. Cothoun, 1823," published in The Northern
Expeditions of Stephen H. Long, thelourreals of 1817 and 1823 and Related
Documents, ed. by Lucile M. Kane, June D. Holmquist, and Carolyn Gilman, (St
Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1978), p. 284.
19 G. C. Beltrami, A Pilgrimage in America, Leading to the Discovery of the
Sources of the Mississippi and Bloody Rivers; with a Description of the Whole
Course of the Former, and of the Ohio (Chicago: Quadrangle. Books, Inc., 1962;
first edition published in London, England, 1828), pp. 204-05.
20 Beltrami, Pilgrimage, p. 205.
21 Kane, St. Anthony, p. 3.
22 Ibid., p. 3
23 Zellic, "Voice of Nature," It 10
24 George W. Featherstonaugh, A Canoe Voyage up the Minnay Sotor, with an
Account of the lead and Copper Deposits in Wisconsin; of the Gold Region in thle
Cherokee Country; and Sketches of1'opularManners (St. Pant: Minnesota
Historical Society, 1970; first published by Richard Bentley in London,
England, 1847), pp. 253-54.
197
25 Fcatherstoreaugh, Canoe Voyage, It 254.
26 Lang, Voyage, p. 34.
27Ibid., p. 35.
28 Zellic, "Voice of Nature," p. 11.
29 Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 9, 12.
30 Ibid., p. 13.
31 Ibid., pp. 13-14.
32 Ibid., pp. 15-16.
33 Ibid., pp. 16-19, quote. p. 17.
34 Ibid., p. 18.
35 Ibid.
36 Ibid.
37 Ibid., pp. 26-27.
38 Ibid., pp. 31-32.
39 Ibid., p. 32.
40 Anderson, Kinsmen, pp. 184-89.
41 Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 34-38.
42 Ibid., pp. 37, 42, 50-51.
43 Ibid., pp. 42, 44, 49. Sanford was the son-in-law of hr trade magnate
Pierre Choutcau. Ccbhard was a banker and importer, and Davis was a
merchant. See. It 25.
44 Ibid., pp. 43, 44.
45 Ibid., pp. 44-49, 52-53.
46 Ibid., pp. 49-54, 5 7. The company lengthened the canal to 600 feet in
the mid -1860s and to 950 feet in the mid -1890s. It created ahead of about
35 feet, and".. Ahis waterpower distribution system turned a six block river -
front ship into the country's most densely industrialized, direct -drive water-
power district." See National. Register Continuation Sheet, p. 8-4.
47 Kane, St. Anthony, p. 53; Wiggins, personal communication (April 27,
2000), suggests that the date construction began on the cast side tunnel was
1867, not 1866. The cave did serve some purpose. From 1875 to 1883,
Mannesseh P IA-ttingifl used part of the tunneland cave to bring tourists in
on flatboats. See Kane, St Anthony, p. 86.
48 Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 5 7, 58, 106
49 Ibid., p. 71.
50 Ibid., p. 72.
51 Minneapolis liibune, November 20, 18 76.
52 Kane, St. Anthony, p. 81.
53 Ibid., pp. 106, 107; Scott Anfinson, personal. communication (April
2000), provided the information regarding the new dam.
54 Anfinson, "Archaeology," pp. 26,28; Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 107-08, 122.
55 Kane, St Anthony, pp. 108, 115, 125
56 Ibid., pp. 27, 32.
57 Dodd and Dodd, Historical Statistics, pp. 24-25; Solon J. Buck, Granger
Movement, pp. 28-34. Kane, St. Anthony, p. 100, uses the following figures:
Minnesota wheat harvest was 17.7 million bushels in 1869 and 39.4 mil-
lion in 1880.
58 Anfinson, "Archaeology," p. 24; Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 59, 99-101.
59 Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 104-05.
60 Dodd and Dodd, Historical Statistics, pp. 24-25.
61 Kane, St. Anthony, p. 102.
62 Ibid., pp. 101-03.
63 Ibid., p. 104.
64 Ibid., p. 101; see Cronon, Nature's Metropolis, chapter 3 for a detailed dis-
cussion of Chicago's grain marketing system.
65 Kane, St. Anthony, p. 105.
66 Ibid., p. 99.
67 Ibid., pp. 98-99, 113.
68 St. Anthony Fags Historic District (SAN), National Register of Historic
Places, National Register Nomination Continuation Form, p. 8-8; Kane, St.
Anthony, pp. 86, 104, 123.
69 Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 86, 87, 116, 123, 147.
70 Ibid., pp. 98-99; SAN, National Register Nomination Continuation Form,
pp. 8-6 to 8-7.
71 Kane, St. Anthony, pp. 115, 150-51, 172-73; SAN, National Register
Nomination Continuation Form, p. 8-7.
72 Kane, St.Anthony, pp. 134-37.
73 Ibid., pp. 140-41.
74 Scarping Great River, p. 22.
75 Kang St. Anthony, p. 154.
76 Ibid., pp. 117,149,152-5 7, 165,171-72; quotes p. 154. The Corps of
Engineers removed the lower dam when it built the Lower St. Anthony Lock
and Dam in the early 19 50s, and the station collapsed in 198 7, after the river
umderuined its foundation. The outline of the old dam was dearly visible
after the poolbehind the lock and dam drained due to the station's collapse.
77 Ibid., pp. 108-10.
78 Ibid., pp. 110-11; see also pp. 59-60.
79 Anfinson, Archaeology, p. 29; SAF, National Register Nomination
Continuation Form, pp. 7-3, 8-7, 8-9; Kane, St. Anthony, p. 173.
Chapter 7
1 Sonic mills lay just outside the MNRRA corridor's boundaries, but they are
stillcriticalto the corridor's history. Their activities helped define the eco-
nomic development of those. communities. Even mills not on the river relied
on the Mississippi to receive logs. Although the sawmills at Anoka were on
the Rum River, a short distance upstream from its mouth and just outside the
boundaries of the MN RRA corridor, they deserve consideration, since Anoka's
early economy was so tied to milling. The same is true for mills on the
Vermillion River in Hastings.
2 J. Fletcher Williams, AHisony ofthe City ofSaintl'aul to 1875, (St. Paul:
Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1983; first published in 1876 by the
Minnesota Historical Society as Volume 4 of the Collections of the Minnesota
Historical Society), pp. 144, 281; Leslie A. Guelcher, ]he History ofNininger.
. More ]han just a Dream," (Stillwater, Minnesota: Croixside Press, 1982), pp.
85-88. Brooklyn township split into Brooklyn Center and Crystal Lake in
1860.
3 Jean James, "'the history of Ramscy/researched, written and published as a
Biccntemual project in 1976," [City of Ramsey, Minnesota, (1976)],
Minnesota Historical Society Collections, p. 54.
4 Albert M. Goodrich, History of Anoka County and the ]owns ofChanrplin and
Hayton in Hennepin County, Minnesota, (Minneapolis: Hennepin Publishing
Co., 1905; reprinted by Anoka Bicentennial Commission, 1976), pp. 123-25;
see p. 124 for a photo of the mill.
5 Goodrich, History ofAnoka County, p. 60
6 Mississippi River Commission (MRC), "Detail Map of the Upper Mississippi
River from Minneapolis, Minnesota, to lake Itasca, in Seventy Eight Sheets,
from Surveys 1898-1904, Chart Numbers 202 (1898), 201(1898);
Mississippi River Commission (MRC), "lletail. Map of the Upper Mississippi
River from the Month of the Ohio River to Minneapolis, Minnesota, in Eighty -
Nine Sheets, Chart No. 189 (1895). There are no chart numbers 190-200.
Numbers 189 and 201 adjoin each other.
7 MRC Chart No.189 (1895).
8 Paul Hesterman, "'the Mississippi and St. Paull: Change is a Constant for
River and the City that Shaped It," Ramsey County History 21:1(1986):13;
Williams, AHistory ofSaintl oul, pp. 144, 281, footnote. pp. 385-86, and p.
433. See quote from the Pioneer, November 28, on p. 281, about the stcam-
powered mill.
9 Zellic, "Hastings' Historic Contexts," submitted to the Hastings Heritage
Preservation Commission and the City of Hastings, landscape Research Only
31, 1993), pp. 15-16; for a short description of various mills see pp. 12-13;
John K. Tester, Minnesota's Natural Heritage, An Ecologicall'erspective,
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 199 5), p. 70, says that the Big
Woods once covered some two million acres south and west of the Twin Cities.
10 Hesterman, "'the Mississippi and St. Paul," p. 14; MRC Chart No. 189,189 5
11 Leslie Randels Gillund, "Coon Rapids, a fine city by a dam site history of
Coon Rapids, Minnesota, 1849-1984," Minnesota Historical Society
Collections, quote p. 7, see pp. 7-8.
12 Rev. Edward D. Neill., History ofHennepin County and the City ofMinneapolis,
Including Explorers and Pioneers ofMinnesota, and Outlines of theHistory of
Minnesota, by]. Fletcher Williams, (Minneapolis: North Star Publishing Company,
1881), pp. 278-79. Other than his initial reference, Neill provides no further
information on the location of these. brickyards. MRC Chart No. 189, 1895,
shows a brickyard on the cast side near the Minneapolis city limits and a day pit
just south of the city limits on the cast side. These could be related to the brick-
yards Neill mentions. Hcsterman, "'the Mississippi and St. Paul," p. 13; Zellic,
"Hastings' Historic Contexts," p. 16.
13 Heritage Education Project, "'the Grey Cloud lime Kiln," Heritage Site File,
Cottage Grove. and Newport, Minnesota, nd., p. 1.
14 Ibid., pp. 1-2
15 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, "Historic Context: Early
Agriculture and River Settlement (1840-1870)," (nd). I found nothing on
sorghum milling in the MN RRA corridor.
16 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, "Historic Context: Railroads
and Agricultural Development (1870 -1940)," (nd).
17 Zellic, "Hastings' Historic Contexts," p. 11, says that Fairbault was the first to
plant wheat but docs not say when. Williams, AHistmy ofSaintlaul, p. 38,
notes that Fairbault had a post one to two mites above St. Paul. when Pike ascend-
ed the river in 1805. Dodd and Dodd, Historical Statistics, pp. 24-25; Buck,
Granger Movement, pp. 28-34. Kang St.Anthony, p. 100, uses the following fig-
ures: Minnesota wheat harvest was 17.7 million bushels in 1869 and 39.4 nril-
198
lion in 1880. Zdlic, "Hastings' Historic Contexts," pp. 11-12; Reynolds,
"Dakota County Resnrce Nomination (Draft, June 1979)," p. 3H
18 Goodrich, History ofAnoka County, pp. 29-30, 35, 58, 107-08.
19 Goodrich, History ofAnoka County, pp. 108-10; Zellic, "Hastings' Historic
Contexts," Jr. 14.
20 Robert C. Vogel., "Cottage Grove History: A Palimpsest," Heritage
Education Project, Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation, City of
Cottage Grove, 1997. pp. 2-3.
21 Vogel, "Cottage Grove History," Jr. 3.
22 Zedlie, "Hastings' Historic Contexts," p. 11.
23 Ibid., pp. 11, 13.
24 MRC ChartNos. 185-89,201-05 (1895 and 1898).
25 Goodrich, History ofAnoka County, pp. 65, 68, 73.
26 Neill, Hennepin County, Jr. 304; Lucile M. Kane and Alan Ominsky, Twin
Cities: A Pictorial History of Saint( ail and Minneapolis, (St. Paul: Minnesota
Historical Society Press, 1983), Jr. 56.
27 Neill, Hennepin County, pp. 279, 301, 304; Goodrich, History ofAnoka
County, pp. 172-73; Zellic, "Hastings' Historic Contexts," pp. 12-13;
Gucdcher, Nininger, p. 89. On Banfil, sec Williams, AHistory ofSaintl'aul, Jr.
160. The mill on Rice Creek appears on MRC Chart No. 201 (1898).
28 Goodrich, History ofAnoka County, Jr. 126.
29 D. Jeromc Tewton, "The Business of Agriculture," in Clifford E. Clark, Jr.,
ed., Minnesota in a Century of Change: The State and Its People Since 1900,
(St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1989), Jr. 267.
30 Ibid., Jr. 268.
31 Robert Hybben and Jeffrey Hess, "Historic American Engineering Record,
Equity Cooperative Exchange Grain Elevator Complex," unpublished docu-
ments prepared for the City of St. Paul, (December 1989), pp. 4-5. This docu-
ment was prepared at the direction of the City of St. Paul but never officially
submitted to the Historic American Engineering Record.
32 Theodore Saloutos, "The Rise of the Equity Cooperative Exchange," the
Mississippi Valley Historical Review 32:1(June 1945):31-62; C. L. Franks,
"Inland Waterways Advocate, Col. George C. Lambert, Dies: Among Pioneers
to Back Channel in Upper Mississippi," UpperMississippi Riverlh lletin 3:3
(March 1934):1; David L. Nass, "'the Rural Experience," in Clark, ed.,
Minnesota in a Century of Change, Jr. 143.
33 E. J. Barry, "Water 1Yansportation and Grain Marketing," in American
Cooperation, 1961 (Washington DC: American Institute for Cooperation,
1961), pp. 365-366. See also "How the Nine Foot Channel was Built,"
UpperMississippi Riverlh lletin 8 (November 1939):4. Barbara A. Mitchel.(,
Hemisphere Field Services, Inc., "A History of the St. Paul Municipal Grain
Elevator and Sack House," prepared for the MNRRA as part of the Historic
Resources Study.
34 Application for Permit, City of St. Paul. August 14, 1951, number
31833; February 18, 1955, 10802; May 13, 1955, 12891; December 22,
1955, 32805, 32806, 32807, 31808; June 1, 1956, 32804; October 24,
1956, 421824, at St. Paul City Hall.
35 Application for Permit, City of St. Paul. May 15, 1958, number 76407
3 6 Robert L. Morlan, political Prairie Fire—the Nonpartisan League, 1915-
1922, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1955), p. 361. Sec also
Oscar N. Refsell, "'the Farmers' Elevator Movement I," Journal ofpolitical
Economy 2l(Novcmber 1914): 872-873.
37 "St. Paul Union Stockyards, Centennial Year 1886-1986," Minnesota
Historical Society Collections (1986), no page numbers.
199
38 "St. Paul Union Stockyards, Centennial Year 1886-1986," Minnesota
Historical Society Collections; Reynolds, "Dakota County Multiple Resource
Nomination (Draft)," Jr. 5H.
391cwton, "The Business of Agriculture," Jr. 275.
40 "St. Paul Union Stockyards, Centennial Year 1886-1986," Minnesota
Historical Society Collections.
41 Kirk Jeffrey, "The Major Manufacturers: From Food and Forest Products to
High Technmlogy," in Clark, ed., Minnesota in a Century of Change, Jr. 225.
Hormel, located in Austin, Minnesota, was the largest producer in the state. by
1920.
421ewton, `"The. Business of Agriculture," pp. 275-76; Charles McGuire, per-
sonal communication, Mississippi National. River and Recreation Arca,
(Spring 2000).
43 Gary J. Brueggermann, "Beer Capital of the State — St. Paul's Historic Family
Breweries," Ramsey County History 16:2 (1981):3; Scott E Arifinson,
"Archacologyofthe Central Minneapolis RiverfronC' 1heMinnesota
Archaeologist, vol. 49:1-2 (1990):41; Zcdlic, "Hastings' Historic Contexts," Jr.
13.
44 Deborah A. Hull-Walskl and Frank Walski, "There's Trouble. a -Brewin':
The Brewing and Bottling Industries at Harpers Ferry, West Virginia,"
HistoricalArchaeology, (1994):106; Jcffrcy, `"The Major Manufacturers," p.
226.
45 Brueggermamn, `Beer Capital of the State," pp. 4-5.
46 Ibid., pp. 6-7.
471bid., pp. 7-9.
48 Ibid., Jr. 9.
49 Ibid., pp. 12-13.
50 Ibid., Jr. 10, has a good description of the caves. The caves stillexist under
West Seventh Street.
51 Ibid., pp. 10-11.
52 Scott F. Anfinson, "Archaeology" Jr. 41.
53 Jeffrey, ``The Major Manufacturers," pp. 226, 239; Zellic, "Hastings'
Historic Contexts," Jr. 14; Brueggermann, "Beer Capital of the State," Jr. 11;
John E. Haynes, `Reformers, Radicals, and Conservatives," in Clark, ed.,
Minnesota in a Century of Change, Jr. 367.
54 Virginia Brainard Kunz, The Mississippi and St. Paul, Ashort history ofthe
city's 150yearlove affair with its river, (St. Paull, Minnesota:lhe Ramsey
County Historical Society, 1987), Jr. 40.
55 Because the falls was the head of navigation, pioneers settling above the
falls had a difficult time getting supplies. Initially, they had to bury their
goods in the town of St. Anthony. To get there, they sometimes tied sonic logs
together and Boated down. They followed Indian trails on their return trip.
Neill., Hennepin, p.298. Goodrich, History ofAnoka County, Jr. 42; James,
The history of Ramsey," Jr. 9. James says the settlers arrived intone of
1850. She shows a photo of some type of working boat with the following
caption: "A steamboat coming into the harbor at Itasca Village." Goodrich,
History ofAnoka County, Jr. 68.
56 Neill provides contradictory reports on steamboat traffic above St.
Anthony. When talking about the history of "Brooklyn," he claims that the.
Mississippi was navigable there and that "smallsteamers ply up and down."
Yet when discussing Champlin, he writes that "At one time, steamboats plied
on the river, landing at Champlin ... " but, he adds, "the river is not navigat-
ed regularly at the present time." Neill, Hennepin, pp. 285, 300.
57 Nancy and Robert Goodman, "Joseph R. Brown, Advenhucr on the
Minnesota Frontier, 1820-1849," (Rochester, Minnesota: Lone Oak Press, Ltd.,
1996), p. 159. Goodrich, History ofAnoka County, pp. 38,43,46-47,49, 63,
71. The present-day Robert Street Bridge in St. Paul is named for Louis Robert.
Neill., Hennepin, p. 299, says that a Joseph Holt began operating a ferry at
Champlin in 185 5. Either this is a second ferry that began operating between
Anoka and Champlin or Halt owned the Elm Creek and Anoka Ferry Company.
Williams, AHistory of St Paul, pp. 237, 322. He says the bridge opened in
1858, whereas Lisa Haller, Ivelise Brasch, Gary Phelps, and Bill Walston,
"Crossings," Over the Years, 31:1 (Dakota County Historical Society,
September 1991):5, say the bridge opened in 1859. Dorothy Goth, ed., St.
PautPark's Heritage. AHistory of Saintl au[ lark on 1beMississippi, 1887-
1895, (Cottage Grove, Minnesota: Inky Fingers Press, 1985), Jr. 56.
58 Zellfe, "Hastings' Historic Contexts," Jr. 21.
59 Gillund, "Coon Rapids," p. 3; James, `"fhc history of Ramsey," Jr. 10; Goodrich,
History ofAnoka County, Jr. 51; Zclhc, "Hastings' Historic Contexts," p. 22.
60 Goodrich, History of Anoka County, p. 51.
61 Vogel, "Cottage Grove History," p. 3. The Henry House, built in 1854 on a
military road, is still standing and is listed on the National Register. See Vogel,
"Cottage Grove History" p. 2.
62 ZcRfe, Hastings' Historic Contexts, Jr. 23. LoisA Glewwe, lbellistory oflnver
Grove Heights, Minnesota's Treasure, 1858-1990, (City of firver Grove Heights,
1990), p. 204, mentions that a military mad was built from Hastings to St. Paul.
was "graded through as early as 1855 by the military crews of Captain William
Dodd." She says it became known as the St. Paul to Hastings Road.
63 Richard S. Prosser, Rails to the North Star, (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Dillon
Press, 1966), pp. 8-12, 17; Gillund, "Coon Rapids," p. 4. The St. Paul. and
Pacific succeeded the Minnesota and Pacific, which had built the First line.
from St. Paul to St. Anthony in 1862. See Gillund, "Coon Rapids," Jr. 4.
64 Prosser, Rails, pp.17, 35.
65 MRC Chart Nos. 185-89, 201-05 (18 95 and 1898).
66 MRC Chart No. 201. 1898.
67 Hesterman, ``fhc. Mississippi and St. Paul.'
68 Hesterman, "'the Mississippi and St. Paul," pp. 9, 14; MBC Chart Nos. 186-
89. On Hastings, sec Zellic, "Hastings' Historic Contexts," pp. 21, 22. Other
than railyards at the city's center, she says, p. 24, "the Milwaukee Railroad
Depot (1884) is among the best evidence of the early transportation context."
69 Hesterman, "'the Mississippi and St. Paul," p. 10.
70 Hesterman, "'the Mississippi and St. Paul," pp. 4-5, 10.
71 Ibid., pp. 6, 9, 12, 14.
72 Ibid., pp. 6, 10.
73 John B. Borchert, `"fhc Network of Urban Centers," in Minnesota in a
Century of Change, p. 69.
74 Borchert, `"Phe Network of Urban Centers," pp. 69-70; Baerwald, "Forces at
Work on the Landscape," in Minnesota in a Century of Change, pp. 23-24;
Gillund, "Coon Rapids," p. 12; Zellic, "Hastings' Historic Contexts," pp. 21-22.
75 Borchert, "'the Network of Urban Centers," pp. 71, 84, 86-87; Baerwald,
"Forces at Work on the Landscape," p. 20.
76 Goth, ed., St. Pard lark'sHeritage, p. 56.
77 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Metro Arca River Guide A
guide to boating the Mississippi, St. Croix and Minnesota rivers," 1994, pro-
vides the river miles for the river above St. Anthony Falls as well as below.
78 Guelcher, Nininger, p. 85.
79 Kane, St. Anthony, p. 40; Haller, et at., "Crossings," pp. 4-9, 20-21; the
entire issue is about bridges.
Chapter 8
1 Thc. literature on the history of the Twin Cities is voluminous and much of
it addresses, however indirectly, the physical growth of the cities. Not all.,
however, directly address residential growth, particularly the ordinary devel-
opment of neighborhoods, developers' plats, and other staples of land use
change. The fallowing texts have been most useful to the present study, and
should be considered the source of specific information, unless otherwise.
noted. John Borchert, ct al., legacy ofMinneapolis: preservationAneid Change
(Bloomington, Minnesota: Voyageur, 1983); Pan[ Donald Hesterman, Interests,
Values, and Public l'olicyforan Urban River. AHistory ofileveloptnentAlong tine
Mississippi River in Saintl'aul, Minnesota (Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1985); Hesterman, ``fhc. Mississippi and St. Paul.:
Change is a Constant for River and the City that Shaped It," Ramsey County
History 21:1 (1986): 3-22; June Hrenning Holmquist, ed., 17iey Chose
Minnesota: A Survey of the State's Ethnic Groups (St. Paul, Minnesota:
Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1981); David Lanegran, "'the
Neighborhood River," in Carole Ze ic, 1beMississippi and St. Pool. APlanning
Study oflnterprefivepotentials (unpublished report submitted to the Ramsey
County Historical Society and the National Endowment for the Humanities,
1988), pp. 37-102; Judith A. Martin and David Lanegran, Where Welive. 1be
ResidentialDistricts ofMinneapolis and Saintl aul (Minneapolis, Minnesota:
Published by the University of Minnesota Press in association with the Center
for Urban and Regional. Affairs, University of Minnesota, 1983); Larry,
Millett, lost livin Cities (St. Paul, Minnesota: Minnesota Historical Society
Press, 1992); Edward Duffield Neill, "St. Paul and Its Environs," Minnesota
History v. 30 (1940):204-19; Warren Upham, Minnesota Geographic Nantes,
lbeirOrigin and Historic Significance (St. Paul, 1969; reprint edition); J.
Fletcher Williams, AHistory ofthe City of St. laul to 1875 (St. Paul, 1876;
reprint, Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1983).
A special notation must be made of the. work of the Presbyterian minister
Edward Duffield Neill. Nullwas surely the most prolific early historian of
the state, bung listed as a principal author of dozens of books on a variety of
subjects. Four of these have been basic to the research undertaken for this
study: History of Hennepin County and the City of Minneapolis (Minneapolis,
Minnesota: North Star Publishing, 1881), History of the Upper -Mississippi
Valley (North Star Publishing, 1881), History ofUakota County and the City of
Hastings (Minneapolis, Minnesota: North Star Publishing, 1881), and History
ofliarrsey County and the City of St Poul (Minneapolis, Minnesota: North Star
Publishing, 1881). The similarities between these volumes extend beyond
their titles and publication dates. Each volume, compiled by George E. Warner
and Charles M. Foote, has a nearly identical Table of Contents. Neill con-
tributed the first essay "Explorers and Pioneers of Minnesota," and J. Fletcher
Williams followed with a year -by -year compilation of significant facts in the
state's history between 1858 and 1881. The following chapters varied slight-
ly from volume to volume but typically included an account of the Civil War
record of men from that county, a brief summary of the county's leading
lawyers, its chief events, and other notations. The bulk of each volume,
though, and the sections most directly important for this study, are the
detailed descriptions of the establishment and early settlement of the cities
and townships (`towns" in the late nineteenth century usage) of each county.
A great deal of the settlement story for this arca, at least nntii around 1880, is
contained in these chapters.
The limitations of these books as analyticalhistory or the "full story" are
obvious. For example, women hardly appear at all; there is an implicitly
"Manifest Destiny" ideology to the books that treats Native Americans as obsta-
cles to "civilization," and, once conquered, as objects of nostalgia. Town settle-
ments are treated as heroic narratives of commercial enterprises and progres-
sions of industrial development. This is not the place to discuss the reasons for
these patterns and biases, nor has there been time to conduct investigations
that would correct and enhance the pictures they depict. Thur use in the pres-
ent study should be understood as sources of important detail on one version of
the past and the Enter,Americansettlement of the MNRRA corridor
2 Some explanation of this typology is in order. The historical and geographi-
cal literature defining towns, cities, population centers, etc., is large and com-
plex. For the purposes of this study, a population center is considered as a
group of dwellings clustered more tightly than the surrounding agricultural.
residence pattern and usually focusing on some non-residential establishment,
perhaps a school, church, or post office, but often a commercial establishment
such as a store or tavern. "Urban Centers" are understood as those places with
200
a sufficient concentration of commercial enterprises to result in a degree of
specialization and perhaps spatial ordering into a "commercial district" or
"downtown:'
Research for this study clearly indicates that the relative importance of a
particular population center changed dramatically over time and in relation to
other centers. For example, Nininger, now a semi urban enclave. between St. Paul
and Hastings, was once a substantialcenter with a population of over 1,000. By
contrast, the present municipality of Coon Rapids did not exist until 19 52,
when the Village of Coon Rapids was formed from Anoka Township. The present
study is intended to be more descriptive than analytical; therefore, the categories
have been developed as a rudimentary attempt to sort out the dominant popula-
tion threads throughout the region during the study period.
3 Isaac, Atwater, cd., History of the City ofMinneapolis (New York: Munsell &
Co., 1893), p. 69.
4 Neill., History of Ramsey County, p. 296.
5 Millett, Lost Twin Cities, p. 10.
6 Upham, Minnesota Geographic Names, p. 439.
7 Borchert, Legacy, pp. 8-9.
8 Upham, Minnesota Geographic Names, p. 226.
9 Atwater, City ofMinneapolis, p. 29.
10 Joseph Stipanovich, City of Lakes:AnlllustratedHistory ofMinneapolis
( Woodland Hills, California: Windsor Publications, 1982), p. 8.
11 Atwater, City ofMinneapolis, p. 29.
12 Upham, Minnesota Geographic Names, p. 223.
13 Scott E Anfinson, "Archaeology of the Central Minneapolis Riverfront, vol.
1: Historical Overview and ArchaeologicalPotmtials," HwMinnesma
Archaeologist 48:1-2 (1989).
14 Neill, History ofHakota County, pp. 209,265; Upham, Minnesota
Geographic Names, p. 165.
15 Neill, History ofHakota County, pp. 265-77.
16 Upham, Minnesota Geographic Names, p. 22, cites the authority of
Professor A. W. Williamson for this derivation.
17 Neill, History of the Upper Mississippi Valley, pp. 222-30.
18 Upham, Minnesota Geographic Names, p. 23; Neill, History of the Upper
Mississippi Valley, p. 2 75.
19 Accounts of Mendota are well known. See standard histories of the state:
Folwell, AHisony of Minnesota, and Blegen, Minnesota; also, Anderson, Kinsmen.
20 Upham, Minnesota Geographic Names, p. 5 72; John H. Case, "Historical
Notes of Grey Cloud Island and Its Vicinity," Minnesota Historical Society
Collectionsvol. 15, pp. 371-78.
21 Upham, Minnesota Geographic Names, p. 166; Neill, History of Dakota
County, pp. 440-43; Leslie. A. Guelcher, McHistory ofNininger... More lean
Just a Dream (Stillwater, Minnesota: Croixside. Press, 1982), p. 5 7.
22 Neill, History of Washington County, pp. 355-56; Upham, Minnesota
Geographic Names, p. 568.
23 Neill, History of Washington County, pp. 3 53-5 7.
24 Millett, Lost Twin Cities, p. 49.
25 Ibid., pp. 49, 107.
26 Anfinson, "Archaeology," p. 50.
27 Stipanovich, City of Lakes, pp. 232, 243.
201
28 Millett, Lost livin Cities-, see also Federal Writers' Project, Works Progress
Administration, HwBohemianllats(St. Paul, 1986; originallypublished 1941)
29 Millett, Lost linin Cities, p. 83.
30 Borchert, Legacy.
31 Anfinson, "Archaeology."
32 Theodore Wirth, Minneapolisl'ark System, 1883-1944: retrospective
glimpses into the history of theBoard of Park Commissioners ofMinneapolis,
Minnesota, and the city's park, parkway and playground system, presented at the
annualmeeting of the Board of Park Commissioners, July 16, 194 5,
(Minneapolis, Minnesota: Minneapolis, Board of Park Commissioners, 1945).
33 Lanegran, ``fhc Neighborhood River," pp. 3 7-102.
34 Martin and Lanegran, Where Welive; Rueben H. Donnelley, Donnelley's
Atlas ofthe City of St. Paul, Minnesota (Chicago: The Corporation, 1892);
Upham, Minnesota Geographic Names, p. 437.
35 Upham, Minnesota Geographic Names, pp. 4 3 7-3 9
36 Williams, City of St. Paul, pp. 260, 414.
37 John Walters, "A History of Harrict Island," unpublished typescript,
Division of Archives and Manuscripts, Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul.
38 David L. Cartier, Curtice's Revised Atlas of the City of St Paul, (St. Paul,
Minnesota: H. M. Smyth Printing Co., 1908).
39 Millett, Lost linin Cities, p. 82.
40 Lanegran, "Neighborhood River," and Hesterman, `'fhc Mississippi and
St. Paul:'
41 Neill, History of Dakota County, p. 296.
42 Ibid., p. 214.
43 Wirth, Minneapolis Park System.
44 Upham, Minnesota Geographic Names, p. 568
45 Lois G(ewwe, South St. Pool Centennial, 1887-1987, (South St. Paul (?):
Dakota County Historical. Society, 198 7).
46 Sec, for discussions of more. recent historical and geographical trends,
Hesterman, Interests, Values, andl'nblicl'olicy, Borchert, "'the Network of
Urban Centers," pp. 55-99; John S. Adams and Barbara J. VanOrasek,
Minneapolis -St. Paul: people Place, andpublic Qfe, (Minneapolis, Minnesota:
University of Minnesota Press, 1993).
47 Martin and Lanegran, Where We Live.
Epilogue
1 Lucile M. Kane, June. D. Holmquist, and Carolyn Gilru in, edited, IheNorthem
Expeditions of Stephen H. Long, theloumals of 1817 and 1823 and Related
Documents, (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1978), p. 66.
2 David Classberg, "Public History and the Study of Memory" lkepublic
Historian, 18:2 (Spring 1996):19-20.
3 Ibid., p. 17.
4 Ibid., p. 21.
5 Section 701.(a) Findings, Public Law 100-696, November 18, 1988, 102
Stat 45 99, Title VII - Mississippi National River and Recreation Arca.
5