A history, Greeley and the Union Colony of Colorado

Front matter

at

( frG 9 y wv - j> f r

A HISTORY:

Preface

LAST summer I wrote a chapter for Frank Hall’s Second Volume of the History of Colorado, on Greeley and the Union Colony of Colorado, from the spring of 1871 up to date. The first year had been sketched by the author in his first volume. While engaged in this work, it occurred to me that a more extended view of our history would be desirable in a separate volume, and which could be had at a figure so low as to be within the reach of all.

The present time appeared to me a favorable one for this work as many of the old landmarks are disappearing, and the data I found were beginning to be difficult to procure. The files of The Tribune were incomplete, nearly the whole of the first year being missing, while The Sun has no files previous to 1885. The deficiency above pointed out, is made good to a certain extent by the care of H. T. West who has collected in a “Scrap Book” a large number of newspaper articles relating to the colony during the first three years. Mr. West has been kind enough to put this in my hands together with other valuable documents, some of which will be printed in full in the appendix.

Mrs. N. C. Meeker and Mrs. Skewes, her daughter, have also furnished me valuable papers — articles published in The New York Tribune from the pen of N. C. Meeker, when he was on his trip to the Rocky Mountains prior to the formation of the colony, and also some forty letters from Horace Greeley to Mr. Meeker during the years 1870, 1871 and 1872. The greater portion of these last I have seen fit to publish on account of their historical value, and to show the deep interest Mr. Greeley took in the welfare of the colony and his friendship for and confidence in N. C. Meeker.

It may seem to some out of place to publish a history of this length about a place so small in population and so young as Greeley. It is worth while to remember that the cities which have, and deservedly, the most celebrity, were not the most populous ; and some of the countries which have had the greatest influence on human progress were of limited extent. The area of Attica, the domain subject to Athens, was only 2,481 square miles, the greater part of which was unfit for cultivation ; and that of Latium, for some centuries the only territory

VI

PREFACE.

of Rome, was only 4,601 square miles, while that of Weld County, when the colony came here, was about 16,000 square miles.

It is true Greeley has not attained the celebrity of these ancient States, but it has become more widely and more favorably known than many American cities of ten times its population. Its reputation is not only as wide as the United States and Canada, but its fame has penetrated to remote hamlets in Europe. William Black, in his novel, “Green Pastures and Piccadilly,” devotes a page or over to a description of our then little town (in 1877) which ends in these words: “As we think of Greeley — here in England in the depth of winter — it shines for us still in the light of that summer morning, and the trees and fields are yet green around it, and the mountains are blue under the blue of the sky. May it shine and Sourish forever.”

In its early days no place of its size was ever so well advertised as Greeley. This came not from any attempt to “boom” the place, but from the wide circulation of The New York Tribune, and the reputation that Mr. Meeker, the founder of Greeley, had as a writer for the columns of that paper; also from the well known experiment we were making as a co-operative and temperance community. The Greeley Tribune, chiefly, after it was started, became the principal vehicle of information to the rest of the country, and was a journal unique not only in the editorial articles, but by the original contributions of many writers here, foremost among them J. Max. Clark. Mr. Meeker was cautious never to overstate the facts as to the advantages of our place ; and the men, mostly farmers, who after the first year had the management of colonial matters, were most pronouncedly opposed to all misrepresentation of the actual situation of affairs here. So, too, the most of the people were free from makingnoisy demonstrations about our success, and we became a subject of remark on the part of strangers on account of our indifference as to what others thought about us or the place.

But this history is written principally for our own people. It is not expected that many outside of the colony will take much interest in the greater part of what will be narrated in the following pages, and the most interest will be attached to it on the part of the earlier settlers. Many of the men and measures which made us a peculiar people have passed away ; and to many it will seem best that they have. If to be spoken well of, and to be free from derision, is a thing to be desired, the Greeley of to-day is in an enviable position compared with the Greeley of eighteen years ago, for we are no longer the butt of ridicule. Most of the men, who according to the slang of the day, would be called “cranks,” and most of the measures, which brought us

PBEFACE.

vn into conflict with other communities, have long passed away or been settled.

In reference to any series of movements of human progress, two classes of statements need to be made — those relating to results accomplished, and those relating to the instrumentalities by which they are brought about. These latter are for the most part men, and they will become conspicuous in proportion to the part they have played in bringing about results. The Union Colony was a co-operative movement, and the result was in a very important sense the work of all; and hence, so far as possible, all genuine, true workers shall have mention. Even those who only worked for selfish ends and devoted no time to the general welfare in making their own careers successful, also to that extent made the colony successful. The writer remembers that during the first year there was a certain class of men who used to sit around on dry goods boxes discussing whether the colony would be a success, and doing nothing but Micawber-like waiting for something to turn up. At a public meeting in the spring of 1871 the writer advised this class of men not to ask whether the colony was goingto be a success, but for each to ask himself, “Am I a Success,” or on the way to become anything of the kind? If he thought he was, then he was going to contribute his just share to the success he was so eager about ; if not, the sooner he left here the better for both him and the colony. It appeared to me many took the hint, and either went to work, or betook themselves elsewhere, for thenceforward these roosting places became comparatively abandoned.

But even in co-operative movements there must be leaders, and it is impossible to describe the movement without giving them prominence. Of these men N. C. Meeker will necessarily occupy the front rank. He was not only the originator of the movement, but while he lived was president of the colony, and more than that, the editor of The Tribune, which was the leader of the intellectual, social and moral life of the people while he lived, and also was to the outside world the exponent of the progress of this place. He wrote so much, and usually so well, that his articles in The Tribune are a rich fund of information in regard to the questions uppermost in importance successively in our history. And here it is worthy of notice what a great advantage the man has in an historical point of view, who puts his thoughts in good form into print over him who only delivers them orally to the crowd on the street corners or at the postoffice, or even to more formal gatherings in halls of audience. To the people during the first year General Cameron was at least as conspicuous a figure as Mr. Meeker. Not so to the historian even if he was on the

Vlll

PREFACE.

ground and heard all the speeches of the latter. Memory is no match for the printed page.

But the writer may be charged with giving a prominence to the career and thoughts of N. C. Meeker quite beyond the limits of the subject assigned to this work. To some extent this is true, in the case of Mr. Meeker we have seen fit to give a hasty sketch of his life before he undertook the colonial movement, and in regard to others we speak only of them so far as connected with this movement, making no inquiry as to what they were before coming here. It seems to me well to do this, in order that we should understand why he was led to form the idea of a co-operative colony. So we have seen fit to quote largely from his letters written to the N. Y. Tribune when on his tour to the Rocky Mountains and Plains country, as these give the most natural explanation of what he undertook upon his return.

Perhaps that portion of his writings relating to his career among the Indians at the White River Agency is most out of place here. It is inserted for the reason that the massacre has given it a general historic interest and that we as a people have an especial interest in it, not only because our leader and founder was there, but because nearly every one killed was from Greeley. It has occurred to me when reading the letters of Mr. Meeker to The Tribune during this period, that they furnished the best means of understanding the cause of the massacre, and how far and in what way he was responsible for it. It appears to me that these letters should be put in a fit form for preservation for the use of the future historian of the State when he comes to treat of this matter.

There is yet another reason why we have reproduced these letters and some others of his so extensively. They are worthy of preservation both in a literary point of view and for the light they cast on Indian customs and character ; and it has appeared doubtful whether there ever would be a collection of his writings. Most of them have a local and passing interest. These on Indian affairs are the least so, and appear to me the best worthy of preservation, and it has occurred to me they will be acceptable to the people of Greeley also, as a relic of the founder of the place after those who knew him and loved him or hated him as the case may be. have become only a name, more or less, longer or shorter time, repeated by the tongues of living men.

In regard to events and facts there has been the greatest care taken to get at the truth, and verify ever}' statement by written records or the oral statements of parties who took a direct part in them. When anything is only hearsay, it is so stated. The numerous misstatements made in Hubert Howe Bancroft’s Volume XXV, which treats upon

PREFACE.

IX affairs with which we are familiar show how worthless is history as sometimes written. As some of these misstatements lie in the line of our work we have noticed them. The one that gives the credit of founding the colony chiefly to Horace Greeley we here mention, but not for the purpose of refutation, as the statement of facts as given in the words of the two men themselves, show clearly the relative parts they played, and it is noticed in the body of the work.

For the most part we have treated the different parts topically ; that

is, while we generally take up the different subjects as they had a commencement in time we pursue each to its end or up to date. The subject of irrigation is so vital a one, and the part taken in it by Greeley men so important, that we have treated it at considerable length without however giving it a general treatment. In this matter the reputed founders of the colony have played an insignificant part, and we have not hesitated to expose the inadequacy and narrowness of their views. The three gentlemen on the Locating Committee were not only destitute of experience, but they lacked the habits of mind that fit one to deal successfully with a new subject of this nature. In other words none of them had either the scientific spirit or method that compares, weighs, measures and then exactly states the results. They trusted to vague general hearsay, and with reluctance would admit the facts that overthrew their fine theories. The colony would have been a ruin within three years if more practical and capable men in this line had not taken the real lead. It was the most difficult thing imaginable to convince any one of the three of the utter insignificance of the canals they had built for the purposes intended. The salvation of the colony at this time was wrought by such men as J. Max. Clark, B. S. La Grange, Solon and Henry Martin and E. E. Baker, and Mr. Meeker saw

it, and as we shall see, had the honesty to acknowledge it. Of the three only H. T. West had any business ability, but that was mainly in the book-keeping line, and a knowledge of mere business forms and routine is not of the least possible advantage in handling the subject •of irrigation in the state in which the colony found it in Colorado. Mr. West did the colony good service in the sphere of accountant, and kept affairs from getting into the chaos they would certainly have fallen during the first three months in the hands of the other two. But it may be said that was his business, that was what he was engaged for, and several thousands of men could have been found who could have done it as well or better. Mr. La Grange, with all his insufficiency and circumlocution of statement, could get at the heart of the exact requirements for irrigating a certain area, or could surmount the obstacles that were constantly arising during our early

X

PREFACE.

period of experiments, far better then men whose exact and well arranged speech, give them a great advantage over him in speaking or writing on the subject. But J. Max. Clark had not only sound practical views but also has written so well and convincingly on the subject, that he must occupy the foremost place at least in the early subjects under discussion.*

Oil this matter I have collected proof and information from various sources which are usually indicated, and where I played a part I have transcribed the record of it, as I have that of the others. This was necessary to give a complete view of the part taken by our community in this most important question, the contribution of each being needed in a statement of the whole result.

It has appeared to me lit to give a brief account of the other colonial movements made in imitation of ours, and show wherein they failed, as they generally did, as colonies. Besides I have described what I call ‘‘outgrowths” of the colony, which were not colonies but irrigation and agricultural undertakings of Greeley men, especially in the Platte valley.

While especial prominence is given to the early times an account is also furnished of late improvements and prominent men who have come later and done so much in building up and beautifying the town. In public spirit and generosity, in standing by and defending the temperance principles, which the founders endeavored to establish here, many of these later comers equal or surpass the colonists. We have also said a word of the prominent men of early days who have left and live in other parts, or who have passed the gates through which no wayfarer returns, and then a word of recognition for the rank and file of veterans who are yet on the muster roll, after twenty years of service.

*In the above it is not meant to convey the idea that Mr. West did valuable service only as a book-keeper. His business ability was useful in niany directions, and to him equally with the other two belongs the credit of having selected this site rather than either of the others inspected. As secretary of the town board at the time of its organization he did most of the work in its formation, and since, as will be seen from the list of town officers in the Appendix, lias served the town frequently. Indeed, Mr. West early became a town man, and stood up for what he considered its rights according to the original compact — the New York constitution as against the country — which meant the enlargement of ditches out of colony funds. That instrument seems to have ignored the creation of a fund for this most vital condition of agriculture in Colorado.

Chapter I. Errata

Page 83, last line, read “ larger ” for “ longer.”

Page 122, line 31, read “ Denver ” for “ Boulder.”

Page 147, line 11, read “ twenty ” for “ ten.”

Page 152, line 1, correct as above.

Page 230, line 4, from bottom, read “ $25,000 ” for “ $2,500.”

Page 248, line 5, read “ four ” for “ three.”

Page 251, line 28, read “F. J. Annis” for “ A. J. Wilber.” The latter went by his own conveyance and took the part assigned him in the text.

Page 371, line 23, read “Secretary of the Interior” for “their agent.”

Page 418, last line, insert “ make ” before the word “ farming.”

a colony in x^oioiauu — —

garded it as a united effort, and hence its name was Union Colony — the honor of first proposing this name belonging to John heavy.

But if Mr. Meeker cannot be said in strictness to be the founder of this town, much less can Horace Greeley or any other one man be so denominated. In conceiving and formulating the colonial scheme Mr. Meeker indirectly founded the town and colony, and without him there would not have been any such colony or any such town. The town of Evans would have been the leading and perhaps the only town near

X

PREFACE.

period of experiments, far better then men whose exact and well arranged speech, give them a great advantage over him in speaking or writing on the subject. But J. Max. Clark had not only sound practical views but also has written so well and convincingly on the subject, that he must occupy the foremost place at least in the early subjects under discussion.*

thin T h niTA /irvll i>-» nti/-\v» fwniv* /-vim inspected. As secretary of the town board at the time of its organization he did most of the work in its formation, and since, as will be seen from the list of town officers in the Appendix, has served the town frequently. Indeed, Mr. West early became a town man, and stood up for what he considered its rights according to the original compact — the New York constitution as against the country — which meant the enlargement of ditches out of colony funds. That instrument seems to have ignored the creation of a fund for this most vital condition of agriculture in Colorado.

CHAPTER I.

WHO FOUNDED GREELEY ? SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF N. C. MEEKER UP TO DATE

OF ORGANIZING UNION COLONY MR. MEEKER’S TRIP TO THE ROCKY MOUN-

TAIN REGION, AND HIS LETTERS TO THE NEW YORK TRIBUNE.

THE fact that the town founded by Union Colony bears the name of the founder of The New York Tribune quite naturally misleads those not acquainted with the facts, into the opinion that the man whose name it bears was its founder. The Locating Committee, at the head of which was X. C. Meeker the president of Union Colony, and the author and projector of the whole scheme of the colony, sawfit, for wise and sufficient reasons, to name the town after Mr. Greeley, who was only- an endorser, and friend, and valuable helper of the scheme, but in no sense its originator. The other two members of the committee, R. A. Cameron and H. T. West, proposed, after the site of the town was selected, to call it Meeker. But he was far too modest a man to hear of such a thing, and of course the next name to be thought of was that of Mr. Greeley.

It is true that in a technical and strictly literal sense, no one man founded Greeley. The whole Union Colony in its organized capacity founded the town and settled the adjacent country, and the site of the town and the colonial lands were selected by a committee elected by the colony for this purpose. The colony, according to the scheme of its projector, was a co-operative movement, and the very first sentence in Mr. Meeker’s call in The New York Tribune states this, and hence all the colonists who settled here founded the town. This first sentence is — "I propose to unite with the proper persons in establishing a colony in Colorado Territory.” This shows that Mr. Meeker regarded it as a united effort, and hence its name was Union Colony — the honor of first proposing this name belonging to John Leavy.

But if Mr. Meeker cannot be said in strictness to be the founder of this town, much less can Horace Greeley or any other one man be so denominated. In conceiving and formulating the colonial scheme Mr. Meeker indirectly founded the town and colony, and without him there would not have been any such colony or any such town. The town of Evans would have been the leading and perhaps the only town near here. Hence the only question at issue is, did X. C. Meeker originate and formulate the scheme which brought about the organization of Union Colony ? It appears to me there can only be one opinion about this among persons familiar with the facts, and these are so easily accessible that it seems strange that any one writing on the subject should not give the credit where it belongs. Yet in Hubert Howe Bancroft’s Volume XXV of his voluminous work on the Pacific and Rocky Mountain region, we find the following : “It — (Union Colony) was a direct outgrowth of the advertising which The Nexv York Tribune gave Colorado (in 1859). Horace Greeley was its prime mover, and one of its most active agents was N. C. Meeker also of The Tribune.'1'’ As authority for this he cites Wm. X. Byers’ “Centennial State MSS.” If Byers makes any such statement it must be from pure malice, as no other man in Colorado, not a Greeley colonist, was so well acquainted with the facts. The truth is, that although Byers was very friendly to the colony and Mr. Meeker at the start, he got down on both but especially the latter because he opposed and exposed gigantic immigration schemes to Colorado, advocated by Byers, because they appeared to him (Meeker) visionary if not dishonest.

But while there might be some excuse for Bancroft making a statement contrary to the facts, there can be none for the one which is the opening sentence of a circular issued by the Board of Trade of Greeley in 1886. This sentence is, “Greeley was founded in 1870 by Horace Greeley, in whose honor it is named.” The writer of the above imitates for us those people who, nothing in themselves are constantly boasting of tlieir illustrious parentage. The one who reads the following pages will have no trouble from the facts laid before him in deciding who originated the colonial scheme, and who contributed most to make that scheme a success. But in order that the reader may see how naturally it came into the head of X. C. Meeker to originate this co-operative colony it will be necessary for us here to give a brief sketch of his life up to 1869.

Xathan Cook Meeker was born in Euclid, near Cleveland, Ohio, in the year 1811. The place is now known as Collamer ; and L. C. Meeker, long a resident of Greeley is now residing on the paternal estate.

Xathan early displayed literary tastes, and is said, when a mere boy, to have engaged in writing poems and stories for the periodical press. In early youth he undertook a journey to Xevv Orleans, and accomplished most of it on foot. Here he succeeded in getting work on one of the city papers, which, however, hardly afforded him a living. He returned to Cleveland in the course of some two years, having met in

THE UNION COLONY OF COLORADO.

his travels George D. Prentice, then the literary “pundit” of the Southwest.

On returning to Cleveland he taught school long enough to make sufficient money to carry him to New York city. Here he attracted the attention of N. P. Willis then editing “The New York Mirror ” For it he wrote poems and sketches. Though the poems were read and sometimes copied, they brought their writer scarcely enough to keep soul and body together ; and he then and there renounced the writing of poetry forever.

While editing The Greeley Tribune, it will be remembered how little patience he had with this foible in others. In speaking at the Lyceum one evening about his early life, he humorously relates how once faring down the Mississippi on a steamboat, he had on a tall plug hat, the upper story of which was filled with this kind of literary lumber. He happened to trip and fall down one of the hatchways and the well-stuffed hat probably saved him from getting a badly cut crown. This he said was the best turn that his poetry served him.

We next see the young man turn up in Pennsylvania teaching school as a make-shift while pursuing literary studies. By the year 1844 we find him back again in Northern Ohio, when he concludes to end his Bohemian life and marries Miss Arvilla D. Smith, the daughter of a retired sea captain.

About this time was being organized near by, what was known as the “Trumbull Phalanx.” This was a branch of the “North American Phalanx.” These communities were organized as near as might be according to the teachings of Francois Marie Charles Fourier, a French Socialistic writer who died in 1837. He is to be sharply distinguished from the illustrious mathematician and physicist, his contemporary of the same surname. The views of this eminent French socialist had to his great mortification received but little attention during his life-time. One abortive attempt had been made in France but with insufficient capital. It is said that the old man, for some years before his death, used to devote a certain portion of each day sitting in waiting ready to receive the visit of some large hearted capitalist who, he was hoping, would come along and undertake to realize for him his dream of a truly humanized, civilized society. His was an earlier vision on a smaller scale of Edward Bellamy’s year 2000. How nearly our American socialist sails to the Frenchman can be seen by readers of “Looking Backward” from the following extract from Chamber’s Encyclopedia.

“ The earth and human society, Fourier taught, are in their crude and infantile state. What we call civilization he considers a false and imperfect condition, with poverty, crime, ignorance, idleness, repugnant toil, disease, wasting wars, general antagonism, oppression, and misery. He believed in a universal harmony, flowing from and centering in God, the author of all harmonies, and that there is therefore a principle of universal analogy. The community should consist of 400 families or 1800 persons, which number he found included the whole ■circle of human capacities. These should live in one immense edifice, in the center of a large and highly cultivated domain, and furnished with work-shops, studios, and all the appliances of industry and art, as well as all the sources of amusement and pleasure. When the earth is covered with these palaces of attractive industry, the associations will also unite in groups and series, under a unitary government. There will at length be only one language and one government, and the only armies will be the great industrial armies, which w7ill drain swamps, irrigate deserts, plant forests, and effect the amelioration of climates. The system of Fourier, does not propose to destroy but rather to conserve property, position, and hereditary rights, nor does it war directly with morals or religion. The apartments are to be of various prices, and the styles of living to vary in luxury and cost, but the poorest person in the Association is not only to be secure of comfort, but his minimum of enjoyments will be greater than the present social arrangements can give princes and millionaires. The economies of the large scale in the Phalanstery reduce by two thirds the expenses of living, while an attractive and scientific industry would quadruple the products of civilization.”