pared manuscripts of more or less historical value, but most of these were gathered up by the publisher of a voluminous history of the Pacific states and* territories that emanated from San Francisco in the early eighties, and have thus been lost to us until the possessor of the collection shall have sold it to those who will throw it open to the searchers and writers of history.
Elwood Evans and James G. Swan were the historians of Washington's early days. They came here about the time of our territorial organization, and remained in active life until after the transition to statehood. Both were liberally educated and of literary tastes. They were trained observers and careful writers, and the commonwealth is the loser because they did not give wider range to their historical work. Much of Swan's writings appeared under the auspices of the Smithsonian Institute of Washington City, a sufficient guaranty of their accuracy, while most of Evans' work appeared in the newspapers and in publications where the identity of the writer was not disclosed. He was a lawyer by profession, and a politician as well, whose predilections and prejudices were equally pronounced. His mind was that of the advocate rather than the judge. In all the controversies connected with the Indian war, the claims of the missions and the Hudson Bay and Puget Sound Agricultural Companies, the adjustment of our northern boundaries, and varied public questions of nearly forty years, he took an active part as counsel in the courts or as a partisan in the newspapers. For this reason, due caution should betaken in accepting his published views on those questions.
In the early days of the Territory he devoted much painstaking effort to the collection, writing, and rewriting of pioneer history. He knew almost every man of note in the Northwest, and he was endowed with a happy fac-
