---

The Golden Age's mention of these three cities was doubtless an allusion to concerns raised by their newspapers regarding the lynching of three robbers -- Dave English, Bill Peoples, and Charley Scott -- a year earlier in Lewiston.  Such concerns were apparently felt elsewhere as well.  For instance, the Sacramento Daily Union's (Nov 12, 1863) account of the second day of the California Supreme Court's hearing of the habeas corpus suit filed on behalf of Romaine, Howard, Lowery, and Page noted in passing:

Hamilton's argument against the trustworthiness of The Golden Age's story on Beachey's arrival continued:

Hamilton continued:


Hamilton concluded his argument by drawing attention to another example of inaccuracy in contemporary newspaper accounts, this time quoting The Dalles Journal's Nov 2, 1863 story of the discovery of Magruder's body by a stranger (which story, incidentally, I quoted in my discussion of research question number 4).

Much as I agree with Hamilton that many contemporary newspaper reports were unreliable, his argument regarding The Golden Age's story on Beachey's return is uncompelling.


For one thing, a story about faraway events in the Sacramento Daily Union and one in The Dalles Journal about a stranger's discovery of Magruder's body are a far cry from what Hamilton asserts The Golden Age did.  Lewiston's newspaper would have had to deliberately misreport a very newsworthy event in the town's history if a lynch mob actually greeted Beachey's arrival. 

Hamilton noted that four other sources -- An Illustrated History of North Idaho, Langford's, Vigilante Days and Ways, Welch's, The Magruder Murders, and Hailey's History of Idaho comported with his account.  Yet this element of his argument may be questioned too.  Let's carefully examine what each source Hamilton cited had to say about Beachey's arrival in Lewiston.

Welch's book treated the event in only a cursory way.  The sum of what she wrote consisted of this:  "...he [Beachey] had to talk a crowd of aroused vigilantes out of trying to take the men and hang them on the spot.  Fortunately, he was liked and trusted in the town and had long experience with frontier situations" (p. 56).  In short, Welch's narrative did not examine Beachy's arrival in detail. 

Similarly, the Illustrated History (1903) offered hardly more: 


Hailey's (1910) account, however, was a little longer:

They [Beachy and party] were met on the bank of the river near the town by a large crowd of good citizens who had become convinced beyond any doubt that Mr. Beachy had the men that had committed the murder, so they met them with a rope for each man, prepared to make a short job of dealing out justice to them. But Mr. Beachy said, "No, gentlemen, I have given my word to the Judge and the Governor of California and to Captain Lees, and also to these men, that they shall have a fair trial by a court and a jury, and I want to keep my promise."  The voice of no man, save and except Beachy 's, could have caused these people to halt in their determination to execute the criminals on the spot.  But they all respected, loved and admired Mr. Beachy for the many noble things he had done, and especially for what he had done in bringing these men to the bar of justice.  When Mr. Beachy finished his short but firm talk, order was restored and the people repaired to their respective avocations, satisfied that what Mr. Beachy said was right and they would not interfere in any way to obstruct the ends of justice to be dealt out by the courts.  The men were confined and safely guarded. (p. 71)

John Hailey

As was Langford's (1890):

At the mouth of the Columbia, a small steamer with a military escort received the prisoners. They were conveyed immediately to Lewiston.  A large assemblage had gathered upon the wharf, intending to conduct the prisoners from the boat to the scaffold. Protected by the military, Beachy succeeded in removing them to his hotel, amid loud cries of " Hang 'em," " String 'em up," by the pursuing crowd.  He then appeared in front of the building, and in a brief address informed the infuriated people that one of the conditions on which he obtained the surrender of the men was that they should have a fair trial at law. He had pledged his honor, not only to the prisoners, but to the authorities, that they should only be hanged after conviction by a jury. This pledge he would redeem with his life if necessary.  He made it, believing that his fellow-citizens of Lewiston would stand by him. "  And now," said he, "as many of you as will do so, will please cross to the opposite side of the street." The movement was unanimous. "

Be gorra ! Mr. Beachy," exclaimed an Irishman, after he had passed over, "you're the only mon in the whole congregation that votes against yourself." (p. 344)

It may be noted that Thomas J. Dimsdale's The Vigilantes of Montana: Or, Popular Justice in the Rocky Mountains (1866, see p. 112), the earliest recounting of the story of the Magruder murders, made no mention of an angry mob at Lewiston greeting Beachey's party's arrival.  Neither, interestingly, did Sheriff Fisk's account, written in 1910.   Fisk would have been particularly likely to have mentioned any unpleasantness at the Lewiston arrival, as he claims the prisoners were turned over to his custody on arrival.  Fisk also recalled that Beachey and his prisoners arrived by stage, not boat.  He wrote:

In due time Beachy, with his escort and prisoners, arrived in the Columbia river, and were transferred to The Dalles steamer at the mouth of the Williamette without touching at Portland; thence on to the military port at Walla Walla, and they were conveyed by stage thence to Lewiston, where the prisoners were turned over to my custody.

Fisk then described examining the prisoners and finding a small saw device concealed in Lowry's hair, with which he had partly sawed through his chains.  It seems unlikely the sheriff would have failed to mention an angry reception for the prisoners in Lewiston..

The key point I would like to stress, however, is that Langford fictionalized aspects of his account of the Magruder murders.  Welch, herself, noted this.  She wrote: "Because Langford's version used the methods of fiction, and because he showed the influence of fiction of his time, his account has more in common with legend than history" (p. 104).  Welch also noted that even unreliable elements of Langford's historical account -- elements that were "untrue from internal evidence" (loc. cit.) -- often became repeated by  in the works of subsequent authors. 

All of which raises the question of where, exactly, the story of the angry lynch mob and Beachey's quelling speech originated.  It is arguably quite likely, it seems to me, that Langford's account is the story's source.  And, if so, then the story may be commensurately downgraded in terms of its likely historical accuracy.

It comes down to this, then:  Notwithstanding an appreciative regard for Hamilton's work and opinion on the case, it seems more likely -- more plausible -- that Langford fictionalized Beachey's arrival.  The angry mob and Beachey's speech certainly boost his account's dramatic content.  Hailey, in turn, probably borrowed the mob element from Langford's account -- he (Hailey) gave no sources.  Beyond that, both the Illustrated History's and Welch's accounts treated the Lewiston mob and Beachey's return so fleetingly as not to bear much weight.

It may be concluded then that the account offered in The Golden Age and the absence of any mention of the Lewiston mob in Fisk's account relatively gain historical credence.  I'm actually quite sorry to see the Lewiston mob and Beachey's speech leave this story, if they must.  What's needed now are better sources on Beachey's arrival in Lewiston.  Surely, there must be other contemporaneous accounts somewhere.  These must be found before any final historical judgment can be rendered on this element of the story.

Well, well, well!  Now comes another newspaper source reporting that no lynch mob greeted  Beachey's arrival with his prisoners at Lewiston.  The following clip is  drawn from a report appearing in the Sacramento Daily Union for December 25, 1863.  It offers valuable details on Beachey's arrival and tends to confirm the report in The Golden Age that Ladd Hamilton discounted.  It's also worth noting that this newly unearthed report differs from Fisk's account in that it says the prisoners were not turned over to his (Fisk's) custody on arrival.  My inference is that Beachey and others may well have had concerns about the prisoners' safety in Lewiston even if the party's arrival did not occasion a threatening situation.   This new and independent Sacramento Daily Union report, by J.W. Brewer, which was apparently prepared by someone who witnessed the events he writes of, further erodes the credibility of Hamilton's more dramatic account of Beachey's arrival.

From the Sacramento Daily Union,
Dec 25, 1863

---

---