Fort Union Trading Post Historic Structures Report (Part II) Historical Data Section

The history of the front gate begins with a mystery. In 1833, Maximilian wrote that a small gate house stood above it. His companion, Bodmer, painted such a gate house, showing it to be of a style and size similar to the bastions. The mystery is that no other writer or artist indicated, or even hinted at such a structure. This report assumes that either the gate house had a very brief existence or that it was planned but never built.

Maximilian described the gate as a large "folding" one. Unfortunately, none of the sketches show the front gate closed, thus its details are not available. A considerable change in it occurred as a result of the smallpox epidemic of 1837; Bourgeois Halsey, fearful of Indians seeking revenge, had a second, inside gate erected. Denig (1843) described it thus:

At the front there is an inside gate of the same size at the inner end of the Indian reception room, which shuts a passage from the outside gate of 32 ft. in length, and the same width as the gate; the passage is formed of pickets. The outside gate can be left open, and the inside one closed, which permits the Indians to enter the reception room without their having any communication with the fort.

He also said that the dimensions of this gate were 12 feet in width and 14 feet in height. At the time of Audubon's visit (1843), a group of Assiniboins, passing the night in this space between the gates, built a large fire that worried Audubon lest it burn down the fort. Halsey (1837) and Harris (1843) both talked about ordinary Indians being allowed into the space, but Chiefs coming on into the fort proper.

Audubon mentioned the opening of the gate at sunrise. Kurz (1852) included among his duties opening the gates in the early morning, "in the evening I must close them; at night, if anyone without wishes to come in, I must open them again; if strangers are there I report the fact."

According to Denig (1843), one of the post clerks, J. B. Moncrevier, did a painting of a treaty of peace between Indians and whites. The bourgeois had this painting erected over the front gate. No sketch shows the painting itself, but Sprague's two works, done at the same time that Denig described the fort, shows what apparently is the frame for the painting.

The date of this painting's removal has not been found. A close examination of Kurz' diary (1851-52) shows that he made no reference to Moncrevier's work. Since Kurz was responsible for painting works of art at the fort, it seems likely that the peace treaty scene had already been removed. Certainly, the detailed Hays painting of the front gate in 1860 shows no trace of this work.

Although no one after Maximilian mentioned a gate house, Kurz did describe, in 1852, his firing a welcome salute from a 4-pounder "that stands on the gallery above the river gate." This was probably the gallery that ran around the inside of the palisades; but Kurz did not explain how he managed to fire the cannon over the fairly high wall. Did he fire from a raised platform perhaps?

One other point must be mentioned. Stevens, in 1853, described the gate in the north wall to be the "front, or main entrance." Since he approached Fort Union overland and would naturally arrive at this side of the fort, he may have thought he was at the front. However, most visitors and employees reached Fort Union by water; also, Indians were required to trade at this river gate, which was considered by all except Stevens to be the main entrance.

Denig (1843) said that this gate, which opened onto the prairie toward the north, was in the middle of the wall. This location is supported by the Bodmer sketch (1833), which shows it directly behind the bourgeois' house. However, the Kurz (1852), Stanley (1853), Soldier (1864), and Photo (1866) sketches show this gate to be toward the western end of the north wall. Kurz' Sept. 1851 sketch shows the gateway in some detail; however, the gate itself which appears to be a double one, can be detected only by its shadows.