Ri ap
Ha
A Hee

Dee th
ie
L ae

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
CORNELL
UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

 

 

 
DATE DUE

 

ornell University Library

The North West company,
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
PUBLICATIONS IN HISTORY

THE NORTH WEST COMPANY
       
     
     
  
 
  
     

a

 

 

AMap or AMERICA,

between Latitudes 10 and70 NORTH, and Longitudes 80 and 150 WESE
Eat biting ,
THE PRINCIPAL TRADING STATIONS
of the Ze
NORTH WEST COM PANY. bose :
a

\

       

—- aT a \ \

{+

    
 

.?

x .
: on
Bi FRoBeY
ay
\ fed : faite Back
x“ HUDson’s §
\ ‘
wt

 

 

Cheaterfeld tye,
ate

eo RE Roe eee

 

  

AWYaAN 3
: i

age |

 

a

 

  
     
 
  

 

 

“ Age be t PrP n = j d
or a
i. Pies en’

MET
ma ot

    

BG bey

 

Reproduced from the pamphlet “Notice respecting the boundary between His Majesty’s Possessions in North America and the United States ... London, 1817,”
THE NORTH WEST COMPANY

BY

GORDON CHARLES DAVIDSON, Ph. D.

NEW YORK /RUSSELL & RUSSELL
FIRST PUBLISHED IN 1918
REISSUED, 1967, BY RUSSELL & RUSSELL
A DIVISION OF ATHENEUM HOUSE, INC.
BY ARRANGEMENT WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS
L.C, CATALOG CARD NO: 66—27059

 

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

wo
PREFACE

A complete history of the North West Company is lacking.
Chapters concerning its activities have appeared in books dealing
with the Hudson’s Bay Company and in similar publications.
Interest has been evinced chiefly in connection with the work of a
few explorers like Alexander Mackenzie, with the Astoria inci-
dent, and, above all, with the events arising from the settlement
commenced by Lord Selkirk on the Red River in territory which
now forms part of the province of Manitoba. Publications which
appeared during the existence of the North West Company, such
as those bearing the names of Mackenzie and Selkirk and the
anonymous On the Origin and Progress of the North-West Com-
pany of Canada, while valuable, do not treat the later years of
the company. On the whole, the most notable work on the sub-
ject has been the prefatory ‘‘ Esquisse’’ by Masson in the first vol-
ume of his work, Les bourgeois de la Compagnie du Nord-Ouest.

It is the author’s hope that the following pages, while by no
means a complete history, may yet prove to be of some utility as
a study of the origin, activities, and end of this famous partner-
ship of fur traders. Some of the material treated has not been
utilized in previous works. But the final word will not be said
until the business papers of the company come to light, providing
they are still in existence. Search for them in Canada and Eng-
land has been unavailing. Valuable papers on this subject may
be contained in the archives of the Hudson’s Bay Company in
London, but the present writer was unable to obtain vermission
to enter those preserves. The governor of the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany, Sir Thomas Skinner, stated that to the best of his knowl-

Vv
Preface

edge, the business papers of the North West Company never came
into the possession of the organization of which he is the head.
But the existence in the Public Record Office of a copy of the bill
of sale of Astoria, sent by a previous governor of the Ifudson’s
Bay Company to the British government, encourages the hope
that some day other individual documents of interest may be
made accessible to students.

‘‘North West Company’’ is the form of the name that regu-
larly appears in contemporary manuscripts. It has therefore
been adopted in this study.

Thanks are due to A. G. Doughty, Canadian Archivist; to KE.
O. S. Scholefield, librarian of the Legislative Library of British
Columbia; and to C. H. Gould, librarian of McGill University,
for many courtesies extended. Acknowledgments for courteous
assistance and timely suggestions are due to members of the offi-
cial staffs of the Canadian Archives; of the Parliamentary Li-
brary, Ottawa; of the legislative libraries of British Columbia,
Manitoba, and Ontario; of the Public Reference Library, Toron-
to; of the University of Toronto Library; of the British Muse-
um; of the Publie Record Office, London; and of the Colonial
Office and Privy Council Office. Mention should also be made of
Mr. H. P. Biggar, agent in Great Britain for the Canadian Ar-
chives, whose knowledge of sources was freely placed at the writ-
er’s disposal. Copies of documents furnished by Mr. Bell, of
‘Winnipeg, were unfortunately lost by shipwreck when the Hm-
press of Ireland went down.

The writer’s acknowledgments are also due to several meni-
bers of the staffs of the Library of the University of California
and of the Baneroft Library. He owes much to the various mem-
bers of the Department of ITistory of the University of Califor-

vi
Preface

nia, particularly to Professor H. Morse Stephens, head of the de-
partment; to Professor Herbert E. Bolton and Dr. Charles Wil-
son Hackett, who have edited this monograph; and to Professor
F. J. Teggart. And especially the writer desires to express his
gratitude to the Order of the Native Sons of the Golden West,
whose generosity made possible his year of study in England.

GORDON CHARLES DAVIDSON.

BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA,
June 6, 1916.

EDITOR’S NOTE

While this book has been in press the author, Dr. Davidson, now a lieu-
tenant in the First Canadian Mounted Rifles, has been at the front in France,
and has therefore been unable to give it his personal attention. This absolves
him from responsibility for any shortcomings of editorial supervision which
the book may show.

vii
CONTENTS

PAGES
PREPAGCE san ceuis Pict idaGuraaiens abet cen ae do wean cageiewdes ce tews v-vii
CHAPTER I

THE Earty Fur TRADE AND THE FORMATION OF THE NortH WEST
COMPANY: Arca i cisgis sot vue al ga eines Baehehd vee Beh eo BA ERA ae 1-31
CHAPTER II
EARLY EXPEDITIONS TO THE WEST ........ 0000 ccc cv ccc esnccsvueeee 32-50
CHAPTER III
MACKENZIE’S EXPLORATIONS 2.0.2.0... ccc cee cee nc secs cee eetarncees 51-68
CHAPTER IV
THE XY COMPANY oy.5 waisean kay he ons ered oe dae MS eee REE aN eee 69-91
CHAPTER V
FURTHER ADVANCE WESTWARD ....... 00. c cece cence eee e tee eneeee 92-117
CHAPTER VI
THE STRUGGLE WITH THE HUDSON’S BAY COMPANY .............05 118-155
CHAPTER VII
Last DAYS OF THE NORTH WEST COMPANY ......-.0.00 0c e ee eeee 156-193

CHAPTER VIII
THE T'RADE AND TRADING METHODS OF THE NorTH WEST COMPANY. .194-248

List Or AUTHORITIES CITED ssjaias gee; donde da veteieda ee aba He eee a 249-255
APPENDICES: ) ig eiavviace yak oeal Re SSe eS Sed oe Meee ee Asa he 256-329
GENERAIAINDEXS acca aus cha cea wads aa ne aT dsee nurs ene dahaus a wenee Hest 330-340
INDEX OF GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES oo. eee cc eects 341-349

ix
to

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

. A Map of America, Exhibiting the Principal Trading Stations of

the: North West; Company s..c sic needle ce gules saa aie ana yen en Frontispiece

. Pond’s Map in C. O. 42, Vol. 47, p. 665 (Public Record Office) facing p. 32
. Pond’s Map, Additional MS., 15332 D (British Museum) ....facing p. 36

» Lrayels: of Captam. Peter Pond s:2. 6.609355 4 45 Sas dees els facing p. 42
o WNotésion back Of Map. dice cagiugh ea aws dean ea teem aaa facing p. 43

. A Map of Part of the Indian Territories in North America, from

British Museum Maps 69917 (75).................0005 facing p. 144
APPENDICES
PAGES
A—Report to General Haldimand on the North West Trade, 1780. .256-259

B—Memoir Accompanying Pond’s Maps in the British Museum... .259-266

C—Extracts from the Evidence of Thomas Ainslie Given before

the: Board-of ‘Trade: nica coecenvnas seed ccher anew ahaa ae2OO-2 TO
D—Canadian Fur Trade, Circa 1789 .............00.0000000. 00040. 270-272
B—staté of the Fur Trade in. 1790. ccc ce gas oe agencies eaemenand oad
F—Alexander Mackenzie’s Report of His Voyages to Lord Dor-

GHESTER «oes cenige, dartvars wd mee 2 nese eae ema G BNE eee a 274-276
G—A Portion of the Manuscript Journal of Alexander Mackenzie

in the: British: MuUsewit 2. s002¢c0se¢arccdaaceabiaw ceeay L2G TE
H—Memoir in Regard to the Fur Trade, Circa 1794.............. 277-279
I—Departments of the North West Company, Cirea 1802.......... 279-281
J—Canadian Fur Trade, 17938-1801 i. cau cage vena ne kame nel 281-283
K—Petition of the North West Company for a Charter ........... 283-285
L—Petition of the North West Company for a Charter ........... 285-292
M—Bill of Sale of Astoria to the North West Company ...........293-296
N—Memorial of the Fur Traders in Regard to the American Boun-

CARY, SVE: sc nccinod Be dela We Se eA AR EAGAN EH SHE ER RAE 296-301
O—Events in the Interior During the Winter of 1820-1821 ........ 301-305
P—Deed of Covenant Executed by the Hudson’s Bay Company and

the MeGillivrays and Ellice, 1821 .............-.-2.00 0. 305-307
Q—Fur Trade of Great Britain in 1800 ............. 0.00002 eee 308-324
R—List of Ships Clearing from Quebec with Furs, 1786-1813...... 324-326

S—Official Values of the Trade of the Hudson’s Bay Company with
Great: Britain, 1772-1837 s.aecseuces girs eevee ed eae die wn ad26:329
Missing Page
2 The Norih West Company

tired of the humdrum life of the habitant, took to the woods and
traded with the Indians. In time these men acquired a liking
for this type of life, which induced them to spend the remainder
of their days with their native friends. They adopted Indian
customs, married Indian wives, and became on occasion as fierce
and intractable as the Indians themselves. These men, the cou-
reurs da bois, as they were called, were lost to the steady growth
of the colony. On the other hand, they spread French influence
and, by their adaptability to conditions and native customs, a
liking for the French, up the St. Lawrence Valley and the Great
Lakes, into the valleys of the Ohio and the Mississippi, and out
over the prairie regions to the westward.

Failing in attempts to forbid this exodus, which was draining
New France of the most daring spirits among the younger gener-
ation, and which was even introducing difficulties in the path of
the laborers of the church, the authorities attempted regulation.
The country was divided into trading districts, and, to prevent
abuses, licenses were granted, which enabled the holders to carry
on the trade? It is difficult to ascertain with accuracy* the
amount of the furs collected from the several districts thus es-
Later still, posts were established in various parts of the interior. Each had
a commandant and a garrison and was of sufficient strength to repel native
attacks (Cf. Douglass, Summary, pt. I, 13).

* The prohibition of the sale of liquor to the natives did not apply to the
King’s Posts, so Carleton reported in 1768 (Can. Arch. Report, 1886, note D,
p. elxx).

* Anderson, in discussing Dobbs’ Argument of 1742, quotes his statement
that the Hudson’s Bay Company’s sales for 1743 were £33,296, including the
March sale of 1743 (17447), and estimates that, at the same rates, the peltry
from New France in the same year as given by Dobbs should have been
worth £120,000 sterling (Anderson, Origin of Commerce, 2d ed., III, 236-
240). Sir Robert Shore Milnes, lieutenant-governor of Lower Canada, writ-
ing to Lord Hobart, October 30, 1802, referred to the monopoly of the
French East India Company in the export of beaver. He gave their price
to the Indian traders as four livres a pound for the green or winter beaver
and 1 livre 10 sols for the parchment or summer beaver, and remarked that
the entire value of furs exported never exceeded £140,000 sterling, and was
often less, particularly in 1754, when it amounted to £64,000. In 1755 it was

£52,000, when it was considered a declining trade (B. T. 1, vol. 20, no. 2; also
Q. 89, p. 144, et seq., printed in Can. Arch Report, 1892, note BE, p. 136).
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 3

tablished by the French. The value of the furs from Canada
under the French is stated to have been about 280,000 livres.s
The castor bills upon a French Canadian company trading in
1747 were paid at three months’ sight.”

The British fur trade in Canada was recognized and regulated
by the charter granted in 1670 by Charles II to Prince Rupert,
the Duke of Albemarle, the Earl of Craven, and others, giving
them control of the trade, commerce, waters, and lands lying
within the entrance of Hudson’s Straits which were not actually
possessed by the subjects of the English king or any other Chris-
tian prince or state. The company thus formed—it was usually
called the Hudson’s Bay Company—had considerable difficulty
from French opposition during the first century of its existence.®

The capture of Canada by the British profoundly affected the
fur trade, the control of which now passed from the French.
Montreal was taken in the year 1760, and in the following spring
a few English and French traders sent goods to the borders of
Lake Superior.*° Some went as far west as Rainy Lake, where
they continued till the year 1763, when the post at Michilimacki-
nae was taken by the Indians. This event, and the Indian war by
which it was oceasioned, produced a temporary suspension of the
trade; and it was not till the year 1771 that British traders
could safely traffic as far as the Saskatchewan, on which river

* Origin and Progress, 4.

°For further information concerning the value of the fur trade see Cana-
dian Archives Report, 1892, pp. 136 et seq.

* Douglass, Summary, pt. 1, 94.

* Report of the Select Committee on the Boundaries between the Province
of Ontario and . . . Ottawa, 1880, p. 55.

» Josiah Tucker, a pamphlet writer of the middle eighteenth century, stat-
ed that the French were able to undersell the English in all articles of fur
in times of peace. He said English monopolies were the cause (J. R. MeCul-
loch, A Select Collection of Tracts on Commerce, 328-329). :

Tt is stated that the French had a schooner on this lake which they
burned on the surrender of Canada (Gourlay, Statistical Account of Upper
Canada, 40).

 
4 The North West Company ,

the most remote of the French posts had been situated.‘ The
subsequent progress of the fur traders in the interior corre-
sponded with the wishes of the Indians to deal with them, and
with the success of the first enterprises in new regions.

At the close of the Seven Years’ War, Great Britain was con-
fronted with the problem of arranging for the government of a
large area of conquered territory in North America. The Proc-
lamation of October 7, 1763, established the four governments, or
provinces, of Quebec, West and East Florida, and Grenada. The
first of these comprised the valley of the St. Lawrence from the
western end of Anticosti to the forty-fifth parallel and Lake Nip-
issing. Labrador, Anticosti, and the Magdalen Islands were
attached to Newfoundland. All lands not in the foregoing juris-
dictions, or within chartered grant of the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany, and all lands west or north of the streams flowing into the
Atlantic Ocean, were reserved as crown lands for the use of the
Indians. No colony might grant lands herein, and all settlers
were required to move out. Moreover, private citizens were for-
bidden to purchase lands from the Indians within the settled
parts of the colonies. Trade with the Indians was permitted to
any person receiving a license from the governor or commander
in chief of the colony in which he resided. The licenses were to
be issued free of charge and were to contain a clause rendering
them void and forfeiting the security, which was required, in
ease any regulations which might be imposed were not observed.
The French settlements in the Indian reserve were ignored.
Neither the military nor the Indian department was given con-
trol over them. Theoretically the old French law remained in
force. The government established by the military authorities
was therefore de facto and not de jure. The lack of civil govern-
ment was recognized in the preamble to the Quebee Act."

 

‘" Origin and Progress, 5.

* The Proclamation is printed in Alvord and Carter, The Critical Period,
in Illinois Historical Collections, X, 39-45.
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 5

The foregoing arrangement was part of an attempt to develop
a more satisfactory policy in regard to Indian affairs, which had
its inception in 1755. Until that year the British government
had managed its Indian affairs through the different colonies
with little or no attempt at unification, and the results had been
far from satisfactory. In 1755, through the influence of Lord
Halifax, president of the Board of Trade, the government as-
sumed political control over the Indians, creating a Southern and
a Northern Department and appointing a superintendent over
each. The Ohio River formed the dividing line.

In 1764 Lord Hillsborough drew up a general plan for the
management of the Indians and the fur trade. The scheme safe-
guarded the chartered rights of the Hudson’s Bay Company. It
provided for the continuation of the two superintendents, with
three deputies for the Northern and two for the Southern De-
partment. All trade was to be conducted at regularly established
posts in the north and at the Indian towns in the south. Every
trader was obliged to have a license, the fee for which should not
exceed two shillings, with an additional registration fee of not
more than sixpence. He might have no dealings with the Indians
at other than these prescribed places. All trade was to be con-
ducted at fixed schedules of prices. At each post in the north
and with each tribe in the south were to reside a commissary, an
interpreter, and a smith. The superintendents and commissaries
were empowered to act as justices of the peace to determine causes
affecting Indians and traders. The latter were not to supply
liquor, swan shot, or rifles to the Indians, and efforts were to be
made to secure four missionaries for each district. To defray the
estimated cost of £20,000 a year for maintaining the plan, it was
proposed to place a tax on the fur trade. This last item would
have required the sanction of Parliament, which was not grant-
ed, but practically all of the provisions were adopted by the

*% Carter, The Illinois Country, 78-79.
6 The North West Company

superintendents. By 1768 the plan had proved too expensive,
however, and in that year the management of the fur trade was
restored to individual colonies.**

The application of these principles of handling the fur trade
in the province of Quebec may be traced, nevertheless, in the in-
structions issued to the governors. On December 7, 1763, Murray
was instructed to see that the terms of the Proclamations of Oc-
tober 7, 1763, which related to trade, were carried out. Carleton
received similar orders on the same date.*®* The Quebec Act of
1774 extended the boundaries of that province on the east to in-
clude the lands which had been made part of Newfoundland since
February 10, 1763, and on the west along the bank of the Ohio
River to the banks of the Mississippi, and northward to the south-
ern boundary of the territory granted to the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany.?® On January 3, 1775, Carleton was instructed in regard
to the extension of the limits of the province, the establishment of
inferior judicatures, and the appointment of a superintendent at
each of the posts. The limits of each post were to be fixed and
settlement beyond them was not to be allowed, because it would
excite the Indians and destroy the peltry trade. The traffic, as un-
der the Proclamation of 1763, was to be free to any subject of any
colony who might obtain from the governor of the same a
license, which would bind the applicant to obey regulations
made by the legislature of Quebec. A copy of the Plan of 1764
was annexed as a guide for making legal provisions, fixing
stated times and places for carrying on the fur trade, prescribing
modes for settling tariffs of the prices of goods and furs, re-
straining the sale of liquor to the Indians, and formulating other
regulations for the fur trade.1’ Further instructions of the same

“Carter, The Illinois Country, 80-81, 102.

* Can. Arch. Report, 1904, Appendix E, 206, 224.

* 14 George III, C. 83. The act is printed in Coffin, The Province of Que-
bec and the Early American Revolution, 544-552.

“Can, Arch, Report,1904, Appendix E, 237-238 ; 242-247.
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 7

date reminded the trader that all furs should be exported di-
rectly to the mother country.1* On May 26, 1785, Haldimand was
instructed to propose to the Legislative Council of Quebec an
ordinance preventing the exportation of peltry to the United
States and was to see that the Order-in-Council of April 8, 1785,
prohibiting the importation by sea of any ‘‘Goods, the Growth
or manufacture of the Countries belonging to the United States
of America,’’ was enforced.”

The Constitutional Act having divided Quebec into the two
provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, Dorchester, in his capa-
city as governor of Lower Canada, was instructed on September
16, 1791, in the same terms regarding the Indian trade as in
Article 32 of his instructions of January 3, 1775, with the excep-
tion that regulations for the ‘‘Peltry Trade of the Interior Coun-
try’’ were to be imposed by the legislature of Lower Canada
and no reference was made to the Plan of 1764.2? The same or-
ders were issued to succeeding governors of Lower Canada, in-
eluding Dalhousie, whose instructions were dated April 13, 1820.7"
The Proclamation of 1763 is cited throughout in regard to licen-
ses.

On September 16, 1791, identical orders in regard to the fur
trade were issued to Dorchester, in his capacity as governor of
Upper Canada, as were given to him for Lower Canada, with the
exception that the legislature of Upper Canada should make the
needful regulations for that branch of commerce.”? On Decem-
ber 15, 1796, it was directed that the governor of Upper Canada
should manage the Indian affairs of that province.** Instruc-

¥Can. Arch. Report, 1904, Appendix E, 249-250. Acts of 3 Anne, 4 Anne,
8 Geo. I, 4 Geo. III, and 6 Geo. III are cited.

“Tbid., 266.

™ Can. Arch. Report, 1905, I, 15.
“Tbid., I, 39, 46-49.

® Ibid., I, 66.

* Ibid., I, 70.
8 The North West Company

tions similar to those of 1791, including those to Dalhousie of
April 13, 1820,?4 were issued to succeeding governors of Upper
Canada.

A few years after the conquest of Canada, the French system
of traffic was laid aside as inconsistent with the principles of free-
dom of trade; and.except to one district,?*no more exclusive priv-
ileges were granted.2* This plan obviated a certain amount of
favoritism on the part of those in authority, but it gave opportu-
nity for violent and lawless conduct on the part of the traders.
Much trading was now done in regions where missionaries and
other churchmen had no control. This situation facilitated the
use of liquor. Licenses were still granted, of course, and meant a
certain amount of supervision, but they were in the nature of per-
mits rather than monopolies.

At the beginning of the English trade, it was conducted en-
tirely by the unsupported efforts of individuals. The trader who
passed one winter with a newly discovered nation or band of In-
dians, or in some spot favorable to his traffic, heard of Indians
still more remote, among whom provisions might be obtained
and trade pursued, with little danger of competition. He there-
fore moved to their neighborhood and, while he was suffered to
remain alone, generally preserved good order and obtained furs
at a reasonable rate.*’ But, as every person had an equal right
to sell goods at the same place, the first discoverer of an eligible
situation soon saw himself followed by other traders who were
ready to undersell him. Thus cireumstanced, he, in his turn, re-
sorted to every means for securing to himself the preference of
the Indians and for injuring his competitors. Such conduct pro-
voked retaliation. The Indians were bribed with liquor, and the
goods were bartered away for a consideration below their value.
—-#Can, Arch. Report, 1905, I, 82, 84-86.

* Probably Selkirk refers to the King’s Posts.

* Selkirk, Sketch, 4.
** Origin and Progress, 6.
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company

Oo

The consequence was that the traders ruined one another, the
Indians were corrupted, and the English character was brought
into contempt. In the struggle,?8 innumerable disorders took
place and blood was often spilt,*° till at length, after a competi-
tion injurious to all parties, mutual interests suggested the neces-
sity of establishing a common concern, subject to general rules.
Accordingly, in 1779, persons composing nine distinct in-
terests*® became parties to an agreement for one year, by virtue

* Until 1778, at least, it had been the custom that the last outfitter of a
trader should be the first one paid, after which the other creditors, whether
of two or twenty years’ standing, should share alike (Add. 21759, f. 1).

» Origin and Progress, 6.

*° Under date of Quebec, April 24, 1780, Charles Grant wrote a memoran-
dum on the North West trade to Haldimand. At the end is the note: “The
North West is divided into sixteen shares, all which form but one Company
at this time. Todd & McGill, 2 shares; Ben. & Jos. Frobisher, 2 do; McGill
& Paterson, 2 do; MeTavish & Co., 2 do; Holmes & Grant, 2 do; Wadden &
Co., 2 do; MeBeath & Co., 2 do; Ross & Co., 1 do; Oakes & Co., 1 do” (Add.
21759, f. 82). The memorandum has been printed in full in Can. Arch Re-
port, 1888, pp. 59-61. The above are apparently the nine interests mentioned
by the author of the Origin and Progress.

A petition to Haldimand, dated Montreal, May 11, 1780, stated that the
trade beyond Grand Portage had been for several years of the annual value
of £50,000 sterling. Nearly three hundred men were engaged in it, who usu-
ally reached Grand Portage from the interior between June 10 and July 10.
The petition was signed by J. Porteous, Holmes & Grant, Simon MeTavish,
Charles Grant, Todd & McGill, Benjamin & Joseph Frobisher, MeGill & Pat-
erson, Forrest Oakes, George McBeath, and Adam Lymburner (Can. Arch.
Report, 1886, pp. 61-62). John Porteous died June 13, 1789 (Can. Arch.
Report, 1889, p. xvi).

In a petition to Haldimand dated Montreal, May 1, 1779, requesting
passes for canoes to Lake Superior and beyond, it was stated that there were
upwards of eight hundred men employed in that trade. The petitioners
represented that the canoes took six weeks to go from Lachine to Grand
Portage (Add. 21877, ff. 60-61). Haldimand granted passes for twenty
canoes, although Grant and Patterson tried to have the number raised to
twenty-six, alleging that the extra canoes were needed for provisions. The
list they submitted enumerated 26 canoes, manned by 208 men and carrying
3640 gallons of rum, 260 gallons of wine, 260 firearms, 64 ewt. of powder,
and 100 ewt. of ball and shot, which apparently were the quantities author-
ized. Of this list 18 canoes manned by 144 men, and carrying 2520 gallons
of rum, 180 gallons of wine, 180 firearms, 44 ewt. of powder, and 68 ewt. of
ball and shot, were destined for Grand Portage under the proprietorship of
Todd, Frobisher, Paterson & Co.; McBeath, MeTavish, Bennerman & Co.;
Wm. & John Kay; John Ross & Co.; Venance 8t. Germain & Co.; Porteous
& Sutherland; and Forrest Oakes (Add. 21877, ff. 62-63).
10 The North West Company

of which the whole trade was rendered common property.* The
success?? which attended this measure led, in the succeeding year,”*
to a second and nearly similar contract, to which a further dura-
tion of three years was given.** As the parties to this agreement
were less anxious, however, to fulfill it while it lasted than to pre-
pare themselves for the event of its termination and for the con-
sequent return of things to the original state of competition, all
the benefit expected from it was not obtained, and at the end of
two years it was renounced.*® The separate traders renewed for
a time their feeble and unprofitable efforts ;?* but the value of the
principles upon which the two agreements had been founded was

 

It was stated in print at a later date that this organization bore the
name of the North West Company of Canada (4A Narrative of Occurrences
. . » London, 1817, p. 57).

2 The Northwest merchants seem to have gotten into distinctly bad odor
with the authorities about this time. Sinclair, writing from Michilimackinae
to Captain Brehm on May 29, 1780, said: “The N. West society are not bet-
ter than they ought to be. Their conduct in sending an Embassy to Con-
gress in ’76 may be traced now to matters more detrimental, I believe, to
every One of the King’s Provision Stores, on the Communication. I have all
their Craft in from Lake Superior, St. Mary’s &¢., but one which will be
brought in or destroyed the ensuing Week. I hope the Genl. will grant them
no passes without insisting on their bringing in the King’s Stores from the
Portage. Lt. Bennet of the 8th can inform the Genl. of the disposition of
the Indians in that Quarter. They obtained indulgence from Genl. Carleton
for the worst purposes in the world... ” (Add. 21757-2, ff. 366-367).

This reads as if this company was fortunate enough not to have its furs
on the “Haldimand,” which was lost on its way down the St. Lawrence in
1780 with a valuable cargo of furs (Haldimand to Germaine, Quebec, Novem-
ber 20, 1780, Add. 21715, ff. 10-12; also B. 55, p. 18 et seq.)

§ Origin and Progress, 6-7.

*Ibid., 7. Between July 31 and October 22, 1782, twenty-five canoes
manned by 218 men passed the Petit Carillon on their way to Montreal
from Grand Portage. Of these canoes Benjamin and Joseph Frobisher
owned ten, Holmes and Grant owned four, Forrest Oaks one, Mr. Beath
(perhaps this means McBeath) owned three, and a Mr. Dawisch, or Davi-
son, owned five (Add. 21790, ff. 54-55, 74-75, 94-95). These all passed
between August 24 and September 17.

*° The agents of the North West Company, writing in 1784, stated that at
the end of 1782 there were no more than twelve interests left in the fur trade
to the North West. The terms in which they wrote convey the impression
that these twelve interests were the ones which formed the union of 1783-4
(Benjamin and Joseph Frobisher to Haldimand, Montreal, Oetober 4, 1784,
Add. 21877, ff. 398-401; also copy in C. O. 42 vol. 47).
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 11

generally acknowledged, and in the winter of 1783-1784 a third
agreement of five years*’ was entered into under the name of the
North West Company.** The merchants of Montreal, who recog-
nized the value of combination, were largely responsible for the
formation of the company, in which the leading persons were
Messrs. Benjamin*® and Joseph Frobisher and Simon McTavish.
The main principle of the arrangement was that the separate cap-
itals of the several traders were to be thrown into a common
stock, in consideration of which each individual held a propor-
tionate share of the combined adventure.*°

Mackenzie states that smallpox had been destroying large
numbers of the natives and seriously reducing the proceeds of
the fur trade, insomuch that the fur traders and their friends
from Canada became confined to two parties, who began seriously
to think of making permanent establishments on the Missinipi*
River, and in Athabasca. For this purpose they selected their
best canoe-men in 1781-1782 and sent them forth, unaware of the
fact that the smallpox had penetrated in that direction. The most
expeditious of the adventurers got only as far as Portage La

* The length of the agreement is also given as five years in a petition for
Haldimand’s consideration addressed to Mabane by Benjamin Frobisher
(Montreal, April 19, 1784, Add. 21735, ff. 421-424, printed in Can. Arch.
Report, 1888, pp. 63-64). The petition announced an intention of exploring
for a route north of Grand Portage and asked for a monopoly over it for
seven years, The reply was non-committal (Add. 21723, ff. 78-79).

* Origin and Progress, 7, which, however, gives the date of the formation
of this company as 1784. It is possible that the author was thinking of the
acceptance by the wintering partners at Grand Portage in the spring of that
year. It may even be argued that he had knowledge that the agreement was made
in the early months of 1784. In this connection it may be noted that Cruik-
shank has stated that the company was formed in October, 1783. Cf. Cana-
dian Institute, Transactions, V, 75. He does not, however, give any author-
ity for his statement. The date which it seems safest to adopt is “the win-
ter of 1783-4,” given by Mackenzie (Voyages, London ed., 1801, p. xvii).

® Benjamin Frobisher died April 14, 1787, and was buried two days later
(Can. Arch Report, 1885, Note A, p. xciv). A copy of the register of the
Anglican parish of Montreal is printed in this volume.

Selkirk, Fur Trade, 10-11.
“ The Churchill.
12 The North West Company

Loche, or Mithy-Ouinigam, in time to dispatch to that country
one canoe, strongly manned and lightly laden. These men found
that the ravages of the smallpox extended in every direction, and
they were compelled to return in the spring with only seven pack-
ages of beaver. The woods and mountains gave safety to those na-
tives who fled from the contagion of the plains, but they were so
alarmed at the general destruction that they avoided the traders
and were too dispirited to do more hunting than was required
for their subsistence. The traders, however, who went back into
the country in the year 1782-1783 found the inhabitants in some
sort of tranquillity and more numerous than they had reason to
expect, so that their returns were proportionately better.*”

The stock of the North West Company as founded in 1783-
17844? was divided into sixteen shares, no capital being deposited.
Each party furnished a proportion of the articles necessary for
the trade and agreed to satisfy his friends in the country who
were not provided for in the agreement, out of the shares which
he held. The two houses of Messrs. Benjamin and Joseph Fro-
bisher and Mr. Simon McTavish had the general management, for

 

*” Mackenzie, Voyages, xvii.

**Captain (later Lieutenant-Colonel) Cruikshank, in an article published
in the Canadian Institute Transactions, is more specific in certain points.
He writes as follows: ‘The original Northwest Fur Company, called the
‘sixteen share concern,’ had dissolved at the end of a single year. In 1781,
a new company, known as the ‘three share concern,’ was formed for one year,
which did not, however, embrace the English River nor Mississippi within the
scope of its operations. The success of this enterprise was sufficient to con-
vince the merchants generally of the benefits of combination, and the num-
ber of adventurers trading in the Northwest had in the meantime been re-
duced to twelve. Consequently, in October, 1783, a general partnership was
agreed upon for five years, in which each stockholder was assigned an inter-
est in proportion to his previous trade. The stock was divided into fifteen
shares of which 9% were allotted to non-residents. The expectations of
profit were then so limited that one of the old traders readily accepted an
offer of an annuity of 4000 livres (£166,135, 4d. currency) in lieu of divi-
dends. He lived to see a clear profit of £2000 sterling derived from a single
share.” So far I have not been able to determine whence Cruikshank got his
precise information in regard to the date of the formation of the company,
the allotment of the shares, and the figures quoted in regard to the value of
the shares.

 
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 13

which they were to receive a stipulated commission on all trans-
actions.4* The company was purely a partnership with transfer-
able shares and not a chartered company, although attempts were
made at a later date to obtain a charter granting exclusive trade
in the Pacific and Mackenzie basins. The firm was probably not
incorporated, and of course was not a limited liability company.
It was rather what has been termed a common-law company, a
type existing in both the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
Such companies were regarded with legal disfavor on account of
their irresponsibility, and, in the middle of the nineteenth cen-
tury, steps were taken to make them suable by public officers. Be-
sides the responsibility of its individual members for their own
acts, the North West Company might conceivably have been con-
trolled by a judicious use of the governmental power of granting
or withholding trading licenses.

In the spring of 1784, two of the agents** went to Grand Por-
tage with their credentials, which were confirmed and ratified by
all the parties having an option except Peter Pond, who was not
satisfied with the share allotted to him. Accordingly, he and
Peter Pangman, who had a right to be a partner but for whom

“Mackenzie, Voyages, xviii. These brief remarks by Mackenzie form
the basis of our knowledge of the North West Company’s organization at
this date. In a letter dated Montreal, October 4, 1784, from Benjamin and
Joseph Frobisher to Haldimand, it is stated that Article 32 of the Agree-
ment of Partnership of the North West Company said that the Articles were
to be registered “at the Secretaries Office for this Province at Quebec, for
the inspection of the public.” Inquiry at Quebee and elsewhere has failed
to elicit any information in regard to such registration. From the wording
of the letter it would appear as if the stipulation of Article 32 had not up
to this time been fulfilled. Possibly it never was fulfilled. Numbers of the
early records at Quebec have been destroyed by fire, and others are not fully
catalogued, making search difficult.

 

**These were Joseph Frobisher and Simon MeTavish. They started in
the month of May. Benjamin Frobisher wrote to Major Mathews on May
10, 1784, that the canoes would probably all be off by the middle of the
month. He asked that the above agents be given power at the Great Carry-
ing Place “to send such persons away, as have been guilty of crimes or dis-
turb the peace, or prove mutinous” (Add. 21735-2, ff. 446-447). It does not
appear whether they received the power.
14 The North West Company

no provision had been made, came to Canada with the determina-
tion to return to the fur country if they could find any persons to
join them and give their scheme a proper support.*®

The consolidation of the competing interests encouraged the
traders resident in the upper country. Having every reason to
expect that their past and future labors would be recompensed,
they forgot all their former animosities and engaged with the ut-
most spirit and activity, so that in the following year they met the
agents at Grand Portage with good returns from the interior.*”
But they were mortified to find that Pangman** had persuaded
Messrs. Gregory and McLeod to join him with their support, al-
though the latter were deserted by Pond, who had accepted the
terms offered by his former associates.*® Alexander Mackenzie,
who had been employed in Gregory’s counting-house for five years
and was now at Detroit, was admitted as a partner to the concern
at the instance of Gregory. Mackenzie, on being informed of the
offer, promptly accepted it and took his departure for Grand
Portage.

A severe struggle for trade now commenced, and was marked
by acts of violence.°° The murder of Ross, one of the opposition
partners, came as a shock to both parties, although intimidatory
firing had previously occurred. The North West Company, fear-
ing the consequences of the deed, was now willing to come to

** Mackenzie, Voyages, xix.
“1 Toid.

* A list of the traders to the Upper Country, apparently compiled in 1785,
gives the following information: The interest trading to Grand Portage
were: Todd & McGill, Benjamin & Joseph Frobisher, George McBeath, Lau-
rence Ermatinger, McTavish & Bannerman, Ross & Pangman, Waden & St.
Germain, William & John Kay, Mnr. Blondeau, Charles Grant, Adam Lym-
burner, Forrest Oakes, Peter Pond, Bruce, McGill & Paterson. Those trad-
ing to Lake Superior were: John & William Grant, Alexander Shaw, Ez].
Solomon, Jobert and St. Germain, Monsr. Cotts, Monsr. Desriviers, Monsr.
Louis Chabollez, Monsr. Perinault, Monsr. Charles Chabollez, James Finlay,
Mr. Cadotte, and Mr. Henry (Add. 21885, f. 350).

*° Mackenzie, Voyages, xix.

* Consult Masson, Esquisse, 21-31, for details of the struggle.
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 15

terms. The opposition, which had been operating at a loss, asked
for nothing better, and a union of interests was concluded in
July, 1787.51 Then for a few years there was fairly united action
on the part of the Canadian fur trading interests in the interior
of the country.

The method of operations is worthy of some attention. The
company was a self-erected concern, which assumed the name of
the North West Company and was no more than an association
of commercial men, agreeing among themselves to carry on the
fur trade unconnected with any other business, though many of
the parties engaged had extensive interests altogether foreign to
it. It may be said to have been supported entirely upon credit,
for whether the capital belonged to the proprietor or was bor-
rowed, it bore interest, for which the association was annually
accountable. There were twenty shares, unequally divided
among the parties concerned. Of these a certain proportion was
held by the persons who managed the business in Canada and were
styled agents of the company. Their duty was to import the
necessary goods from England, store them at their own expense
at Montreal, get them made up into the articles suited to the
trade, pack and forward them, and supply the funds that might
be wanting for the outfits; for this they received, independent of
the profits on their shares, a commission on the amount of the
accounts, which they were obliged to make out annually, keeping
the adventure of each year complete. Two agents went annual-
ly to Grand Portage, to manage and transact the business there
and on the communication®? at Detroit, Michilimackinac, St.
Marys, and Montreal, where they received stores, and packed up
and shipped the company’s furs for England. On this they
also had a small commission.

** Mackenzie, Voyages, xx.

* Previous to 1792, the portage at Niagara was from opposite Queens-
town to Fort Schlusser. Later it was from Queenstown to Chippewa (Maude,
Visit to the Falls of Niagara in 1800, p. 144).

 
16 The North West Company

The remaining shares were held by the proprietors, who were
obliged to winter and manage the business of the concern with the
Indians, the respective clerks, and others. These proprietors were
not supposed to be under any obligation to furnish capital. or
even credit. If they obtained any capital by the trade, it was to
remain in the hands of the agents, and the proprietors were al-
lowed interest for it. Some of them, from long service and influ-
ence, held double shares, and were allowed to retire from the bus-
iness at any period of the existing concern, each with one of these
shares, and with the privilege of naming any young man in the
company’s service to succeed him in the other. Seniority and
merit were, however, considered as affording a claim to the suc-
cession, which nevertheless could not be disposed of without the
concurrence of the majority of the concern, who at the same time
relieved the retiring person from any responsibility respecting
the share that he transferred, and accounted for it according to
the annual value and rate of the property, so that the seller could
have no advantage but that of realizing the share of stock which
he retained, and receiving for the transferred share what was fair-
ly determined to be the worth of it. The seller was also discharged
from all duty and became a dormant partner. Thus all the young
men who were not provided for at the beginning of the contract.
succeeded in turn to the character and advantages of partners.
Under such expectations they entered into the company’s service
for five or seven years, and their reasonable prospects were sel-
dom disappointed; there were, indeed, instances in which they
succeeded to shares before their apprenticeship expired, and it
frequently happened that they were provided for while they were
in a position of articled clerkship. Shares were transferable only to
the concern at large, since no person could be admitted as a part-
ner who had not served his time in the trade. The dormant part-
ner, indeed, might dispose of his interest to anyone he chose, but
if the transaction were not acknowledged by his associates, the
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 17

purchaser could be regarded only as his agent or attorney. Every
share had a vote, and two-thirds formed a majority.

This regular and equitable mode of providing for the clerks of
the company excited among them a spirit of emulation in the dis-
charge of their various duties and, in fact, made every agent a
principal who perceived his own prosperity to be connected imme-
diately with that of his employers.*? Masson states that the
agents of the company at Montreal and Grand Portage were to be
MeTavish, Frobisher, and Gregory. They were to furnish the
funds and make the necessary purchases and financial arrange-
ments for a commission of five per cent besides their shares in the
profits of the company. He also notes that, since the union had
taken place late in the year, after the departure of a large por-
tion of the winter outfits for the interior, it was determined to
leave each company in charge of its own property until the arri-
val of the brigades at their respective destinations, when an in-
ventory should be taken. One result of this decision was that
there were few changes in the locating of the partners.**

It is difficult to determine closely the returns of the fur trade
of the North West Company at this, or indeed at any period of
its existence. There are, however, various estimates and figures
in regard to the Canadian fur trade as a whole which are of in-
terest. Brissot de Warville states that the sales in London of furs
from Canada in 1782 produced four million seven hundred thou-
sand livres tournots. In 1783 the total was somewhat greater,
and in 1784 it amounted to about five millions.*> Estimating the
livre at seven-eighths of an English shilling, this would give up-
wards of £218,750 in the latter year. According to Anderson, in
1782 the amount of the spring sales in London of Canada furs
and peltry sent over the preceding year was £189,000.°° The

33 Mackenzie, Voyages, xxi-xxii.

* Masson, Esquisse, 31.

® Brissot de Warville, Travels, 2d ed., London, 1794, p. 214.
% Anderson, Origin of Commerce, 20 ed., IV, 441.
18 The North West Company

sale produced £165,000 in 1783,°7 £201,000 in 1784,°* £242,000 in
1785,** and £173,000 in 1786.°° The large returns from the sales
of 1784 and 1785 are noteworthy.

In a memorandum addressed to Carleton, January 20, 1778,
it was stated that the annual returns from the trade west of
Grand Portage fell little short of £40,000 sterling and that nearly
five hundred persons were employed in it.*t A memorandum on
the trade by way of the Grand® River, apparently written in
1780,°* stated that the fur trade of the province of Quebec pro-
duced each year on an average £200,000 worth of furs, of which
at least one-half came from Michilimackinac and its dependencies.
The trade required one hundred canoes, each navigated by eight
men. Each of the canoes, including transportation charges from
England to the Indian country, was worth £700 currency. Of
these hundred canoes, a third were necessary for the Northwest,
and the remainder for lakes Huron and Michigan, and La Baye
(Green Bay). The traders to the former section, who were most-
ly old subjects,°* had been allowed forty canoes in the preceding
years and were stated to have sent four loaded canoes to Michili-
mackinae for distribution in the latter section, which had been
allowed only twenty canoes.°° An accompanying memorandum
states that the trade to the upper country by way of lakes Ontario
and Erie had an average annual volume of £50,000 and required

“Anderson, Origin of Commerce, IV, 521.

58 Tbid., IV, 568.

© Tbid., TV, 598.

° Tbid., IV, 627.

Add. 21759, ff. 1-2.

= T.e., the Ottawa.

“It is undated but is in a volume, Add. 21759, in which the dated papers
range from 1778 to 1782. The memorandum states that forty canoes had
been allowed to go to the Northwest and twenty canoes to La Baye, ete., the

preceding year. Now it appears (Add. 21759, f. 71) that these numbers
were true for the year 1779.

* T.e., French.
® Add. 21759, ff. 140-141.
Early Pur Trade and Formation of the Company 19

two hundred batteawr men from La Chine to Carleton Island.**
Charles Grant, reporting to Haldimand in 1780, likewise estimat-
ed the total value of the trade at £200,000 sterling and said he
was informed that from ninety to one hundred canoes had been
used annually by the Ottawa River route. He added that one-
half of the furs came from Lake Huron and the districts beyond;
one-fourth from Niagara, Detroit, and their environs; and one-
fourth from the lower posts and inhabited parts of the province
of Quebec.*"

A petition to Haldimand dated Montreal, April 19, 1781, re-
questing permission to purchase five hundred bushels of corn at
Detroit for the Northwest trade, stated that the annual value of
that trade to the province was £30,000 sterling.*® A later writ-
er gave the same value for the returns in 1784.°° Hay, writing
from Detroit in 1784, said that furs to the value of £100,000 ster-
ling had been sent out that year from Detroit.”

A committee of the Montreal merchants reported in 1787 that
the Indian trade owed a debt of probably more than £300,000
sterling to the merchants of the province of Quebec, chiefly of
Montreal. Of this amount £125,000 was owed from Cataraqui to
Detroit and its dependencies; the remainder came from Michili-
mackinae and its dependencies, which included all the country
west and north of the east shore of Lake Huron. The committee
estimated the total annual value of furs from Michilimackinae
and Detroit, with their dependencies, to be not short of £160,000
sterling. of which three-fifths came down by the Grand River’
and two-fifths by the lakes. They therefore strongly urged the
retention of the posts.7?

Add. 21759, ff. 138-139.

* B, 99, pp. 110 et sea.

Add. 21877, f. 184.

® Origin and Progress, 9.

* Hay to Nepean, Detroit, September 1, 1784, Q. 56, pp. 564 et seq.

" T.e., the Ottawa.

= Committee of Merchants of Montreal to Committee of Council on Com-
mercial Affairs and Police, Montreal, January 23, 1787, C.O. 42, vol. 11,
Dorchester (No. 5) Enclosure C, pp. 41-42.

 
20 The North West Company

All these furs were paid for with English manufactures, and
the fourth part of them were prepared in England, by which
their value was doubled. Naturally a large proportion of the
furs did not come from the sphere of operations of the North
West Company. Part of the sales of 1784 were no doubt made
by agents of the North West Company in London, but even these
furs can hardly be said to have been traded for under the aus-
pices of that firm, which did not definitely take charge of the op-
erations in the interior until the meeting at Grand Portage in
that year. However, the company sent down in 1784 eight hun-
dred packs of furs, which apparently composed its returns for
the season.”*

The value of each canoe-load, on arrival at Michilimackinac,
had been estimated in 1780 to be £660 currency, or $2640. This
shows that the cost of transportation by the Ottawa was $640 for
each canoe, the value at Montreal having been $2000.74 In April,
1784, Benjamin Frobisher wrote that there were ready to be sent

Captain Robertson to Captain Mathews, Michilimackinac, August 19,
1784, Add. 21758, f. 317; also B, 98, p. 278 et seq.

™ This estimate was that in the report of Charles Grant to Haldimand as
printed in Can, Arch. Report, 1888 (Note E, pp. 59-61). Grant stated that
a canoe-load of goods was reckoned to be worth in dry-goods £300 first ster-
ling cost in England. Charges at fifty per cent would make this £450. Be-
sides this each canoe carried about 200 gallons of rum and wine, worth about
£50 more. Thus every canoe on its departure from Montreal might be said
to be worth £500 Quebec currency. The charges of all sorts from Montreal
to Michilimackinae were £160, and from thence to Grand Portage £90, mak-
ing a value for each canoe at Michilimackinae of £660 and at Grand Portage
of £750 currency. Each canoe was manned by eight men for transportation
of the goods. If wintering, they took up ten men (Add. 21759, ff. 81-82).
The apparent discrepancy in Grant’s report, where he changes his monetary
standard from sterling to Quebee currency, has been passed over by Willson,
who does not quote the first estimates of values. In fact, it looks as if he
had copied directly from Brymner’s statement in Can. Arch. Report, 1890,
P oa only omitting the name of Grant (Cf. Willson, The Great Company,

, 66).

Writing in 1784, Frobisher stated that freight by the Ottawa route was
generally estimated at about twenty-five per cent on canoes assorted for the
trade, but provisions or other articles of little value required from fifty to
sixty livres in freight to Michilimackinac, and from eighty to ninety livres
to Grand Portage (Benjamin Frobisher to Hamilton, Montreal, May 2, 1785,
C.O. 42, vol. 47; also Q, 24-2, pp. 423 et seq.).
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 21

off twenty-eight canoes, valued at £20,000 currency, or $80,000, a
sum for each canoe largely in excess of the estimate of four years
before.*®

In 1779 a partnership of traders, termed a ‘‘General Store,”’
was formed at Michilimackinac.”* According to an undated list,
probably compiled in 1780, this store was composed of thirty-
eight individuals and companies who contributed an estimated
number of 3434 canoe-loads of goods.7 A union of the traders
at Michilimackinae was formed in 1785 by the pooling of stocks.
This organization was spoken of two years later as the ‘‘ Michili-
mackinae Company.’’’®

The goods given in barter for furs are of interest. Anburey,
in a letter written at Montreal in 1776, stated that the traders
took with them brandy, tobacco, a kind of duffle blanket, guns,
powder and ball, kettles, hatchets, tomahawks, looking-glasses,
vermillion and various other paints. Lord Sheffield, writing in
1784, adds to the list coarse woollens, cutlery, beads, ribbons, and
other ornaments.”® The Indians were especially eager to obtain
powder, ball, paint, brandy, and tobacco. The guns were at-
tractively fitted up; but since they were by no means fool-proof,
accidents were common from bursting firearms. The Indians on
oceasion took revenge by attacking the first traders they could
lay hands upon.*®

The furs from a certain amount of United States territory were
also going through Canada to Europe.*t This was particularly
"% Willson, The Great Company, II, 109.

* De Peyster to Haldimand, Michilimackinac, October 5, 1779, Can. Arch.
Report, 1886, p. 703.

™ Add. 21757-2, ff. 577-578.

*® Joseph Howard to the Committee of Merchants at Montreal, Montreal,
January 11, 1787, Dorchester (No. 5) Enclosure CG, p. 78. C.O. 42, vol. 11.

” Sheffield, Observations on the Commerce of the American States, new
ed., 33.

® Anburey, Travels, I, 126-128.

" MeGill, writing in 1785, stated that he estimated the value of the Up-
per Country trade—in which he included the country from the mouth of the
22 The North West Company

the case in the territories in which the Indians were supplied
with goods from the posts retained by the English after the
treaty of peace in 1783, which retention the English justified on
the ground that the Americans themselves had not fulfilled cer-
tain articles of the treaty.*? These furs were not handled by the
North West Company, although various of its members were also
interested in the trade. The North West Company appears at
this time to have been tapping United States territory only at
Grand Portage and, possibly, at Fond du Lac. South of this, the
furs went out by way of Michilimackinac** or down the Missis-
sippi. The Spaniards, according to Imlay, controlled the Mis-
souri trade and that toward the Wisconsin and Illinois rivers
from the post of St. Louis.®*

The company employed two sets of men in transportation,
making over five hundred in all. Of these men, one-half were en-
gaged in transporting the goods from Montreal to Grand Portage
in canoes of about four tons burden, each manned by eight or ten
men. The other half were employed in transporting the goods
inland from Grand Portage in canoes of about one and one-half
tons burden, manned by four or five men only. The large canoes
left Montreal in May and followed the Ottawa River route. At
Michilimackinae they took an additional supply of provisions,
part of which was intended for use on the inland transport, and
part for consumption at Grand Portage. The quantity required
was so large that part had to be forwarded across Lake Superior
in boats or a ship. All supplies had to be at Grand Portage early

Ohio and on the rivers falling into the Mississippi to as far north as Lake
Arabaska—at £180,000 currency. Of this £100,000 came from the country
south of the American line (James McGill to Hamilton, Montreal, August 1,
1785, Q, 25, pp. 111 et seq., printed in Can. Arch Report, 1890, pp. 56-58).

° Notification of this policy was sent to Haldimand by Sydney under date
of London, April 8, 1784 (Can.. Arch. Report, 1885, p. 286, cataloguing B,
45, pp. 129 et seq.).

In spite of complaints of a poor season by the traders, nearly 4000
packs came down by way of Michilimackinae in 1773 (Add. 2173, f. 25).

“Imlay, Description of the Western Territory, 30 ed., 501.
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 23

in July, and fifteen days were usually consumed in making the
ten-mile crossing.’® The parties for the interior generally left
the west end of the portage between July 15 and August 1. They
took a canoe-lading of about one-third provisions and two-thirds
trading goods. They were therefore compelled to depend in part
upon provisions obtained from the natives en route. Asa result,
there was at times much suffering and privation on these inland
trips, and the situation was likely to be worse on the trips out in
the spring.®°

According to the settlement of 1784, the North West Com-
pany had in the interior, exclusive of its houses and stores at the
different posts, property to the value of £25,303-3-6 currency. and
it planned to send inland the next year from Montreal goods
amounting in value to nearly the same sum.*”

The volume, personnel, and character of the trade is illustra-
ted by the trade passes. The enumeration may be tedious, but the
showing is interesting and significant. Haldimand, in his report
of August 20, 1783, stated that there had been ninety-four appli-
cations for trade passes to date that season. Of these, three were
not allowed. The total value of the goods specified in the applica-
tions was £232,374-8-4, to be transported in 120 canoes and 347
batteauxz by 2479 men. The licenses to Grand Portage were to
Simon MeTavish, Holmes & Grant, Benjamin & Joseph Frobisher,
and Joseph Dejarlais & Baptiste Plante, for goods of a total value
of £9900. The first-named was allowed 6 canoes, 54 men, 500 gal-
lons rum, 72 fusils, 2800 pounds gunpowder, 35 ewt. shot, ete.,

* A request by the North West Company for a grant of land one acre in
width from Lake Superior to “Long Lake” for the purpose of constructing
a wagon road to obviate the need of using one hundred men at the portage,
was adversely reported on by the Council at Quebec on June 30, 1788. They
considered, however, that the company might be granted the monopoly of
transport there at a regulated rate (Q, 37, pp. 262-266).

* Benjamin and Joseph Frobisher to Haldimand, Montreal, October 4,
1784, Add. 21877, ff. 398-401.

‘Tbid.

 
24 The North West Company

valued at £4500. The second were allowed 3 canoes, 28 men, 200
gallons rum, 16 fusils, 600 pounds gunpowder, 10 ewt. shot, etc.,
valued at £1800. The third were allowed 5 canoes, 40 men, 680
gallons rum, 48 gallons wine, 32 fuszls, 1160 pounds gunpowder,
11 ewt. shot, ete., valued at £3500. The fourth were allowed 1
canoe, 5 men, 60 gallons rum, 4 fusils, 70 pounds gunpowder, 1
ewt. shot, ete., valued at £100.

Permits to Lake Superior were granted to McBeath & Pond,
Charles Chaboillez, and Hypolite Desrivieres, the goods being
valued at £4000. There were also twenty-four passes to Michili-
mackinac, two passes to Temiscamingue for goods worth £4500,
one pass to Michipicoton for goods worth £450, and one pass to
Nipigon for goods worth £1500. J.B. Cadot had passes to Sault
Ste. Marie for £1000 worth of goods. John Gregory had a pass to
Detroit for £17,500 worth of goods and to Michilimackinae for
£960 worth. Benjamin & Joseph Frobisher, besides the pass to
Grand Portage, had others to Carleton Island, Niagara, and De-
troit for £1800 worth, and to Michilimackinae for £630 worth,
while Joseph Frobisher had one to Detroit for goods worth
£2000.%8

In the year 1785 there were issued forty-three passes for 108
canoes, 146 batteaur, 1644 men, 42,780 gallons rum, 7270 gallons
wine, 48,610 pounds powder, 1425 fusils, 83914 ewt. shot, to a
value of £109,875. Of these the following were granted to Grand
Portage: On May 2, Pass No. 13 was issued to Gregory and Mc-
Leod, on the security of John Gregory and N. McLeod, for 4 ¢a-
noes, 50 men, 400 gallons rum, 32 gallons wine, 1700 pounds
powder, 64 fusils, 20 ewt. shot, worth £2850. On May 3, Pass
No. 15 was issued to Benjamin & Joseph Frobisher, directors of
the North West Company, on the security of Benjamin Fro-
bisher and James McGill, for 25 canoes, 260 men, 3500 gallons
rum, 340 gallons wine, 8000 pounds powder, 300 fusils, 120 ewt.

* Haldimand to North No. 14, August 20, 1783, in C.O. 42, vol. 44.
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 25

shot, worth £20,000. On May 9, Pass No. 27 was issued to J oseph
Howard, on the security of J. Howard and Al. Hay, to Michili-
mackinac and Grand Portage for 3 canoes, 24 men, 500 gallons
rum, 100 gallons wine, 600 pounds powder, 24 fusils, 8 ewt. shot,
worth £550. On May 12, Pass No. 29 was issued to Donald Me-
Kay, on the security of D. MeKay and Daniel Sutherland, for 2
canoes, 17 men, 100 gallons rum, 100 gallons wine, 700 pounds
powder, 20 fusils, 12 ewt. shot, worth £500. On May 19, Pass
No. 35 was issued to Pangman & Ross, on the security of John
Gregory and William Griffin, for 4 canoes, 40 men, 350 gallons
rum, 32 gallons wine, 1600 pounds powder, 36 fusils, 18 ewt.
shot, worth £2775. These items are interesting because of the
active opposition trade which was started in 1785. It is probable
that, while not so mentioned in the return, the values given in-
clude dry goods and other articles for the trade besides those
which are given.

In the year 1786 there were sixty-seven licenses granted for
163 canoes, 163 batteauz, 2139 men, 56,324 gallons rum, 8950
gallons wine, 2010 fusils, 66,207 pounds powder, 89914 ewt. ball
and shot, value £144,880. Of this list, there were licensed to
Grand Portage 41 canoes, 2 batteaur, 422 men, 4800 gallons rum,
584 gallons wine, 624 fusils, 12,600 pounds powder, 181 ewt.
shot, value £8500. The individual items follow: On May 18,
Benjamin and Joseph Frobisher, directors of the North West
Company, got a license, on the security of Benjamin Frobisher
and James McGill, to send to Grand Portage 2 batteaux and 9
men with a lading valued at £500. On June 17 they similarly
received a permit to send to Grand Portage 30 canoes, 300 men,
3000 gallons rum, 500 gallons wine, 500 fusils, 9000 pounds pow-
der, 120 ewt. shot, value £2500. On May 20, Gregory & McLeod
received a permit, on the security of N. McLeod and James Fin-
lay, to send to Grand Portage 8 canoes, 83 men, 1600 gallons

® ©. 0. 42, vol. 47, p. 675.
26 The North West Company

rum, 64 gallons wine, 104 fwsils, 2800 pounds powder, 45 ewt.
shot, value £4500. This was the company opposing the North
West Company. On May 22, McKay & Shaw received a permit,
on the security of A. Shaw and Alex. Robertson, to send to
Grand Portage 3 canoes, 30 men, 200 gallons rum, 20 gallons
wine, 20 fusils, 800 pounds powder, 16 ewt. shot, value £1500.
Besides the above, the Frobishers were interested in six other
licenses to trade to Cataraqui, Niagara, Michilimackinac, and the
Illinois. McGill was also widely interested. Hypolite Des-
rivieres was licensed for Lake Superior with two canoes and a
lading worth £1000. Cadot was scheduled for Sault Ste. Marie
with two canoes and a lading worth £1000. Leon St. Germain
was licensed to Michipicoton with one canoe and a lading worth
£500. There were three licenses to the St. Maurice aggregating
six canoes and ladings worth £500. Desrivieres and Beaubien
were licensed to Temiscamingue with eight canoes and goods
worth £1200. Except where stated, there is nothing to show that
these men were connected with the North West Company.
Charles Chaboillez was licensed to Michilimackinac in the same
year, B. Frobisher being one of his backers. The Forsyths ap-
pear with interests in the trade at Michilimackinac, Detroit,
Niagara, and in the Miamis Company, of which the directors
were Askin, McIntosh, and Leich.®°

An abstract of the craft, men, and goods licensed to trade
with the Indians in the Upper Countries in the year 1787 re-
corded 116 canoes, 167 batteaux, 1766 men, 59,105 gallons of
rum, 1570 fusils, 47,893 pounds powder, 742 ewt. of shot; value
of the goods £97,972. A note stated that other items of mer-
chandise besides those enumerated were included in this total.”
This must also have been true in preceding years.

“Enclosure in Hope’s No. 32 of October 21, 1786, Q, 26-2, p. 563 a.

2 In Lord Dorchester’s No. 44 of November 9, 1787, Q, 28, p. 187. (More
particular details are not included.)
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 27

It was predicted that the cession of the posts in 1783 would
throw the fur trade into the hands of the United States.°2 Shef-
field advocated the drawback of all duties upon exportation of
furs from Great Britain, arguing that the furs intended for for-
eign consumption would otherwise all go through the United
States, and he even went so far as to advocate the removal of all
duties on the importation of furs certified to be the product of
the British North American colonies.** The danger adverted to
by Sheffield was met by a prohibition of the exportation of furs
from Quebec by land or to foreign European countries.°* Evi-
dence was given before the Board of Trade in 1789 by Thomas
Ainslie, who had been collector of customs in the province of
Quebec for twenty-seven years, that the prohibition was strictly
enforced, but that some beaver was now and then smuggled into
the United States.’ He also stated that the Indians brought
nearly all their furs to Michilimackinae and a few to Detroit,
receiving in return strouds, blankets, all kinds of woollens, fire-
arms, powder, shot, traps, flour, bread, wampum and other trink-
ets, and a small quantity of spirits.°° According to a return sup-
plied by him, the value in the London market of the furs shipped
from Quebec in 1788 was £258,970-3-1014."

= Cf. Sheffield, Observations on the Commerce of the American States,
new ed., 1784, pp. 100-101.

“ Thid., 102.

“This step was taken after Haldimand had given evidence before the
Board of Trade on March 7, 1785, that he as governor had forbidden such
export and that in his opinion such a step was advisable. He remarked that
such a step would have the advantage of keeping down the price of furs to
the merchants. He was optimistic as to the prospects of retaining large
share of the fur trade if smuggling were guarded against. The committee
adopted a resolution recommending that the governor should recommend the
passing of the required ordinance to the Legislative Council (B. T. 5, vol. 2,
pp. 208-209). A similar resolution was passed March 14, 1785 (B. T. 5, vol.
2, pp. 220-221). On July 13, 1787, it was again resolved that Lord Dorches-
ter should under no circumstances allow the export of peltry from the prov-
ince of Quebec to the United States (B. T. 5, vol. 4, p. 325).

=B. T. 5, vol. 5, 233.

“Tbid., 228.
"Tbid., 250,
28 The North West Company

The policy of the British government after the conquest, as
expressed in instructions to the governors of Quebec, was that
the fur trade should be open to every British subject provided
with a proper license.** The traders were expected to observe
certain regulations in regard to supplying liquors®® and rifles—
the latter were forbidden—to the natives. Posts were to be es-
tablished in the northern districts of America for trading pur-
poses and were to be under military supervision. Such restric-
tions hardly applied to the North West Company, because the
government did not at that time establish posts west of Lake Su-
perior. A detachment had been stationed at Grand Portage in
1777 and succeeding years to preserve order during the trading
period. This was done at the request of the merchants,’°° who
bore part of the expenses, including the construction of a small
fort which was commenced in 1778.1?

The government did not reduce the number of its vessels on
lakes Erie and Ontario as much as it had intended, because of the
importance and extent of the fur trade.1°? For purposes of reg-

* Twenty-eight licenses were granted at Quebec between April 13 and
June 4, 1778, for trade to Michilimackinae and beyond, involving sixty-one
canoe-loads. Of this number William and John Kay had a permit for 2 ca-
noes, 20 fusils, 1200 pounds of gunpowder, and 1200 pounds of shot and ball
for the “North West.” Grant and Solomon had two licenses for 5 canoes,
1600 pounds of gunpowder, and 3400 pounds of shot and ball for Nipigon.
Gabriel Cotté had a permit for 3 canoes, 34 fusils, 1200 pounds of gunpow-
der, and 1200 pounds of powder and shot for Nipigon. John Baptiste Barthe
had a license for 3 canoes and 5200 pounds of shot and ball for Lake Su-

perior. The rest all went for trade in the region towards the Illinois and
Mississippi rivers (Add. 21757, f. 5).

“Writing to Carleton from Michilimackinae on May 30, 1778, Dr. Pey-
ster stated that rum was rising in price because the importation was stopped
“except a little for the North Trade” (Add. 21757, f. 3).

™ Add. 21678, f. 195; also B, 18; also B, 40, p. 64.

™ De Peyster to Haldimand, Michilimackinac, September 16, 1778, B,
96—1, p. 9 et seqg.; also Add. 21756-1.

“ Haldimand to the Treasur uebee, September 1, 1784, B, 56, p. 285;
also Add. 21716. oa Weiesure tenes
Early Fur Trade and Formation of the Company 29

ulation it was required that the traders’ goods'** and furs should
be transported on these lakes in the royal ships.!°*

The trade was not without its difficulties. The government
complained of attempts to evade the law against sending furs to
the United States,°° and of delay in the payment of freights’™*
which necessitated commencing suit.1°7 The merchants com-
plained of insufficient ships to transport their goods at the re-
quired time.*°® In compliance with the request of the North
West merchants,?° permission was granted to them in 1784 to
construct a vessel at Detroit which was to be drawn up above the
falls of St. Marys and employed on Lake Superior.1?° Orders
were transmitted by the same letter that every assistance should
be granted to the North West Company in the matter of
forwarding provisions to Michilimackinac in the king’s ships,
for use in the Northwest trade. A vessel, the ‘‘Beaver,’’ was
constructed at Detroit and sailed from there in the spring of
1785. She proved too large to be taken up the Falls of St.
Marys, and the North West Company was again reduced to the

*8 By May 26, 1780, twenty-two passes for trade by Niagara had been
granted (Add. 21721, f. 74), but there was a doubt as to whether the goods
could be transported in time, the amount being large and the king’s service
requiring consideration (Add. 21721, f. 72).

14 Add. 21721, f. 253; B, 61, p. 143; Add. 21724, f. 34.

5 A letter of Haldimand dated Quebec, August 9, 1784, speaks of the
reports that Charles Patterson had sent furs by way of Lake Champlain the
preceding autumn and that Mr. Ellice had done the same that spring (Add.
21724, f. 34). Ellice later tried to explain on the score that the furs had
been sold in the province and were only being delivered to the purchasers at
St. Johns (Robert Ellice & Co. to Major Mathews, Montreal, August 23,1784,
Add. 21735-2, f. 532).

106 A dd. 21724, ff. 34-35.

*7 Q, 26-1, pp. 295 et seq.

8 A third ship was employed in the king’s service on lakes Erie and On-
tario in 1784 (Add. 21724, f. 34). This was the result of a petition by the
merchants because the number had been reduced to two ships.

1 Benjamin Frobisher to Mathews, Montreal, October 4, 1784, Add.
21877, f£. 402-403.

"0 Haldimand to Hay, Quebec, November 10, 1784, B, 64, p. 405, printed
in Can, Arch. Report, 1888, Note E, p. 72.
30 The North West Company

necessity of depending on boats and canoes on Lake Superior, as
had been the case since Lieutenant-Governor Simcoe had ordered
down the Falls the vessels which were on Lake Superior. Even
with the cargo of the ‘‘Beaver’’ and what could be carried in the
king’s vessels, it was claimed that the supply of provisions would
have been insufficient for the inland trade had it not been for a
chance purchase. This left no corn at St. Marys for the canoes
bound for Montreal, but Lieutenant-Governor Hay took it upon
himself to allow the ‘‘Beaver’’ to take the necessary supply to
St. Marys on another trip.111. The North West Company there-
fore requested permission to use the ‘‘Beaver’’ for the purpose
of carrying goods and the provisions, which it was accus-
tomed to purchase at Fort Erie and Detroit, to Michilimackinac
and St. Marys, the vessel to be under the command of any person
selected by the government and paid by the company. The ‘‘Bea-
ver’’ was a small decked vessel of thirty-four-foot keel, thirteen-
foot beam, and four-foot hold. She cost £1843-13-2 York eur-
rency to construct.1!? Hamilton, who considered the request rea-
sonable, could not give the required permission. He forwarded
the petition to Sydney for decision,'!? and a copy of it to Barry
St. Leger, who did not recede from his previous decision on the
question of navigation of the lakes.''* This decision was that
there were enough king’s ships for the purposes of trade and
that the delays complained of had been due to the exceptional
step of relieving the regiments at the posts in the Upper Coun-
try.17° Permission had been granted to take goods up the lakes
in private batteaux and canoes.

™ Benjamin Frobisher to Hugh Finlay, Montreal, August 8, 1785, Q, 25,
pp. 119 et seq., printed in Can. Arch. Report, 1890, p. 59.

*? Benjamin and Joseph Frobisher to Hamilton, Montreal, May 8, 1785,
Q, 25, p. 122, printed in Can. Arch. Report, 1890, p. 60.

3 Q, 25, p. 125, printed in Can. Arch. Report, 1890, p. 61.
*4 St. Leger to Hamilton, Montreal, August 15, 1785, Q, 25, p. 134.

St. Leger to Sydney, Montreal, July 25, 1785, Q, 25, p. 156, printed in
Can. Arch. Report, 1890, p. 64.
Early Fur Tradeand Formation of the Company 31

In the year 1776 the traders to the Northwest had possessed
a vessel which they termed a periauger or perriauger. This ves-
sel made a trip from Grand Portage to St. Marys, leaving the
former place June 9 of that year. McTavish left Michilimacki-
nae June 12 and was to ‘‘go from St. Marie’s to the Portage in
the Perriauger for which place I imagine she has already
sailed.’’!46

The firm of Dyer, Allan, and Company of Mincing Lane,
London, appears as an English firm interested in the trade of
the North West Company. On January 12, 1785, John Strettell,
one of the firm, wrote to Haldimand in support of the petition of
the North West Company for an exclusive control for ten years
of the trade by way of a route which they were exploring."
Haldimand promised attention to the subject of the petition—
which had been presented to him at Quebec—in a letter dated
London, January 14, 1785.18 The letter refers to the exploration
by Umfreville of the route by Lake Nipigon and Lae Seul in the
year 1784. This interesting letter is discussed in the next chapter.

' "6 James Bannerman to William Edgar, Michilimackinae, June 23, 1776,
Edgar Letters, pp. 21-23. Toronto Public Library.

oA dd. 21736, f. 6; B, 76, p. 7.
HS Add. 21724, f. 129.
CHAPTER II
EARLY EXPEDITIONS TO THE WEST

The North West traders were by no means the first to pene-
trate the secrets of the western wilderness. The French in 1756
held a chain of posts from Montreal to the foot of the Rockies.
The posts of Presq’ile, Le Boeuf, Venango, and Du Quesne com-
manded the navigation of the Ohio. They had stations on the St.
Josephs, Wisconsin, Wabash, and Illinois rivers which quite mo-
nopolized the trade of the surrounding country. Thriving settle-
ments of long standing at Kaskasia, New Orleans, and elsewhere
on the Mississippi gave them control of that mighty river. In
the Southwest they had posts at Natchitoches, Cododachos, and
Taovayas on the Red River, and on the Arkansas, Osage and
Kansas. They had establishments at Prairie du Chien and Lake
Pepin in Wisconsin. Pascoya, on the upper Saskatchewan, was
nine hundred leagues beyond Michilimackinac, and the journey
thither usually occupied three months. The most western French
post, La Jonquiére, was still a hundred leagues beyond Pascoya.
St. Denis, La Harp, Dutisne, Bouremont, the Mallets, La, Véren-
drye and his sons, Le Gardeur de St. Pierre, and other adventur-
ers had explored this western country.

Bougainville, writing about the western establishments two
years before the English conquest, said:

The Post of the Western Sea is the most advanced towards the north;
it is situated among many Indian tribes with whom we trade and who have
intercourse with the English towards Hudson Bay. We have there several
forts built of stockades, trusted generally to the care of one or two officers,
seven or eight soldiers, and eighty cngagés Canadiens. We can push further
the discoveries we have made in that country and communicate even with
California.

The Post of La Mer de L’Ouest includes the forts of St. Pierre, St.

‘Cruikshank, Early Traders and Trade Routes in Canadian Institute,
Transactions, III, 254.
 

 

 

 

Pond’s Map in ©. O. 42, Vol. 47, p. 665 (Public Record Office).
Early Expeditions to the West 33

Charles, Bourbon, De Ja Reine, Dauphin, Poskoiac, and Des Prairies (De la
Jonquiére), all of which are built with palisades that can give protection
only against the Indians.’

Jefferys gives a similar list, except that he mentions Fort Mau-
repas and omits Fort des Prairies.’

Ninety canoes were annually permitted to go to the southern
posts, which were Niagara, Toronto, Frontenac, La Presentation,
Detroit, Oulas, Miamis, Michilimackinac, La Baye, St. Josephs,
Illinois, and their several dependencies. Twenty-eight canoes
were despatched to the northern posts, namely, Temiscamingue,
Chagouamigon, Nipigon, Gamanistigouia and Michipicoton, Mer
du Ouest, Riviére des Kikipoux, Lake Huron, and Belle Riviére.
Of these, Toronto and Fort Frontenac were king’s posts. The
trade to them was conducted for the royal account, and the furs
were sold by auction at Montreal.* Such was the situation at the
outbreak of the Seven Years’ War.

After the British conquest these French posts were aban-
doned and the Indians carried their furs to Hudson Bay. A
number of coureurs du bois followed them there or dispersed
among the different tribes. Soon only slight traces of the civili-
zation of the French fur trader and missionary were left in the
Northwest.®

One of the first Englishmen who ventured into this old French
country* was Alexander Henry, a daring merchant. Ignorant
alike of the trade and the wilderness, he trusted to an old French
trader, Etienne Campion. He purchased his goods at Albany

? Quoted in Bryce, Remarkable History of the Hudson’s Bay Company,
3d ed., 90-91.

3 T[homas] Jefferys, Natural and Civil History of the French Dominions,
pt. II, 19.

*Q, 5-1, pp. 382 et seg. Apparently used without citation by Cruikshank
(Canadian Institute, Transactions, III, 255).

5 Masson, Esquisse, 9.

* Anthony Hendry had traveled inland from York Factory to the Black-
feet country in 1754-1755. His journey has been edited by L. J. Burpee, in
Royal Society of Canada, Proceedings and Transactions, Series III, vol. I,
sec. 2, pp. 307-364.
34 The North West Company

because they were not to be obtained at Montreal. Going by the
Ottawa route, he found it advisable to adopt the voyageur cos-
tume. Shortly after he reached Michilimackinae, that fort was
taken by the Chipewyans during Pontiac’s war. Henry was cap-
tured after the first fury of the attack was over, but finally
reached Niagara in safety.‘ In 1765, having obtained a grant of
the monopoly of the trade around Lake Superior,’ he combined
his interests with Jean Baptiste Cadotte, who had established a
post on what is now the Michigan side of Sault Ste. Marie.

In a letter to Haldimand, Benjamin and Joseph Frobisher
stated that the first British adventurer went from Michilimacki-
nac in 1765.2 He was stopped and plundered that year and the
year following at Rainy Lake, but in 1767 the canoes went past
Lake Winnipeg. Matthew Cocking’s Journal of 1772 makes James
Finlay reach the Saskatchewan not later than 1767. Burpee
suggests that Thomas Curry was with Finlay.’° If Curry was
along he was breaking his license, which was issued July 12, 1767,
on the security of Isaac Todd, and permitted him to go to Kami-
nistiquia with two canoes and £1000 worth of goods.’! At any

*Masson, Esquisse, 10; Henry, Travels, Bain ed., pp. 11-174. The ecap-
ture caused a loss to Howard, Chinn & Bostwick of £5000 sterling (Joseph
Howard to Committee of Merchants at Montreal, Montreal, January 11,
1787, C.O. 42, vol. 11, p. 79).

* Masson, Esquisse, 11; Henry, Travels, Bain ed., 184-185.

* Benjamin and Joseph Frobisher to Haldimand, Montreal, October 4,
1784, C. O. 42, vol. 47, pp. 637-648; Add. 21877, ff. 398-401.

” Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 304.

“C.O. 42, vol. 14. Eighteen canoes with £7481-17-0 worth of goods went
to Lake Superior this year; fourteen canoes with £5117-10-7 worth of goods
went by Lake Superior to the Northwest; five canoes with £6875-9-0 worth
of goods went to Lake Huron; twenty-four canoes with £6875-9-0 worth of
goods went into Lake Michigan; forty-three canoes with £13,364-10-4 worth
of goods went by Lake Michigan into La Baye; and seventeen canoes with
£4850-0-0 worth of goods went by La Baye to the Mississippi, making a total
of 121 canoes with £38,964-6-11 worth of goods from Michilimackinae.

The permits to trade to the Northwest were to Blendeau, issued on July
7 to go to Fort La Reine and Fort Dauphine with two canoes and £700-0-0
worth of goods, on the security of Spicemaker & Blendeau, Jr.; to Le Blan-
cell on July 7, to go to Fort Daphne (probably Dauphin) and La Pierce
with six canoes and £2400-0-0 worth of goods, on the security of Alexander
Early Expeditions to the West 35

rate Mackenzie stated that Curry was the pioneer on the Saskatch-
ewan.’” Masson says that the traders remained in the districts
south of Lake Superior and in the neighboring regions until
1767, when a trader by the name of Clause!* went beyond Lake
Nipigon in an attempt to reach the Indians who were then trad-
ing with the Hudson’s Bay Company. He and his men almost
perished of hunger.’* Two or three later expeditions met a worse
fate. Many voyageurs died of starvation, and the place acquired
a bad reputation among their fellows.’

In the meantime Thomas Curry went to Kaministiquia and
made a very successful venture. Some traders followed him there
the next vear but the majority went to Grand Portage, and the
Kaministiquia route was in due time completely forgotten.'®

Further determined efforts were made to extend the trade in
other directions and to forestall the Hudson’s Bay Company. In
1770 Curry attempted to reach the most westerly of the French
posts, but got only as far as Fort Bourbon, where he traded to
such advantage that he was able to retire. The next year James
Finlay reached Fort Lacorne, or Nipawee, as Mackenzie calls it.
In 1772 Joseph Frobisher established Cumberland House near
the site formerly occupied by Fort Poskoyac on the Saskatche-
wan River..7 He then proceeded to the Missinipi, or Churchill,

Baxter; to Campion on July 10, to go to Lac De Plieu and Lae Dubois with
one canoe and £400-0-0 worth of goods, on the security of Groessbeek; to
Mareaut on July 13, to go to Nipigon and La Carpe with two canoes and
£511-10-0 on the security of Guillard & [blank]; and to Menard on July 23,
to go to Nipigon and La Carpe with three canoes and £1106-0-7, on the se-
curity of Forrest Oakes.

” Mackenzie, Voyages, Vili.

*Marcaut and Menard had permits to go this year with two and three
canoes respectively to Nipigon and La Carpe (C.O. 42, vol. 14). Was Clause
under these or was he trading without a license?

™“ Masson, Bourgeois, II, 242.

* Masson, Esquisse, 12-13.

“Ibid., 13-14.

“Ibid., 14. Bain states that the North West Company had a fort here
which was established about 1793. And Alexander Henry speaks
36 The North West Company

River, where he met the Indians on their way to Hudson Bay
with valuable furs for payment of the credits which they had re-
ceived.1® He purchased all these furs, the number being so great
that he was forced to build a fort to store the portion that he
could not take down with him. This post bore the name of Fort
La Traite, in memory of his success.'* Later he sent his brother,
Thomas Frobisher, to establish the post of Ile 4 la Crosse.?°

In 1774 Samuel Hearne built Cumberland House on Cumber-
land, or Pine Island, Lake for the Hudson’s Bay Company.*!
This was the first effective step in inland work for the chartered
company, although in the years 1740-1760”? they had built three
posts close to the Bay: Henley House on Albany River; Split
Lake House on Nelson River, and Fort Nelson on Footprint
River. Hearne went to Prince of Wales Fort as governor in
1775. The same year Alexander Henry the elder came up from
Sault Ste. Marie by way of Grand Portage, Lake of the Woods,
Winnipeg River, and the Saskatchewan, reaching Cumberland
House October 26, 1775. On the way he had been overtaken by
Peter Pond, and later by Joseph and Thomas Frobisher.2? Pond
had preceded Henry into the West. It is clear from one of his

only of the Hudson’s Bay Company’s fort at this place in 1775 (Henry,
Travels, Bain ed., 261, note 17). Burpee suggests that it must have been
only a temporary trading structure (Search for the Western Sea, 324).

** A map drawn by Peter Pond was presented to Congress March 1, 1785.
It bears, however, on the west side of a lake, just below Portage de Traite,
the legend “Fort Frobisher 1771”, with a location mark. This would appear
as if the Canadian traders had been thus far north of the Saskatchewan
some years before the Hudson’s Bay Company established Cumberland House
(Add. 15332, D, and Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 182).

ss Masson, Esquisse, 14-15. It is “Mr. Frobisher in 1774 called Fort de
Trait” on the map by Pond (C. 0. 42, vol. 47, p. 665).

* Masson says “next year” (Esquisse, 15), but Henry’s account makes
the date 1776 at the earliest (Henry, Travels).

; a Hearne had at an earlier date crossed the Barren Lands to the Copper-
mine River and returned to his starting point, Fort Churehill.

* Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 162-163.
* Henry, Travels, Bain ed., 230-263.
 

Pond's Map. Additional MS., 15332 D (British Museum).
Early Expeditions to the West 37

maps that he had been on the St. Peter’s River in 1774.2! If the
figures given by Crévecoeur are accurate, Pond must have gone
to the West as early as 1768.

At Cumberland House the canoes separated, Cadotte going
up the Saskatchewan to Fort des Prairies,?> Pond returning to
Fort Dauphin,** Henry and the Frobishers going up the Maligne

“There are in the British Museum two maps entitled “Copy of a map pre-
sented to the Congress by Peter Pond a native of Milford in the state of
Connecticut. This extraordinary man has resided 17 years in these countries
& from his own discoveries as well as from the reports of Indians, he as-
sures himself of having at last discovered a passage to the N.O. sea; he is
gone again to ascertain some important observations. New York lst, March
1785. The original map being incumbered with a great deal of writing I
have thought it best to transcribe it separately with the references marked
by ye numbers.—Copied by St. John de Crevecoeur for his Grace of La
Rochefoucault.” They are Add. 15332, C, and Add. 15332, D. They are ac-
companied by remarks and a memoir in French which shows that the map
was presented to Congress March 1, 1785 (Add. 15332, E). Both maps are
30” x 22” in size. They are both on a thin tracing paper. It is evident from
the differences in detail that neither map is a copy of the other. Add.
15332, C, which is of a cream shade with the waters a weak brown, does not
photograph well. Add. 15332, D, which is of a brown shade with waters
edged with green, photographs better. The British Museum acquired these
at the Barbié de Bocage sale of November 9, 1844. This is the only record
of their history which the Museum possesses. Burpee has printed a similar
map from the Kohl copy, which is said to have been copied from a map in
Hudson’s Bay House, London. This printed map also differs from both the
above maps. These go as far south as the Gulf of California, and also have
figures on them to place the information in Add. 15332, E. These maps lo-
cate a “Fort Pond 1774” on the St. Peter’s River, which Burpee identifies
as the Minnesota River (Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 309).

* Bain says it was probably just below the junction of the North and
South Saskatchewan (Henry, Travels, Bain ed., 275, note 4), but Pond’s
maps locate it on the North Saskatchewan above the Forks (Add. 15332, D;
C. O. 42, vol. 47, p. 665; map copied by Stiles,1790).

7? Pond’s map of 1785 shows where he wintered in 1775 at the northwest
corner of Lake Dauphin (C. 0. 42, vol. 47, p. 665). The copy published in
Can. Arch. Report, 1890, is quoted by Bain (Henry, Travels, Bain ed., 263,
note 15), who adds that the North West Company’s house here was later on
Ochre River, a few miles south of the lake. This “fort Pond 1775” is also
located near the northwest corner of Lake Dauphin in the copy of the map
which is in the British Museum and was presented by Pond to Congress (Add.
15332, D). The map as printed by Burpee from the Kohl copy has this as
“Pond Fort 1779” (Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 182).

Burpee challenges the date of 1785 for the map in the Public Record
Office, and argues that it was the map sent by Dorchester to Grenville in
connection with his letter dated Quebec, November 23, 1790 (cf. Burpee,
Search for the Western Sea, 338-342).
38 The North West Company

River?” and wintering at Beaver Lake.** Bain has noted how
cleverly the traders had located themselves on the waterways

Now the map among the Colonial Office Papers in the Public Record
Office: is bound among the other enclosures in C. O. 42, vol. 47, with other en-
closures in the letter dated Quebec, June 6, 1785 (Hamilton to [Sydney]).
It is rather improbable that a mistake was made in the binding, which is
certainly not recent. It is true that two plans are referred to in Hamilton’s
letters as No. 1 and No. 2. The first plan, which is a sketch of the water
connection from the Bay of Quinté to Lake Huron, bears the endorsement
“No. 1,” and this larger folded map bears no endorsement of any kind. The
map contains no date later than 1784, which fact tends to show that it was
constructed at the earlier date. Moreover, in Dorchester’s letter of Novem-
ber 23, 1790, there is a marginal note opposite the mention of the map “In
a Tin Case.” The letter is endorsed on the back “Rd. Jany. 4th 1791” and
also “(Tin Case not yet delivered).” Perhaps this map never reached the
Colonial Office. It was not to be found in the Public Record Office, the Co-
lonial Office, or the British Museum in the spring of 1915. The size of the
Publie Record Office map, 2814” x 1914”, seems rather small for presentation
to the Empress of Russia, or even for requiring enclosure in a tin case. On
the whole, it is safe to conclude that this is the map sent to the Colonial
Office in 1785. It bears the Jesuit water-mark, below which is the further
water-mark I. VIULEDARY.

The roughness of the map, or rather of the copies of the map presented
to Congress March 1, 1785, as compared with this one, may be explained by
the fact that the notes in French which accompany these copies in the British
Museum are dated and signed by Peter Pond at Arabosea, March 15, 1784.
He further adds “Il ne faut pas croire que les Details que je mets sur Cette
Carte ont aucune analogie précise avec L’endroit méme. Eloigné dans les
bois, avec peu de Papier, j’ecrirai mes reflexions et les placois ou je Pourai”
(Add. 15332, E, ff. 2-3). Burpee has stated that the Kaministikwia route is
indicated on the Public Record Office Map, or rather on the reprint of it in
the Canadian Archives Report. A closer examination of the map itself leads
to the conclusion that such is not the correct interpretation of the forked
waterway at Lake Superior. The northern branch is apparently the water-
way, the difficult lower waters of which necessitated the Grand Portage. The
southern branch is probably nothing more than one of the lesser streams of
the region, perhaps the one beyond the Grand Marais. A bay with a river
emptying into it from the north is shown on the map farther to the north-
east. It is west of Nipigon River. It surely is Thunder Bay, and the river
is the Kaministikwia, but there is no indication of a route to the west by
way of it. Had Pond known of such a route in the summer of 1784, when
Umfreville made his exploration, he might not have spoken of it to the part-
ners of the North West Company, because he was then dissatisfied with the
terms they offered him. But soon afterwards we find him assisting in an
attempt to get from the government a monopoly for ten years of the trade
along Umfreville’s route (Pond to Hamilton, Quebec, April 18, 1785, C.0.
42, vol. 47, pp. 649-652). It is very unlikely that he would have kept silence
then had he known of the Kamanistikwia route.
ins Now called Sturgeon-Weir River (Burpee, Search for the Western Sea,
* Henry, Travels, Bain ed., 263-264.
Early Exrpcditions to the West 39

south, west, and north of Cumberland House in order to meet
the Indians with furs before they reached the Hudson’s Bay
Company’s establishment.?® Henry left the post on Beaver Lake
on New Year’s Day and went by way of Cumberland House and
the Saskatchewan River to Fort des Prairies, where he found
James Finlay, who, Bain states, was the pioneer on the upper
Saskatchewan, having wintered at Nipawi House in 1771-1772.

From Fort des Prairies, Henry went with a party of Assini-
boines to their winter camp and then returned to Beaver Lake,
which he reached April 9.°° Three days later Thomas Frobisher
was sent to construct a fort on Churchill River in order to in-
tercept the fur trade down this river to the Bay.*! This was
probably a permanent fort, on or near the site of the temporary
post built in 1774. On June 15 Joseph Frobisher and Henry
reached this fort. They left it the next day, proceeding up
Churchill River—or English River, as Joseph Frobisher had
named it.*? At the entrance to Ile 4 la Crosse Lake they met the
Chipewyan Indians for whom they were looking and returned to
the new fort with them. Here they bought twelve thousand bea-
ver skins, besides large numbers of otter and marten.** These
Indians described to them Lake Athabasca, Peace River, Slave
River, and Slave Lake, but were unable to state whether or not
the latter was the sea or a body of water emptying into the sea.**

Leaving Thomas Frobisher to return with the Indians to
Athabasca Lake, Henry and Joseph Frobisher proceeded by way
of Grand Portage to Montreal, which they reached October 15,
1776. Henry had left Montreal for the interior in August, 1761.
How far Thomas Frobisher went with the Indians, it is hard to

 

* Henry, Travels, Bain ed., 266, note 21.
°° Ibid., 267-322.

% Tbid., 323.

*® Toid., 325-326.

8 Tbid., 328-331.

% Thid., 331-332.
40 The North West Company

say. Mackenzie states that he went only as far as Ile a la Crosse
Lake.’ Pond’s map of 1785 bears a legend which indicates that
Frobisher wintered on the west side of Ile 4 la Crosse Lake in
1777, but this may mean the winter of 1777-1778. This was the
spot in which Pond wintered in 1783.°° It was the site upon
which Ile 4 la Crosse House was later built and was a strategic
point, where various forts were constructed by both the North
West and Hudson’s Bay companies.

Pond, who had wintered in 1775-1776 at Fort Dauphin, went
to the forks of the Saskatchewan in 1776 and wintered slightly
above the forks on the north branch. He passed the following
winter at the same place.*7 In the spring of 1778 he went to
Sturgeon Lake. The fur traders here pooled their stock and sent
Pond with it to the Athabasca country. He went by way of the
Churchill, Ile 4 la Crosse Lake, Lake Clear, Buffalo Lake, River
La Loche, Lake La Loche, Portage La Loche or Methye Portage.
and the Clearwater River to the Athabasca River, where he built
a fort about thirty miles above its mouth.** It was called ‘‘Old
Establishment,’’ ‘‘Old Pond Fort,’’ ete. Mackenzie says it was
the only fort in this part of the country until 1785.3° Pond was
apparently here quite frequently during the next six years.*

ss Mackenzie, Voyages, xii.

°C, O, 42, vol. 47, p. 665.

* Add. 15332, D; and C. O. 42, vol. 47, p. 665. It would be interesting to
know how far Pond went up the Saskatchewan. He stated in connection with
site 11 on the Congress map that in the mountains there he had seen flints
(pterres a fusil) containing veins of white metal which looked like silver.

The figure 11 is in the mountains west of the North and South Saskatchewan
(Ada. 15332, D, and Add. 15332, E, f. 3).

* Masson states that, after trading for some time on the English River,
he crossed, being the first to do so, the height of land at Portage La Loche,
and two years later reached the celebrated Athabasca region, where he built
Fort Athabasea on River 4 la Biche, forty miles above its mouth (Masson,
Esquisse, 15). The information given on Pond’s own maps does not accord
with this account of his movements.

* Mackenzie, Voyages, xxxvii.

“The Public Record Office map states that he wintered here in 1778 and
1784 (C. 0. 42, vol. 47, p. 665). The meaning of this latter date is ambigu-
Early Expeditions to the West 41

The map in the Public Record Office indicates that he was at Lae
La Ronge in 1782; and the copies of the Congress map, that he
was at the same place in 1781.41. However, he had been at Lac
La Ronge before, in 1780%? with Jean Etienne Waden, who had
also been there the previous year.*? These two men represented
rival interests at Grand Portage; and as a result of the ill-feeling
which arose between them, Waden was shot and mortally wound-
ed. Pond and one of Waden’s clerks named Toussaint Le Sieur
were tried for murder but acquitted.** Pond later acquired more
notoriety by the murder of Ross. In 1790, according to Masson,

 

reling with the newly formed North West Company at Grand Portage that
summer and attempting to form an opposition. It seems to be certain that
he was there during the winter of 1783-1784, since the date 1783 is given on
the map presented to Congress, or at least on the copies in the British Muse-
um and on the one printed by Burpee. Moreover, his remarks to accompany
this map were dated at Araboska, March 1, 1784 (Add. 15332, E). These
maps also indicate that he wintered there in 1782. This clashes with the fact
that these same maps locate him at Ile 4 la Crosse Lake in 1782. And the
Public Record Ofiice map dates his presence at Ile & la Crosse Lake in 1783
and at Lac La Ronge in 1782, whereas the copies of the Congress map date
his presence at Lae La Ronge in 1781. It is interesting to observe that the
copies of the Congress map, particularly the British Museum copies, locate
“Fort Pond 1782, 1783” quite plainly on the south shore of Lake Athabasca,
eastward from the river.

"C_O. 42, vol. 47, p. 665; Add. 15332, D; and Burpee, Search for the
Western Sea, 182.

“Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 329; Mackenzie, Voyages, xvi.

*® Mackenzie says that Waden was killed about the end of 1780 or the be-
ginning of 1781 (Mackenzie, Voyages, xvi). Brymner gives an account
of the event from the deposition of Joseph Fagniaut. This makes the date to
be the beginning of March, according to Brymner’s account (Can. Arch. Re-
port, 1889, p. xxxvi), as does the petition of his wife.

On May 29, 1783, the widow, Josetta Waden—as she spelled her name—
petitioned for the apprehension of Pond and Le Sieur by the military officers
at the back posts, as the civil power was inefficient at such a distance (Add.
21879, ff. 122-125). The deposition, which is referred to, is not with this
copy of the petition in the British Museum, although Josetta Waden’s peti-
tion and the covering Jetter of Allan Morison to Captain Mathews are in this
bound volume. The endorsement reads, Joseph Fagnant, instead of Fag-
niaut. Brymner quotes the Canadian Archive copy B, 219, p. 113. This
must have been copied from the British Museum papers, or else Brymner's
reference is wrong.
42 The North West Company

he sold out his shares for £800 and retired to the United States,
where he died a poor man.**

The question of Pond’s activities is partly elucidated—and
also partly befogged—by the notes on the backs of two maps in
the Canadian archives which are copies of a map in Yale Univer-
sity Library entitled, ‘‘Travels of Capt. Peter Pond of Milford
from April 1793 to March 1790. Extracted from his own Map
by Ezra Stiles, March 25, 1790.’’** The notes in question do not
agree with the data on the map.*7 Moreover, there is an unusual
amount of detail between lakes Athabasca and Great Slave east
of Slave River which is not contained in present day maps. It is

* Masson, Esquisse, 16; Bourgeois, I, 38.
*© Probably should be 1773.
** The notes referred to contain, among other things, the following:
“Capt. Peter Pond. Residences.
1773. Wintered at St. Peters R. in the sources of the Mississippi, 3
Leagues below
1774. the falls of St. Antoine.
1775. Two years at Ft. Dauphin on 8. W. side L. Winepeke No. 8.
an at Ft. Prairie No. 12.
1778. At Arabauska and came to Montreal 1779.
ses t Montreal, 1781 Ft. La Rouge. No. 14. 1782 or 1783 at
! Mischlamakinak & Montreal.

1786 } No. 21 in summer, Excursions
1787 ) & came out 1788.
and came out of the 2nd [Probably should be “Ind."] country 1788.
At Montreal & Quebeck 1789 and 1788.
Returned to Milford March, 1790.”

“The map shows the fort on the west side of Lake Ile 4 la Crosse with
the legend, “Capt. Pond here 1787.” Fort “No. 21” is marked east of the
mouth of Jotchyniny River [Slave River] with the legend, “Here Capt. Pond
reside 3 years 1781, 1782, 1783, 1784 came off.” Fort Dauphin is located.
“No. 12 Ft. Rai—” [Fort des Prairies] is located on the North Saskatche-
wan above the forks with the legend, “Capt. Pond wintered 2 y with 160
men.” A fort “No. 15” is shown north of this on the east side of a lake
which may be Green Lake. A fort “No. 18” is shown on the east side of the
mouth of Athabasca River. Fort “No. 19” is on the south side of Peace
River, some distance from the mouth. A fort “No. 20” is shown on the north
side of Lake Athabasca, well to the east of the exit of Slave River. This ap-
pears to be an otherwise unrecorded post.

vise | N Arabauska 3 years to
 

 
 

offs a

   
  
    
      
  

/20 “ 4/0 - C V0 A Lom

Sto armed hare | \v¢ : \ ee

» a | andi d Cp Cale Cor efchifod

ae fron Spel lays
| 22 Oey ha

    
      
            
   
   
       
  

 

49 YER 493
494 com» off

 

 

Capt Pon TTrane

55°26 ye 0 phe
\

HN. & Cov
\

TEN Oh”
Pao fodioa ee \ |
A ke siy2 elit
ns 1gOt agg te

   
  

Travels of Captain Peter Pond.
  
  
 

I Se ge rm ees

— omaile i. etait clas, : SE see

= Cal of # efi” Fond ~ Rig lepis ge ek 8S oy ee

oe 2. Senta er Cy Pra R. on n Hee fetees Me 290 ico ye , 2 Pape tein oe
a 14 es plte 4 Se Orleans. oe ae

i ys Ta eS ot tr. 2 JAA yaleen aN a wy neat) foun oe ek e he ae

Ths ax SEE ) ain he 12,

nyé 03 ne Opidinalta arnak ly heat why ge So ee oe

SE ye

WS n orlfead. ry Fo tags lo ohagia, ee Mi abe

wha J swe ug, Cat } Cen e aa /) Be
dy Lia GLU WIP EN, : Ce
0) a b Cneaeance! ea o (Ee fe Ds a pay Be: A ih tl head cond G wel ¥e Sau e766

: a Jona. Cournhy | Toe : aes / OD.
a Cut! Se | “Relior . Ah Reale th, jy oh ee

  

we <

Notes on back of the map, “Travels of Captain Peter Pond.”
Early Expeditions to the West 43

a noteworthy fact that this map shows no river connecting Great
Slave Lake and the Arctic Sea, but instead has two rivers with a
considerable distance between their heads. The western edge of
Great Slave Lake does not appear on the map, and there is no
sign of the Mackenzie River. Pond’s route-marks might easily
make one think that Peace River flowed out of Lake Athabasca.‘
This map throws light on the map which Pond was preparing in
1789 and explains where Isaac Ogden of Quebec*® got some of the
ideas which appear in the letter he wrote to his father, David
Ogden, November 7, 1789.°° It would be interesting to know
what reasons Pond had for exchanging his earlier theories—which
were fundamentally sound—of the Athabasca drainage system
for his later erroneous view. Whatever these reasons were, they
probably influenced Alexander Mackenzie’s subsequent activities,
for it is evident from the account given by the latter of his 1789
journey that he started out under the impression that the water-
way which he was following would lead him to the Pacific Coast.
The fact is made positive by some notes affixed to a map in the
Colonial Office Library in London.*! Now Ogden explains very
clearly Pond’s belief, derived from inspecting Pond’s map and
from conversing with Pond, that the river which flowed out of
Great Slave Lake went southwestward and was the river the
mouth of which Cook had explored on the Pacific Coast. The
Rocky Mountains were supposed to end just far enough south to
permit the passage of this river.

“Tt is Lake of the Hills on this map.

“He was then acting clerk of the Crown. Later he was a judge of the
Vice-Admiralty Court in Quebee (Can. Arch Report, 1889, p. xxvii).

%° Brymner printed this in Can. Arch. Report, 1889, pp. 29-32, from Q,
49, pp. 357 et seq., the copy in the Canadian Archives. A comparison of the
printed version with the copy in the Publie Record Office in England shows
many yariations in spelling, capitalization, and paragraphing, with one seri-
ous slip on p. 31, where Brymner prints “Eastward of the Lake” for “South-
ward of the Lake. ” The latter was published in the Gentleman’s Magazine
in 1790, vol. 60:1, pp. 197-199. The names of the writer and his correspon-
dent did not appear there, however.

*\ The map is listed as America, No. 54.
44 The North West Company

Moreover, Ogden states that Pond had left a man by the name
of McKenzie at Slave Lake with orders to go down the river,
thence to Unalaska, and thence to England through Russia.
Mackenzie certainly says nothing in his published work about
such orders. He does not even give Pond credit for information
on the geography of this portion of America. If Pond’s ideas
were current among the traders, it may possibly help to explain
why Mackenzie’s exploration of the Mackenzie River in 1789 re-
ceived little attention at Grand Portage when he went there the
next year. Moreover, the traders were probably not quite satis-
fied that he had reached the Arctic Ocean. As late as 1814.
Wentzel writes of Sir Alexander Mackenzie’s turning back on the
Grand*? River.5? In 1807 he writes to Roderick McKenzie that
‘‘The Grand River, which obtains its waters from Slave Lake and
which empties into the Pacific Ocean, is perhaps one of the long-
est and most beautiful rivers in the North.’** Wentzel was
doubtless not alone in his error.®*

It is difficult to identify the rivers north of Great Slave Lake
on the map. They are well west of the Coppermine, which is in-
dicated, though not named, as part of Hearne’s route. Probably
Pond knew of Lac a la Martre and its drainage into Great Slave
Lake. The river draining into the Arctic may even be one drain-
ing into Great Bear Lake.

The route-marks on the map suggest that Pond went north-
wards from Fort des Prairies via Green Lake and Lake Ile a la
Crosse to Athabasca, but Mackenzie’s account is opposed to such
a route.*®

% T.e., Mackenzie.
3 Masson, Bourgeois, I, 111.
* Ibid., 77.

* Had he read Mackenzie’s book? He does not make the argument that
Mackenzie, who took the middle channel of the delta, had missed a westerly
branch which might lead to the Pacific Ocean.

“ Mackenzie, Poyages, xii.
Early Expeditions to the West 45

Besides the facts previously mentioned, this map locates a
fort on Lake Superior,*’ a fort at Rainy Lake, a fort at the east
end of Red Lake, a fort on the east side of Red River, Fort Epi-
nett on the north side of the Assiniboine, a fort on the Qu’-
Appelle, a fort on a river emptying into the east side of Lake
Winnipeke (Winnipeg), a fort on a little river emptying into the
northwest corner of Little Winnipeg Lake, a fort on a little lake
north of Lake Winnipeg, Fort Traite on the north side of Church-
hill River, Fort Eturgeon on the South Saskatchewan above the
Forks, and a fort some distance up the North Saskatchewan.

Much of the knowledge displayed in the Pond maps was
based upon Indian reports. Pond stated in the remarks accom-
panying the Congress map that he had talked with forty Red
Knife Indians who lived a short distance from the Northwest
Sea. They informed him that there were tides in that sea, that
they knew of no lands farther north, that the shores of this sea
ran towards the west, and that the navigation of the rivers empty-
ing into it was open at the beginning of summer. They also spoke
of having seen icebergs.*® Pond furthermore claimed to have
conversed with Indians who had captured prisoners west of the
Rocky Mountains.*® He had purchased articles made of copper
from the natives, whom he called Ochipoins or Orchipoints. It is
probable that Pond had been at Lake Athabasca by the time he
drew the Congress map, but that he had not been north of it. In
fact, the map makes one think that he confused the Mackenzie
River with Coppermine River, and the general character of the
remarks accompanying the map tends to support this belief. The
later Public Record Office Map has a river which is apparently
intended for the Coppermine.

* Probably it is at Grand Portage.

* Add. 15332, E, f. 2. It is a curious fact that Pond, in speaking of
Hearne’s voyage to this northern shore, states that it occurred in 1773, 1774,
and 1775. The same erroneous time is given by Alexander Henry. Pond
stated that his knowledge was from Indians who had accompanied Hearne.

© Add. 15332, E, f. 3.
46 The North West Company

Dorchester, writing in 1790 in connection with the Pond map,
which he was forwarding, stated that Pond, who had left for the
United States, returned from the Northwest in 1788, after having
penetrated as far as Great Slave Lake.®°

About this time the dissensions of the traders encouraged the
tribes of the south and west to massacre the whites and pillage
the posts. The Indians were also irritated by unscrupulous ac-
tions on the part of the traders. An overdose of opium adminis-
tered to an Indian precipitated an outbreak. The trader who
gave the fatal draught was killed, with several of his men. Some
months later, in the autumn of 1780, two forts on the Assini-
boine were attacked. One, the Fort aux Trembles, commanded
by Bruce and Boyer with twenty-one men under them, was at-
tacked by Assiniboines and ‘‘sauvages du bas de la riviére.’’ The
fort was abandoned, the goods and men being transported to the
mouth of the Assiniboine. Other forts were assailed, and the
movement was assuming formidable proportions when it was
checked by the smallpox, which ravaged the country from the As-
siniboine to the Saskatchewan and even to the Churchill River.
The trade was interrupted for a time, but revived again.*?

It is not quite certain when English establishments were first
located in the Assiniboine district. Fort Espérance on the Qu’-
Appelle is said by John McDonnell to have been built by Robert
Grant about 1787."* As has been mentioned, Fort aux Trembles
was there in 1780. How much earlier the English traders were on
this river, it is hard to say. They appear to have early explored
the Assiniboine, its tributaries, the Qu’Appelle and the Souris,
and to have crossed the prairie to the Mandan villages on the

° Dorehester to Grenville, No. 78, Quebec, November 23, 1790, C. O. 42,
vol. 73, pp. [1-2].

* Masson, Lsquisse, 17-18; Mackenzie, Voyages, xiii-xvii.

® Masson, Bourgeois, I, 274. The author of Masson Papers, 2352, which
is in McGill University, states that he was informed in 1793 that Robert
Grant built the fort in 1787.
Early Expeditions to the West 47

Missouri. Trade in the latter region seems to have been conduct-
ed from Pine Fort. This fort was abandoned in 1794 because
the Hudson’s Bay Company® and other traders had established
themselves in 1793 at Souris River Fort, about seven leagues by
land higher up the river. After this, the Mandan trade of the
North West Company was conducted from Souris River Fort.**
In MeDonnell’s Journal there are references to the journey of a
band in 1793 from Fort Espérance to the Mandans, and to one
which had just returned in May, 1795.% During 1793 David
Monin, the North West Company clerk whom Robert Grant left
in charge of Pine Fort, made a trip to the Missouri on the solici-
tation of three freemen, Morgan, Jussome, and Cardin. While re-
turning,*° Monin and Morgan were killed by a Sioux war party.
Hudson’s Bay Company men may have gone from the Assiniboine
to the Missouri about this time, but no names or dates are extant.
The first detailed account of an expedition is that of David
Thompson, 1797-1798.

The formation of the North West Company put a check for a
moment to the renewed fierce competition, but this respite was
soon followed by the strife with the opposition firm of Gregory,
MeLeod and Company.** During the summer of 1784, before the
latter body was organized, the North West Company had dis-

® They had established Osnaburgh House in 1786 (Masson, Bourgeois,
II, 244).

“ Masson, Bourgeois, I, 271-272. It is here called River La Souris.

“Tbid., I, 286-294.

% Masson, Papers, 2352, MeGill University.

Roderick McKenzie gives a list of the members of this company in
1785. There assembled at their newly constructed headquarters at Grand
Portage on the north side of Pigeon River: Jobn Gregory, Peter Pangman,
John Ross, Alexander Mackenzie, partners; Duncan Pollock and Laurent
Leroux, clerks; James Finlay and Roderick McKenzie, apprentice clerks.
Norman McLeod, being a dormant partner, remained at Montreal. The
guides, commis, and interpreters, were few in number and not of the best.

The Athabasca Department was put in charge of Ross; English River, of
Mackenzie; Fort des Prairies of Pangman; Red River, of Pollock; and sev-
eral smaller outfits were entrusted to subalterns. Roderick McKenzie was
left at Grand Portage, under Pierre L’Anniau (Masson, Bourgeois, I, 10-11).
48 The North West Company

patched Edward Umfreville to explore a route by way of Lake
Nipigon to the interior.°° The boundary, as arranged by the
treaty of peace, placed Grand Portage in United States territory.
The lower portion of Pigeon River was not navigable, and the
land to the mouth of it did not admit of a portage route. In re-
turn for this expedition and for the proposed exploration of the
country between latitudes 55° and 65° from Hudson Bay to the
Pacific, the North West Company requested a monopoly of the
fur trade to the Northwest for ten years and the exclusive use of
the route they expected to find.*® The question had been sug-
gested as early as April, but the governor had intimated that he
could not promise anything,’° and the officials of Quebec were not
too favorably inclined towards the request. Pond"! and the Fro-
bishers corresponded with the government on the subject, and
finally in 1785 Haldimand wrote to Sydney suggesting—he did
not directly recommend—the granting of the privileges request-
ed ;"* but there is no record of their being granted. Neither were
the trading posts handed over to the United States for some

* Umfreville’s Journal for this expedition is part of Masson Papers, 2370,
in MeGill University. It opens Wednesday, June 16, 1784, with the words,
“At 11 a.m. parted company with Mr. Grant, having an Indian guide to
conduct us to lake Nipigon . . . .” The last entry is on Wednesday, July
28, when they reached Portage du Rat. Umfreville reports rather favorably
of the route which he had explored, and signs all at Lac du Bois, July 31,
1784. He explains the Journal’s numerous abbreviations by saying that it
was copied at Portage de l’Isle.

The expedition had been discussed for some time. Mathews wrote to Fro-
bisher, April 26, that the governor would give every assistance towards as-
certaining a new passage, but that the traders should not express doubts
about the boundaries (Mathews to Frobisher, Quebec, April 26, 1784, Add.
21723, ff. 78-79).

® Benjamin and Joseph Frobisher to Haldimand, Montreal, October 4,
1784, C.O, 42, vol. 47, pp. 637-639; Add. 21877, ff. 396-403; Can. Arch. Re-
port, 1890, pp. 48-52.

* Benjamin Frobisher to Haldimand, Montreal, April 19, 1784, Add.
21735, ff. 421-424; Benjamin Frobisher to Mathews, Montreal, May 3, 1784,
B, 75-2, p. 123 et seq.

™ Pond to Hamilton, Quebec, April 18, 1785, C. O. 42, vol. 47.

7 Add. 21855, f. 354; and Hamilton to Sydney, Quebec, June 6, 1785, .
O. 42, vol. 47,
Early Expeditions to the West 49

years. Since the route traversed by Umfreville was circuitous and
diffieult,“° the Grand Portage route was followed for the greater
part of two decades ;** and when the British traders finally found
it necessary to change, they used the Kaministikwia waterway.

Although the situation was tense, the winters of 1785 and
1786 passed fairly amicably in a number of districts.7> There
was some extension of the trade, too. It is stated that in 1786
Pond sent Cuthbert Grant and Laurent Leroux" to establish a
post on Great Slave Lake. They succeeded in establishing a post
at the outlet of Slave River which was later called Fort Resolu-
tion.77 Leroux went even farther north to a place called at a
later date Fort Providence, to induce the Indians to come to trade
at the southern posts. It is difficult to determine whether white
men had been over this route before.

The murder of Ross in the winter of 1786"* led to an amalga-
mation of the rival companies as soon as the news was brought
to Grand Portage. Alexander Mackenzie, who was sent from
English River to the Athabasca district to act with Pond, at first
planned tc abandon the posts farther north. Then he changed
his mind, and Boyer was sent to establish a fort on Peace River.

 

73 4 memorial dated Montreal, December 9, 1792, and signed by McTavish,
Frobisher & Co., Forsyth, Richardson & Co., and Todd, McGill & Co., stated
that the Nipigon route would require three or four weeks longer and that the
small North Canoes were to be obtained only at Rainy Lake and not at Nipi-
gon (Q, 278, pp. 146-162).

% In 1788 Simon McTavish and Joseph Frobisher, on behalf of the North
West Company, asked for a grant of land an acre in width from Lake Su-
perior to Long Lake in order to build a wagon road. The Council reported
adversely June 30, 1788 (Q, 37, pp. 264-265).

5 For example, Roderick McKenzie and William McGillivray both made
good returns with the Indians of Lac des Serpents (Masson, Bourgeois, I,
17-18).

% Tg this the Leroux who was in the employ of the opposition company in
1785 (ef. Masson, Bourgeois, I, 11)?

™ Masson, Esquisse, 30.

**The Athabasca brigade reported to Roderick McKenzie in June, 1787,
that Ross had been shot in a scuffle with Pond’s men. MeKenzie took the
news to Grand Portage (Masson, Bourgeois, I, 18-19).
50 The North West Company

Leroux was sent back to Slave Lake, from which he had been re-
called, with orders to press the trade there. The natives being in-
dolent, Leroux sent the influential Chipewyan ‘‘English Chief’’
on a successful mission to influence the Indian tribes to come to
his fort to trade.*® James Sutherland, an employee, followed this
up by an expedition, returning in the spring with some natives
and a considerable number of furs. Presents were given to the
chiefs. As a result, the savages from Lac a la Martre and the
country beyond it came the next spring in great numbers to the
fort on Slave Lake.®° At their request, a fort was built at Lae
ala Martre, fifteen days’ travel from Great Slave Lake.*!

Fort Espérance, which Robert Grant founded at this time on
the Qu’Appelle, became later the chief provision depot of the
North West Company. Large quantities of dried meat and pem-
mican were kept here for distribution to the other posts in case of
scarcity of game or fish.

In 1789 Angus Shaw established Lae d’Original Fort at the
lake of the same name on the upper course of the Beaver River.
northeast of the present city of Edmonton.*? He found four
Hudson’s Bay traders near there with a band of Assiniboines
and had them sent away.8* Three vears later he established Fort
George on the Saskatchewan River.**

 

 

Masson, Usquisse, 31-32.

* Burpee states that this fort was at the eastern mouth of Slave River.
(Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 416). It is mentioned by Mackenzie
under date of June 9, 1789, as “the houses erected by Messrs. Grant and La
Roux in 1786” (Mackenzie, Foyages, 8).

‘' Masson, Esquisse, 33.

* Masson, Bourgeois, II, 14.

“Tbid., I, 32.

* Tbid., II, 17.
CHAPTER III
MACKENZIE’S EXPLORATIONS

Alexander Mackenzie! was now in a position to carry out the
extensive explorations for which he was well fitted. The year
spent in the Athabasca department with Pond had given him a
good grasp of its known geographical features and of the theories
regarding the unexplored portions.? Pond left the Upper Coun-
try in 1788, irritated because the North West Company was not
providing for him as fully as he wished, and his fellow-partners
evidently did not urge him to remain. Mackenzie had to report a
season’s trade fraught with difficulties and somewhat meager in
returns.? For a time he also was uncertain whether he should re-
main in the country, but finally he decided to do so. In the lat-
ter part of July he was at Rainy Lake superintending the ar-
rangement of the Athabasca affairs there. He urged his cousin

Bryce (Mackenzie, Selkirk, Simpson, 10), has ascertained that Macken-
zie was born at Stornaway, on the Isle of Lewis, in 1763. The article by H.
Manners Chichester in the Dictionary of National Biography, XXXV, 134-
135, is a hopeless tangle of truth and error, particularly about the early
career of Mackenzie.

?TIn his report to Dorchester, Alexander Mackenzie stated in regard to his
expedition of 1789, ‘I followed the course of the Waters which had been re-
ported by Mr. Pond to fall into Cook’s River, they led me to the Northern
Ocean, in latitude 6914 north and about 135 of west longitude... ” (Mae-
kenzie to Dorchester, Montreal, November 17, 1794, copy enclosed in Dor-
chester to Portland, No. 10, of November 20, 1794, C. O. 42, vol. 101.

*TIn a letter dated Ile & Ja Crosse, February 1, 1788, Mackenzie reported
to the agents at Grand Portage that he had been unable to get the goods into
Athabasca the preceding fall. The lading of only three canoes had been car-
ried across Portage La Loche, and these had to be left at the end of the
portage. Mackenzie himsclf:in a light canoe with eight men had only reached
Athabaska October 25. It was too late to send goods either to Slave Lake
or Peace River. After some correspondence Leroux was recalled from Slave
Lake; MacLeod and Boyer were sent to Peace River, November 9, with two
canoes and nine pieces of goods to trade for provisions for the spring canoes
and to induce the Indians to bring their furs to the fort in March (Masson,
Bourgeois, I, 23-24).

‘On account of the distance, the Athabasca canoes did not go to Grand
Portage, but discharged their returns and received fresh supplies at Rainy
Lake (Mackenzie, Voyages, London, 1801, lvi).
52 The North West Company

Roderick McKenzie to reconsider his determination to leave the
country. The latter at first refused, but when Mackenzie con-
fided to him his plan for exploring the waterway out of Slave
Lake,® he consented. A refusal would have necessitated the aban-
donment of the project for lack of a person to take charge of the
department during Mackenzie’s absence.*®

On reaching Pond’s Old Establishment, Alexander Macken-
zie attended to the sending out of the trading outfits and re-
mained there over winter with two or three men. Roderick Mc-
Kenzie was sent to Lake Athabasca, about one or two days’ travel
farther on. Here he built Fort Chipewean on a point on the
south shore of the lake.” It was later perceived that the north
shore of the lake afforded a more suitable situation and, about
1820, this fort was abandoned.? Fort Chipewean was the most
important establishment in the far northwest, being the head-
quarters from which departed the expeditions down the Macken-
zie and up the Peace River. The fisheries were a main source of
its food supply. Mackenzie visited the new fort about Christmas
and remained until the departure of the winter express in Febru-
ary. By it he sent a letter dated February 14, 1789, to the
partners at Grand Portage, announcing the building of Fort
Chipewean and the opening of an extensive trade with the Chipe-
wyans, who had been accustomed to trade at Hudson Bay, though
it cost them a seven-months’ journey.’ Roderick McKenzie, on
his way to Grand Portage and back in 1789, explored for a better

° Mackenzie, it would appear, had suggested some such trip to McKenzie
in January of that year. A letter of his says: “I already mentioned to you
some of my distant intentions, I beg you will not reveal them to any person
. ..” (Masson, Bourgeois, I, 22).

° Masson, Bourgeois, I, 26-27.

"Ibid.,27, The name is also spelled Chepewyan. It finally settled into
the form Chipewyan.

* Masson, Bourgeois, I, 38, note 1. Franklin writes as if the post on the
north shore of the lake had been under construction at least eight years be-
fore 1820 (Franklin, Narrative, 152-155).

* Ibid., I, 28-29.
JMackenzie’s Explorations 53

route than the long and difficult Portage La Loche, or Methye
Portage. He found no better, although he followed the route by
way of Little Fish River below Portage La Loche on his way out,
and crossed from Lake Ile 4 la Crosse by Lace Clair to the head of
Athabasea River on his return. This river was particularly tur-
bulent and he experienced some difficulty in making his way to
the landing-place of Portage La Loche. On his way to Grand
Portage he carried a letter from Mackenzie dated Athabasca,
May 22. 1789, announcing that there was a sufficient stock of
goods on hand for the succeeding year, and that eight canoes,
with three of the five that remained inland, would be ample to
carry out the returns. The traders had still to place their chiet
reliance for furs on Peace River, as the Chipewyans clung to
their habit of going to Hudson Bay. Vaudreuil was to pass the
summer on Peace River, as Boyer was going out. Leroux had
returned March 22 from the north side of Great Slave Lake,
where he had traded with a great number of Red Knife and
Slave Indians, to whom he promised a rendezvous that summer
on the west side of the lake.'°

It was in this year that Alexander Mackenzie made his expe-
dition down the great river which bears his name. On June 3,
1789, he left Fort Chipewean with four Canadians, a German,
and two women.'t| The men were Francois Barrieau, Charles
Ducette, Joseph Landry, Pierre de Lorme, and John Steinbruck.
Various Indians, including the English Chief, accompanied the
party. Mackenzie also took Leroux along with him to establish
relations with the Yellow Knives north of Great Slave Lake. He
was to build a fort at the outlet of the river from Lac a la Mar-
tre. This was old Fort Providence, on the north shore of Great
Slave Lake, in longitude circa 114°.

Mackenzie’s party entered Slave River on the first day’s trip.

* Masson, Bourgeois, I, 29-30.
" Mackenzie, Voyages, 1-2.
54 The North West Company

Here their leader noticed the peculiarity of the river, which emp-
ties into Lake Athabasca when the water is high in Peace River,
and at other times carries the waters of this lake northward into
Great Slave Lake.12 Several rapids necessitated portaging on
the way down Slave River, and heavy rain compelled the party
to stay in camp for the better part of two days.

On June 9 they reached Great Slave Lake.*? They were de-
tained by the ice for five days at Leroux’s establishment, which
had been started in 1785.14 It took them nine days to cross
through the ice to the North Arm, where they met the Red Knife
Indians, and Leroux did some trading.** Mackenzie left Leroux
here on the morning of June 25; and after four days’ canoeing
along the north shore, the party entered the river which was later
to bear the name of Mackenzie.** Mackenzie here mentions the
fact that land where pine, spruce, and white birch have been
burned off, afterward grows nothing but poplar, though no pop-
lar may have been there before. This remark was, of course,
challenged by the British reviewers of Mackenzie’s book.1"

Horn Mountain, the home of the Beaver Indians, was now in
sight to the northwest.* The party proceeded, and passed the
River of the Mountain” on July 1. About nine miles farther on
they hid two bags of pemmican for use on their return.2° They
were now daily expecting to arrive at a great rapids of which
alarming stories had been told them.

The following day they sighted the Rocky Mountains, which
appeared to be sprinkled with white stones, that glistened in

“Mackenzie, Voyages, 2-3.

*Ibid., 7.

NIbid., 8.

*% Tbid., 10-17.

“Ibid., 18-23.

“ Hdinburgh Review, ed. 4, I, 149.
* Mackenzie, Voyages, 25.

* Now called Liard River.

* Mackenzie, T’oyages, 28.
Mackenzie’s Explorations 90

the sun. The Indians ealled these manetoe aseniah, or spirit
stones. Mackenzie thought that they might be tale, but on his
return found that they were only patches of snow.*? On the
morning of July 5 the party met five families of Dog-rib and
Slave Indians. They were made to smoke, though they apparent-
ly were unacquainted with the use of tobacco, and presents were
also made to them of grog, knives, beads, and other articles. In
return they gave some fabulous accounts of the river which terri-
fied the Indians with Mackenzie, so that he had trouble in in-
ducing them to proceed.?? That afternoon the party passed the
mouth of Great Bear River,?* and the next day they reached a
rapids, but although this proved to be the waterfall of which
they had been hearing dire things,** it presented little difficulty.
On July 7 the party passed between the ramparts of the Mac-
kenzie River. The next day they were among the Hare Indians,
so-called because the hare formed a staple article of their diet.
One day’s travel farther brought them among the Deguthee
Dinees, or Quarreller Indians.”°

On July 10 Mackenzie reached the delta at the mouth of the
river, and was somewhat at a loss which channel to follow, but
finally he determined to proceed along the middle one.** This
day Mackenzie got an observation of 67° 47’ north latitude,
which was farther north than he expected. He assigns the vari-
ation of the compass as the reason.?* Mackenzie here states for
the first time that it was evident that these waters emptied into

 

 

*t Mackenzie, Voyages, 29.

= Thid., 33-34.

* Tbid., 39.

* Ibid.,41. It is now called the Sans Sault Rapid (Burpee, Search for
the Western Sea, 430).

> Mackenzie, Voyages, 42-44.

6 Thid., 51.

“Thid., 53.

* Thid., 54. According to the 1914 Dominion of Canada map, he was, if
anything, not far enough north in his observation.
56 The North West Company

the Hyperborean Sea, and he determined to proceed to their out-
let.2° His guide became much discouraged, declaring that he had
never been at the Belhoullay Toe, or White Man’s Lake, and that
when he had gone to Esquimaux Lake, which was a short distance
ahead, he had made the trip by land. The Chipewyan hunters
were also anxious to return, but Mackenzie persuaded them to
proceed for seven days more. At the end of that time, scarcity
of provisions made binding the promise to return.*°

The next day the party reached a deserted Esquimaux en-
campment, and on July 12 they came to what Mackenzie thought
was the entrance to the lake of which they had heard.**. He ob-
tained an observation of 69° 1’ north latitude. Without know-
ing it, he had reached the mouth of the middle branch of the
Mackenzie River. The party now followed a westerly course to
an island fifteen miles away, the water being only five feet deep.
The ice prevented their going farther westward.*? Next day
Mackenzie took an observation which gave him 69° 14’ north lat-
tude, the meridian variation of the compass being 36° eastward.
He states in a footnote that the longitude had later been deter-
mined by dead reckoning to be 135° west.2? The party engaged
in a fruitless chase of some small white whales on July 14, from
which circumstance Mackenzie named this Whale Island.*+ That
evening they camped at the east end of the island. Mackenzie
mentions at the end of the entries for the day that he ordered that
morning a post erected close to their tents, and that on it he en-
graved the latitude of the place,*® the number of the persons with

* Mackenzie, Voyages, 54.

* Ibid. Benohulla Toe, as here spelled by Mackenzie, becomes elsewhere
Belhoullay Toe.

» Tbid., 60.

“Tbid., 60.

“ Thid., 63, note 2.

* Toid., 64-65.

* Probably that of 69° 14’, though he does not state specifically that such
was the case. It was the observation he had made the preceding day.
Mackenzie’s Explorations 57

him. and the time they remained there. On the morning of July
15 he found at four o’clock that the water had risen among their
baggage. and concluded that it was the tide. At noon he got a
reading of 69° 7’ north latitude. An observation of the tide next
morning showed about sixteen or eighteen inches of rise, but ac-
curacy could not be attained because of the wind.** This day they
sailed among the islands apparently to the eastward and then
‘“*made for the river and stemmed the current.’’** This casual
statement is all that Mackenzie vouchsafes in regard to his aban-
donment of further search for the sea.

At ten o’clock on the morning of July 21, the party was back
at the head of the delta.** The strength of the current made it
necessary to resort to the towing line. The next day Mackenzie
visited an Indian village and conversed with the natives through
the medium of the English Chief. From them he received some
information about the Esquimaux, in particular the fact that ten
or twelve winters before the Esquimaux had seen large canoes
filled with white men to the westward on the lake which they
called Belhoullay Toe, or White Man’s Lake. From these white
men they had received iron in exchange for leather.** On July
26, the party met a Dog-rib Indian, who stated that the Hare In-
dians had informed him that there was a river on the other side of
the mountains to the southwest. This river was much larger than
the Mackenzie and emptied into the Belhoullay Toe.*° The fol-
lowing day Mackenzie heard more about this river. Meeting a
party of Indians, he paid one of them some beads to draw a map
upon the sand. He says:

This singular map he immediately undertook to delineate, and according-

% Mackenzie, Foyages, 65-66.

* Tbid., 66-67.

STbid., 71.

” Ibid., 74-75.

 Tbid., 82-83. This was probably the Yukon, or one of its larger tribu-
taries.

 
a8 The North West Company

ly traced out a very long point of land between the rivers, though without
paying the least attention to their courses, which he represented as running
into the great lake, at the extremity of which, as he had been told by In-
dians of other nations, there was a Belhoullay Couin, or White Man’s Fort.
This I took to be Unalascha Fort, and consequently the river to the west to
be Cook’s River; and that the body of water or sea into which this river
discharges itself at Whale Island, communicates with Norton Sound."

But he could persuade no one to guide him to this river. Con-
versation with another party the same day elicited no new in-
formation, and Mackenzie decided that he could hear nothing
more until he reached Great Bear River. Here he expected to
meet some Indians who on his way down had informed him about
this river to the westward. Mackenzie had not believed their ac-
count at the time.*? On his arrival there, August 2, the natives
were absent hunting.**

On August 13 Mackenzie reached the River of the Mountain“
and the next day ascended it about two miles.** On August 22
the party reached the entrance to Great Slave Lake.** Two days
later they met three canoes, containing Leroux and’some Indians,
who had been out on a hunting party for twenty-five days. Le-
roux had been as far as Lac 4 la Martre, where he met some Slave
Indians.*7 On August 30 the entire party arrived at Leroux’s
house. Here Mackenzie paid off his Indians, and arranged with
the English Chief to bring the Beaver Indians to trade their furs
at this establishment.*® The next day Mackenzie proceeded on
his way and arrived at Fort Chipewean on September 12, after
a journey which had lasted one hundred and two days.*®

“* Mackenzie, Voyages, 84-85.

*” Ibid., 86-88.

8 Ibid., 95-97,

“ The Liard.

*° Mackenzie, Voyages, 106-107.
* Tbid., 110-111.

T Tbid., 112.

“Tbid., 115.

* Tbid., 119.

 
Mackenzie’s Explorations 59

It would appear, from reading the account of this journey as
published by Mackenzie, that he started down the river which
drains Great Slave Lake under the impression that he was going
to the western coast of America. It was not until he reached the
delta that he recorded his conviction that the river emptied into
the Arctic Ocean.

It is also an interesting question whether Mackenzie realized
that he had actually reached this northern ocean. He had
reached that large branch of the Arctic now marked on the maps
as Mackenzie Bay. On the map in his published work, the term
“THE SEA”’ appears north of Whale Island, and in his re-
port to Dorchester dated Montreal, November 17, 1794, he speaks
of the waters he followed as leading him to the Northern Ocean.*®
But it is by no means certain that Mackenzie realized on his
journey—or even soon after his journey—how far north he had
actually been. There is no definite statement in his published
journal that he had reached the northern ocean. In fact, he
speaks rather of a lake.» He records that the expedition had
reached tidal waters, but the effect of tides may be perceived at
some distance up rivers and similar bodies of water, and the
height of the tide which he gives is not great. An interesting
point is that he does not record whether the water was salt or
fresh. If he ever tasted the water on this whole trip, he certain-
ly does not mention it.*?, On a manuscript chart in the Colonial
Office which is attributed to Mackenzie, there is a semicircular
body of water with Whale Island in it marked at the mouth of
the river. The delta is not shown. On the east side of the
mouth of the river is the inscription, ‘‘5 ft. deepest Water in the
Entrance of the Lake 12 July 1789.’’ On the west side of the

“Copy in Dorchester to Portland, No. 10, of November’ 20, 1794, C. O.
42, vol. 101.

*t Mackenzie, Voyages, 60.

* Barrow noted the fact that Mackenzie had not dipped his finger into the
water to see if it were salt (Hugh Murray, Historical Account of Discoveries
and Travels in North America, I, 156-157).
60 The North West Company

river-mouth is another inscription, ‘‘Number of Streams seen
from a Hill.’’ And where the river turns sharply from a west-
by-south to a north-by-west course in about 67° 25’ north lati-
tude, there appears on the west side of the river the inscription,
‘‘By the Indian Account the Sea is but a short way to the West-
ward.’’? It would seem from this map that Mackenzie did not
realize that he had reached the Arctic Ocean.**

% This map is cited as “America No. 54.” It is of size 471%" x2’ 4”.
The scale is about 29 leagues to the inch. It is drawn on a thin paper, which
might possibly be a tracing paper, and is gummed at the edges to a heavy
white paper. The Colonial Office officials were unable to state when this map
came into their possession. The map shows nothing east or south of Ke-
weenaw Point (?) on Lake Superior. Lac 4 la Martre and Great Bear Lake
do not appear. It does not show the route to the Pacific. There is merely a
line for the Rocky Mountains, with nothing west—except some of the coast
line—or just east of them. Peace River is named and drawn as if well
known to about latitude 57° 20’ and longitude 122° 30’. Beyond this is a
hypothetically sketched “Lake of the Plains” in longitude 120° 50’ to 124°
circa 25’ and latitude 56° 12’ to circa 56° 45’ from which the Peace River ap-
pearsto flow. From the west side of this lake a hypothetical river flows southwest-
ward to the “Rocky Mountains” in longitude 125° and Jatitude 56°. There is
a “Fort” on the north side of the Peace River in about latitude 58° 15’ and
longitude 118° 50’. The Pacifie coast is sketched from the “Strait of Juan
de Fuca” around to the Arctic past “Bhering’s Strait.” Uncertainty is shown
in various spots. The long rivers are on the southeast shore of the Alaskan
peninsula and just south of Norton Sound. The name “COOK’S RIVER” is
on the inlet in latitude 60° and longitude 153°, where there is no such name
in the printed work. On the other hand, the printed map has Cook’s Inlet,
which this map has not. The location is slightly different. Vancouver Island
is not marked. There is a big “Nepean Sound” with islands in it on the
mainland coast east of “Queen Charlotte’s Isles.”

Besides the fort already mentioned on Peace River, this map locates Fort
L’Eppinett, Fort Dauphin, Fort la Biche, Cumberland House, Fort Eturgeon,
Hudson’s House, Manchester House, Ft. de Trait, York Fort, Fort Church
[sic], a fort at Grand Portage, one on the east side of Red Lake, and the fort
of “P, Pond 1773.”

It would appear that this map was drawn by Mackenzie before his jour-
ney of 1793. Possibly he gave it to the authorities while in England before
that journey. Possibly it came through some other source. It might have
been given in the winter of 1794-1795, when Mackenzie was in England, offi-
cially recommended. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that in his re-
port to Dorchester, dated Montreal, November 17, 1794, he states that he
made himself but little known during his residence in London in 1791-1792
because he had not been provided with proper instruments for ascertaining
longitude on his first expedition (C.O. 42, vol. 101). But in this case it is
strange that his western expedition is not delineated. Pinned to the map are
some manuscript notes entitled, “A few Remarks to Elucidate my Tracks
from Athabesea Latitude 58.38 North and Longitude 11014 West from

 
Mackenzie’s Explorations 61

The portion of the notes pinned to the map which deals with
the journey of 1789 is worth quoting in full. It reads as follows:

Athabasca is 2750 Miles to the North and West of Montreal the dis-
tance from this to the North Sea in Latitude 6914 North and Longitude
about 135° West from Greenwich by the Slave Lake and McKenzie’s River
is 1540 Miles. It was in the Summer of 1789 that I went this Expedition in
hopes of getting into Cook’s River tho I was disappointed in this it proved
without a doubt that there is not a north west passage below this latitude
and I believe it will generally be allowed that no passage is practicable in a
Higher Latitude the Sea being eternally covered with ice.

This statement indicates that Mackenzie supposed that the
river which drains Great Slave Lake emptied into the Pacific
Ocean. In regard to the ‘‘Lake’’ mentioned on the map, it is
worthy of remark that Wentzel as late as 1814 wrote to Roderick
McKenzie:

. . the Natives also affirm that the sea is much nearer to that end of
the lake,* than it is from where Sir Alex. MacKenzie turned back on the
Grand River, which they maintain is a large lake which communicates to the
sea by a very broad outlet, and not a bay of the Ocean as generally believed
by the Whites.©

Wentzel was, of course, trusting to third-hand Indian accounts.

In September, 1789, Alexander Mackenzie went up the Atha-
basea River and met Roderick McKenzie at the mouth of the
Clearwater on his way back from Grand Portage. They win-
tered together at Fort Chipewean.*® In the spring the explorer
went to Grand Portage, where he arrived July 13. He wrote
three days later: ‘‘My expedition was hardly spoken of, but
that is what I expected.’ Interest was concentrated upon the
reorganization of the North West Company agreed upon that
Greenwich to the Nortb Sea and Western ocean as delineated on Mr. Arrow-
smith’s Map.” Most of these notes constitute a brief summary of the expe-

dition of 1793. They are the same, barring slight differences in spelling, as
the material in the Stowe MS, 793, ff. 80-81, in the British Museum.

* The east end of Great Bear Lake.
® Masson, Bourgeois, I, 111.

* Tbid., I, 31.

™ Tbid., I, 35.
62 The North West Company

summer. This was at first kept secret, and it was not until a year
later that Mackenzie divulged it to his cousin Roderick in a letter
dated at Lac La Pluie, August 2, 1791. The reorganization was
for seven years from the end of the year in which the letter was
dated.°® There were to be twenty shares, of which McTavish,
Frobisher and Company held six. Montour, Grant, Small, Greg-
ory, Pangman, and Alexander Mackenzie held two shares each.
McGillivray and Sutherland held a share each. Mackenzie paid
McBeath three hundred and fifty pounds Halifax currency ‘‘over
and above the stock on hand’’ for one of his shares. Gregory
and Pangman had to purchase their shares from Holmes and
McLeod. The latter sold his for two hundred pounds per annum,
probably for three or four years. Sutherland got his share from
McTavish, Frobisher and Company. McGillivray bought his
from Pond for eight hundred pounds. A commission of five per
cent on the amount of the invoice was to be paid to the Montreal
company on the goods imported for the North West Company.®
There were few changes among the clerks or the heads of second-
ary posts. There continued to be some trading on shares. St.
Germain traded to Riviére a la Biche on the condition that when
the profits did not amount to two hundred pounds the company
should supply the deficiency. Lesieur & Fraser had a similar
agreement.

Mackenzie was in England during the winter of 1791-1792,
perfecting his mathematical knowledge and purchasing technical
equipment.*°° The astronomer Turner wintered in Athabasca that
year, having been sent by the Hudson’s Bay Company at the in-
stance of the Colonial Office.** He made an observation of the

** Masson states in his preliminary sketch that the company was reorgan-
ized in 1790 for nine years (Esquisse, 42). This is a slight distortion of
what occurred, because the union of 1787 had been for five years and would
not expire until the summer of 1792, and Mackenzie states that this company
terminated in 1798 (Voyages, xxiii).

*® Masson Bourgeois, I, 38-39.

* Masson, Esquissc, 56.

* Ibid., 52-54,
Mackenzie’s Explorations 63

position of Fort Chipewean, proving that Lake Athabasca, in-
stead of being only forty or fifty leagues from the Pacific, as
Pond and others had supposed, was really over three hundred
leagues distant. Mackenzie had not been able to determine any
longitude.

Mackenzie returned to Canada in the spring of 1792® and
proceeded to Fort Chipewean to make preparations for an expe-
dition to the Pacifie Ocean the following year.*? Leaving Rod-
erick \MeKenzie in charge here, he set out October 10, 1792, with
two canoes laden with necessary supplies, to winter on Peace
River.** Other canoes were to follow. On the morning of Octo-
ber 19 the party reached the Old Establishment, apparently the
post built by Boyer in 1788. The river had already been sur-
veyed to this point by a certain Vaudreuil, formerly in the com-
pany’s service.** On October 20 they landed at the post where
Finlay was to spend the ensuing winter.** Three days later Mac-
kenzie proceeded, and on November 1 reached his wintering
place,*’ six miles above the mouth of Smoky River. Two men,
who had been sent forward in the spring, had the timber and

 

*° He left the Downs, May 9, 1792 (C.O. 42, vol. 101).

There were various proposals by Holland and others in 1790 to explore
the territory from Lake Athabasca westward to the strip of coast explored
by Cook, Alexander Dalrymple, the geographer, was also interested in the
problem. The proposals were not put into effect. Later, in 1792, Holland
renewed his proposal in a letter to Simcoe dated Quebec, October 6 (Q,
279-1, pp. 207 et seq). Simcoe forwarded it in his despatch No. 12 of No-
vember 23. It is possible that this renewal of the proposal was due to a
knowledge that Mackenzie was planning to explore westward the next spring.
Evan Nepean was the originator of the idea of the expedition in which the
Hollands were interested in 1790 (John Frederick Holland to Evan Nepean,
Quebec, November 10, 1790, C.O. 42, vol. 72). This letter, in speaking of
Mackenzie’s expedition in the preceding year, states that the North West
Company thought the river emptied into the Western Ocean, a belief which
was disproved by this voyage. Holland also writes as if Mackenzie had re-
ported that he did not reach the Arctic Ocean.

™ Mackenzie, Voyages, 121-122.
 Tbid., 124.

°° Tbid., 125.

™ Ibid., 127-128,
64 The North West Company

palisades at hand, and the structure was ready for occupation
two days before Christmas.®® These men had been here early in
the preceding May and possibly through the winter before that.®
From the Indians Mackenzie now heard of Lesser Slave Lake”
and also of a river on the other side of the mountains, the course
of which was towards the midday sun." Mackenzie records the
fact that Canadian traders were first on the Peace River in
1786.7?

On May 8, 1793, he sent six canoes with furs, provisions, and
letters to Fort Chipewean. At seven o’clock in the evening of
the next day he embarked with Alexander MacKay, Joseph Lan-
dry, Charles Ducette, Francois Beaulieux, Baptiste Bisson, Fran-
cois Courtois, Jacques Beauchamp, and two Indians as hunters
and interpreters. He had no guide. Joseph Landry and Charles
Ducette had accompanied him on his expedition of 1789.73 The
passage up Peace River, where white men had never been before,
was a toilsome one. On May 31 he reached the forks of Peace
River.** An old Indian had advised him to take the Parsnip and
not the Finlay River branch. His men were not pleased with his
determination to follow the former branch, which afforded dif-
ficult passage.”*> Through paddling up the east side of the Par-
snip River in the high water season, Mackenzie missed the mouth
of Pack, or McLeod’s Lake, River, which would have led him
to Giscome Portage. He does not mention it on his return,
either.*° On June 9 he met some Indians, probably Sic-
annis, who had iron utensils, the metal of which was procured

Mackenzie, Voyages, 129-135.

“Ibid., 136.

*Tbid., 139-140.

™ Tbid., 140.

™ Toid., 146.

8 Ibid., 151-152.

“Tbid., 185.

™® Tbid., 185-186.

© Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 456.
Mackenzie’s Explorations 65

by intertribal trade from the coast.7_ The following morning he
got word from these Indians that he could proceed by a series of
portages from the head of Parsnip River to a small river empty-
ing into a large one flowing towards the midday sun. This latter
river he was told did not empty into the sea.7@ It was of course
the Fraser. The party proceeded with one of these Indians as a
guide, and on June 12 they reached a small lake which Macken-
zie considered the highest and southernmost source of the Unji-
gah, or Peace, River in latitude 54° 24’, longitude 121°.7* They
then portaged to Bad River, as Simon Fraser later named it.®°
In this river they lost almost all their bullets in a bad wrecking
of the canoe, and the voyageurs were nearly discouraged. But
on June 17 a navigable branch of the Fraser River was reached.*!
Two days later the mouth of the Nechaco River was passed un-
seen, in the same manner as Pack River.*? On June 21 Macken-
zie established friendly relations with the Carrier Indians, who
had never seen white men before, although they possessed articles
from the coast which had been obtained in trade.** The next
day Mackenzie learned from other Indians that it would be a
long and dangerous way to the sea if he followed the river, but
that the way overland was short and not difficult.** The prob-
lem was complicated. He did not wish to abandon his explor-
ation of the river. But provisions and ammunition were running
short, time was pressing, and he might find himself unable to re-
turn to Athabasca that season. Moreover, he was becoming con-
vineed, from the descriptions given by the Indians, that the river
could not empty into the ocean north of what was then called the

™ Mackenzie, Voyages, 200-201.

S Tbid., 203-204.

” Tbid., 214.

»° Toid., 215.

* Toid., 228.

” Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 463-464.

* Mackenzie, Voyages, 242-246.
* Tbid., 253-254,
66 The North West Company

River of the West.*° Later, under date of August 18, he calls it
the Tacoutche Tesse, or Columbia River.

On June 23 Mackenzie decided to turn back on his course and
follow the overland route to the ocean.*® Difficulties with his
euide lent danger in addition to that of an Indian population
aroused and rendered suspicious by the sudden turning back of
the expedition, but on July 3 the West Road*’ River was
reached.*§ Goods were cached, and on the following day the
party set out overland. The route lay along the Blackwater and
Bella Coola rivers, the latter of which was reached July 17.°° On
the morning of July 20 the party reached the mouth of the Bella
Coola River, on Bentinck Arm, and the next day they arrived at
Vancouver’s Cape Menzies.°° Here trouble was started by an
Indian who had been punished by some of Vancouver’s men, but
in spite of this, observations were taken and the following in-
seription was written in grease and vermillion on a rock:

Alexander Mackenzie, from Canada, by land, the twenty-second of July,
one thousand seven hundred and ninety-three.™

Mackenzie’s latitude by an artificial horizon was 52° 21’ 33”,
and by the natural horizon it was 52° 20’ 48” His longitude was
128° 2’.

Mackenzie now retraced his steps. There was more trouble with
the Indians in the village at the mouth of the Bella Coola River,
but it was overcome by a bold front, and the return trip was made
in safety. The Fraser River was reached on August 4, the Parsnip

“Mackenzie, Voyages, 255-256.

*Tbid., 260. Fort Alexandria was later built at the spot where the party
started back.

*' Blackwater.

Mackenzie, Voyages, 282.

“Tbid., 317; Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 475.

* Mackenzie, Voyages, 343.

* Ibid., 349. Mackenzie does not appear, either on this voyage or on the
one down the Mackenzie River in 1789, to have taken possession of the newly
cy lands for the Crown. He was, of course, a civilian with no official

us.
Mackenzie’s Explorations 67

River on August 17, and the main Peace River on August 19.°?
At 4 p.m. on August 24, Mackenzie reached his fort on Peace
River, surprising the men he had left in charge of that estab-
lishment.°* Thus was accomplished the first crossing by white
men of the American continent north of the Spanish settlements.
Mackenzie’s explorations had demonstrated that there was no
Northwest passage navigable for ships south of latitude 70°.
Mackenzie spent the following winter at Fort Chipewean.
The next summer he left the interior country and did not re-
turn to winter, but became one of the agents of the Company, in
which capacity he attended yearly the business at Grand Por-
tage. He left this same year for England, returning in the sum-
mer of 1795.°* In 1801 he published the account of his explora-
tions, and on February 10, 1802, he was knighted for his accom-
plishments. The published work®® opens with a ‘‘General His-
tory of the Fur Trade,’’ which some persons think was written
by Roderick McKenzie. The book closes with some remarks by
Mackenzie in support of his plan for uniting the activities and

* Mackenzie, Voyages, 388-390.

® Tbid., 396-397.

* Masson, Bourgeois, I, 45. He wrote to Simcoe on September 10, 1794,
describing his expedition to the Pacific (Q, 280-2, pp. 362-363). Official men-
tion of this expedition was sent to England in November by Dorchester, who
enclosed a brief account of both expeditions and recommended Mackenzie to
notice (Dorchester to Portland, No. 10, Quebec, November 10, 1794, C.O. 42,
vol. 101).

* Stowe MS 793 in the British Museum, consisting of 81 folios or 160
pages of manuscript written in a fine, slanting hand, bears on the first bind-
ing-page the following pencil note: “This is the original journal in the hand-
writing of Mackenzie.” It has the following misleading heading: “Journal of a
Voyage performed by Order of the N. W. Company, in a Bark Canoe in search
of a Passage by Water through the N. W. Continent of America from Atha-
baska to the Pacific Ocean in Summer 1789.” The expedition of 1789 is
given at some length in the first 79 folios. The expedition of 1793 is dis-
missed with a summary, on folios 80-81. Another copy of the material on
these last two folios is pinned to Map America, No. 54, in the Colonial Office
library. Nothing of the preliminary history of the fur trade which appears
in the printed work, is in this manuscript. The account of the expedition of
1789 is not in the expanded, literary form of the printed version. The paper
is of size 714" x 614”.
68 The North West Company

privileges of the Canadian traders and the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany in a big trans-continental and trans-Pacific fur trade. He
seems to have entertained this idea at least as early as 1794, for
we find Simcoe, in a postscript to his report to the Lords of Trade
dated September 1 of that year, stating that Mackenzie had re-
marked on the necessity of combined action on the part of the fur
companies for this Pacific trade, on the value of the Hudson Bay
route, and on the probable action of the East India Company.”

* Simcoe to the Lords of Trade, Navy Hall, September 1, 1794, Q, 280-2,
pp. 307-363, especially pp. 359-361.
CHAPTER IV
THE X Y COMPANY

After the foundation of Fort Cumberland by Hearne in 1774,
the Hudson’s Bay Company seems to have taken no active steps
in trading by means of interior posts until after the formation
of the North West Company. The intervening period had been
one of wide-spread warfare for Great Britain. In 1786, wishing
to stop the Indians of the Height of Land from trading with the
Canadians of Nipigon district, they founded Fort Osnaburg on
Lake St. Joseph. This post had to face the efforts of Duncan
Cameron, who took charge of the Nipigon district as clerk for
Mr. Shaw in 1785. It also formed a basis for further advance
inland.1 Encouraged by two years of good trade, the Hudson’s
Bay traders penetrated inland until they reached the Red
River.? Clause had reached Nid du Corbeau beyond Lake Nipi-
gon in 1767, and succeeding Canadian traders had arrived at Lac
du Pichou. Here the advance from the south ceased until 1793,
when Cameron sent in Turecot, who reached Big Lake.* In 1796
Cameron himself penetrated a hundred leagues beyond this and
met the Hudson’s Bay traders from York Factory.* He re-
mained in the Nipigon Department for at least a decade more,
and records a decreasing trade.

In 1787 the Hudson’s Bay Company sent an expedition in-
land to the Saskatchewan under an officer named Tomison. This
party established two new trading posts on the stream above the

1 Masson, Bourgeois, II, 243-244.

2W. McGillivray wintered in 1789 at Rat River Fort, where he opposed
the Hudson’s Bay Company. He took out 105 packs of furs and 6 kegs of
eastoreum when he left. His journal opens September 9, 1789, and closes
June 13, 1790 (Masson MSS, vol. 3, Canadian Archives).

2 Possibly Lake Severn. It was evidently on Severn River ( Masson, Bour-
geois, II, 283). Cameron calls it Big Lake (Masson, Bourgeois, II, 244).

* Masson, Bourgeois, II, 242-245.
70 The North West Company

forks. David Thompson, a member of the party, wintered at the
first, Manchester House, in 1787-1788, and at the second, Hud-
son’s House, in 1788 and 1789. The next two winters he spent at
Cumberland House. Following this beginning, the Hudson’s
Bay Company continued in the trade on the upper Saskatchewan.
On October 18, 1793, Thompson was at South Branch House,
whence he went to Manchester House and Buckingham House on
the North Saskatchewan. Ie wintered at the latter place." Writ-
ing in 1805, Harmon speaks of the destruction by the Indians of
the Hudson’s Bay Company’s post on the South Saskatchewan
fifteen years earlier.”

In 1789 the Hudson’s Bay Company made a fruitless effort
to establish itself on the Assiniboine, and its men were on Lake of
the Woods in 1793.8 In the latter year, they first descended the
Winnipeg River, according to a journal among the Masson Pa-
pers. The writer’s party passed Portage de 1’Isle on August 27
and heard from the Indians that a Hudson’s Bay trading party of
three boats and two canoes had for the first time descended the
river eight days before. They overtook them on August 29 and
found that their leaders were Donald McKay and Sutherland.
This Hudson’s Bay party went on up the Red River.’

The same year the Hudson’s Bay Company made a successful
settlement at Souris River, where the North West Company fol-
lowed them.’° From this post, trade was conducted with the
Mandans and Gros Ventres on the Missouri through men who
took a certain number of skins in credit and paid on their re-
turn. So many of their servants deserted from the Mandan
country to go to the Illinois and other Mississippi points, that

* Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 186.

® Thid., 187-188.

* Harmon, Journal, 117,

* Masson, Esquisse, 44.

* Masson Papers, 2352, in MeGill University.
* Masson, Bourgeois, I, 271.
The X Y Company 71

the North West Company later neglected this trade." The Hud-
son’s Bay Company entered the Assiniboine River by way of
Swan River, carrying their goods on horseback from one river to
the other, a trip which took three days. They were thus a month
ahead of the traders from Grand Portage, and secured the best
of the beaver and other skins which had formerly gone to swell
the Red River returns.’ Traders from Prairie du Chien at this
time were trading on the Assiniboine, which they ascended after
coming down the Red River."* In fact, five different parties
traded in opposition to one another at Souris River in the winter
of 1794-1795.1* Hudson’s Bay Company men traded with poor
results on Pembina River in 1797-1798.

The Hudson’s Bay Company did not have as much success in
the south and west as in the northern departments, when the In-
dians were accustomed to making long journeys with their furs
to the posts on Hudson Bay and where the Hudson's Bay Com-
pany was now taking steps to meet them half-way, at posts like
Fairford House and Bedford House.'® The competition was un-
scrupulous. The Canadian traders resorted to doubtful means,
like offering high prices for furs for which the Hudson’s Bay
Company had given credits. They also made free use of liquor.
The English company, however, retained much influence over the
Indians of Churchill River, Lake Athabasca, and the country to
the eastward.1’ In other districts their officers lacked zeal, and

“Masson, Bourgeois, I, 272.

” Toid., 275.

8 Thid., 269, 290.

* Tbid., 294,

* Journal of Charles Chaboillez in Masson Papers, Canadian Archives.

** David Thompson was at Fairford House, on the Churchill, one mile below
the mouth of the Deer River, in June, 1796. From here he went by way of
Reindeer Lake and Black River to Lake Athabasca. Retracing his steps, he
built Bedford House on Reindeer Lake and wintered there (Burpee, Search
for the Western Sea, 189). Burpee here and elsewhere has made use of J.
B. Tyrell’s brief article on David Thompson.

™ Masson, Esquisse, 48-49.
72 The North West Company

their men were not the equals of the voyageurs in the adaptabil-
ity requisite for a life of adventure. The character of the voya-
geurs appears to have more than compensated for the disadvan-
tage of distant bases of supplies and the expense incident to the
upkeep of a system which was spread over so great an area that
it required a small army of more than a thousand men to manage
the posts and transport the provisions, goods, and peltries.”®
And now dissension among the Montreal traders was to add
a further quota to the burden of the North West Company. In
1795? some partners withdrew and undertook an independent

%Tsaac Todd and Simon McTavish, writing in 1794 in connection with
the proposed relinquishment of the posts to the United States, estimated that
at the average price of the preceding five years, the furs sent from Canada to
England were worth £250,000. Nearly £100,000 worth of these came from
the Northwest trade (Chatham MS, vol. 346). These men also requested that
the Indian lands be made neutral trading-ground, and that the delivery of
the posts extend over a period of three years. They pointed out the dif-
ficulties which would arise in the matter of transportation at Sault Ste.
Marie and Grand Portage (C. O. 42, vol. 88, Q, 57-2, pp. 382-384).

Mr. Inglis of Mark Lane, writing about the same time, estimated the
average annual value of the furs imported from Quebec for the preceding
ten years at £200,000, obtained as follows: £30,000 from below Montreal;
£30,000 from the Grand River and the north sides of lakes Ontario, Huron,
and Superior; £40,000 from the country generally called the Northwest; and
£100,000 from the country south of the lakes, mostly centering at Detroit
and Michilimackinae, as there was very little Indian trade at Detroit. A
note appended to the estimate on Northwest trade stated that since the esti-
mate was made in 1790, the Northwest trade had greatly increased and was
supposed to have doubled during the preceding two years because the traders
had penetrated farther inland, and that the trade at the nearer posts con-
tinued with little variation, but would decrease as the country was settled.
The trade of Detroit was estimated at about £40,800. A pack was estimated
at £12, and 1000 packs came from Detroit, Saginaw, and the south side of
Lake Huron; 2000 packs from the Miami and Wabash country; and 400
packs from Sandusky. With an estimated value of £20 per pack, the Michili-
mackinac trade amounted to £60,400. Of this, 100 packs came from the
Grand River; 300 packs from St. Josephs, 100 packs from Chegago, 120
packs from Milwaki, 300 packs from the south side of Lake Superior, and
600 packs from the Illinois country. The figures for La Baye, or Green Bay,
including the upper parts of the Mississippi, are not given, but, to make the
estimated total of 3220 packs, it would be 1700 packs (C. 0. 42, vol. 88, Q,
57-2, pp. 382-387). A slightly different report appears in C.O. 42, vol. 72.
Here it is 1500 packs from La Baye, making a total of 3020 packs for the
Michilimackinac trade. Chegago appears as Chequago.

; “In this year a North West Company partner, writing in Athabasca, es-
timated that the North West Company got about eleven-fourteenths of the
The X Y Company 73

trade under the auspices of a strong organization — Forsyth,
Richardson and Company—which had already been engaged for
some time in the trade around Lake Superior. The greater num-
ber stayed with the old company, among them being Alexander
Mackenzie.*°° He had gone to Grand Portage in the spring of
1794 and had become an agent of the North West Company as a
member of the firm of McTavish, Frobisher and Company. He
therefore could not separate from his associates, but he assented
to the arrangement of 1795 for three years only, reserving the
right to retire at the end of that time if he judged it proper.?*
During that period ill-feeling increased between him and Simon
MeTavish. The agreement of 1795 is referred to in the agree-
ment of 1802. In the preamble of the latter it is recited that on
October 30, 1795, an agreement was made at Montreal by Simon
McTavish, Joseph Frobisher,?? John Gregory, and William Me-
Gillivray. comprising the firm of McTavish, Frobisher and Com-
pany of Montreal, and by Angus Shaw, Roderick McKenzie,
Cuthbert Grant, Alexander McLeod, and William Thornburn,
these being represented by Alexander Mackenzie as agent and
attorney, to carry on a joint trade to the Northwest. Other part-
ners were to be admitted, and the agreement was to go into op-
Northwest trade returns, that the Hudson’s Bay Company got one-seventh,
and that the various oppositions from Canada got one-fourteenth (Masson
Papers, No. 2370, item 3, p. 50. MeGill University).

* Masson, Esquisse, 73-74. Mackenzie apparently first announced the fact
of the formation of this concern to his cousin Roderick in a letter written
October 25, 1797 (Masson, Bourgeois, I, 46). It is possible that this is a
later development. The whole matter is rather obscure. The names of Wil-
liam and Thomas Forsyth appear in the trading license reports of 1786 as
interested in Michilimackinac, Detroit, Niagara, and Miamis trade (En-
closure in Hope’s No. 32 of October 21, 1786, Q, 26-2, p. 563 a). The sur-
render of the frontier posts to the United States, arranged in 1794 and com-
pleted in 1796, may be connected with this appearance in the Northwest
trade.

* Masson, Esquisse, 74. I find no other authority for this statement.

“Frobisher was a native of Halifax, Yorkshire. His daughter was the
wife of Major O’Brien of the 24th Regiment. She was burned to death at
Exeter (Maude, Visit to the Falls of Niagara, 239; Landmann, Adventures
and Recollections, I, 233).
74 The North West Company

eration with the first outfit of 1799 and to terminate with the re-
turns of the outfit of 1805. The concern was to consist of forty-
six shares. Further rules and regulations are not recited.2? It
will be noticed that Alexander Mackenzie apparently did not
sign this agreement on his own behalf.

In 1798 the company took on a new form, the shares being in-
creased to forty-six in number. New partners were admitted
and others retired. This date marked the termination of the
existing agreement, which was not renewed by all the parties
concerned in it. The majority continued to act upon the old
stock and under the old firm. The others began a new firm,”!
the date of the agreement being given in the coalition articles of
1804 as October 20, 1798.2° Simon McTavish wrote to Roderick
McKenzie on July 22, 1799, stating that the threatened opposi-
tion had that year made a serious attack upon them.*> He ex-
pressed his fear that a coalition of the opposing interests?’ would
render them more formidable, but cherished a hope that the new
discoveries in the department under McKenzie’s charge, coupled
with extension of the Fond du Lac trade, would make up for the
returns taken by the opposition.”*

In that year, his engagement with the company coming to an
end, Alexander Mackenzie*® announced at the annual meeting

* Masson, Bourgeois, II, 459-460.

* Mackenzie, Voyages, xxiii. This latter is evidently what was to be
known as the New North West Company, though Mackenzie gives it no name.

* Masson, Bourgeois, II, 486.

* Phyn, Inglis & Co. of London were probably interested in this opposi-
tion. At any rate, they addressed a communication to the Duke of Portland
in this year protesting against a request by the North West Company for a
grant of land at the Falls of St. Mary’s on the ground that it would mean a
monopoly of the Northwest trade (Phyn, Inglis & Co. to Portland, London,
December 6, 1799, Q, 286-2, pp. 532-533).

* Harmon in 1800 speaks of the X Y Company as “a number of mer-
chants of Montreal, Quebec, &¢.,” and states that they had little success
(Harmon, Journal, 15).

** Masson, Bourgeois, I, 47-48.

* Alexander Mackenzie, Roderick McKenzie, and William McGillivray ap-
parently came to this meeting from Montreal by way of the lakes, instead of
The X Y Company 75

his intention of leaving it. <A violent discussion arose between
the wintering partners and the agents. The former declared that
Mackenzie alone had their confidence and urged him to reconsider
his resignation. He persisted, left Grand Portage at once, and
retired from the concern in November.*® He again proceeded to
England, and Roderick McKenzie was chosen to fill the vacancy
occasioned by his withdrawal.

While in England, the explorer published an account of his
voyages and on February 10, 1802, was knighted.*+ Mackenzie
was now interested in a far-reaching scheme for combining the
fur trade of America with the fisheries. Some reference to this
plan is made in the concluding pages of his printed work. In
January, 1802, while in London, he laid proposals on the subject
before Lord Hobart, the colonial secretary. His ‘‘Preliminaries”’
suggested the formation of a supreme civil and military estab-
lishment at Nootka, with one subordinate station on the Colum-
bia River and another in Sea Otter Harbor, in latitude 55°. It
was proposed that those acts be repealed which granted to the
South Sea and East India companies the exclusive right of fish-
ery, trade, and navigation in the Pacific Ocean and on the west
coast of North America, or else that irrevocable and unlimited
licenses be obtained from those companies to trade and fish and
establish factories and agents in Canton or elsewhere for the sale
or barter of their exports or imports. Moreover, a clause pro-
posed that a license of traffic be obtained from the Hudson’s Bay
Company, with a right to the latter to have a manifest presented
and examination made at the first port of entry within its juris-
diction, but not at any other station or trading post. The exist-
ing establishments at Montreal and in the interior were to be
utilized, but establishments were not to be made within the lim-

taking the usual Ottawa route (Landmann, Adventures and Recollections, IT,
68).

% Masson, Esquisse, 74; Bourgeois, I, 48.

*% Dictionary of National Biography.
76 The North West Company

its of the United States or the territory of the Hudson’s Bay
Company.”

Mackenzie did not succeed in forming his company. Hobart
recommended that, as a first step, he secure the union of the
two Montreal companies. On October 25, 1802, Mackenzie wrote
to Sullivan, the under secretary, stating that he had not been able
to secure this union, and probably would not be unless the gov-
ernment would grant a license to one party, with the option to
the other of sharing in accordance with the trade then being ear-
ried on.*? This the government was in no hurry to grant, al-
though on December 15, 1802, the colonial secretary desired
Milnes to communicate at an early date his ideas in regard to the
subject of forming a chartered company.** The latter replied in
May that he was not as yet prepared to express an opinion.*®> On
his return to Canada, Mackenzie placed himself at the head of
the New North West Company, also known as Sir Alexander
Mackenzie and Company, and better still as the X Y Company.*®
Bitter rivalry commenced once more,*’ and fights between mem-
bers of the two companies became common. Intoxicating liquors

* Alexander Mackenzie to Lord Hobart, Norfolk St., January 7, 1802, Q,
90, pp. 37 et seq., printed in Can. Arch. Report, 1892, pp. 147-151.

*% Can. Arch. Report, 1892, xxxvi, 150-151.

*Tbid., xxxvi.

* Milnes to Hobart, Quebec, May 31, 1803, C. O. 42, vol. 121; copy in Q,
91, pp. 154 et seq.

8 Masson, Esquisse, 76-77.

* Among other things, there was in dispute the use of a boat canal about
half a mile in length, which the North West Company had constructed on the
Canadian side of the River St. Mary in 1797-1798, following the cession of
the posts to the United States. The North West Company wished the mon-
opoly of its use as private property, but not of a road which they had also
built there. The X Y Company wished the privilege of using the canal in
return for slight payments, The matter was complicated by applications
from the rival companies for grants of land for buildings and roads, and by
the fact that Forsyth, Richardson & Co. had paid £45, which formed one-
sixth of the cost of the survey in 1797. The X Y Company also built a road
of their own. The matter appears to have been unsettled when the com-
panies united in 1804, Brymner has diseussed the question, largely on the basis
of the C. Series papers at Ottawa (ef. Can. Arch. Report, 1886, xx-xxix).
The X Y Company 77

were freely used.** Reference to this strife is made by Lord Sel-
kirk in his Sketch of the British Fur Trade in North America.
He also definitely gives the date of the founding of the X Y
Company as 1798.°° The prestige and business ability of Mac-
kenzie made the X Y Company’s operations very menacing.

MeTavish, who scornfully called his opponents ‘‘The Little
Company,’’ rose to the occasion. He reorganized his company on
new lines in 1802, and enlarged the circle of its operations.‘
The agreement, which was to go into effect December 1, 1802,
was to last for twenty years. There were to be ninety-two shares,
of which seventy-six were assigned by the reorganization agree-
ment. The agents, McTavish, Frobisher and Company, held thir-
ty shares. In return for their services in purchasing goods, dis-
posing of the furs, and advancing funds, they received four per
cent commission on the outfits, and five per cent and six per cent
on the moneys they advanced. They also received one-half per
cent on furs sent to England, and two and one-half per cent on
those sent to the United States. Other duties of the agents were
defined. Strict rules were laid down against competitive trad-
ing, a fine of five thousand pounds per share being the penaity.
Extensive powers were given to the general meeting of the part-
ners and agents at Grand Portage, but an echo of the coming
change of the place of rendezvous found expression in the docu-
ment. The agreement was signed by twenty-eight persons, the
name of the forceful ‘‘Marquis’’ heading the list. Some of the
more able clerks were made partners, and sixteen shares were left
unassigned as a prospective reward for faithful and able ser-
vice.*1

The North West Company was now attempting to extend its

* Masson, Esquisse, 77.

® Selkirk, Sketch, 62.

*“ Masson, Esquisse, 77.

** Masson, Bourgeois, II, 459-481.
78 The North West Company

operations into new fields. An attempt by Livingston to hunt for
silver and open trading relations with the Esquimaux ended dis-
astrously, in the massacre of the party in 1799.47 Expeditions
were also sent to the Missouri and to the waters of the South
Saskatchewan. <A post was established on Bow River in a region
of warlike tribes.**

The fisheries of the St. Lawrence were now utilized. MeTav-
ish rented the King’s Posts for one thousand lowis a year,** the
lease to run for twenty-one years from 1803.*° The servants of
the North West Company established themselves at Lake St.
John and ninety miles above the mouth of the Ashwapmuchuan
River. They were even at Lake Mistassini,**® where there had
been no fixed posts before the North West Company rented the
King’s Posts. Here they were only four days’ journey from the
Hudson’s Bay Company post of Birch Point, which was outfitted
from East Main Factory.**7 The Aing’s Domains, although re-
stricted by the grant of Murray Bay to Major Nairn and Lieu-
tenant Fraser in 1762, was still an extensive tract. James Mc-
Kenzie, who has left a journal of his trip through this section in
1808, states that it extended seventy-six leagues along the coast
from the Black River, a rivulet five leagues below Murray Bay,
to the River Cormorant, nine leagues beyond the Seven Islands,
and up the Saguenay River in a westerly direction to Lake Mis-

* Masson, Bourgeois, I, 95.

** Masson, Esquisse, 78-79. It appears that the South Saskatchewan as a
whole was called Bow River at this period (Masson, Bourgeois, II, 30, note
1).

“ Masson, Esquisse, 79. The author of the Origin and Progress says it
was for about £1000 sterling annual rent to the government (Origin and
Progress, 29). The pound sterling and the French louis d’or were of nearly
the same value.

*® Origin and Progress, 29.

*° Masson, Esquisse, 79.

*" Masson, Bourgeois, II, 446.
The X Y Company 79

tassini.** The North West Company also traded in Mingan sei-
enory, according to the statement of this same writer.‘

In the spring of 1803 McTavish sent the ‘‘Beaver,’’ a vessel
of 150 tons, to Hudson Bay to trade, and prepared land expedi-
tions with orders to go by way of lakes St. John and Mistassini
and consult with the commander of the ‘‘Beaver’’ in regard to
establishments on the Bay. Two posts were established: one on
Charlton Island, the other at the mouth of Moose River. These
posts did not have great financial success and were soon aban-
doned.*° In connection with this movement, the Hudson’s Bay
Company laid a case before Erskine, Gibbs, and others. The lat-
ter gave the opinion that the Hudson’s Bay Company’s title was
good and that a trespass had been committed, but that, it not
being a criminal action or an appeal, there was no recourse to
English courts. The North West Company had sufficient force
to defy the Hudson’s Bay Company’s jurisdiction. William
McGillivray later stated to Coltman in writing that the Hudson’s
Bay Company purchased the ship ‘‘Eddystone’’ from the North
West Company when the latter withdrew from the Bay.*

One result of the reckless competition was a more definite ex-
tension of the jurisdiction of the Canadian courts. In 1788 Dor-
chester had reported that there were doubts as to the jurisdiction
of the courts of Quebec on the southern frontier, in the districts
at Niagara, Detroit, and Michilimackinac, which had not been
surrendered to the Americans, and that there was difficulty with
respect to the trial of persons charged with murder in the North-
west, owing to the indefinite boundaries of the Hudson’s Bay
Company’s territory.*? If brought to trial under the Act of 33

 

*® Masson, Bourgeois, II, 406. An anonymous writer said it extended from
the Saguenay to the Moisée, and included all the area draining into the St.
Lawrence within that space of coast (Origin and Progress, 29).

*° Masson, Bourgeois, II, 436.

° Masson, Esquisse, 79-80.

3 Blue Book of 1819, pp. 129-134.

* Dorchester to Sydney, No. 67, Quebec, June 9, 1788, Q, 36-1, pp. 276
et seq.
80 The North West Company

Henry VIII, ¢. 23, it was argued that proceedings must be insti-
tuted in England, which would necessitate great delay, expense,
and inconvenience.

The grand juries of Quebec and Montreal repeatedly called
attention to the want of jurisdiction, either in the Canadas or in
the Indian territories, for the trial of offences committed in the
latter region.*? The executive officers supported these represen-
tations, and on August 11, 1803, the Act of 43 George IIT. ec. 138,
received assent. This provided that offenses committed in the
Indian territories and other parts of America should be tried in
the same manner, and be lable to the same punishments, as if
performed within the provinces of Upper and Lower Canada.
The Act claimed special authority over British subjects.**

The Hudson’s Bay Company had held in abeyance its char-
tered right to jurisdiction. Otherwise there would have been a
jurisdiction for a portion of the Indian territories. The Act of
43 George III, c. 138, was quite extensive in application. Doubts
having been raised as to the power of the courts under it. a fur-
ther act to remove these was assented to in July, 1821.°°

The tenseness of the situation between the Montreal traders
was removed by the death of Simon MeTavish in July, 1804.°°
Ie had been the great opponent of conciliation. On his death,
overtures were made to Sir Alexander Mackenzie and his friends.
with suecessful results.

 

“Jor an example, ef. Q, 293, p. 239.

“ Selkirk later remarked upon the facet that from the vague wording of
the Act, an argument had been made that. the term “Indian Territories and
other parts of America” could be applied to the colonies of New Brunswick,
Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland (Selkirk, Sketch of the Fur Trade, 85). The
Act recognized Upper and Lower Canada and the United States as if they
were the sole jurisdictions in America.

“1 and 2 George IV, ¢. 66.

_ “He left a widow who later resided at Ramsgate, Kent. By her he had
four children: William, who died in 1818, Simon, Mary, and Ann (Q, 343-

1-2-3, pp. 231-233). After her husband’s death, Mrs. MeTavish married W.
8. Plenderleath.
The X Y Company 81

In the autumn of 1804 operations were commenced with the
object of developing the trade of the Missouri. Charles Chaboil-
lez, the partner in charge of the Assiniboine River, found that he
had a surplus of men and goods because of an agreement with his
opponents not to establish any new outposts in that quarter. He
therefore hired a freeman named La France, who had been a
Missouri trader for several years, to serve as guide, clerk, and
interpreter. A party was organized under the command of
Francois Antoine Larocque. Besides the leader, it consisted of
the two clerks, La France and Charles Mackenzie, and four voya-
geurs. The goods were transported on horseback. The party
left Fort Assiniboine November 11, quietly in order not to arouse
the opposition traders or the Assiniboine Indians. They reached
the Mandan villages November 24, and in this neighborhood they
passed the winter. When they arrived, the Lewis and Clark ex-
pedition was already there. Relations were quite amicable, La-
roeque not questioning the claim of the American leaders that the
region formed part of the territory of Louisiana, which had been
purchased the preceding year by the United States.** The party
was none too successful in a trading way. A Hudson’s Bay
Company trader, who was on the ground, got his full share of
the trade. Moreover, the tribes were too self-sustaining to hunt
beaver for the advantage of the whites.°* The united company
determined to send Larocque back to the Missouri, with orders to
go to the foot of the mountains, if possible, and encourage the
Indians to hunt beaver. Mackenzie was to go as far as the Man-
dans.

 

 

Lewis recorded that the North West Company, having carried on un-
licensed trade to the Missouri under the Spanish domination, was planning,
according to his information, to make a permanent establishment, since
Louisiana had been purchased by the United States. The treaty privileges of
1794 and 1796 were relied upon. Lewis expresses his opinion that these did
not apply to Louisiana (Lewis and Clark, Journals, Thwaites-ed., VI, 52).
Lewis was probably quite correct as to the reasons for the action of the
North West Company. The Michilimackinac traders appear to have been
adopting similar tactics (B. T. 5, vols. 16, 28).

% Masson, Esquisse, 81-84; Bourgeois, I, 299-340.
82 The North West Company

The party set out on June 5. On their arrival at the Mis-
souri, they met a number of Gros Ventres, who had plundered a
party of whites on the Saskatchewan.®® The Gros Ventres were
opposed to Larocque’s plan of ascending the Missouri. Neverthe-
less. the latter persisted and, with two companions, he accompan-
ied a large body of Crows to the upper waters of the Missouri.
In August Mackenzie returned to the Assiniboine, where La-
roeque also appeared on November 18, his expedition having met
with disappointing results.°° Mackenzie made a third expedition
to the Missouri in the winter of 1805-1806.° He set out once
more on June 4, 1806, collected some furs for which he had given
eredits the preceding winter, and made a trip to the Cheyennes
south of the Missouri. Shortly after his return to the Missouri.
Alexander Henry, Charles Chaboillez, Alan Macdonel, and three
other men arrived. These partners did not make a good impres-
sion upon the Indians. After accompanying the Gros Ventres
and Mandans on an unsuccessful trading expedition to the Chey-
ennes, which nearly resulted in a fight, the traders returned from
the Missouri." Masson states that the last two expeditions were
merely for closing accounts,®? and that it had been already de-
cided, on the recommendation of De Rocheblave, who had suc-
ceeded Chaboillez in charge of the Assiniboine district, to aban-
don the attempt to organize the Missouri trade.**

* Probably the party under John McDonald of Garth (cf. Masson, Bour-
geois, II, 33-34).

® Masson, Esquisse, 85-87 ; Bourgeois, I, 341-362.

* Masson, Bourgeois, I, 362-370.

@Tbid., 371-393.

“The fourth expedition was sent primarily to collect the debts of 9 free-
man who had taken credits to trade among the Pawnees. He was captured
by the Sioux, and the debts were lost (Masson Papers in McGill University
Library).

“ Masson, Esquisse, 87. Merry reported from Washington in 1806 that
he had received a memorial from the principal merchants of Lower Canada,
known by the name of the North West Company, complaining that their trade
with the Indian tribes up the Missouri had been obstructed by a proclamation
dated St. Louis, August 26, 1805, issued by General Wilkinson, the governor

 
The X Y Company 83

Mention has already been made of the union of the competing
interests. A convention, or agreement, was signed at Montreal,
November 5, 1804, between the two competing companies, who
therein designate themselves as the Old and the New North West
companies. For the Old Company thirty men were present, or
represented by their attorneys. Of these John Gregory, William
McGillivray, Duncan McGillivray, William Hallowell, and Rod-
erick McKenzie composed the firm of McTavish, Frobisher and
Company. Three firms were represented in the New Company
interests. The first was that of Forsyth, Richardson and Com-
pany, composed of Thomas Forsyth, John Richardson, and John
Forsyth. The second was the firm of Phyn, Inglis and Company
of London, composed of Alexander Ellice, John Inglis, and James
Forsyth. This firm was represented by John Richardson and
John Forsyth. The third was the defunct firm of Leith, Jami-
son® and Company, which was represented by John Richardson,
John Forsyth, and Thomas Forsyth as trustees and assignees.
The last-named individual, being absent, was represented by the
other two members of the firm of Forsyth, Richardson and Com-
pany. Sir Alexander Mackenzie was present in his own right
and as the representative of five wintering partners out of the
six belonging to the New Company. The other was represented

of Louisiana, and complaining further of the restrictions of the American
custom houses at Detroit and Michilimackinac. He enclosed copies of his
correspondence with the American Government on the subject (Merry to
Lord Mulgrave, No. 5, Washington, January 31, 1806, F.O. 5, vol. 48).
From the enclosures, it would appear that Merry was in error as to these
complaints being from the North West Company, which he apparently con-
fuses with the Michilimackinac traders who, relying on the Treaties of 1794
and 1796, were attempting an extension of their existing trade, upon the ac-
quisition of Louisiana by the United States. Wilkinson did not consider that
these articles applied to the newly acquired territory, and his government
supported him. The correspondence was considered by the Board of Trade
(B. T. 5, vols. 16, 82), which recognized the American contention. A copy of
the petition of the traders is in Q, 99, pp. 8-14.

It is Jamison, not Jamieson, in the MS from which Masson printed
(Masson Papers, No. 2368, McGill University).
84 The North West Company

by John Forsyth. John Ogilvie®* was present in his own right
and as representative of John Mure of Quebec. But the name of
Thomas Thain of Montreal, which is recited in the preamble, is
not among the signatures. No reason for the omission is given.

The agreement united the interests of the two companies for
the balance of the term named in the agreement of July 5, 1802,
which meant that the company should operate for eighteen years
beginning with the outfit of 1805.°7 There were to be one hun-
dred shares, of which the New Company should control twenty-
five. They were to give one of these shares to each of their six
wintering partners. As the New Company had been planning to
put their wintering partners on the same footing as those of the
Old Company when their agreement of October 20, 1798, should
expire, it was stated that these six men must definitely accept or
refuse when they were informed of the offer at Grand Portage
the following summer. If they refused, the New Company might
appoint any of their deserving clerks. The Old Company should
then have the nominations to the next three vacancies. After
that, candidates were to be selected strictly by seniority and merit.

It is not clear by what method the Old Company was reduced
from the seventy-six shares, which are said to have been dis-
tributed in the agreement of July 5, 1802, to the seventy-five
shares here named. Sixteen shares were not distributed in the
earlier agreement, but reserved for new partners. If none of these
had been assigned, they were now probably given to the New
Company with eight extra, which would raise the total number to
one hundred shares. But what of the one share taken from the
Old Company? It is stated®* that Alexander N. McLeod refused

** He was a partner in the firm of Parker, Gerrard, Ogilvie, and Company
in 1800 (Maude, A Visit to the Falls of Niagara, 185).

“Tt was stated at a later period that the North West Company termi-
nated by effluction of time on November 30, 1822 (Masson Papers, Letters
addressed to the Editor of the Canadian Courant by a Creditor of the North
West Company, Canadian Archives, 24).

** Masson, Bourgeois, II, 480, note 1.
The X Y Company 85

to take his share. This is partly an error. There is an Archibald
Norman McLeod whose name appears in the preamble and among
the signatures to the agreement of July 5, 1802. Archibald N.
McLeod is assigned two shares. Article 20, which was not print-
ed by Masson, states that Alexander McLeod refused to take his
share and that those forming the new agreement guaranteed that
he should be paid what would have been coming to him for the
balance of the term agreed upon October 30, 1795, which was to
end with the returns of the outfit of 1805.°° But this does not
appear to have been counted as one of the seventy-six shares. So
the difficulty remains unsolved.

As the shares of the six wintering partners of the New Com-
pany became vacant, they were to go to the joint concern. The
share of the late firm of Leith, Jamison and Company was to hold
until the end of the first outfit, when it should go to the partners
of the New Company who should agree to purchase it.

The New Company was to have one-quarter of the commis-
sions and advantages accruing after the deduction of the actual
running expenses of the joint concern. Its agents were to im-
port one-fourth of the goods of the joint concern from its cor-
respondents in London, and these should receive one-fourth of
the exports, the risks, however, being on the joint concern. The
same proportion was to obtain in the tobacco ordered from the
United States.

The New Company was not to be responsible for Simon Me-
Tavish’s venture to Hudson Bay; but in case Dunean McGilli-
vray should sueceed in his negotiations with the Hudson’s Bay
Company for a complete transit of goods and returns by way of
Hudson Bay, it should bear one-fourth of the expense, and it
might arrange with the Old Company for more than one-fourth
of the business in case an arrangement for full participation in,
or complete purchase of, the rights of the Hudson’s Bay Com-

* Masson Papers, No. 2368. McGill University.
86 The North West Company

pany should be effected. Nothing apparently resulted from these
suggested negotiations.

The two agents appointed by the New Company were Thomas
Thain and John Ogilvie, who were to hold their positions for five
years. One of these was to go annually to the general meeting.
They were to be employed in whatever department of the joint
concern was found advisable. The advances of money on the
part of the Old Company were to be by McTavish, Frobisher and
Company; on behalf of the New Company by Forsyth, Richard-
son and Company.

Goods and debts in the interior were to be inventoried at Old
Company valuation. The forts, buildings, and vessels on lakes
Superior, Huron, and Erie, comprehending three-eighths of the
schooner ‘‘Nancy,’’ were to be valued later. Goods were to be
forwarded from Kingston and Niagara jointly. At Sandwich.
Angus McIntosh, the Old Company agent, was to continue, but
the New Company was to furnish its share of the provisions.

No business except the fur trade and the fisheries below Que-
bee, then leased by the Old Company, was to be carried on with-
out the consent of the New Company. The penalty named in the
agreement of July 5, 1802, should apply to any partner trading
or supplying goods for trade in the Northwest, but not in the ter-
ritory drained by the Mississippi River or in the region south of
Lake Superior, reckoning from the mouth of the St. Louis River.

Unless distinctly stated to the contrary, the articles of July
5, 1802, a copy of which was attached to the new agreement, were
to hold.7°

As a result of the coalition, scenes of violence decreased in
number, and less liquor was sold. The clerks and the employees
alone suffered. Their salaries, which had been raised twenty-
five per cent during the competition, were restored to their form-
er very modest size.

™ Masson, Bourgeois, II, 482-499.
The X Y Company 87

In regard to the relative importance of the two companies,
Milnes reported in 1802 that the capital of the New North West
Company was equal to that of its rival. He also stated that the
former employed about one-third as many men as the Old North
West Company, and enclosed a statement by MeTavish, Frobisher
and Company of the posts and men of the company they repre-
sented. Various figures as to the amount of furs were also en-
closed.”

According to this statement, the Old North West Company
possessed, exclusive of the King’s Posts, one hundred and seven-
teen trading posts in various parts of the country, at which they
employed regularly one thousand and fifty-eight men.** Of these,
ninety-five were employed in the United States territory south of
Lake Superior and including Grand Portage, seventy-six on the
waters that drain into the St. Lawrence from the north side of
Lake Superior to the St. Maurice, six hundred and thirty on the
waters draining into Hudson Bay, and two hundred and fifty-
seven on the waters emptying into the Arctic Ocean by Macken-
zie River. Besides these, there were from eighty to one hundred
free Canadians and Iroquois who held contracts with the North
West Company. The company annually employed on the Otta-
wa five hundred and forty men, of whom four hundred went to
the rendezvous on Lake Superior and brought back the furs. It
had one post at St. Marys, three at Michipicoton, one at Kaminis-
tikwia, two at Grand Portage, two at Mille Laes, three at Pic, two
at Lake Nipigon, seven in Nipigon District, six at Rainy Lake,
ten on the Red and Assiniboine rivers, seven at Lake Winnipeg,
seven at Fort Dauphin, nine on the Saskatchewan River, nine on

7 Milnes to Hobart, Quebee, October 30, 1802, Q, 89, pp. 14+ et seq.
Other copies in B. T. 1, vol. 20, No. 3, and B.T. 1, vol. 21, No. 2, printed in
Can. Arch. Report, 1892, pp. 136-144.

% In connection with these estimates, it may be well to consider the charge
made by Selkirk that the North West Company in this rivalry hired many

more men than they had ever employed before and that they paid retaining
pensions to retired voyageurs (Selkirk, Sketch of the Fur Trade, 63).
88 The North West Company

Churchill River, eighteen in Athabasca, three on the Upper
Athabasca River, twelve on the south side of Lake Superior and
at Fond du Lae, four on the Ottawa River, three on the St. Mau-
rice, two at Moose River and Hudson Bay, and six at Temiskam-
ing.*8

The duties on the furs exported from Quebec to England for
the nine years from 1793 to 1801, reckoned on the Consolidation
Act of 27 George III, were £16,071 15s. 4d. Additional imports
would bring this up to £22,051 15s. 4d. The value of the furs
exported in 1801 from Quebec, according to the average prices at
which they sold in London, was £371,139 11s. 4d.

John Richardson of the firm of Forsyth, Richardson and Com-
pany, writing in 1802, estimated that there were from twelve hun-
dred to fourteen hundred men from Canada who wintered in the
British territory in the interior, where the question of jurisdic-
tion applied. Of these he estimated that the Old Company had
about two-thirds, and the New Company about one-third.**

A report of the Northwest population in 1805 by Alexander
Henry listed ten hundred and ninety men, three hundred and
sixty-eight women, and five hundred and sixty-nine children, ap-
parently for the North West Company. The list includes Atha-
basca, Athabasca River, English River, Rat River, Fort des Prai-
ries, Fort Dauphin, upper Red River, lower Red River, Lake Win-
nipeg, Lac la Pluie, Nipigon, Kaministikwia, Mille Laces, Lac des
Chiens, and Pic. There were also five hundred and twenty men,
thirty-seven women, and thirty-one children of ‘‘A M K Co. Men
& Co.’’ This is evidently the X Y Company. The Indian popu-
lation of the same regions is given as seven thousand five hundred

™ An incomplete list found among Roderick MecKenzie’s papers was pub-
lished by Masson. It lists fourteen partners and proprietors, and ninety-six
clerks, ete. The wages and equipments of the latter amount to 97,770 (the
ee is not given) in Grand Portage currency (Masson, Bourgeois,

“Richardson to Ryland, Montreal, October 21, 1802, Q, 293, pp. 230 et
seq., printed in Can. Arch. Report, 1892, pp. 144-146.
The X Y Company 89

and two men, sixteen thousand nine hundred and ninety-five
women, and fifty-two thousand eight hundred and seventy-one
children.*®

The X Y Company appear to have competed with the North
West Company rather widely in the interior. Details are scanty,
however. Wentzel speaks of the diminution of returns from the
natives of Mackenzie River from the winter of 1799 onward, part-
ly because of the X Y competition and partly because of the
death of many natives.’* James McKenzie records the opposition
of the X Y Company at Fort Chipewean in 1800. At least one
of their men went up Peace River, but how far and with what
success does not appear.“’ It has been stated that there was a
well-equipped X Y fort on the north bank of the Peace River op-
posite the Smoky River.** McDonald of Garth records the pres-
ence of X Y traders on the North Saskatchewan as far up as Fort
Augustus,”® and also the death of King at the hands of La Mothe
of the X Y Company in 1801.°° He speaks of the opposition of
the Hudson’s Bay Company in the same territory and also on the
South Saskatchewan, but makes no mention of X Y traders on
the latter river.8t In a letter dated at Fort Augustus, October
15, 1800, McDonald and D. McGillivray said that the X Y Com-
pany had gone to Athabasca®? with six canoes and seventy pieces
of goods by way of the Pembina River. Charles Mackenzie refers
to the opponents in trade of the North West Company on the As-
siniboine in the fall of 1804.8 There were X Y men among these,

™ Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, I, 282.

7 Masson, Bourgeois, I, 95.

™ Tbid., II, 389-399.

7 Mair and Macfarlane, Through the Mackenzie Basin, 88.

” Now Edmonton.

Masson, Bourgeois, II, 22-26, 35. Selkirk gives further details (Sel-
kirk, Sketch of the Fur Trade, 88-91).

% Masson, Bourgeois, II, 25, 31. ;

* Journal of Norman McLeod 1800 at Alexandria, Masson Papers in
McGill University.

53 Masson, Bourgeois, I, 327.
90 The North West Company

no doubt, although the fact is not specifically stated. Alexander
Henry refers to an X Y brigade’s going up the Assiniboine on
August 20, 1800.84 Harmon writes on June 2, 1803, that the X Y
people are building a fort five miles up the river® from Alexan-
dria.8° The same author records, February 22, 1804, that he is to
winter at Lac La Péche, two days’ journey west of Alexandria, in
opposition to the X Y Company.®’ He also records, on October
26, 1804, that the North West and X Y companies have forts on
River Qu’Appelle,** and on May 27, 1805, that the North West.
Hudson’s Bay, and X Y companies have each an establishment at
Souris River, about fifty miles from Montagne a la Basse.** Mal-
hiot, who built a fort and wintered at Lac au Flambeau, south of
Lake Superior, in 1804-1805, sending men to trade on the Wiscon-
sin River, had to face the opposition of the X Y Company as well
as of the Michilimackinac traders.°° Cameron mentions the pres-
ence of X Y traders at Red Lake in the Nipigon Department in
October, 1804.°: Selkirk speaks of an X Y post at the Pic in
1803.°? The X Y Company had a fort at Grand Portage, and
Henry records that they continued to take their furs there when
the North West Company removed to the mouth of the Kaminis-
tikwia,®? but there was an X Y house one mile above the North
West Company’s rendezvous in 1804.°* Henry several times men-
tions X Y traders and posts on Red River, at Scratching, Pem-
bina, and Salt rivers in the years 1801 to 1804.°° The presidential

* Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, I, 48.

* Assiniboine.

‘° Harmon, Journal, reprint 1903, p. 75.

‘Tbid., 80.

* Tbid., 100.

“Should be Montagne 4 la Bosse (Harmon, Journal, 107).
" Masson, Bourgeois, I, 228, 229, 231, 249, 258, ete.

" Tbhid., II, 294-295.

” Selkirk, Sketch of the Fur Trade, 48.

“ Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, I, 218.

* Tbid., 217, note 19.

" [bid., 187, 188, 193, 195, 214, 225, 231, 239, 242, 245, 251, ete.
The X Y Company 91

message to Congress of February 19, 1806, reporting explorations
by Lewis and Clark, Sibley, and Dunbar, speaks of trade on the
Assiniboine and Red rivers of the X Y and other companies.

The keenness of the opposition is shown by the quantity of
liquor used. It was estimated that in 1800 there were consumed
ten thousand and ninety-eight gallons. In 1803 the North West
Company used sixteen thousand two hundred and ninety-nine
gallons, and the traders opposing them used five thousand gal-
lons,—in all twenty-one thousand two hundred and ninety-nine
gallons. The average consumption in the years 1806 to 1810 in-
clusive was ninety-seven hundred gallons.*®

 

 

* Qriain and Progress, pp. 9-10. The author wrote in the interest of the
North West Company.
CHAPTER V
FURTHER ADVANCE WESTWARD

Much of our knowledge of the exploration accomplished in
the Northwest during the closing years of the eighteenth and the
opening years of the nineteenth century is based upon the jour-
nals of David Thompson, Daniel Williams Harmon, Alexander
Henry the younger, and similar men. The first-named left the
service of the Hudson’s Bay Company at Bradford House on
Deer’s Lake in 1797,1 when it was intimated to him that explor-
ation and survey were not the services expected of him. Travel-
ing down to Grand Portage, which he reached July 22, 1797,? he
was enrolled in the service of the North West Company. He re-
ceived directions to determine the location of their posts, to locate
the forty-ninth parallel of latitude, to go as far as the Missouri
and visit the ancient villages of the agricultural nations that
dwelt there, to inquire for the fossils of large animals, and to
search for any monuments which might throw light on the ancient
state of the countries traveled over and examined. He received
orders on all the agents and trading posts of the company for
men and whatever else he required.*

Thompson left Grand Portage in the brigade under Hugh Me-
Gillis on August 9, 1797.4 He went along the regular route from
Grand Portage to Lake Winnipeg, passing the establishments on

*The entry in his Journals reads as follows: “May 23, Tuesday. This
Day I left the service of the Hudson’s Bay Company and entered that of
the Company of Merchants from Canada. May God Almighty prosper me”
(Thompson, Journals, vol. III, A, Book V, 1, Ontario Archives. These are
typed copies).

* Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 530.

* Lindsey, Report on the Boundaries of Ontario, 236-237. Lindsey makes
the error of stating that the 49th parallel had been the boundary to the
Rocky Mountains since the Treaty of 1792.

“Thompson, Journals, vol. III, A, book V, 25. Lindsey says 1796

(Boundaries of Ontario, 229). Burpee repeats the errror (Search for the
Western Sea, 531).
Further Advance Westward 93

Rainy River and at the mouth of Winnipeg River.’ The latter
was an important depot for provisions, which were brought in
from the bison countries that surround the Red and Saskatche-
wan rivers, and were distributed to the canoes and boats on their
way to the several wintering places on Lake Winnipeg. From
here Thompson went up Dauphin River, portaged to Lake Win-
nipegoosis, and ascended Swan River to Swan River House. Leav-
ing here September 26, he went to the Stone Indian’ River, where
there were several posts, the upper one being in charge of Cuth-
bert Grant. Thence he went to the post in charge of Belleau, be-
tween Swan River and the Assiniboine. From here he returned
to the upper trading house, and proceeded to the post which
Thornburn commanded.® His course was now down the Assini-
boine to the post under John McDonnell. Having written up his
journals and surveys, he left for the Mandan villages on the Mis-
souri, November 28, 1797. His guide and interpreter, René Jus-
somme,’ had resided in those villages for eight years and Hugh
McCraken, another member of the party, had been to the villages
many times and had resided there for weeks and months at a
time. There were in the party seven more French-Canadians,
who on this occasion were free traders, outfitted by McDonnell.
On December 7 they were at Ash House on Souris River, and
twenty-two days later they struck the Missouri River six miles
above the Mandan villages, having been compelled to go about a
hundred miles out of the direct line.1° The party remained here
until January 10, Thompson being unable to persuade the Man-
dans to hunt beaver and go to the posts on the Assiniboine to

° Lindsey, Bounduries of Ontario, 230.
° Ibid., 231.
* Assiniboine.

‘Lindsey, Boundaries of Ontario, 233. Thompson’s record until Novem-
ber 9 may be found in Journals, vol. III, A, book V, 25-57.

° Jussaume.
* Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 354.
94 The North West Company

trade.1! On the return trip the party reached McDonnell’s House
on February 3.12. On the twenty-sixth of that month Thompson
left for the sources of the Mississippi.1? He reached Red River on
March 7 and followed it towards its souree.* On March 14 he ar-
rived at the post under Charles Chaboillez, which he found to be
slightly south of the forty-ninth parallel. There were Hudson’s
Bay Company traders here at the time.’ Leaving this post on
March 21, he reached the post under Baptiste Cadotte four days
later. This was still farther up Red River, in latitude 47° 54’ 21”
and longitude 96° 16’, according to Thompson’s observations.'®
Apparently it was the most southerly post of the North West Com-
pany in this region. From here he went to Red Lake, where the
North West Company maintained an occasional winter post, and
then to the head waters of the Mississippi, making Turtle Lake its
source.’7 He next visited Red Cedar Lake post, which was in
charge of John Sayer, partner, went down the river, and turned
up Sand Lake River to Sand Lake post, which was under Boiské.'®
From here he crossed to St. Louis River through a difficult piece
of country. This was the route of the North West Company for
their trade between Lake Superior and the Mississippi.!® Thomp-
son’s route then lay down St. Louis River to Lake Superior,
which he reached in May, 1798. Near the mouth of this river
was a post under Lemoine. Its estimated furs for the year would
be one thousand pounds, of which he had obtained six hundred.
Thompson, on this trip, had made the first careful survey”? of the

“Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 356-357.

¥ Tbid., 358.

8 Tbid., 532,

“Lindsey, Boundaries of Ontario, 236.

*Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, I, 79, note 2.

* Lindsey, Boundaries of Ontario, 239.

“TIbid., 240.

*Tbid., 241.

* Ibid., 243.

* These posts are located on Thompson’s large manuscript map in the
Ontario Archives. The second manuscript map, in a folio atlas by John
Further Advance Westward 95

upper waters of the Mississippi. He had already left the first de-
tailed account extant of an overland expedition from the Assini-
boine to the Missouri since the British conquest of Canada.

Thompson now surveyed part of the south shore of Lake Su-
perior, reached Sault Ste. Marie, and took canoe to Grand Por-
tage, arriving on June 7.24. Seven days later he started back for
the country north of the Saskatchewan. He went by way of
Churchill River and Ile 4 la Crosse Lake to Beaver River, contin-
ued up Green River past a North West Company post at Green
Lake.?? and crossed overland to Fort George on the Saskatche-
wan.?> Turning north by Beaver River, he built a fort at Lac La
Biche and wintered.** In the spring of 1799 he went to Fort Au-
eustus on the North Saskatchewan. Then, after exploring Pem-
bina River, he visited Lesser Slave Lake, and, descending Athabas-
ca River and crossing Methye Portage, reached Ile a la Crosse
Fort. Here he was married on June 10.2° In the summer he was
at Grand Portage. In September he was back once more at Fort
George, where he remained until March, 1800. Then he went to
Fort Augustus and to Rocky Mountain House, the latter being the
uppermost permanent post on the Saskatchewan. It was on the
north bank, a mile above the mouth of the Clearwater.2* From
Dutton, 1814, locates the Worth West Company posts on Red Cedar Lake,
on Leech Lake, and on the west bank of the Mississippi opposite Meadow
River. It locates a “Trader's Ho.” on Elk River east of the Mississippi
(Add. 27368).

** Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 533.

“Pond’s map, as copied by Stiles in 1790, shows a post here (ef. Cana-
dian Archives copy).

* Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 533.

** Thompson’s account of his route from Beaver River via Fort George to
Lae La Biche, which he calls Red Deer’s Lake, can be read in Thompson’s
Journals, book VI, 7114-91.

* Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 534-535.

*“Tbid., 535. The date of the erection of this post is dubious. McDonald
of Garth says that he built it in 1802. He had previously spoken of Thomp-
son's presence in the department (Masson, Bourgeois, II, 26-27). The name
Rocky Mountain House was used by Thompson in 1800 (Thompson, Jour-
nals, vol. III, A, book VII, ¢. 1). The name was applied at various times to
96 The North West Company

here he sent four men down the Red Deer River from its upper
waters to the South Saskatchewan. They were the first white men
over a large portion of this route.27_ On October 5 he left Rocky
Mountain House for a trip to the foot of the Rocky Mountains,
where he met the Kootenay Indians in the region of the upper
Red Deer River.?® On November 17 he went on another trip to
the upper Bow River, going as far as the Gap.?® Thompson states
that Dunean McGillivray made a trip westward this summer to
the source of the North Saskatchewan through Howse Pass, going
as far as a stream running westward. As Tyrell has pointed out,
this shows that McGillivray, not Thompson. was the discoverer of
Howse Pass.*° Thompson wintered at Rocky Mountain House,
and the following June made another trip into the mountains to
a point in latitude 51° 57’ 24”, longitude 116° 27’ 54”.
Thompson’s journals are missing from the autumn of 1801 to
the autumn of 1802.32 In November, 1802, he was at Lesser
Slave Lake, where he observed the position of the North West
Company’s post at the west end of the lake. Early in the vear
1803 he arrived at Fort of the Forks on Peace River, five miles

four other posts in different parts of the country (Masson, Bourgeois, II, 26,
n. 2).

** Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 536.
* Ibid., 536.

” Tbid., 536-537.

* Tohid., 537.

* Tbid., 537-538. Alexander Mackenzie was probably referring to some
of this exploration when he stated to Lord Hobart that two attempts had
been made by partners in the old fur company to penetrate to the Columbia
River south of his route. Both attempts failed; the first on account of ill-
ness of the leader, and the second because of a mutiny of the men. He
speaks of an astronomer’s being with them. This was probably Thompson
(Mackenzie to Sullivan, Montreal, October 25, 1802, Q, 293, p. 225, printed
in Can. Arch Report, 1892, pp. 150-151).

* Pelly, writing to Huskisson in 1825, stated that Thompson crossed the
mountains in 1802, at which time Pelly understood that he was “in one of
the tributary streams of the Columbia” (Pelly to Huskisson, July 25, 1826,
C. 0. 6, vol. 6). Pelly’s statement may or may not be fact. He was not ex-
actly telling truth when he stated earlier in the same communication that the
North West Company had posts on the Columbia in 1806. Those posts were
Further Advance Westward 97

above the mouth of Smoky River, where he remained until March
15, 1804. He then went down the Peace River past Horse Shoe
House to Athabasca House. From this post he continued past
Pond’s old fort and Tle 4 la Crosse Fort to the New Fort on Lake
Superior, whither the headquarters of the North West Company
had been moved from Grand Portage since Thompson was last at
a general meeting.** In June he followed the new route through
Lae Mille Laces and Lac La Croix to the connection with the old
line by way of Rainy Lake, Lake of the Woods, and Winnipeg
River. On September 9 he was at Cumberland House. Until
June, 1806, he was traveling in the country between the Sas-
katchewan and the Churchill, east of Cumberland House and
Frog Portage. During this period he was mapping routes and
establishing new posts.** At first glance this activity, which
threatened the Hudson’s Bay Company’s trade, might seem to be
a result of the union of the North West and X Y companies in

on Fraser River, for Pelly cites Harmon. Later in this communication he
states: ‘In 1803, when Mr. Duncan McGillivray who died in 1807 set out
on an Expedition with David Thompson from the North West Company’s
Post in Saskatchewan River to Cross the Rocky Mountains to explore the
Country and with a view to establish trading Posts Mr. McGillivray was
taken ill and obliged to remain behind. Mr. Thompson proceeded with the
Expedition crossed the upper part of the Columbia and called the first great
river he reached MeGillivray’s, the next after himself. McGillivray &
Thompson were both Partners in the North West Company. They
traded with the natives but formed no Establishment at _ that
time.” These statements must be received cautiously. In a letter
dated May 9, 1845, Thompson states: “In 1801 the North West Company
determined to extend their Fur Trade to the west side of the Rocky Moun-
tains, and if possible to the Pacific Ocean; this expedition was intrusted
to me, and I crossed the Mountains to the headwaters of McGillivray’s
River; but an overwhelming force of the eastern Indians obliged me to
retreat a most desperate retreat of six days for they dreaded the western
Indians being furnished with Arms and Ammunition” (quoted by F. W.
Howay in Rev. Hist. Publ. relating to Canada, XIX, 146, from Report of
Prov. Arch. Dep. of British Columbia). Howay states that this is a new
item of information, and remarks on the gap in Thompson’s journals from
September, 1801, to November, 1802. If the date as quoted is correct, the
item is of much interest. On the other hand, the events sound somewhat
like those of 1810 and 1811.

* Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 538.
* Ibid., 539.
98 The North West Company

November, 1804. But Thompson probably received his orders at
the general meeting preceding the amalgamation, which would in-
dicate that it was really part of the activity resulting from the
reorganization of 1802. In this connection it may be noted that
Thompson had been in the outlying trade region of the Peace
River in 1803, and was later to go to new trade regions beyond
the Rockies. It would be interesting to know what relation there
existed between Thompson’s activity of 1804-1806 and the inva-
sion of the Hudson Bay trade, undertaken by Simon McTavish,
which had resulted in the founding of the Charlton Island and
Moose River posts.

On June 14, 1806, Thompson set out from Cumberland House
for Fort William. On September 11 Harmon met him at Cum-
berland House on his way to Fort des Prairies.** One month
later he was at Rocky Mountain House, where Jules Quesnel was
now in charge,** and on May 10, 1807, he left this post to cross the
mountains. On June 22 he was at the summit, and soon came to
Blaeberry River.*’ He reached the Columbia on June 30 and pad-
dled upstream to Windemere Lake. Building Fort Kootenay ou
the west side of the river a mile below the lake, he wintered
there.** In April, 1808, he crossed the portage from Upper Co-
lumbia Lake to the Kootenay River, which he descended to Koo-
tenay Lake, following the Moyie River on his return. He was
back at his fort on June 5, and then went to Rainy Lake House
with his furs, arriving on August 2.2° On October 31 he was back
on the Columbia River. Sending Finan McDonald to build a fort
at Kootenay Falls, he went on and wintered at Kootenay Fort.*°

 

* Harmon, Journal, 122.

* Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 539.
* Tbhid., 540-541.

8 Tbid., 541-542,

*° As was the case with Athabasca, this region beyond the Rockies was so
distant that there was not time to make the journey to Lake Superior and
back. Thus returns were delivered and outfits received at Rainy Lake.

* Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 543.
Further Advance Westward 99

In April, 1809, he crossed the mountains with forty packs of furs,
and was at Fort Augustus by June 24. On his return he met Mr.
Howse of the North West Company, who had been exploring in
the mountains.** Crossing the mountains, Thompson went up the
Columbia and down the Kootenay. He passed over the Cabinet
Range to Pend d’Oreille Lake and built Kullyspell House on its
eastern shore. He then explored the country around the lake.*?
In November he built Saleesh House near the mouth of Ashley
Creek, Montana, and wintered there.

In 1810 he went to Rainy Lake again. On his way east he
passed the ruins of Fort Augustus, which had been destroyed
by the Blackfeet since he last passed that way.*? The Piegans
were blocking Howse Pass* on his return, trying to prevent arms
and ammunition from reaching the Flatheads.** So he made his
way northward and crossed Athabasca Pass, after being in immi-
nent danger of starvation. On January 10, 1811, he crossed
the height of land. For scientific and practical purposes, Thomp-
son discovered Athabasca Pass on this trip, though a party of
freemen and Nipissing Indians had traversed it a few years
before.*®

Thompson then explored up the Columbia as far as he had
been before and continued to Spokane House, which seemingly
had been built by him, or by one of his assistants some time
before.*7 He descended the Spokane River to the Columbia;
and after going up to Kettle Falls, went down the Columbia.

“Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 543-544.

" Thid., 544-545.

8 Tbid., 545.

“This was the pass by which Thompson first crossed the Rockies. Dun-
can McGillivray, who named it after Jasper Howse of the North West Com-
pany, had ascended the North Saskatchewan to this pass in 1800 (Burpee,
Highways of the Fur Trade, Royal Society of Canada, Transactions, III, Ser.
3, sec. 2, p. 191).

* Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, II, 643.

“Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 546-549.

*" Tbid., 549-550.
100 The North West Company

As far as the mouth of the Snake River he was on new ground.
From here to the mouth of the Columbia he had been preceded by
Lewis and Clark in 1805. At Snake River, which he reached on
July 9, Thompson laid formal claim to the country for Great
Britain. He reached the mouth of the Columbia on July 15 or
July 16. Ross and Franchére give the former date, but Thomp-
son’s own account rather indicates the latter, as Tyrrell ob-
served.** Thompson found that he had been preceded by the
Astor party, which erected Fort Astoria for the Pacific Fur
Company. After remaining a few days, Thompson ascended the
river. He went up Snake River as far as lattitude 46° 36’ 13”,
longitude 118° 50’, and then crossed overland to Spokane House.
Descending Spokane River, he then ascended the Columbia
through the Arrow Lakes to Boat Encampment at the mouth of
Canoe River. He had now completed his survey of the Columbia,
an accomplishment which had taken him four and a quarter
years.*®

Thompson next crossed the mountains by Athabasca Pass, but
returned the following year. For the last time he went east from
Boat Encampment over the mountains in May, 1812. His survey
stops short on Beaver River. In August, 1812, he was at Fort Wil-
liam,®° and then he left the West. After settling at Terrebonne
he spent two years on his great map of the West, which is now in
the care of the Provincial Archivist at Toronto. Portions of it have
been copied for Coues’ edition of the Henry-Thompson Journals.
Thompson died at Longeuil, February 16, 1857, and was buried
in Mount Royal Cemetery at Montreal, his wife following him to
the grave about three months later.*?

‘Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 550-551.

“ Tbid., 551-553.

*° Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 554-555.

" Ibid., 555-556. Erroneous statements by H. H. Bancroft in regard to
Thompson’s activities on the Pacific slope (ef. his History of British Colum-
bia, 134, and his History of the North West Coast, II, 122), are pointed out
by Burpee (Search for the Western Sea, 556-559). But Burpee is certainly
Further Advance Westward 101

Thompson’s map is of good size, its dimensions being 10’ 314”
x 6’ 6”. It is entitled:

Map of the North West Territory of the Province of Canada from ae-
tual survey during the years 1792 to 1812. This Map was made for the
North West Company in 1813 and 1814 and delivered to the Honorable Wil-
liam McGillivray, their agent. Embraces the Region lying between 45 and
60 Degrees North Latitude and 84 and 124 degrees West Longitude com-
prising the Discovery and Survey of the Oregon Territory, to the Pacific
Ocean, the Survey of the Athabasca Lake, Slave River and Lake, from which
flow Mackenzie’s River to the Arctic Sea by Mr. Philip Turner, the Route of
Sir Alexander Mackenzie in 1792 down part of Fraser’s River together with
the Survey of this River to the Pacific Ocean by the late John Stuart of the
North West Company, by David Thompson, Astronomer & Surveyor.

David Thompson.

The error in the date of Mackenzie’s presence on Fraser River
will be noticed. Turner was in the service of the Hudson’s Bay
Company as astronomer and surveyor. His work was done in
1790-1792. A copy of his map is in the Kohl Collection of the
Library of Congress and has been reproduced by Burpee.*? Tur-
ner had the support of the Colonial Office in his work.**

Thompson’s map locates seventy-eight posts of the North
West Company.** The title of the map covers the space between

in error when he states, on page 559, that David Stuart left Astoria in July,
1811, under instructions from Thompson to explore the Okanagan. David
Stuart was a partner in the Pacific Fur Company and was not likely to be
taking orders from a partner of the North West Company. For exploration
up the Okanagan and to the Thompson River, consult Irving, Astoria (N.Y.,
1855 ed.), 105, 118, 351, 4384; Ross, Adventures of the First Settlers,
145-151.

5% Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 170.

33 Masson, Esquisse, 54.

% At Falls of St. Maries; Mishipicoton (south side of the mouth) ; north
side of Peak River [Pic River]; Fort William; [Fond du Lac]; up Mon-
treal River, lat. 46°, long. 90° 10’ circa; at bottom of the bay southeast of
Pt. Keewenaw; west side of Sand Lake; east side of Leach Lake; west
side of Red Cedar Lake; southwest corner of Red Lake; on Red Lake River;
south side of mouth of Pembina Brook; in forks of Rat Brook and Red
River, lat. 49° circa; east of Meadow Portage in lat. 48°54”, long. 90° 8’
circa; southwest corner of Rainy Lake; southeast of Isle Portage on north-
east side of the river in lat. 50° 5”, long. 94° 30’ circa; south side mouth of
[Winnipeg River]; south of Dauphin’s Lake on west side of river; south
102 The North West Company

Lake Superior and Winnipeg River and Hudson Bay. There
are no North West Company posts marked on the Missouri River

side of Swan Lake; west side Cedar Lake; north side Cross Lake in lat.
54° 40’, long. 97° 55’ circa; northwest side of a lake in lat. 55° 30’, long.
97° 55’ circa; north side of the mouth of a river from Burnt Wood Lake to
a lake eastward on Wood River in 55° 44’, long. 98°55’ irca; east side
Indian Lake in lat. 56° 55’, long. 99° 10’ circa; south side of a lake in lat.
56° 10’, long. 100° 25’ circa; south side of Pine Island Lake in lat. 54°,
long. 102° 15’ circa; on north side of a small lake in a river in lat. 54° 40’,
long. 101° 24’ circa; east side of Pelican Lake in lat. 55°10’, long. 103°
circa; west side of the mouth of river draining Lac la Ronge; southwest
corner of Lae la Ronge; east side of Lae Ja Ronge; east side of water
in lat. 55° 40’, long. 105° 35’ circa; south side of Snake Lake in lat. 55° 38’,
long. 106° 45’ circa; west side of Lake Isle a la Crosse; between fork of
Lesser Athabasca River and another river in lat. 56° 45’, long. 118° 30’;
east side of lower point of the southwestern bay of Rein Deer Lake in lat.
56° 20’, long. 103° 15’ circa; northwest corner of Rein Deer Lake south of
the mouth of the river connecting it with Manito Lake to the north; at
outlet of Lake Athabasca; north bank of Peace River near Grand Marais;
north bank of Peace River in long. 114° 55’ circa; north bank of Peace
River near Fort Liard in long. 116° 20’ circa; Fort du Tremble on west
bank of Peace River in long. 116° 40’ circa; Fort Vermillion on north bank
of Peace River in long. 117° 2’ circa; on east bank of Peace River in lat.
57° 6’, long. 117° 30’ circa; Old Fort on west bank of Peace River in lat.
56° 40’; long. 117° 5’; on west side of Peace River in lat. 56° 5’, long.
117° 10’; south side of Peace River in lat. 56°10’, long. 120° 40’ circa;
west bank Fraser’s River in lat. 54° circa marked “The place of Mr. Simon
Fraser’s & Party’s departure”; near mouth of Columbia River; on Skeetsho
River in lat. 47° 50’, long. 117° 50’ circa; east side Kullyspell Lake in lat.
48° 15’, long. 116° 15’ circa; west side McGillivray’s River in lat. 48° 45’,
long. 116° 2’ circa; west side of Columbia River and small lake [Winder-
mere Lake]; east side mouth of Canoe River [later Boat Encampment];
Pine Fort on north side of [Assiniboine River]; north side of [Assiniboine]
River just west of the mouth of Mouse Rivulet; on south side of Calling
Rivulet [Qu’Appelle] in lat. 50° 30’, long. 101° 56’ circa; on east side of
river in lat. 51° 30’, long. 101° 58’ cirea; Alexandria on west side of the
river in lat. 51° 45’, long. 102° 30’ circa; on north side of Red Deer’s Rivu-
let (which runs into Winnipegoos Lake) in lat. 52° 55’, long. 102° 15’ circa;
on north side of the same in lat. 53°, long. 101° 30’ circa; south side of Sas-
katchewan River in lat. 53° 15’, long. 103° 55’ circa; north side of Saskat-
chewan River west of a river from the north in lat. 53° 10’, long. 105° 56’;
south side of Saskatchewan River north of the mouth of Battle River; Fort
George on north side of Saskatchewan River in lat. 54°50’, long. 111°1’
circa; Fort Augustus on north side of Saskatchewan River south of the
mouth of Sturgeon Rivulet in lat. 53° 45’, long. 113° 5’ circa; north side of
Saskatchewan River in lat. 53° 25’, long. 114° 2’ circa; on north side of
Saskatchewan River in lat. 53°10’, long. 114° 45’ circa; northwest side of
Saskatchewan River across and above the mouth of Clear Water River; on
northeast side of Green Lake in lat. 54° 15’, long. 107° 40’ circa; on north
side of Beaver River in lat. 54° 25’, long. 109° 30’ circa; on east side of
Red Deer’s Lake (Beaver Lake is east of this) in lat. 54° 50’, long. 111° 50’
Further Advance Westward 103

or on Mouse Rivulet.°> At the mouth of Fraser River is the
legend: ‘‘Mr. Fraser and Party returned from the Sortie of the
River.’’? This looks as if Thompson thought that Fraser actually
got to open water, and he delineates the lower waters of the
Fraser accordingly.

There are five large manuscript maps by Thompson in the
British Museum.*® Each is about four feet in width and over
ten feet long. The first one®” covers latitude 51° to 53° 50’ and
longitude 110° 10’ to 126°, but has map work only between lon-
gitudes 114° and 123° 25’. It lacks detail in the portions north
of latitude 52° and east of longitude 115° and in the portion
north of latitude 53° and east of 116° 50’. It gives detail be-
tween longitudes 115° 48’ and 117° 5’ south of latitude 53° 6’,
which the Coues and Burpee prints®® lack. It has fewer names of
the small rivers. The second map*® is between latitudes 48° and
51° and longitudes 110° and 126° It is blank east of 112° 10” and
also north of latitude 49° and east of longitude 114°. It gives de-
tail west of longitude 124°, which the Coues and Burpee prints
lack, but leaves out many small data, particularly the inscription
at the mouth of the Fraser River. It locates posts on Kullyspell,
McGillivray’s, and Windermere lakes. The latter post, however,
is on the east side of the Columbia. The third map® shows the
district between latitudes 45° and 48° and between longitudes 110°
and126°. It is blank north of latitude 47° 50’ and east of longitude
circa; on east side of Buffalo Lake west of Slave Lake) in lat. 55° 35’, long.
116° 4’ circa; on east end of Slave Lake south of a river in lat. 55° 10’,
long. 114° 52’ circa; on west side of river in lat. 54° 45’, long. 114° 15’ circa ;

on south side of river in lat. 54° 8’, long. 115° 30’ circa; on east side of
river in lat. 52° 58’, long. 117° 50’ circa.

5 Souris River.

% They are listed as Add. 27363, A-E, and are marked as purchased of
Bohn in 1866.

Add. 27363, A.

T.e., from the Ontario Archives manuseript map.

5 Add. 27363, B.

“Tbid., C.
104 The North West Company

113° 5’. It has much detail in the rivers and their tributaries.
It locates Spokane House on the Skeetsho River, a ‘‘N. W. Ho.”’
in longitude circa 115° 25’ on Saleesh River, and Astoria. The
third map" covers the area between latitudes 41° and 45° and
longitudes 116° and 126°. A-good knowledge of the country is
shown between longitudes 109° and 114°, possibly even to 115°, as
far south as latitude 41°. There is also apparently good knowl-
edge between longitudes 122° 40’ and 124° 20’, as far south as
latitude 41°. The Wilarmut or Wilarbut—both names appear—
is marked as flowing from south of latitude 41°. Some of its trib-
utaries are traced almost to latitude 41°. The map marks Reid’s
Fort, on the Kamoenim River, where Reid and his men were
massacred by the Snake Indians in 1813-1814. It also marks
“‘Henry’s Fort built Canoes.’’ The fourth map® is of lexs
interest. It delineates Lake Superior, marking Fort William
and Grand Portage, and is signed ‘‘ David Thompson, Astronomer
and Surveyor under the 6th and 7th Articles of the Treaty of
Ghent.’’ The other maps are signed by Thompson, but say
nothing of such official position.

The year after Thompson entered the service of the North
West Company, Roderick McKenzie rediscovered the route to
the Northwest by way of the Kaministikwia River and Dog Lake.
This route had been traversed by traders during the French
period ;** but from the time that La Vérendrye had followed the

™ Add. 27363, D.

=Ibid., E.

Masson, Bourgeois, I, 46; Mackenzie, Voyages, viii. Burpee calls at-
tention to Mackenzie’s mention of the route and to the indication of the
route on Pond’s map which he dates in 1789. He suggests that the reason
for the apparent ignorance of the North West Company may be found in
the fact that both Alexander Mackenzie and Peter Pond were members of
the X Y Company, which was not absorbed by the North West Company
until 1804 (Burpee, “Canoe Routes from Lake Superior to the Westward,”
in Geographical Journal, August, 1910, p. 201). The first edition of Mac-
kenzie’s work appeared in 1801, three years after the rediscovery of the
route in 1798 when Mackenzie was still a partner in the North West Com-
pany, as he had been since 1787, and there is no evidence extant of his being
Further Advance Westward 105

Grand Portage route, the more southerly course was adopted, and
the Kaministikwia route was presently forgotten. There is no
record of an English trader’s having up to this time traversed
it. It has been already stated that Umfreville had in 1784 ex-
plored a route by way of Lake Nipigon and Lac Seul to Winni-
peg River. The route being difficult and the posts to the south-
ward being retained by the British, the traders continued to go
by way of Grand Portage. Since the surrender of the posts in
1796, the question of a more northerly route which did not trav-
erse United States territory was again of interest. In the spring
of 1798, while returning from a visit to Canada, Roderick McKen-
zie learned from the Indians at the Height of Land of the Kami-
nistikwia route. He obtained a guide and traced the route from
Lac La Croix to Kaministikwia, whence he proceeded to Grand
Portage.** On June 22 of the following year, Simon McTavish
wrote to McKenzie stating that if the company’s application for
a grant were successful, the place of rendezvous on Lake Supe-
rior would be promptly changed.** Thompson states that in the
summer of 1800, a United States collector landed®* and informed
the British fur traders that he would levy duties on all the
merchandise and furs that should be brought into the bay or
across the portage. The traders therefore, after surveying the
Kaministikwia route, moved in 1802.%° McKenzie says that
Kaministikwia became the headquarters in 1801,*°* though the

a member of the X Y Company until he returned from England in 1802.
Pond was not a member of the X Y Company. He had sold his share in the
North West Company in 1790 and retired to the United States, several
years before this Company was organized. Moreover, an examination of the
Public Record Office original (C. O. 42, vol. 47, p. 665) of the map to
which Burpee refers, would indicate that the route which Burpee considers
the Kaministikwia route, is in reality that by Grand Portage.

* Masson, Bourgeois, I, 46.

* Tbid., 47.

* At Grand Portage.

Quoted by Burpee, Highways of the Fur Trade, Royal Society of
Canada, Transactions, Ser. 3, VIII, sec. 2, p. 188.

% Masson, Bourgeois, I, 47.
106 The North West Company

date usually given is 1803. Apparently the movement began in
1801. Building went on in 1802 and 1803, as we see by Henry,
but was not expected to be completed until 1804, although the
fort proper was complete in 1803. It received the name of Fort
William in 1807, in honor of William McGillivray. Harmon
ealls it the New Fort in 1805.°

Alexander Henry the younger was another fur trader and
traveler of note. His journals for the years 1799-1814 have been
published by Coues, with many references to Thompson’s jour-
nals. This trader entered the North West Company in 1792.”
His journals commence abruptly in 1799 at Riviére Terre
Blanche, about thirty-five miles west-north-west of Portage la
Prairie, where he was building a trading post. He had come
here from Montreal by the Grand Portage route.) The following
year he went down to Grand Portage, whence he proceeded by
way of Lake Winnipeg and Red River to Park River in North
Dakota, where he built a post about a quarter of a mile up the
latter stream.7? On his way up Red River he passed the fort built
by Chaboillez in 1797 at the mouth of the Pembina River, and, on
the other side of Red River, the remains of an old fort built by
Peter Grant some years earlier.”®

In May, 1801, Henry abandoned Park River and built a post
lower down Red River, on the north side of the Pembina.** In

© Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, I, 219, note 22; 222. William MeGil-
livray directed the construction of the fort on the ground laid out by Colonel
Bruyeres of the Royal Engineers (Can. Arch. Report, 1897, p. 99).

™ Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, II, 452.

" Tbid., I, 1, note 1.

” Ibid., I, 6-123.

 Ibid., I, 80-81. Henry states that this was the first establishment ever
built on Red River. He no doubt means the upper Red River and may
mean North West Company establishment. Burpee states that, except for a
rumored fort of La Vérendrye, this was the earliest post on upper Red
River (Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 385). The map of Peter Pond,
as copied by Stiles in 1790, shows, however, a post on the east side of upper
Red River some distance south of the river draining Red Lake (Copy in
Canadian Archives),

™ Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, I, 181-188.
Further Advance Westward 107

1803 he went to the mouth of the Kaministikwia River. Since
his last visit the depot on Lake Superior had been moved here
from Grand Portage. Building was still going on, and he re-
cords the presence of two vessels, the ‘‘Invincible’’ and the
““Otter.’’7> Again in 1804 Henry made the trip from Pembina
to Lake Superior and returned.7* On New Year’s Day he heard
at his post of the union of the North West and X Y companies,
which had taken place on November 5. In 1805 he again went
to the rendezvous, and in 1806 he made a trip via the Assiniboine
and Souris rivers to the Missouri.”

On May 8, 1808, Henry left the Red River Department for the
Saskatchewan. He wintered at Fort Vermillion on the North Sas-
katchewan, having passed on his way thither the ruins of Fort
Montagne d’Aigle just below the Forks, an old establishment
named Fort Providence near the site of Prince Albert, and Hud-
son House of the Hudson’s Bay Company.** In 1809 he made the
trip to Fort William, reaching there June 18. He arrived at Fort
Vermillion again on September 13.7? He then made a trip to Fort
Augustus,®° past old Fort George, which had been built for the
North West Company by Angus Shaw in 1792 and had been aban-
doned since 1802. He also passed old Fort Augustus on the north
side of the Saskatchewan.*. On May 31, 1810, the Hudson’s Bay
and North West companies abandoned Fort Vermillion for White
Earth River.*? Thompson passed by this year on his way to

™Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, I, 214-223. Coues states that the “In-
vineible” was lost November 13, 1816 (ibid., note 23). The sloop “Otter’’
belonged to the North West Company in 1799 (Masson, Bourgeois, I, 65).

% Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, I, 244-246.

" Ibid., I, 258, 285-421. There is an abridged form of the journal of
this expedition in McGill University. It was apparently revised in 1840,
according to a pencil note on the back (Masson, MS, No. 2365, McGill
University).

8 Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, II, 447-509.

” Ibid., II, 509, 539.

5 Edmonton.

" Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, II, 560-567
® Tbid., II, 601.
108 The North West Company

Rainy Lake.*? In September, Henry went to Rocky Mountain
House, and on November 9 he rode up the river to a spot on the
north bank where Peter Pangman had cut his name on a pine
in 1790.8 In February, 1811, he went into the mountains to a
spot near the source of the Blaeberry River. He was back at
Lower White Earth House May 17, 1811.%° There is a gap in
his journals from this date until November 15, 1813. He was
then at Astoria, having come from Fort William.** He was
present when the name was changed from Astoria to Fort George,
on November 13. On May 22, 1814, he was drowned there with
Donald McTavish, of the North West Company, and several
others, on their way from the fort to the company’s vessel, the
“Isaac Todd.’’§7

Beside the names of Thompson and Henry stands that of Har-
mon. Daniel Williams Harmon entered the North West Company,
apparently in 1800.8° On June 13 of that year he reached Grand
Portage, which he describes. Three years earlier®® the X Y Com-
pany had built a post about two hundred rods away from the
North West establishment. After a month at Grand Portage,
Harmon proceeded inland, intending to go with John McDonald
to Fort des Prairies. He was a day or two at Fort Charlotte
at the west end of Grand Portage, sending off the Fort des
Prairies canoes.°® On July 31 he reached the North West Com-

 Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, II, 606-607.

“ Ibid., Il, 632-642, 662.

 Tbid., II, 676-699, 745-746.

% Tbid., II, 747.

“ Ibid., II, 770, 916. Burpee points out H. H. Bancroft’s errors in stat-
ing that Alexander Henry wintered at the forks of the Missouri 1808-1809,
built Fort Henry on the Clearwater branch of the Snake River, and was in
charge of Willamette post in 1814. Andrew Henry is the man whose name
should be connected with the first two of these actions. Alexander’s cousin,

William Henry, was in charge of Willamette post in 1814 (Burpee, Search
for the Western Sea, 405-407).

“ Harmon, Journal, 1; citations are from the New York, 1903, reprint.
*Tbid., 14-16.
 Ibid., 17-18.
Further Advance Westward 109

pany’s establishment at the mouth of Winnipeg River. The
Hudson’s Bay Company had a fort here too. It was now deter-
mined that Harmon should take charge of a new post in the
Swan River Department, for which region he left with the
Swan River brigade on August 10.°t Stopping at the mouth of
Dauphin River, they made up the goods for Dauphin River post.®”

On October 10 they reached Swan River Fort, whence Harmon
sent two men about fifty miles up the river to build his post.
The Hudson’s Bay Company had abandoned this region several
years earlier.°*? On October 18 Harmon went from Swan River
Fort to Fort Alexandria on the bank of the Assiniboine, or Upper
Red River, arriving five days later.°* For the next three years
Harmon was in the Assiniboine and Swan River country, moving
from fort to fort. In March, 1804, he made a trading trip west-
ward to the Rapid Indians, or Atsinas, apparently somewhere
about the South Saskatchewan.®® In the autumn he went from
Fort Alexandria to Fort Montagne 4 la Basse, about fifty miles
above McDonnell’s House.°* On November 24, while at Fort
Alexandria, he received a letter from Chaboillez stating that
Lewis and Clark were among the Mandans.*7 He was back
at Montagne a la Basse in April, 1805.°° In June and July
he made the trip to the mouth of the Kaministikwia.°° On
September 5 he was at Cumberland House. Thence he pro-
ceeded up the Saskatchewan one hundred and twenty miles
above the Forks to South Branch Fort, which had been con-
structed the previous summer. On his way he passed several

“Harmon, Journal, 21-22, 24.
 Ibid., 26.

 Tbid., 30-31.

*% Tbid., 31-33.

* Tbid., 83-91.

"© Tbid., 100.

" Tbid., 101-102.

 Ibid., 104-105.

” Tbid., 106-114.
110 The North West Company

abandoned trading posts.?°° The North West Company’s fort on
Lake Bourbon had been abandoned in 1802. A fort situated
about six miles below South Branch Fort had been abandoned
fifteen years earlier. The Rapid Indians had captured and pil-
laged the neighboring Hudson’s Bay Company’s fort and then
attacked the North West Company’s post. They were repulsed
by the garrison of three men, who abandoned the fort under
cover of darkness and established another two hundred miles
farther down the river below the Forks.**

Harmon returned to Cumberland House in September, 1806,
and wintered there.?°? In July, 1807, he was again at Lake
Superior, and records the changing of the name of New Fort to
Fort Wiliiam in honor of William McGillivray.*°? He wintered
at Sturgeon Lake in the Nipigon Department.'** In the spring he
went to Fort William, which he left, the day following his arrival,
for the Athabasca district with J. G. MeTavish. Taking the route
by Frog Portage, the Churchill, and Portage La Loche, they
reached Fort Chipewean September 7.1% Two weeks later Har-
mon notes in his journal that Simon Fraser had just returned
from his voyage down the Fraser River.?°%°

From Fort Chipewean Harmon went past Fort Vermillion
to Dunvegan on Peace River, where he remained until October,
1810, when he was sent to take charge of New Caledonia.’ He
went past St. John’s Fort, Rocky Mountain Portage Fort,
MeLeod’s Lake Fort, and Fort St. James to Fort Fraser on

Harmon, Journal, 115-117.

™ Tbid., 117-118. This is an interesting mention of early trading opera-
tions by these companies on the South Saskatchewan.

™Tbid., 122-123.
8 Tohid., 125-126.

4 Tbid., 126-130. He notes Fort Dunean at the north end of Lake Nipi-
gon, and a post at Red Lake.

“Tid, 132-139.
3 Thid., 140.
“7 Thid., 140-153.

 
Further Advance Westward 111

Fraser River.°S He wintered here. In the spring of 1811 he
returned to the fort on Stuart’s Lake, which was his headquar-
ters for six vears,’°? during which he studied the Indian tribes.
In January, 1812, he went on a journey to the Nate-ote-tains, or
Babine Indians, who had never been visited by white men before.
From them he heard something of the country to the westward
and of a river which was probably the Skeena.1?° In November,
1812, he notes the arrival at McLeod’s Lake Fort of John Stuart
and his party from Fort Chipewean. Stuart’s men planned to
winter near the source of the Columbia River, descend it in the
spring under the leadership of J. G. McTavish, and meet Donald
MeTavish and others, who had sailed from England in October
for the mouth of that river.74. On Mav 138, 1813, John Stuart,
with six Canadians and two Indians, left Stuart’s Lake to join
J. G. MeTavish on the Columbia and, if possible, find a waterway
from Stuart’s Lake to the Columbia by which annual supplies
of goods could be imported and the returns sent out to be shipped
directly to China in vessels which the North West Company
would then build on the coast.1?? On September 25 Harmon
received three letters from Stuart describing his successful jour-
nev. He had gone down the Fraser for eight days and then
transported his goods overland on horseback for a hundred and
fifty miles to Lake Okanagan.1?* From Okanagan he wrote that
he could go by water to the Pacific, which he hoped to reach in
twelve or fifteen days at the outside.14* On November 7 Joseph
Laroeque, who had accompanied McTavish and his party on the

 

 

“Harmon, Journal, 153-162.

1 Thid., 165 et seq.

™ Thid., 182-184.

“Tbid., 188.

1 Thid., 191-192.

“3 He spells it O-ke-na-gun.

14 Harmon, Journal, 198-199. Stuart evidently descended the Fraser for
eight days, though Burpee says the Columbia (Burpee, Search for the West-
ern Sea, 504).
112 The North West Company

voyage down the Columbia, arrived at Stuart’s Lake Fort. They
had met Stuart and his party on their return, and Larocque,
with two of Stuart’s men, had come to Stuart’s Lake by the very
circuitous route of Red Deer River, Lesser Slave Lake, and
Dunvegan, from which place they accompanied Harmon’s people,
returning from Rainy Lake."®> It would be interesting to know
what route they followed from the Columbia to the Red Deer
River, and from the Red Deer River to Lesser Slave Lake.1?*

On February 4, 1814, Harmon received word from the Colum-
bia Department of the purchase by the North West Company
of the property of the Pacific Fur Company.1?7 On October 18
Larocque arrived with two canoe-loads of goods from Fort
George, which place he left in the latter part of August. North
West Company vessels'!® had arrived there in March and April,
and soon after one of them sailed with a cargo of furs for Can-
ton. Laroeque also brought the news of the drowning of Henry
and McTavish.1?® On October 4, 1817, the fort at Fraser’s Lake
was burned, but nearly all the goods were saved.’*° In May, 1819,
Harmon finally left New Caledonia. He reached Fort William
August 18 and proceeded east after having spent nineteen vears
in the interior.?*

Meanwhile the Norwesters following Mackenzie had estab-

 

“3 Harmon, Journal, 199.

n° Burpee states that they went by Yellowhead Pass (Burpee, Search for
the Western Sea, 505). This would hardly bring them to Red Deer River if
that means the branch of the South Saskatchewan which at present bears the
name and is similarly named in Harmon’s map. One wonders if they as-
cended the Kicking Horse River instead of the Blaeberry and thus made
their way over Kicking Horse Pass. If, however, by the Red Deer River,
Harmon means the upper Athabasca, which is called Elk River in his map,
Burpee’s surmise is more likely to be correct.

“7 Harmon, Journal, 202.

8 At least Harmon says “our vessels” and he later speaks of the “Isaac
Todd.”

“9 Harmon, Journal, 204-205.

9 Thid., 226.

1 Ibid., 232-233.
Further Advance Westward 113

lished themselves in the Fraser River Valley. In 1797 James
Finlay ascended Peace River and examined the river which bears
his name. He then ascended Parsnip River nearly to its source,
but did not ascend the branch which leads to McLeod’s Lake.?”?
In the spring of 1805 James McDougall ascended the Peace and
Parsnip rivers to McLeod’s Lake, where a fort was soon built
which was later called Fort McLeod. He then continued his ex-
plorations to the great fork of the Fraser and beyond to the Car-
riers Lake.’?° Later in the same year Simon Fraser’** ascended
Parsnip River, following Finlay’s track.*> Rocky Mountain
Fort on Peace River was then under construction, in December,
1805.12 It is worth noting that this activity was taking place in
the year following the union of the Old and New North West
companies.

On January 28, 1806, McDougall started on a second expe-
dition to McLeod’s Lake, which he found temporarily deserted.1**
On February 23 Fraser heard, from Indians arriving at Rocky
Mountain Fort, of a large lake in the interior of New Caledonia,
reached by a portage from Finlay River.’** On May 20, 1806,

2 Bancroft, Northwest Coast, IT, 87.

1237 bid., 87-88.

14 Simon Fraser entered the North West Company at the age of sixteen.
About ten years later he was a partner. Before this time we get notices of
him from David Thompson and others. Te was apparently at Grand Portage
in 1793. In 1795-1796 he wintered at Lac La Ronge. In 1797 he was agent
at Grand Portage, and in 1804 was at Fort Liard in Athabasca, in which
department he had been in 1799. In 1802 he signed the Montreal agreement
in person, and his attorneys sigued the agreement in 1804 (Masson, Es-
quisse, 96; Masson, Bourgeois, I, 61, II, 481, 498; Masson, MS, 2352, in
McGill University; Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 506-507).

% Bancroft, Northwest Coast, II, 89.

"6 Tbid., 91. There appears, however, to have been a similar, if not the
same, post at an earlier date. Among the Masson papers is a journal of
the Rocky Mount Fort for the fall of 1799. The writer, whose name does
not appear, left the forks of Peace River on October 5 and arrived at his
destination on October 13, 1799. The last entry is dated April 20, 1800
(Masson, MS, vol. 4, Canadian Archives).

™ Bancroft, Northwest Coast, II, $2-93.

8 Thid., 95-96. In Harmon’s map this appears as Great Bear Lake at
the head of Finlay’s Branch. There is no lake of such size in that region.
114 The North West Company

he left the Rocky Mountain Fort with John Stuart to cross the
Rockies again. They visited the fort on McLeod’s Lake, and
proceeded from there to the Fraser River, not going by Giscome
Portage, but following the more roundabout route of the Parsnip
and Bad rivers.'® They entered the Nechaco River on July 11,
and fifteen days later reached Stuart Lake. Here they com-
menced the construction of Fort St. James in accordance with
their orders to establish posts beyond the mountains.1*° On
August 28, 1806, Stuart went overland to Fraser Lake. His
report on this section was so favorable that Fort Fraser was built
at the east end of the lake.?**

Fort George was built in 1807, at the confluence of the Ne-
chaco.1** Having received orders to explore the Tacoutche Tesse,
then supposed to be the Columbia, Fraser and Stuart left Fort
George May 28, 1808. Their party comprised, besides them-
selves, Jules Maurice Quesnel, nineteen voyageurs, and two
Indian euides.%* On May 29 they encamped at the mouth of
Quesnel River.1*4 The next day the party passed the point where
Mackenzie had turned back in 1793. Atnah and Tahowtin
Indians were met.’®* Then Chilk-hodins who lived on the banks
of Chilecotin River were encountered.'** The difficulties of the
route beeame so vreat that on June 10 Fraser decided to abandon
the canoes.1** The next day the party set out overland. On
June 12 they met Askettih Indians. These were probably Lillooet

™ Bancroft, Northwest Coast, II, 98-106.
™ Thid., 107-110.

*1Tbid., 110-111. The Baneroft MSS at the University of California
contain copies of journals of Finlay, Stuart, and Fraser, and letters of
Stuart and Fraser for these years.

™ Bancroft, Northwest Coast, II, 112.

*8 Masson, Bourgeois, I, 157. Fraser’s Journal, dealing with the expe-
dition, occupies pn. 157-221 of this volume.

™ Masson, Bourgeois, I, 158.
% Thid., 159-161.

18° Tbhid., 165.

*" Masson, Bourgeois, I, 172.
Further Advance Westward 115

Indians.**8 Two days later the fork of the Thompson and Fraser
rivers was reached." At the Askettih village Fraser heard of
a river to the eastward, but it was evidently the Columbia, which
Thompson was then traversing"? On June 15 the party con-
tinued the journey by water,'*? but eleven days later they had
to abandon the canoes once more.!*#?, On June 28 they reached
the Achinrow village.**® The next day they embarked in canoes
belonging to the natives, but, a day later, secured canoes of
their own."** On July 2 the party sighted a gulf, or bay of
the sea.**? An observation gave the latitude to be nearly 49°,
so the river was evidently not the Columbia, to Fraser’s great
disappointment."** He turned back and reached Fort George on
August 6, 1808.147

™Masson, Bourgeois, I, 173; Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 517.

8° Masson, Bourgeois, I, 175.

*° Tbid., I, 176; Burpee, Search for the Western Sea, 519. The Fraser MS in
the Bancroft Library reads rather differently. It states that the Indians
“say that they heard of white people having been down the first large river
that flows into this on the left, but whether it had been Captain Lewis or
some of the Fort des Prairies people we cannot determine” (Fraser, Second
Journal, 23).

41 Masson, Bourgeois, I, 177.

™ Thid., 190,

8 Tbhid., 192.

Mt Tbid., 194-195.

™ Thid., 200.

™ Thid., 203,

“7 Tbid., 221. The original journal which Masson used is now in the To-
ronto Public Reference Library. An examination of it shows that Masson as
usual takes liberties with his paragraphing and wording. The most serious
(liserepancy is the omission of five observations of meridian altitude taken by
Stuart. These observations explain why Thompson cites Stuart rather than
Fraser in the title of his large manuscript map. There is another copy of a
portion of the journal of this expedition in the Bancroft MSS at the Univer-
sity of California. This was the one used by Bancroft. It left him for some
time in doubt how far the expedition went, but his doubts were resolved by
some notes by Stuart (Bancroft, Northwest Coast, II, 118, n.11). The jour-
nal which Bancroft used covers from Nay 30 to June 10, 1808. Baneroft
probably arranged for the copying of this journal while searching in British
Columbia for material. There are many differences between it and the print-
ed form in Masson’s work and the manuscript from which Masson printed,
whieh is now in the Toronto Reference Library. It gives much more detail

 
116 The North West Company

Fraser had probably descended the river, which was to bear
his name, about as far as the site of New Westminster.*** The
lower portion of the river was apparently not explored until
1824, when Chief Trader McMillan of the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany entered its mouth, with an expedition organized at Fort
George by Governor Simpson.'*® The journey of Simon Fraser
was connected in point of policy with an attempt on the part of
the North West Company to obtain a charter from the British
government granting them the monopoly of the trade of the

of the directions and distances covered, and, on the whole, looks more like a
faithful transcription of some portion of the original journal. George
Keith, writing to Roderick McKenzie in 1815, discussed briefly the fact that
Simon Fraser had been preparing his journal for publication (Masson, Bour-
geois, II, 128-129). The Toronto manuscript may well be a revised form of
the journal.

48 This is stated in Anderson, Northwest Coast, 15, Bancroft MSS. It is
partly contradicted when the same author states on p. 56 that the expedition
“ran down the Fraser in 1808 to the sea.” Stuart also says that they went
to the mouth of the river (Anderson, Northwest Coast, 235). Fraser, how-
ever, states definitely that they had not seen the main ocean, though almost
within view of it (Masson, Bourgeois, I, 203).

“© Pelly to Canning, Hudson’s Bay House, London, December 9, 1825, F.
O. 5, vol. 208. An extract from MeMillan’s report of date December 31,
1824, is enclosed. One member of the expedition, Proveau by name, was
with Fraser and Stuart on the descent of the river in 1808. This
man, says McMillan, “described several parts of it [the river] before reach-
ing them and those parts I recognized afterwards by his description particu-
larly the point from whence those Gentlemen returned which is situated about
20 Miles above the entrance of the River.” The letter also encloses a copy of
extracts from the journal of Alexander McKenzie, who was on the brig
“William and Ann” engaged in sounding the entrance to the river, of dates
August 17 to August 24, 1825. Mr. Swan, the mate, entered the river in a
boat while sounding on August 21. Apparently the brig did not enter. If
this sounding expedition were really in 1825, as dated in this copy, the news
certainly reached England very rapidly.

The letter also encloses a copy of the bill of sale of Astoria to the North
West Company. Pelly suggested to the British government in this letter, re-
specting the boundary line, that “starting from Lat. 49 at the Rocky Moun-
tains, the line ought to be continued Southward along the height of Land to
the place where Lewis & Clark crossed the Mountains, said to be in Lat. 46°
42”, then westerly along Lewis’s River, until it falls into the Columbia, and
thence into the Sea, leaving the navigation of both these Rivers, free to the
subjects of both nations.”
Further Advance Westward 117

Pacific Slope and the Mackenzie River basin. Thompson’s ac-
tivities in the Columbia Valley were even more closely concerned
with this attempt. The efforts of the North West Company in
this respect did not, however, achieve success.**?

4 This question is discussed in the next chapter.
CHAPTER VI
THE STRUGGLE WITH THE HUDSON’S BAY COMPANY

Attention has been paid in the preceding chapters to the
development of the competition between the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany and the Canadian traders. The union of the interests of
the North West and X Y companies resulted in making this com-
petition even keener. The struggle culminated, in the second dec-
ade of the nineteenth century, in a period of petty hostilities, in
which Lord Selkirk’s agricultural colony on Red River was an
important factor.

The attention of Thomas, fifth Earl of Selkirk, had been
directed to the interior of North America west of Lake Superior.
by the publication of Mackenzie’s Voyages in 1801. On April 4.
1802, he addressed a letter and memorial to Lord Pelham, then
secretary of the Home Department, recommending Red River
as a field of colonization for emigrants from Ireland and the
Highlands of Scotland. He was referred to the Colonial Depart-
ment.’ The matter was not taken up, because the government
entertained an unfavorable attitude towards emigration, although
there was much distress in portions of the country.

The following year Selkirk organized a body of over eight
hundred settlers, but the government made him take them to
Prince Edward Island, where they formed a successful settle-
ment. In 1805 Selkirk published his Observations upon the
Present State of the Highlands of Scotland with a View of the

*Montgomery, Substance of a Speech in the House of Commons, June 24,
1819, pp. 7-8. Bryce states that he obtained a copy of the letter, with two
memorials attached to it, from the Colonial Department. These items are in
C. O. 42, vol. 330. A copy is in Q, 293, pp. 172 et seg. Brymner gives good
summaries of the early activities of Selkirk in colonization in Can. Arch. Re-
ports, 1886, 1892. He bases his remarks on the material in Q, 293, and Q,
294, which are copies of C. O. 42, vol. 330-331.

*The copies of the Selkirk Papers in the Canadian Archives give much
information about the details of Selkirk’s activities in North America.
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 119

Causes and Probable Consequences of Emigration. A perusal
of this work shows that he had a real humanitarian interest in
his colonizing plans. There was, however, a strong feeling against
the peasantry’s leaving the British Isles, if one may judge from
a series of eight letters in reply published in the Edinburgh
Herald and Chronicle by a writer who signed himself ‘‘ Amicus.’”?

After his colonists were established in Prince Edward Island,
Selkirk visited Montreal. Here he was well received. The
Beaver Club, the famous social organization of the North West
Company, entertained him. He was much interested in all that
concerned the Northwest, asked questions freely, and listened
attentively. Having already a working knowledge of the fur
trade from Mackenzie’s publication, he now acquired a good
grasp of the subject.

Another of his attempts at colonization was lacking in suc-
cess. The Baldoon Settlement in Upper Canada‘ encountered
serious difficulties. Among these was its low site, which made it
liable to serious inundations in the spring. It was likewise
unhealthful.®

Such were Selkirk’s experiences in colonization before his
more famous attempt in the Red River region. This enterprise
was closely associated with the rivalry between the Hudson’s Bay
Company and the North West Company. A few figures may be
cited to indicate the volume of the activities of the former com-
pany. The imports to Hudson Bay, which amounted to £3600 in
1780, amounted to £6200, almost double that amount, the follow-
ing year. They ranged between £4800 and £9900 from 1783 to
1790, in which year they dropped to £3400. In 1791 they jumped

*These letters were reprinted in pamphlet form in 1806. The British
Columbia Legislature Library possesses a copy of the pamphlet.

*Selkirk had been negotiating in 1802 for colonization at Sanlt Ste.
Marie. He appears to have obtained the Baldoon lands in 1803 ((.O. 42,
vol. 330-331).

* Bryce, Mackenzie, Selkirk, Simpson, 134.
120 The North West Company

to £19,800. Except for the year 1801, when the imports were only
£4000, they remained above £20,000 yearly until 1803, the largest
importation being £83,200 in 1794. In 1804 the imports amounted
to £4800. The following year they were £20,200. In 1806 the
amount was £13,100; in 1807 it was £20,700; and in 1808 it was
£25,500. The value of the exports from Hudson Bay to Great
Britain, which meant to London, was £15,000 in 1780, and
£14,700 in 1781. It was £6800, £7500, and £7600, respectively,
for the next three years. In 1785 the exports were £11,200, and
they remained above £10,000 and below £20,000 for a decade.
In 1795 they were £7600, but the next year they were £29,700,
and the succeeding year £20,700. In 1798 they amounted to the
very moderate total of £14. In 1799 and 1800 they were respec-
tively £18,200 and £38,400. In the succeeding years they were:
£17,000, £16,000, £10,900, £15,600, £15,000, £18,800, and £20,900.
In 1808 the exports were again very slight, amounting to £8.7
The continental market was much perturbed in the years pre-
ceding 1808, which may account for the low figure of the ship-
ments to England in that year.2 The Hudson’s Bay Company

8C. H. 17, vols. 6-30.

"Ibid., where the figures are given to the penny. The above figures are in
round numbers to the nearest hundred pounds. The valuations were accord-
ing to the regulations observed by the customs officials, and, were they ever
so accurate in that respect, would not accurately reflect the market prices
of the times.

*On February 23, 1809, the Board of Trade considered a memorial of the
Hudson’s Bay Company transmitted by the Treasury. This stated that their
trade suffered greatly from the want of a demand for furs in the foreign
market, and that they had a three-years’ stock of furs on hand and prayed
for temporary assistance. The Board of Trade reported that the memorial
contained no proposition on which they could advise the Treasury (B.T. 5,
vol. 18, p. 438). The petition was dated Hudson’s Bay House, December
21, 1808, and was transmitted by Harrison, January 16, 1809 (B.T. 1, vol.
42, no. 36). The following statements are worth quotation: “The
Cargoes [from Hudson Bay] are sold at public Sales. The Beaver
& some few inferior Furs, together with the Oil, are bought for home con-
sumption, and sell for about £30,000, but the fine Furs were, till after the
Sales of 1806, bought by the Fur Merchants for the Fairs of Frankfort and
of Leipsick for Petersburgh & before the present War, for France. Since
that year there has not been a Fur sold for exportation, & as a proof to your
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 121

was apparently being forced into a policy of retrenchment in
the purchase of furs. On October 23, 1809, Bird of the Hudson’s
Bay Company arrived at Fort Vermillion with orders from
York Factory to take no wolves and as few small skins as pos-
sible. Only beaver, muskrat, and swan skins were to be con-
sidered of value.®

While the quantity of liquor used in the fur trade was appar-
ently not so great as it had been before the union of the rival
Montreal companies, acts of violence by no means ceased. The
evidence is not extensive, but, such as it is, it indicates that the
North West Company’s people were the aggressors.!°

The enterprising spirit of the Canadian traders was evident
in a less exceptionable form in their activities on the Pacific slope
and in the Mackenzie basin. Here they did not as yet have to
face the opposition of the Hudson’s Bay Company traders. The
advance of the traders and trading posts beyond the Rocky
Mountains has been stated. In connection with this advance,
there arose the question of the control of the fur trade, and the
North West Company attempted to obtain chartered rights over
it. On July 28, 1808, the Board of Trade read a letter from
Mr. Cooke, dated March 17, 1808, enclosing copies of a letter and
memorial from Sir Alexander Mackenzie on the subject of form-
ing an exclusive company for establishing a permanent fur trade

Lordships that the deficiency of Buyers did not arise from our holding back
for a higher Market, We sold in 1806 for Seven Shillings per Skin Furs that,
in the more quiet State of Europe in 1804 had brought us Twenty Shillings
& Three Pence, & which for years previous to that time had sold for a simi-
lar price, & other depreciation prevailed, in about the same proportion, the
whole of the Furs calculated for the foreign Market, and in some instances
Furs were sold for a lower Price than the Duties we had paid for them.
Since that period no Orders have been received from abroad & our Ware-
houses are now filled with the most valuable productions of Three Years
Import, that if sold at the prices of those years before the closing of the
Ports on the Continent would have produced us at least £150,000” (B.T. 1,
vol. 42, no. 36).
° Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, II, 459.

” Selkirk, Sketch, 56-63, 66-74, 91-106.

 
122 The North West Company

on the northern coast of the Pacific Ocean. Nothing was ordered
in the matter. It will be noticed that this was the year in
which Fraser and Stuart explored the lower Fraser Valley, and
that Thompson had crossed the mountains to the upper Columbia
in 1807. It is quite possible that Fraser’s discovery that he was
not on the Columbia River may have disarranged the plans of
the North West Company. They could not as yet be certain that
Thompson was on Columbian waters. However this may be,
some years passed before the North West Company was again
found urging their request for a charter.

On April 12, 1810, Nathaniel Atcheson wrote to Lack inquir-
ing if a determination had been reached by the Board of Trade
in the matter of the proposed exclusive company. This letter
contained two enclosures. The first was a letter dated Downing
Street, March 19, 1808, from Cooke to Mackenzie stating that the
petition to Castlereagh of March 10, 1808, in regard to the pro-
posed company on the Pacific Coast, had been referred to the
Board of Trade. The second enclosure was the memorial.’ The
Board of Trade then apparently leisurely hunted up Mackenzie’s
earlier communication, which now makes its appearance among
the papers of 1811.1 From this copy of Mackenzie’s letter,
which was dated at the Adelphi, March 10, 1808, it develops that
he had discussed the matter with Cooke two days earlier. He
says: ‘‘from what I understood to be your opinion, I have chosen
the system of exclusive privilege of commerce in that Quarter,
in preference to urging the necessity of making such Military &
Naval Establishments, with Expensive appointments, as would
be absolutely necessary to protect an open and general Trade;...”’
In his memorial, Mackenzie submitted the desirability of con-
ducting the fur trade by a line of posts across the continent from

* 8B. T. 5, vol. 18, p. 208. The items referred to appear at a later date,
when they were reconsidered.

“B. T. 1, vol. 59, no. 39.

® Ibid., no. 14.
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 123

the British settlements to the mouth of the Columbia, ‘‘where
a Commercial Colony might be planted, from whence a Trade
could be carried on and extended, not only with the Interior,
but along the Coast and its adjacent Islands.’’ He stated that
the North West Company was best able to fulfil such a plan,
but that ‘‘it would be necessary to grant them an exclusive Right
of Trade in the Columbia and its tributary Waters and along a
certain extent of coast for a given period, as well as Grants of
such Portions of Lands as may be deemed necessary to carry on
the general object of the undertaking; .. .’’ It would also be
necessary to obtain from the Hudson’s Bay Company, if it had
the legal right to grant or refuse it, an irrevocable and unlimited
license for transit of goods through its territories on the same
terms as the company itself enjoyed,’* the Canadian traders giv-
ing security that these goods would not be disposed of before
reaching their actual settlements. Furthermore, unlimited and
irrevocable licenses would be necessary from the East India and
South Sea companies granting the privilege of trading along the
Pacific Coast and of establishing factors or agents in China for
the ‘‘direect Sale and Barter of the Exports and Imports, from
and to the said Coast of North America, to and with the People
of China, and others residing there, or trading at the Time.’”®
War existing with Spain, the protection of a small naval force
might be necessary. Prompt action would be required now that
Lewis and Clark’s expedition had been made, to forestall the
Americans from asserting exclusive privileges in the interme-

“There is an interesting side-note in another hand which contains the
remark that the Hudson’s Bay Company charter, “not having been confirmed

by Act of Parliament, is of no Force whatever under the Ist Wm. & M.
Sess. 2, Chap. 2” (i.e., under the Bill of Rights).

*® Another side-note indicates that it was considered certain that the Kast
India Company would resist the grant of such extensive rights in the China
trade. Americans were not fettered thus in the China trade. The Act of 8
Geo. I, ¢. 15, s. 24, which required that all furs which were the produce of
British plantations in America, Asia, and Africa, should be brought to Great
Britain, might be easily remedied.
124 The North West Company

diate country and along the coast northward from the Spanish
boundary to latitude 50°. Possible bases for such American
pretensions were discussed, and Mackenzie claimed that he was
the first to penetrate to the Columbia and thence to the Pacific
Ocean, in 1793. This communication was read on August 2,
1811,1* and on the same day Atcheson’s letter of April 12, 1810,
enclosing a similar memorial, was also read.’ The wording of
this memorial is almost the same as the above. It speaks in one
place of ‘‘the Columbia or Oregan’’ River, and the changed
international situation is reflected when, in discussing the neces-
sity of a naval force, the phrase ‘‘being at war with Spain”’ is
replaced by ‘‘Being at variance with the Americans.’’ Atcheson
also stated in his letter that on the fourth instant?® he had trans-
mitted to Fawkener a duplicate of other papers relative to the
subject, which had been submitted to the consideration of
Marquis Wellesley.

On June 22, 1811, a petition by McTavish, Fraser and
Company, Inglis, Ellice and Company, and Sir Alexander Mac-
kenzie, requesting a charter of incorporation for the North West
Company for the period of twenty-one years, was read before
the Prince Regent in Council at Whitehall.1® It was referred to
the Board of Trade. Chetwynd’s letter, enclosing a copy of the
petition, was received by the Board of Trade on July 4, and
considered on November 16, 1811.2° This petition, after reciting
the situation and plans of the North West Company of Canada,
proceeded to request a charter of incorporation for twenty-one
years, granting exclusive trade on a large portion of the Pacific
Slope and in the Mackenzie Basin, in the following words:

*B. T.5, vol. 20, p. 470.

* B. T. 1, vol. 20, p. 476.

** April 4, 1810.

* Privy Council Register, vol. 192, pp. 255-256.

*B.T. 5, vol. 21, pp. 52-53. The letter and copy of the petition are in
B.T. 1, vol. 61, n0, 12. e .
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 125

Your Petitioners therefore submit to Your Majesty’s most gracious Con-
sideration this their humble Application for a Charter of Incorporation, for
Twenty one Years, for the granting and securing to your Petitioners, and
their Successors, the Sole and exclusive Trade and Commerce of that part of
North America situate between the Summit of the Chain of Mountains called
the Rocky Mountains on the East and the Pacific Ocean on the West, and ex-
tending from Cape Blanco in the Latitude of 42° North to 60° North, to-
gether with the Seas, Streights, Bays, Inlets, Lakes, Rivers, Creeks, and
Lands which lie within these Limits and the Countries, Territories, Lands,
Coasts, and Confines which border upon the different Branches and Sources
of the River Columbia or Oregan, or by whatever other name it may now or
hereafter be called or designated, being the great River which falls into the
Pacific Ocean in or about Latitude 46° North, and also the Countries, Lands,
Territories, Coasts and Confines bordering upon all those Lakes, Rivers, Wa-
ters and Streams which are discharged into the Northern or Frozen Ocean,
and have their Outlet to the Sea through the great Slave Lake and Macken-
zie’s River, in whatever Latitude or Longitude the Branches and Source of
the said Rivers, Waters, and Streams may be situated, and of the produce of
those Countries.”

The Board of Trade considered the matter on November 16,
1811, and reported that they had several times been attended by
the parties on the subject of the petition. They agreed that
British interests were deeply involved in the proposed trade and
that a company was the only means of successfully conducting it.
They reported, however, that a charter, if granted, should be
subject to the following conditions: First, exclusive right of trade
should be confined to the portion of the continent of America
west of the Rocky Mountains; second, any persons then in Can-
ada who had been concerned in the Indian trade should be
allowed to become members of the company, if they so desired,
within a specified time after the granting of the charter; third,
the charter, if granted for twenty-one years, should be terminable
on three years’ notice. Moreover, the Board of Trade reported

2B. T. 1, vol. 61, no. 12. The Privy Council Papers not being arranged
in strict order of date, but simply according to the year, it was not possible
to locate the original petition in the spring of 1915. It was therefore neces-

sary to trust to the Board of Trade copy. The Privy Council Papers were,
however, being duly assorted.
126 The North West Company

that they had no means of determining whether the limits pro-
posed would infringe on territory to which the United States
had a claim.??, The Privy Council read the report of the Board
of Trade on December 18, 1811, and referred it to the commit-
tee.2?. The committee considered it on February 21, 1812, and re-
ferred it, together with a copy of the petition, to the Attorney-
and Solicitor-General for their opinions.?*

In the meantime, Nathaniel Atcheson had written to Bathurst
on September 19, 1811, stating that 4 Wm. & Mary, ec. 15, see. 2,
and 14 Geo. III, ec. 26, sec. 1, were the only mention he found of
the Hudson’s Bay Company’s charter in Ruffhead’s edition of
the Statute Book. He added that the United States had char-
tered a company which had fitted out at New York an expedition
to take possession of and settle on the banks of the Columbia.
Ife referred Bathurst to the printed ‘‘Statement of the Origin &
of the North West Company’’ for information, and otherwise
urged the granting of the charter. The printed work referred to
is evidently the anonymous On the Origin and Progress of the
North-West Company, published in 1811.?

*“ B. T.5, vol. 21, pp. 52-53.

* Privy Council Register, vol. 192, p. 409.

* Thid., p. 527.

* This publication was evidently written to aid in obtaining the charter
(ef. pp. 27-38, especially pp. 28-29, therein). There is a reference to As-
tor’s company on p. 32. I have located and examined three copies; one in
the British Columbia Legislative Library, one in the Toronto Public Refer-
ence Library, and one in the Colonial Office Library. The first-named con-
tains a map which is lacking in the other two, though referred to in the
work, p. 30, footnote. It is noteworthy that this map depicts the country
west of the Rockies as if the river which Mackenzie followed were the Co-
lumbia, and it is so claimed in the text, p. 34. The results of Fraser’s ex-
pedition must certainly have been known, though no mention is made of it in
the text. They would, of course, weaken the North West Company’s case.
There is no appearance of the map’s having been removed from the Toronto
and Colonial Office copies. There is a written note on the Toronto copy in-
dicating that Nathaniel Atcheson was the author. The note is in an old-
style writing. It is not that of Bain, under whose librarianship the work
was accessioned. From Atcheson’s part in the negotiations and from the
nature of his known publications, it appears highly probable that he was
the author. Atcheson held the position of secretary to the Committee of
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 127

The Law Officers of the Crown, Gibbs and Plumer, reported
to the committee on March 12, 1812, that there could be no objec-
tion to granting articles of incorporation provided that the con-
ditions proposed by the Board of Trade should be observed, that
United States territory should not be infringed upon, and that
no grant of sale and exclusive trade should be made.2* A letter
to this effect was accordingly sent to McTavish, Fraser and
Company on May 13, 1812.27 McTavish, Fraser and Company,
Inglis, Ellice and Company, and Sir Alexander Mackenzie there-
upon sent to the Board of Trade another memorial, on behalf the
North West Company, dated at London, June 30, 1812. This
treated the question of the trade in greater detail, remarking
upon the necessity of constant extension of the fur trade into
new districts and stating that the region beyond the Rockies
was the only one of these left. The expense of transporting
goods thither overland was considerable over two hundred
per cent on the original value. The company thus could not com-
pete with goods carried by sea. To undertake so uncertain and
expensive an enterprise, in which returns could not be expected
short of three vears, they would require an exclusive control of
the trade, to prevent speculators from reaping their profits. They
therefore requested such a charter for twenty-one years, termina-
ble not on three but on five years’ notice. They then recited the
action of the United States government in regard to the Michili-
mackinae Company and how it had been compelled to sell out to
an American company. This company was now planning to
British North American Merchants, which position he apparently accepted
at London, August 1, 1809. This body was formed at London that year and
had John Inglis and John Bainbridge as chairman and deputy chairman, and
Mackenzie, Shedden, Brickwood, Venner, Hamilton, Usborne, Poigndester,
Livie, Auldjo, McGillivray, Goodall, Gillespie, Forsyth, and Linthorne as

members (F. O. 353, vol. 59). Several of these were interested in the North-
west trace.

*° Two copies in B. T. 1, vol. 70, no. 16.

7 Butler to MeTavish, Fraser & Co., Council Office, Whitehall, May 13,
1812, copy in B. T. 1, vol. 70, no. 16.
128 The North West Company

extend its posts across the Rocky Mountains, and, having already
sent one ship from New York to the Columbia in 1810 and an-
other in 1811, it was preparing a third ship for the same region.
If unopposed in such action, the United States government would
doubtless found a claim on such possession. Apprehending
opposition, the American company had repeatedly requested the
North West Company to share in the enterprise to the Pacific
Coast. The former had expressly offered to the latter a third of
the trade, and, it was thought, would readily grant a half. The
North West Company would thus share in the benefits of the
American charter and the China trade, but would have to recog-
nize the government of the United States and even be instrument-
al in extending its sovereignty. This it was determined not to
do; and if the proposed charter were granted to the company, it
hoped that the fur trade and the possession of the country where
it was carried on might be preserved to Great Britain. Without
the charter, the North West Company would have to abandon the
idea of the trade.”®

Not hearing from the Board of Trade on the subject,
McTavish, Fraser and Company and Inglis, Ellice and Company
addressed a memorial to Castlereagh on September 24, 1812,
reciting briefly what they had done, stating that they feared the
Board of Trade did not consider it strictly within the reference
to them to make a final decision on the application for a charter,

* Copy in B.T. 1, vol. 70, no. 16. It was signed by MeTavish, Fraser &
Co. and Inglis, Ellice & Co. on behalf of themselves and William MeGilli-
vray, William Hallowell, Roderick Mackenzie, Angus Shaw, Archd. Norman
McLeod, James Hallowell, Simon McGillivray, Thomas Thain, and Alexander
Mackenzie, agents; and on behalf of Sir Alexander Mackenzie, Thomas For-
syth, John McDonald, John McDougall, Charles Chaboillez, Aeneas Cameron,
Alexr. MeDougall, Duncan Cameron, John Richardson, John Forsyth, John
Inglis, John B. Inglis, Edward Ellice, John Ogilvy, John Mure, Daniel Mac-
kenzie, William Mackay, Alexander Fraser, John Sayer, Donald McTavish,
John D, Campbell, John Thomson, Pierre de Rocheblave, John McDonald,
John Haldane, James Leith, James Hughes, Alexander Mackay, James Mac-
kenzie, John McGillivray, Hugh McGillis, Simon Frazer, Alexander H. [sic,
probably Henry.], David Thompson, John Willis, Kenneth Mackenzie,
Archd. MeLillann, and Ranold Cameron, wintering partners.
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 129

and requesting Castlereagh’s influence for an early and favor-
able decision by the government. Enclosures accompanied this.2?
It was sent to the Privy Council by order of Bathurst on October
3, 1812.%° On November 9 the papers in the matter were sent
to the Board of Trade from the Privy Council.2t On November
16, 1812, the Board of Trade considered the matter and reported
to the Privy Council that it did not feel competent to offer an
opinion on the policy of granting exclusive trade to new com-
panies. If the charter were granted, they advised that it should
be subject to the conditions stated in their report of November
18, 1811, provided that the limits proposed should not interfere
with the territories of the United States.*?

Meanwhile, Atcheson had been in steady correspondence on
the subject with the Foreign Office and the Colonial Office.** The
report of the Board of Trade on November 16 was apparently
final in regard to the charter.**

* Copy in B.T. 1, vol. 70, no. 16.

* Goulburn to Chetwynd, Downing Street, October 3, 1812, B.T. 1, vol.
70, no. 16. A side note states it was in the original enclosure in Mr. Atche-
son’s of September 25. It had been sent to the Colonial Office by the For-
eign Office on September 26, 1812 (Cooke to Goulburn, Foreign Office, Sep-
tember 26, 1812, C.O. 42, vol. 149).

* Chetwynd to Colonial Office, Whitehall, November 9, 1812, B. T. 1, vol.
70, no. 16. The enclosures comprise eight items.

“8B. T. 5, vol. 22, pp. 17-19.

* Atcheson to Castlereagh, Duke Street, Westminster, September 25, 1812;
in Cooke to Goulburn of September 26, 1812 (Atcheson’s letter had enclosed
the memorial of the North West Company to Castlereagh of September 25) ;
Atcheson to Bathurst with enclosures, Duke Street, Westminster, October 9,
1812; Ateheson to Goulburn, Duke Street, Westminster, November 2, 1812;
Atcheson to Goulburn with enclosure, Great Winchester Street, November 19,
1812; Atcheson to Goulburn, Great Winchester Street, November 26, 1812;
all in C.O. 42, vol. 149. Some of these also deal with the question of pro-
tection for a proposed expedition to the Columbia.

* The letter of Atcheson to the Colonial Office of November 26 expresses
a desire to know the decision of the government on the subject (Atcheson to
Goulburn, Great Winchester Street, November 26, 1812, C.O. 42, vol. 149).
There would hardly have been time by this date for Atcheson to have
learned of the report of the Board of Trade. The next North West Com-
pany’s item in the same volume says nothing about the charter (Simon
McGillivray to Goulburn, 2 Suffolk Lane, Cannon Street, December 29, 1812,
C.O. 42, vol. 149), and there appears no further negotiations on the subject.
130 The North West Company

The wintering partners were evidently aware of this attempt
to obtain a charter. In April, 1812, Simon McGillivray wrote
to them from London. After mentioning that he had recently
become a member of the firm of McTavish, McGillivrays and
Company, he spoke of other matters, among them being the
question of the charter. He stated that they were meeting with
delays and disappointments in the matter, remarking that such
delay was to be expected in applications to the government.**

In the meantime, the North West Company had been making
application to the East India Company for permission to carry
its produce to China.** In this the company was apparently
successful, for in 1812 the partners at the general meeting wrote:
‘“We are happy to learn that part of the difficulties that existed
between us and the East India Company are done away with.’’??
And at a later date North West Company ships, like the ‘‘Isaac
Todd,’’ carried furs to China.

In 1810 the North West Company made proposals to establish
the boundaries of the fur trade between them and the Hudson’s
Bay Company. These were to remain in force for twelve years.
The Hudson’s Bay Company was to have the Nipigon country,
not advancing towards Abbittibi and Temiscaming or beyond
Micabinishi.*® The North West Company would retain Michipi-

*% Simon McGillivray to the wintering partners at Fort William, Lon-
don, April 9, 1812, printed, together with reply, in Letter to the Earl of
Liverpool, 202-206. McGillivray stated in the same letter: ‘In regard to
the proposed expedition to the Columbia, I conceive it to be as much a mat-
ter of necessity for the North West Company to follow it up, as it is to
prevent Lord Selkirk from establishing colonies on Red River.”

Copy of Statement, etc., enclosed in Simon McGillivray to Bagot of
November 15, 1817, which is in Bagot to Castlereagh, no. 74, of December 2,
1817.

* John MeDonald, ete., to William McGillivray, Fort William, July 18,
1812. Selkirk Papers, part of vols. 27 and 28, pp. 164-166. Permission ap-
pears to have been granted before 1812, because it is stated in the Origin
and Progress that “the East-India Company have agreed to grant a license
to the North-West Company to trade to China” (Origin and Progress, 29).

°° Possibly this is now Missinabi.
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 131

coton, Pic, Lake Nipigon, Monontague, Red Lake, Rainy Lake,
Lake of the Woods, and Winnipeg River. The Hudson’s Bay
Company was to have all the country east and north of Lake
Winnipeg from the mouth of Winnipeg River to the mouth of
the Saskatchewan, including the Maskegon and Rat River regions.
The line was to run thence along the canoe route by Grand
Rapids, Cedar Lake, etc., to the Missinipi River at Frog Portage,
but the Hudson’s Bay Company was not to establish any post
within three winter-days’ march of this line, especially north of
Sturgeon Weir or Maligne River as far as Fort de Traite. Neither
party was to establish posts on Reindeer, Wollaston, or Black
lakes,?® but the Indians were to be free to trade with either.
The North West Company was to have Swan River Department,
including Swan River, Fort Dauphin, and River La Biche as
far as the district opposite Cumberland House. The Saskatche-
wan River was to be the boundary from Cumberland House. The
Hudson’s Bay Company was to have all the country to the south
and west of this to the Rocky Mountain line, including the South
Saskatchewan and Bow River. It was to have the Assiniboine,
except two provision posts for the North West Company. It
was also to have the Red River Department.*? The North West
Company was to have Athabasca, Churchill River, Beaver River,
and all the country north and west of the Saskatchewan. Cum-
berland House was to be held as a provision post for both par-
ties. The Hudson’s Bay Company was not to go beyond the
Rocky Mountains. The North West Company estimated that it
was giving up territory in which it had seventeen posts and
employed six partners, twenty-six canoes, and about one hundred

* They are called Lac des Cariboux, Lac la Hache, and Black Lake in the
proposals. They form a waterway from the Missinipi, or Churchill, River to
Lake Athabasca.

“ They are listed as having Upper and Lower Red River in the estimates,
but the accompanying sketch-map looks as if the North West Company were
to hold from Lake Winnipeg beyond the forks of Red River.
132 The North West Company

and sixty men. From this territory the company obtained from
three hundred and thirty to three hundred and ninety packs of
furs, valued at £13,600.*1

The correspondence on the subject continued through 1811,
the Hudson’s Bay Company holding out for its charter limits
to the Height of Land and refusing to debar its members from
the region west of the Rocky Mountains. The scheme of delimita-
tion failed.*? There was further discussion of the question at
Montreal in December, 1815. Selkirk, who had been furnished
with copies of the 1811 correspondence, represented the Hudson’s
Bay Company, which still adhered to the charter boundaries.
The North West Company proposed a division on the basis of
existing trade, and also suggested joint participation in the trade.
These suggestions were refused, the latter on account of the
divergent character of the two companies, and the former because
the Hudson’s Bay Company were expecting greater returns from
their trade.*? The last statement probably was a reference to
their plans of trading in Athabasca.

The uncertain relations with the United States in 1810,
coupled with the proposal of the Upper Canada government to
open a road and settlement from Lake Ontario to Georgian Bay,
induced the North West Company to petition Gore for grants
of lands on Kempenfeldt Bay, on Penetanguishene Bay, and at
Guillimsbury. These were the respective ends of the road and
the landing place on Georgian Bay. The company represented
that its members were desirous of changing to this route to avoid
difficulties with American officials, that it would be at consider-
able expense in quitting the route of its ships from Fort Erie to

“A copy of the proposals, which were dated Montreal, November 7,
1810, is in Selkirk Papers, Canadian Archives, vol. 1, pp. 188-193. The
copyist has mistaken the Missinipi for the Mississippi River.

“Selkirk Papers, vol. 1, pp. 188-216; Q, 147-1-2, pp. 201-228.

é “The negotiations were from December 10 to December 20, 1815 (Sel-
kirk Papers, Canadian Archives, vol. 1, pp. 217 et seg.; Q, 147-1-2, pp. 201 et
seq.; C.O. 42, vol. 184, p. 35, of printed memorial therein).
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 133

Sault Ste. Marie, and that along the new route it would purchase
the provisions which it had previously obtained on American ter-
ritory. The company was informed that it could not hope for a
monopoly of land at the ends of the new route, but was otherwise
encouraged. The matter was referred to the Executive Council.*#

The American company, which has been mentioned in the
correspondence concerning the proposed charter, was the Pacific
Fur Company, and its founder was John Jacob Astor. In the
winter of 1783-1784 he had made his first voyage to America,
where he invested the returns from some merchandise in furs,
which he disposed of in London in 1784. He returned the same
vear to New York and devoted himself to the fur trade.** In
time he engaged in the Canadian fur trade, at first shipping
directly to England. When the restrictions on direct trade from
Canada to the United States were removed by treaty, Astor made
a contract with the agents of the North West Company in London
for furs. He could now import them direct from Montreal to
the United States, for the home market or for shipment to the
European and China markets.*° By about 1807 he was com-
peting with the Michilimackinaec Company, and in 1809 he ob-
tained a charter from the New York Legislature for the American
Fur Company, which had a capital of a million dollars. In 1811,
in conjunction with other men, some of whom were North West
Company partners, he bought out the Michilimackinac Company
and merged it and the American Fur Company into the South
West Company. The war of 1812 suspended this association, and

“MeTavish, McGillivray & Co. to Gore, Montreal, November 5, 1810;
Halton to William McGillivray, Lieutenant-Governor’s Office, November 29,
1810, copies in Brook’s, no. 2, dated York, November 23, 1811, to Liverpool
(Q, 314, pp. 140-149). The members of the firm of McTavish, McGillivray
& Co. are stated in the memorial to be William McGillivray, William Hallo-
well, Roderick McKenzie, Angus Shaw, Archibald Norman McLeod, and
James Hallowell, Jr.

“Irving, Astoria, 27-28. There is a quite different account of Astor’s
early career in Kelton, Annals of Fort Mackinac, 51.

“Irving, Astoria, 29.
134 The North West Company

after the war it was dissolved.*7 By this time Astor was inter-
ested in his extensive plan for a trans-continental and trans-
Pacific trade, with a depot on the Columbia River. He made
overtures to the North West Company, offering a third interest
in this trade, but it was refused.*® Nevertheless, the Pacific Fur
Company was formed on June 23, 1810, by Astor and four others,
three of whom had served in the North West Company.*? A sea
and a land expedition were now organized. The ‘‘Tonquin,’’
Captain Thorn, sailed for the Columbia, September 8, 1810,°°
and reached the mouth of that river March 22, 1811.5 The build-
ing of Astoria was commenced the following month.®? The Asto-
rians soon heard of the presence of North West Company traders
on the upper waters of the river, and on July 15, 1811, David
Thompson arrived at their post.°? On his return he was accom-
panied for some distance by David Stuart, who then established
Fort Okanagan.** The overland party of the Pacific Fur Com-
pany, under William Price Hunt, reached Astoria in January
and February, 1812, with the exception of two men, Crooks and
Day, who did not arrive until May 11, 1812.55 On October 10,
1811, Astor, who was also engaged in negotiations with Russia in
the interests of his company, sent out the ‘‘Beaver,’’ which
reached the mouth of the Columbia on May 6, 1812, having gath-
ered the news while at the Sandwich Islands of the destruction
of the ‘‘Tonquin’’ by the natives of the Northwest Coast.** The
Astorians now continued to explore the country in the interests

 

 

“Irving, Astoria, 30-31.

8 Thid., 41-42.

* Ibid., 42-44,

“Tbid., 53.

% Ibid., 78.

° Ibid., 91.

 Ibid., 95-96.

* Tbid., 97, 105; Ross, Adventures, 145.
© Irving, Astoria, 325, 352-353.

© Ibid., 354-356,
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 135

of their trade, and built posts on the Spokane and Shahaptan
rivers.°’ In spite of the outbreak of the War of 1812, Astor, on
March 6, 1813, sent out the ‘‘Lark,’’ which was capsized off the
Sandwich Islands.5® This was the last ship sent out by Astor.
Hearing at Canton of the outbreak of war, Captain Sowle of the
‘‘Beaver’’ kept his ship there until the conclusion of peace.®®
Hunt chartered the ‘‘ Albatross’’ to reach the Columbia from the
Sandwich Islands. On his return he purchased the ‘‘Pedler’’ for
ten thousand dollars, and again sailed for the Columbia, January
22, 1815.°°

The news of the outbreak of war was brought to Astoria by
McKenzie on January 16, 1813. While visiting Clarke at the
Spokane post, he had learned of it from John George McTavish
of the North West Company. McTavish added that the armed
ship ‘‘Isaac Todd’’ would be at the mouth of the Columbia about
the beginning of March and that he was ordered to join her there.
McKenzie promptly came down to Astoria after caching the
goods at his own post.**

The determination to send a ship to the Columbia was taken
at the annual meeting at Fort William in 1812, and Donald
MeTavish was chosen to head the expedition. Thompson’s report
of his expedition down the Columbia in 1811 showed that the
route was shorter and less arduous than had been expected. It
also gave knowledge of the advanced situation of the Pacific Fur
Company, and it now became necessary for the North West Com-
pany to take steps to hold their only remaining beaver country.
The scarcity of beaver east of the mountains had been so severely
felt for the preceding two years that it was considered impos-
sible, without expansion, to maintain their establishment of part-

“Irving, Astoria, 436. It is also called Lewis’ River.

SThid., 432, 476-477.
® Tbid., 472.

“Tbid., 473, 480.
% Thid., 444-445,
136 The North West Company

ners, clerks, and other employees. In August the Montreal
agents wrote to the London members of the firm informing them
of the determination of the annual meeting and that the ‘‘Isaac
Todd’’ should promptly be sent to England.® They suggested that
the ship sent to the Columbia should be given a letter of marque,
and added that Lord Harrowby had proposed some years earlier
to send a war vessel there.** The London agents petitioned the
Privy Council in October, reciting the steps taken to obtain a
charter, stating that a North West Company party was being
sent overland that year to settle on the Columbia, and pétition-
ing for the right to export thither by sea various cannon, fire-
arms, ammunition, and other things.** On November 19 they
petitioned the Colonial Office in support of their application to
the Admiralty for a sloop of war to convoy their ship, which
was scheduled to reach the Columbia in May, and to clear the
coast of hostile vessels.*° On December 29 McGillivray wrote to
the Colonial Office referring to a conference held a few days
earlier in which Bathurst had promised to support this appli-
cation for a convoy, and also to propose to the Russian Ambassa-
dor some arrangement for the mutual introduction of the North
‘West Company traders and Russian settlers on the Pacific Coast.*°

= The ship “Isaac Todd,” Captain Smith, cleared from Quebee for Lon-
don, November 4, 1811, with “183 bales and 1 Pack of Peltries.” Her own-
er was John McTavish; she was built in 1811, registered at Quebec the same
year, and was a 350-ton ship with no guns. Her crew consisted of seventeen
persons (C.O. 42, vol. 82).

"’ MeTavish, MeGillivrays & Co. and Thomas Thain to MeTavish, Fraser
& Co., Inglis, Ellice & Co., and Sir Alexander Mackenzie, Montreal, August
18, 1812, copy in Atcheson to Bathurst of October 9, 1812, C. O. 42, vol. 149.

“ MeTavish, Fraser & Co. and Inglis, Ellice & Co. to the Privy Council,
London, October 1, 1812, copy in Atcheson to Bathurst of October 9, 1812.
The signature of Mackenzie; whose name is in the heading, does not appear.

* McTavish, Fraser & Co. and Inglis, Ellice & Co. to Bathurst. London,
al 19, 1812, in Atcheson to Goulburn of November 19, C.O. 42, vol.
149.

“Simon MeGillivray to Goulburn, 2 Suffolk Lane, Cannon Street, De-
cember 29, 1812, C.0O. 42, vol. 149. An endorsement indicates that an ex-
tract of this was sent to the Foreign Office on December 31.
The Struggle with the Hudson's Bay Company 137

The ‘‘Isaac Todd”’ sailed in due time for the Columbia, reach-
ing Baker’s Bay, April 22, 1814.67 She was commissioned as a
letter of marque with twenty guns, with Donald McTavish in
command of the men for the Columbia. She was convoyed by
the frigate ‘‘Phoebe’’** from Portsmouth, which she left in
March. and by the ‘‘Phoebe,’’ ‘‘Cherub,’’ and ‘‘Raecoon’’ from
Rio; but she proved to be a slow sailer, and they parted com-
pany.®? The ‘‘Raccoon,’’ Captain Black, with John McDonald
of Garth aboard, proceeded in advance and reached Baker’s Bay
on November 30, 1812.*°

storia was already in the possession of the North West Com-
pany when the ‘‘Raccoon’’ arrived. When McKenzie brought
the news of war, the Astorians held a council and determined to
abandon the establishment the ensuing spring or summer, it being
considered impossible for Astor to send them further supples
or reinforcements.77 On April 11, J. G. MeTavish, Joseph La-
rocque, and nineteen voyageurs arrived in two canoes. They
had come to await the ‘‘Isaac Todd’’ until July. On May 25,
Wallace and Halsey came in from their winter quarters on the
Willamette, with seventeen packs of furs. Early in June, Clarke,
David Stuart, and McKenzie came in with one hundred and forty
packs of furs, the result of two years of trade at Okanagan and
one year on the Spokane.”? Clarke and Stuart pointing out that
provisions and horses were wanting for the overland journey, it
was decided not to abandon the country until the following

= Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, II, 892-893.

* The orders given to Captain James Hillyar of the “Phoebe” to convoy
the “Isaac Todd,” annihilate any American settlements in the region of the
Columbia, ete., are in Admiralty 2, vol. 1380, pp. 367-379.

° Masson, Bourgeois, II, 43-48; Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, II, 746,
n. 1; Franchére, Narrative, tr. Huntington, 169.

Masson, Bourgeois, II, 48-50; Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, II,
757-766.

™ Franchére, Narrative, 166-167. The manuscript of Franchére’s book
is in the Toronto Publie Reference Library.

™ Tbid., 169-170.
138 The North West Company

April."* MeTavish was given goods on credit to purchase pro-
vision to take his party homeward.7* On August 4 Hunt arrived
in the ‘‘Albatross.’? He was surprised and ill-pleased at the
decision to abandon the post, but by himself could do nothing,
and he re-embarked at the end of the month.”> On October 6,7
McKenzie returned with J. G. McTavish and Angus Bethune,
heading a party of about seventy-five men. They camped near
the fort, but lacked provisions, for which they depended on the
Astorians. The latter were sparingly supplied; and, as the ships
did not arrive, the North West Company men found themselves in
a very awkward situation. They thereupon proposed to pur-
chase the whole establishment. The Astorians were willing, since
they anticipated the arrival of the ‘‘Isaac Todd.’’ The North
‘West Company leaders tried to prolong the negotiations, think-
ing capture would obviate purchase, but the bargain was finally
signed on October 16, 1813, and Astoria passed from American
ownership.”*

The bill of sale recited that the Pacific Fur Company had
been dissolved on the preceding July 1 by Duncan McDougall,
Donald McKenzie, David Stuart, and John Clarke, with the inten-
tion of abandoning the trade. All the establishments, furs, and
stock on hand on the Columbia and Thompson rivers were to be
sold to the North West Company at prices stated, which were
either reckoned on the prime cost or named outright in Halifax
currency. Payments were to be made in three equal installments

™Franchére, Narrative, 170-171.

™ Tbid., 172,

© Tbid., 173-180.

Ross says October 7 (Ross, Adventures of the First Settlers, 252).

™Franchére, Narrative, 190-193; Irving, Astoria, 482-484. Franchére
states that the North West Company party arrived early in September and
that the agreement was signed on October 23. In the latter item, Irving is
evidently right, as is proved by a copy of the bill of sale in F.O. 5, vol.
208. Ross says that MeDougall and McKenzie manned the guns at Astoria
and gave McTavish two hours to sign or depart (Ross, Adventures of the
First Settlers, 254).
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 139

on or before October 25, November 25, and December 25, 1814.
The North West Company agreed to transport any servants of
the Pacific Fur Company to Montreal and there pay them any
arrears of wages within one month of their arrival, such sums
to be deducted from the first payment. They also agreed to
pay the Pacific Fur Company the amount of any debts of men
who entered their service. The bill was signed by Duncan
McDougall, John George McTavish, John Stuart, and seven wit-
nesses. On March 10, 1814, an item was added by which Wilson
P. Hunt took the place of McDougall in the agreement. This
was signed by McDougall, Hunt, McTavish, and Stuart, and wit-
nessed by Halsey and Bethune.”®

On December 13, 1813, Captain Black of the ‘‘Raccoon’’ went
through the formality of taking possession of Astoria, which was
renamed Fort George, and of the country in the name of the
British sovereign.”® On the last day of the year the ‘‘Raccoon’’
left the Columbia River.*°

The North West Company played little real part in the actual
hostilities of the War of 1812.8: The same is true of the Indians
with whom they traded.*? When word of the outbreak of war

* Pelly to Canning, copy of the bill of sale in Hudson’s Bay House, Lon-

don, December 9, 1825, F.O. 5, vol. 208. The declaration that .the company
was dissolved on July 1, 1813, is of distinct interest.

™ Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, II, 770-771.

© Tbid., 780.

*On June 25, 1812, Prevost wrote to Liverpool enclosing a letter re-
ceived from “the principals of the North West and South West Companies”
stating that war was declared (Prevost to Liverpool, Quebec, June 25, 1812,
enclosing letter of Forsyth, Richardson & Co. and McTavish, McGillivray &
Co., dated June 24, 1812, Q, 118, pp. 2 et seg.). The joint action is note-
worthy.

“In a petition of the fur merchants to Bathurst, dated May 7, 1814, it
was stated: “That the different tribes of Indians who aided in the defence
of Upper Canada come partly from the Mississippi and Mississourie, but
principally from the Countries between the latter River and the Ohio.” The
petition is enclosed in Inglis, Ellice & Co. to Goulburn, Mark Lane, May 7,
1814, C.O. 42, vol. 159; also copy in F.O. 5, vol. 103. The petition sug-
gests boundaries but seems to be distinct from North West Company trade,
though some of the signatures are of firms interested in that trade. It was
140 The North West Company

reached Fort William, a small force was organized to proceed to
Fort St. Joseph. There it was learned that Captain Roberts,
with a force largely composed of traders and Indians from south
of the lakes, had captured Michilimackinaec. The North West
Company party visited the place and then dispersed.** However,
the North West Company rendered an important service to the
British government at the outbreak of the war by throwing open
their stores on liberal terms to the Indian Department, which was
thus able to give presents to the Indians.** A corps of voyageurs
was even organized, with various members of the North West
Company as officers; but it apparently did no fighting,®* and was
discharged March 12, 1813.**

It was necessary to exercise care in transporting the annual
returns from Fort William to Montreal, especially from Sault
Ste. Marie to French River. The Americans never succeeded in
seizing the furs, but the danger was great in 1814. On July 23
an American force under Major Holmes pillaged and burned
the property of the North West Company at Sault Ste. Marie,
including their schooner on Lake Superior.** There were on
Lake Huron two armed American vessels, the ‘‘Tigress’’ and
‘*Seorpion,’’ which were captured by a boat party from Michili-
mackinae under Worsley and Bulger.*® The fur brigade fol-
lowed safely the route between the islands and the shore until

signed by Inglis, Ellice & Co., McTavish, Fraser & Co., Mackenzie, Gillespie,
Parker & Co., Gillespie, Girrard & Co., and Jas. Daniell, Todhunter & Co.

The Letter Book of Miles Macdonell contains two letters from his
brother, John, who was a member of the expedition from Fort William (M.
155, pp. 155 et seg.; Masson, Bourgeois, II, 42).

* Selkirk, Sketch, 27.

* Tbid., 32-35. The writer claims that it provided a method by which the
North West Company could retain control over the voyageurs at public ex-
pense during the periods when they were not actually engaged in the trans-
portation to and from Fort William.

% Statement respecting the Earl of Selkirk’s Settlement, 17.
* Franchére’s Narrative, 350-351; Q, 128-1, p. 145.
Masson, Bourgeois, II, 53-54; Q, 128-2, pp. 290 et seq.
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 141

it reached French River. It is stated that the furs, valued at a
million dollars, were carried in forty-seven large canoes, guarded
by a hundred and thirty-five armed men.®®

The American control of Lake Erie, after Perry’s victory at
Put-in Bay, caused the North West Company to apply to the
British government for permission to use the route through Hud-
son Bay. Their petition, dated at London, February 9, 1814,
was addressed to Bathurst. They stated that the Hudson’s Bay
Company had a capital of one hundred thousand pounds in stock
which had fluctuated during the preceding twenty years from
two hundred and fifty to fifty per cent, and that for the past
seven years the directors had never declared a dividend nor laid
any statement of their affairs before their proprietors. They
requested permission to send supplies by way of Hudson Bay to
their traders in the interior. They had already, they stated,
applied to the Admiralty for protection to their vessels while in
the bay. At the same time they requested inquiry as to the
validity of the Hudson’s Bay Company’s monopoly.*? On March
8 McGillivray wrote to request an early interview for Ellice and
himself on the subject of the petition, as the ship intended for
that expedition was then at Spithead ready to sail for Quebec.
Another letter on the subject followed a week later.°* On March
16 Bathurst wrote to the Hudson’s Bay Company desiring per-
mission for that year for the North West Company to send in
stores and provisions by way of Hudson Bay to their establish-
ments and to bring out their goods collected the preceding year.
On March 23 Berens replied that the Hudson’s Bay Company
would carry out and deliver goods to the agents of the North

® Franchére, Narrative, 354-355.

* McTavish, Fraser & Co. and Inglis, Ellice & Co. to Bathurst, London,
February 9, 1814, C.O. 42, vol. 159; also printed in Narrative of Occur-
rences, Appendix, 55-58.

™ Simon McGillivray to Goulburn, 2 Suffolk Lane, Cannon Street, March
8, 1814; the same to the same, March 15, 1814; both in C.O. 42, vol. 159.
142 The North West Company

West Company on payment of reasonable freight charges. In
regard to bringing out furs, complaint was made of the en-
croachments of the North West Company, and it was requested
that some person of responsibility in England should give
security for the good conduct of those who should come to the
seaport. It was also pointed out that the route by way of the
lakes probably created an additional annual expense of ten
thousand pounds to the North West Company, and that the
earlier market possible by the Hudson Bay route would be worth
even more. An adequate compensation for these advantages was
therefore requested by the Hudson’s Bay Company.*? As already
stated, the furs went out by the regular route in 1814.

The North West Company filed claims for compensation for
several items at the end of the War of 1812. Mention has already
been made of the loss which they had suffered at Sault Ste. Marie.
The brig ‘‘Caledonia,’’ which had helped to convoy Roberts’
expedition to Michilimackinac, was boarded opposite Fort Erie
by a party of Americans in the early hours of October 9, 1812.
The armed brig ‘‘Detroit’’ was boarded at the same time. Their
cables were cut and they drifted towards the American shore.
The ‘‘Caledonia,’’ which carried a quantity of North West Com-
pany furs, grounded at Black Rock. The ‘‘Detroit’’ was de-
stroyed by fire.*?

The schooner ‘‘Nancy,’’ belonging to the North West Com-
pany and in service as a transport, was burned at Nottawasaga
Creek early in August, 1814.°* Two new schooners built on Lake
Superior were also lost. The ‘‘Mink,’’ of forty-five tons, was
captured on Lake Huron. Later the ‘‘Perseverance,’’ of eighty-
five tons, was burned at Sault Ste. Marie.°° The North West

® Joseph Berens to Bathurst, Hudson’s Bay House, March 23, 1814, C.0.
42, vol. 149.

Christie, 4 History of the late Province of Lower Canada, II, 20-21,
43; Gourlay, Statistical Account of Upper Canada, I, 54-55.

* Prevost to Bathurst, no. 192, Montreal, September 20, Q, 28-1, p. 226.
** C, 363, pp. 80-81.
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 143

Company put in claims for compensation,®* which were consid-
ered December 14, 1814, by a board of officers; and on February
20, 1815, Prevost wrote to Bathurst that he had ordered a pay-
ment for part of these and that the remainder was referred to
the government.*” The ‘‘Nancy’’ and ‘‘Mink’’ having been paid
for, the British government decided that the North West Com-
pany had no legal claim for indemnification for the ‘‘Persever-
ance,’’ but gave instructions to pay them £1000 because of their
zeal and services.®®

The agricultural settlement in the Red River Valley was now
developing into a cause of concern to the North West Company.
About 1810 Selkirk, whose earlier colonizing activities have been
outlined, began to think seriously®® of securing land in the inte-
rior through the Hudson’s Bay Company. He obtained the legal
opinion of Romilly, Holroyd, Cruise, Scarlett, and John Bell as
to the validity of that company’s charter. These men stated
that it was good and that the Hudson’s Bay Company had a legal

* Petition of MeTavish, McGillivrays & Co. and Alexander Mackenzie to
Prevost, Montreal, November 17, 1812, C, 363, pp. 80-81. This states that
William MeGillivray, Simon McGillivray, Archibald Norman McLeod,
Thomas Thain, John McTavish, and Henry McKenzie then composed the
firm of McTavish, McGillivrays & Co. They asked £2200 for the “Nancy,”
and £1486-5-0 for her transport services; £1000 for the schooner “Mink”;
£2500 for the schooner “Perseverance”; £2500 for their houses, stores, and
sawmill at Sault Ste. Marie; and £4330-13-9 for losses of provisions and
goods at Sault Ste. Marie, St. Josephs, and on the “Mink.” The first two
items are marked “allowed.” The amounts were all in Quebec currency.

“ Prevost to Bathurst, no. 229, Quebec, February 20, 1815, Q, 131, pp.
50-54. The North West Company was paid £2200 currency for the schooner
“Nancy,” £1000 curreney for the “Mink,” and £1243-5-0 currency for the
services of the “Nancy.” The case of the “Perseverance” was referred.

* Treasury to Goulburn, November 28, 1815, C.O. 42, vol. 164.

* He had considered the purchase of Hudson’s Bay Company stock in
1808. Alexander Mackenzie wrote two letters to him that year, dated at the
Adelphi, London, The second was dated October 29. Mackenzie had been
making inquiries about purchasing Hudson’s Bay Company stock. He stat-
ed that he would require a loan to the amount of his proportion of the pur-
chases. In the second letter he stated that the undue influence of the secre-
tary prevented the purchase of the stock, an immediate transfer of which
would be necessary to qualify Selkirk for the directorate (Selkirk Papers,
Canadian Archives, M, 733, pp. 1 et seq.).
Ii4 The North West Company

right to sell portions of its territory, which, according to the
charter, embraced all the lands the waters of which flowed into
Hudson Bay. These men stated further than the Act of 1803
did not apply within the territories of the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany.*°° Selkirk then proceeded to get control of the Hudson’s
Bay Company stock, in order to purchase the territory he de-
sired. The North West Company at once took alarm. They
considered the colonizing plan as a scheme on the part of the
Hudson’s Bay Company to destroy their trade by throwing an
agricultural colony across their line of communication from Mon-
treal and Fort William to the interior. Besides directly injuring
the North West Company’s trade, this colony would be a base of

supplies which would undoubtedly be of great service to the: - -

Hudson’s Bay Company, especially in their competition in the
lands towards the Rocky Mountains. The North West Company
was therefore more than ever disposed to assert their claims
that they were the legitimate successors to the old French trad. ©
ers in the West and that the Hudson’s Bay Company’s charter
was an illegal royal monopoly grant. They also got legal opin-
ions to the effect that the charter gave no territory or exclusive
trade privileges at such a distance from Hudson Bay.?*?
Having obtained control of not less than thirty-five thousand
of the total stock of one hundred and five thousand pounds ster-
ling of the Hudson’s Bay Company, Selkirk brought his plan for
a colony before a General Court, which assembled May 30, 1811.
Tle proposed to purchase a large amount of land on the Red
River and settle it with a large number of colonists in a limited
period. He undertook the expense necessary for transport, gov- —
ernment, protection, and the quieting of the Indian title to the .

* Statement respecting the Earl of Selkirk’s Settlement. Appendix A
iS a copy.

*™ They already had some opinions made in 1804, stating that they could
trade in Hudson Bay. They now got the opinion of Pigott, Spankie, and
Brougham in January, 1816. The Narrative of Occurrences, Appendix, 10-20,
prints these.
 

ole God Maret S

; PART ov THELEN, LY VERRAITORIES 1 \
“N reer “etre eo: I
NORE AYCE RICA,
Lvbibiting a Reiley Wn Ladian bir Traders:

PROM Cc En pa
FORT WILLIAM A 4 RED RIVER,
~~ a ~~

 

nd tlhe Sout Ain “ny Autti Wd f Me

ace oD), eee
Horth West Company.
oom , PSP ix “) ‘

SS ,

 

 

ae

. PLANO THEGHOUND
ir’ : ‘atm

 

ner tle j
FORKS ov RED RIVER,
nth the

TRACK OF TUR TICLES Ree

 

Ww Jane We,

1 Spat utr th Mutton Sivenat
UWhenr they C4 the Kod sd
a fo avent bon
Truck of iy. E Zr ff ary

 

rap Tee 0 Whore they wae Miccriat x tie Vor,

A bhvin whens then trad en th

 

Wher the tine wih Beunytes poy

 

 

Baw de da Riviere Wink
+ CW eet of Proview
Ned fiver
‘

 

Bonne
Bee hike

 

 

 

  

vi Douplaw hehe
Fort Gibraltar.” ke
NAW

hte

aa N A rTraer

wn bvrt Willinas te the ditha
Wert Count ay:

Viveting Cote

 

1 Konto the Paar tne

interior LD ata
| ondg wt | jn the tulerit Lapras fa OTe
fof Ws g py bare Set tein te

a . fake yp they | t | ig yerritory clained 6
'
i

at oy He

Hrlwons Bay Company.
e

sat i ig }
6 A f sp
/ i
Pr ce Me | Per aoa haey +

er

 

J

Amine ©

il

uD

 

 

 

 

         
      

wos Vou 1OD Loagitade Wert 10.0 from Geeenwich 99 on

From British Museum Maps, 69917 (75).
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 145

lands. There was some opposition, particularly vehement on
the part of some North West Company shareholders who held
only two thousand five hundred pounds of stock.1°? When the vote
was taken, it was found that holders of stock valued at £29,937
voted in the affirmative. Of this amount, Selkirk voted £4087.
Negative votes were cast by holders of stock valued at £14,823,
of which Thomas Thwaytes held £9233.1°8

The land purchased covered an area of about one hundred
and ten thousand square miles, part of which is now United States
soil.*°* The colony was called Ossiniboia, and Miles Macdonell,
formerly a captain in the Royal Canadian Volunteers,’ was

*? Some of this was purchased by Inglis, Ellice, and Simon McGillivray
in order to attend the meeting (Simon McGillivray to MeTavish, MeGilli-
vray & Co., June 1, 1811, in Halkett to Bathurst of January 30, 1819. Me-
Gillivray’s stock was not transferred in time to vote (Q, 153-1-2-3-4, pp. 610
et. seq.).

*8 Willson, The Great Company, II, 145. Possibly Willson is quoting
these figures from the minute books of the Hudson’s Bay Company.

** The boundaries of Selkirk’s grant are marked in the folded map in the
anonymous ‘“‘Notice respecting the Boundary between His Majesty’s Pos-
sessions in North America and the United States, London, 1817.” This map
also shows a proposed American boundary line. It marks many trading-
posts of the North West Company, several of which are west of the Rocky
Mountains. It introduces a Caledonia River between Fraser’s River (an
eastern tributary of which is called Kashmin River) and the Otchenaukane
[Okanagan] River. This river, which empties into Puget Sound and the
Gulf of Georgia by a double mouth, is apparently a confusion of the course
of Thompson River, perhaps being a junction of it with the Skagit River.
The map, and possibly the whole pamphlet, was intended to accompany the
Narrative of Occurrences in the Indian Countries of North America (Pam-
phlet 383, Canadian Archives). Part of the Selkirk grant is shown in a print-
ed map in the British Museum entitled “A Map of Part of the Indian
Territories in North America exhibiting the route of the Indian Fur Trad-
ers from Fort William to the Red River, and to the other Trading Stations
of the North West Company.” It has an inset plan of the ground near the
Forks of Red River with route-marks to show the movements of June 19,
1816, evidently delineated in the interest of the North West Company. The
map is undated, but is not earlier than 1818, as it shows the boundary line
adopted by the Convention of 1818. It shows thirty North West Company
trading-posts marked as such, besides Cumberland House, which is not so
marked. These are mostly on the waters between Lake Superior and the
Saskatchewan, and on the Red and Assiniboine rivers and their branches.

* Can. Arch. Report, 1886, p. xix; M, 155, p. 24.
146 The North West Company

made its governor. Difficulties were encountered from the ene-
mies of the colony in the British Isles. The first settlers, about
seventy in number, who were sent out in 1811, reached Red River
in the autumn of 1812. Point Douglas was selected as the site
of the settlement. The colonists wintered at Fort Daer, near
Pembina, and returned to their lands in the spring. In 1813,
1814, and 1815, further small detachments arrived, and agri-
culture was undertaken.

In the meantime the feeling against the colony was changing
into active opposition. It is a debatable point which side was
responsible for the first attempts at injury. At any rate, the
proclamation issued by Miles Macdonell on January 8, 1814,
precipitated the struggle. By this proclamation, the exportation
of food from the colony was forbidden for a twelvemonth except
by special license for the support of the trading parties then in
the territory. This was followed by the seizure of a considerable
quantity of pemmican and grease in the North West Company’s
fort at the mouth of Souris River. An arrangement was made
by which sufficient provisions were allowed from the colony for
the use of the Athabasca, English River, and other posts.’°°

The matter was debated in the general meeting at Fort Wil-
liam that summer. According to the testimony of John Pritchard,
it was determined to induce as many settlers as possible to desert
the colony, then to arouse the Indians against the remainder,
and to bring Miles Macdonell a prisoner to Montreal. Two
partners, Duncan Cameron and Alexander Macdonell, were put
in charge of the execution of the plan. Macdonell wintered at
Qu’Appelle River, while Cameron used his influence upon the
settlers. Many of these were induced to go to Canada. On Octo-
ber 21, 1814, notice was served on the North West Company to

1% Franchére states that the voyageurs were prepared to take the provi-
sions by force and that only the mediation of McDonald and De Rocheblave
averted a collision (Franchére, Narrative, 331-334).
Lhe Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 147

quit the premises at the forks of the Red River within six
months.!°7

In 1815 there were various acts of violence. Cannon were
seized from Selkirk’s stores and taken to Fort Gibraltar. Men
were fired upon. Attempts to get the Indians to rise ended in
failure, however. Conditions became so serious that Miles Mac-
donell, in the interests of peace, surrendered in obedience to a
warrant that he had at first defied.°* He was taken to Montreal,
but never tried. An attack upon the settlement resulted in its
abandonment, the inhabitants going to Norway House, July 25,
1815. They were brought back the same year by Colin Robertson.
More settlers came with them, and again they wintered at Fort
Daer. Robert Semple, the new governor, was there, but does not
seem to have assumed his duties at once.'°® The settlers went to
Red River again in April, 1816.

In October, 1815, Fort Gibraltar was seized by Colin Robert-
son, and Selkirk’s cannon and goods were recovered. The fort
was returned, and Duncan Cameron, who had been captured,
was released upon his promise of good behavior. In the early
spring of 1816 Fort Gibraltar was again seized, and Duncan
Cameron was sent to England, where he was released without
trial.?° Fort Gibraltar was torn down and the materials used
to strengthen Fort Douglas. At this news, Sheriff Alexander
Macdonell seized Pembina House of the North West Company.
The military stores were taken to Fort Douglas, but the prisoners
were released on promise of good behavior.

Matters were now ripe for a collision. Yet Governor Semple
apparently could not see the peril of his position. This is the
"47 Q, 133, p. 58.

* Narrative of Occurrences, 37-38.

*” He had been appointed by the Hudson’s Bay Company as chief gov-
ernor over all their factories and territories (Statement respecting the Earl-
of Selkirk’s. Settlement, 86).

“Cameron was not charged with any felony in which the English courts
had primary jurisdiction.
148 The North West Company

more remarkable when it is considered that the reason alleged
for the destruction of Fort Gibraltar was the danger that it
would prove a rallying point for an attack by the Metis, or
half-breeds, from the west.

When the attack came, it was a double one. One party under
Maecdonell came from Qu’Appelle, seizing Brandon House on
the way; and another party, under A. N. McLeod, came from Fort
William." A mounted detachment from the Qu’Appelle party
was sent forward under Cuthbert Grant. This body passed at
some distance from Fort Douglas, and some of its members were
made prisoners in the settlement. Semple, on observing the course
of these horsemen, came out with a small party from Fort Doug-
las, apparently to protect the settlers, though his numbers were
too small to accomplish even this. The half-breeds turned back
to meet him. A brief parley was followed by a conflict, in which
Semple’s party was annihilated by superior numbers and more
deadly marksmanship. The governor himself and twenty others
were killed. One wounded man and possibly six unwounded men
escaped from Semple’s party. The opposing party lost one man
killed, called Battoche’s son, and one wounded out of a party of
about sixty.?. Such was the skirmish of Seven Oaks, or Frog
Plains, June 19, 1816.

ut Letter to the Earl of Liverpool, 66-67.

12 Statement respecting the Earl of Selkirk’s Settlement, 96-97; Letter to
the Earl of Liverpool, 67. It has been suggested that the Qu’Appelle party
was intended to join the Fort William party before making an attack on the
settlement (Bryce, Remarkable History of the Hudson’s Bay Company, 3rd
ed., pp. 234-235). The contemporary literature speaks of a double attack,
not of a combined attack. Bourke later deposed that he overheard a con-
versation in which MeDonell stated that he intended to starve out the set-
tlers, and in which it was said that McLeod intended to attack their posi-
tion (Statement respecting the Earl of Selkirk’s Settlement, 114, |xxix).
Lavigne’s deposition shows that the half-breeds were already attacking the
settlement when Selkirk’s party left Fort Douglas (Statement respecting the
Earl of Selkirk’s Settlement, lv-lvi). But Frederick Damien Huerter, who
was with MeLeod’s party, added a singular item. He swore that their party
was to unite with one from Portage des Prairies and a third party from

above through Lake Winnipeg, and that Alexander Mackenzie informed him
that a strong body of half-breeds under Alexander Macdonell was to make
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 149

Fort Douglas surrendered at discretion, and three days later
the colonists left onee more for Lake Winnipeg. On the way
they met the Fort William party and were deprived of their
letters, account books, and documents. The North West Com-
pany later claimed that the half-breeds were attempting to pass
at a distance from the settlement and meet parties from below in
order that the regular provision supply might be maintained.1**

In the meantime Lord Selkirk, who had spent the winter of
1815-1816 at Montreal, was on his way to his colony of Red River
by the route of Fond du Lac and Red Lake. In his party were
a number of discharged soldiers of the De Meuron and Watte-
ville regiments whom he was taking to stiffen the defensive quali-
ties of his settlement. They were going as settlers, not as mili-
tary men. The party had just quitted Sault Ste. Marie when
news came of the clash at Seven Oaks. Selkirk determined to
go to Fort William in his capacity as a justice of the peace for
Upper Canada and the Indian territories. He requested Erma-
tinger and Askin, two magistrates of Sault Ste. Marie and Drum-
mond Island, to accompany him, but they were unable to go.
Selkirk reported the fact in writing to Sherbrooke, the governor-
general of Canada, and proceeded without them.** He had a
sergeant and six men, besides the aid of his own party. On
August 12 he reached Fort William, released the prisoners held
in custody by the North West Company, and investigated the
recent events, taking depositions from witnesses. He arrested
several of those charged with complicity™® in the events at Red

the first attack on the settlement (Amos, Trials, 269). There is no other
mention of these Portage and Saskatchewan parties.

43 Such is the import of Siveright’s affidavit (Narrative of Occurrences,
Appendix, 47).

™4 Statement respecting the Earl of Selkirk’s Settlement, 70-74.

19 Ags a result, the Upper Canada authorities were compelled to consider
the matter. Gore reported that Fort William having been considered in the

Indian Territory, he would not have presumed to interfere had Selkirk not
apprehended the traders under his own warrant as a magistrate of the
150 The North West Company

River and sent them under guard to Montreal, where they were
admitted to bail. One of Selkirk’s warrants was served at Fond
du Lae and resulted in the president’s forbidding licenses to
British subjects there.1'*

When Selkirk reached Fort William, the wintering partners
had departed except those for Red River, Winnipeg River, and
Lake Superior, who were there with their outfits. He consid-
ered it necessary to stop these canoes from going westward from
Fort William that season. The North West Company later
claimed that there were goods worth £8000 and six hundred
packs of furs valued at £60,000 which Selkirk held at Fort
William."’? It is quite probable that the chief reason why Sel-
kirk’s action did not cause more bloodshed was the disinclina-
tion of the North West Company’s servants for an armed con-
test with the trained soldiers in his party.

In 1817 Selkirk pushed forward to Red River and reinstated
his colony. He also made treaties with the Indians in order
to extinguish their titles to his lands. He returned by wav of
St. Louis to Washington and Albany, whence he proceeded to
Upper Canada to answer the legal charges made against him.

Sherbrooke, after considerable delay, had nominated Lieu-
tenant-Colonel William Batehelor Coltman and Major Fletcher
as commissioners to proceed to the Northwest, investigate the

Western District of Upper Canada (Gore to Bathurst, York, September 9,
1816, Q, 320, pp. 324 et seq.).

"6 Bagot to Castlereagh, no. 10, Washington, January 6, 1818. Astor
wrote to Selkirk in 1817-1818 for damages because some of the furs at Fond
du Lae and:the liquor at Fort William belonged to the American Fur Com-
pany (Selkirk Papers, Canadian Archives, vols. M 742, pp. 3441-3442, and
M 746, p. 4802).

_™ Printed Memorial, of date London, 1819, in C.O. 42, vol. 1814; also
evidence of McKenzie, Q, 325-2, p. 319, printed in Can. Arch. Report, 1897,
p. 96; Narrative of Occurrences, 66.

“8 Letter to the Karl of Liverpool, 77-81. Fort Douglas had been recap-

tured by a party under D’Orsonnens earlier in the year (Kingsford, History
of Canada, IX, 138).

 
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 151

occurrences, and see to the establishment of law and order.!!®
They were compelled to winter at York, but they sent a special
expedition with news of the revocation of all magisterial com-
missions west of Sault Ste. Marie. This order Selkirk obeyed
upon receipt. A proclamation was also issued by Sherbrooke in
the name of the Prince Regent calling upon all parties to desist
from hostilities, restore property, and cease obstructing trans-
portation.

Selkirk had assumed control of Fort William, Rainy River
Fort, Bas de la Riviére Fort, Fond du Lac Post, and some others.
He thus had control of the North West Company’s ecommuni-
cations and was in a situation to cripple its trade, had he so
desired. The North West Company was alarmed at the pros-
pect. Its London agents urged in January, 1817, that the gov-
ernment send a military force with the commissioners to enforce
their decisions, stating that if Selkirk interrupted the commu-
nication for the ensuing spring the damage would be beyond
remedy by any appeal.'*°

In May, 1817, the commission proceeded westward to Fort
William and Red River, where Selkirk was met. Coltiman was
impressed with Selkirk’s evident attempt to avoid violation of
the laws, and recommended that the charges against him be
not pressed. The report of the commission is a carefully pre-
pared, impartial statement of events. As a result, both parties
blamed it for not giving the full facts of the case.

The struggle was now transferred from the plains of Red
River to the law courts of Upper and Lower Canada. These
courts, by the Canada Jurisdiction Act,’?? passed on account of

49 Coltman had been appointed by the Prince Regent an Honorary Mem-

ber of the Executive Council of Lower Canada, January 13, 1812 (C. 0. 47,
vol. 123).

129 MeTavish, Fraser & Co., Inglis, Ellice & Co., and Sir Alexander Mac-
kenzie to Goulburn, London, January 31, 1817, Q, 147-1-2, pp. 313 et seq.

¥1 43 Geo. ITI, ¢. 138.
152 The North West Company

conflicts between the North West and X Y companies, had power
to deal with offenses committed in the Indian territories.

These trials may be briefly summarized. Charles Reinhard
and McLellan were accused of the murder of Owen Keveny and
tried at Quebec, May, 1818. McLellan was acquitted. Reinhard
was found guilty, but the sentence of hanging was apparently
never executed. This was probably because of a question of
jurisdiction, it not being certain whether the murder was com-
mitted in Upper Canada, Lower Canada, or the Indian territories,
Keveny having been killed at a falls on Winnipeg River.

Selkirk appeared at Sandwich to answer charges made against
him. Witnesses not appearing, the court accepted bail. These
cases against Selkirk were seemingly never reopened, though a
man named Allen was tried and acquitted.1??. Selkirk then pro-
ceeded to Montreal to answer to the charges for which Coitman
had bound him. The court found want of jurisdiction, but
bound him over to appear in Upper Canada, under the large sum
of £12,000 which Coltman had imposed.1?*

In Montreal, Colin Robertson and four others were tried in
May, 1818, for riotously destroying Fort Gibraltar. They were
found not guilty.1?*

In September, 1818, charges were laid against Selkirk and
others of a conspiracy to ruin the trade of the North West
Company. The grand jury at Sandwich delayed its answer to
Chief Justice Powell. The court was summarily adjourned, and
an act was passed by the Legislature of Upper Canada to enable
the case to be tried in any district of the province.1?®> The cases

1 Letter to the Earl of Liverpool, 114-124.

*8Tbid., 125-126.

* Amos, Trials, 1-27.

“©The act was passed by the Legislative Council, October 23, and re-
ceived Lieutenant-Governor Maitland’s assent November 27, 1818. Besides
attempts to repeal this act in Upper Canada, attempts were made in Eng-
land to have assent refused to it. The Hudson’s Bay Company petitioned
the Board of Trade on August 3, 1819, to be heard by counsel against the
The Struggle with the Hudson’s Bay Company 153

were then tried at York. Deputy Sheriff Smith was given a
verdict of £500 against Selkirk for imprisonment at Fort William.
MeKenzie, a North West Company partner, was likewise given
a verdict of £1500 for false imprisonment. McKenzie had exe-
cuted a bill of sale to Selkirk of the North West Company’s
property at Fort William. He later repudiated it, stating that
he had been under duress and continually intoxicated at the
time.*76

In October, 1818, charges were brought on the part of Lord
Selkirk. Cuthbert Grant and seventeen others were charged
with being principals or accessories in the murder of Robert
Semple, June 19, 1816. A verdict of not guilty was returned
in the case of two of the alleged principals, Paul Brown and
Francois Firmin Boucher, who were tried at York in Octo-
ber, 1818. As accessories to the same murder, six North West
Company partners, including Alexander Mackenzie and Simon
Fraser, were tried at York in October, 1818, but they were
aequitted.1?*

Brown was also tried at York for the robbery of a blanket

act. They represented it as a marked innovation which would operate to the
disadvantage of their servants and claimed that its application to the Sel-
kirk cases was ez post facto, which was apparently true. They also claimed
that Fort William was not in Upper Canada (B. T. 1, vol. 139, no. 6). The
Board of Trade replied on August 5, that the petition should have been ad-
dressed to the Privy Council (B.T. 5, vol. 28, p. 103). The act was al-
lowed to continue in effect, and on January 23, 1827, the Board of Trade
reported that it, with others which had not been disallowed, should be con-
sidered in force (B. T. 5, vol. 35, pp. 398-399).

6 A claim was later made by an anonymous writer that McKenzie had
accepted an offer of arbitration on damage claims; that property on both
sides was to be put in the hands of arbitrators; and that in the matter of at
least £1000 worth of goods which were stipulated to be sold for fifty guineas,
it was the express condition that the sale should be void if the conditions of
arbitration were complied with. In other words, it was a legal formality
(Notice on the Claims of the Hudson’s Bay Company, Montreal, 1817, pp.
143-146). Selkirk had made arbitration proposals in a letter dated August
27, 1816, but they were refused by the North West Company (Narrative of
Occurrences, 97-99).

“1 Amos, Trials, 189-335,
154 The North West Company

and gun from Michael Heden. He was acquitted.1?® John
Cooper and Hugh Bennerman were charged with the robbery
of a cannon in a dwelling-house of Lord Selkirk. They were also
acquitted when tried at York in November, 1818.

Thus the legal contest ended.1?® Considering the great social
and political influence which the North West Company pos-
sessed in the Canadas at that date, Selkirk was probably fortu-
nate not to have had even more severe penalties imposed upon
him,

The evidence at the trials was printed by both parties, and
various partisan pamphlets appeared.1*° After Selkirk’s return
to England, Sir James Montgomery, one of his friends, brouglit
the matter before the House of Commons and moved for the
papers in the case. The motion was carried. As a result, the
Blue Book of 1819 was prepared. It is a valuable official source
of information on the disturbances of which Lord Selkirk’s
colony was the center.*3?

“Amos, Trials, 337-346.

” Bryce’s account of the Red River troubles and the subsequent legal
proceedings is favorable to Selkirk. His statements are evidently largely
based on the contemporary literature (Bryce, Remorkable History of the
Hudson's Bay Company, 3rd. ed., 202-259).

Kingsford sums up strongly against Selkirk and in favor of the North
West Company. His account is marred, however, by errors of fact (Kings-
ford, History of Canada, IX, 103-158).

4° The criticisms made by Selkirk’s supporters are stated freely in the
Letter to the Karl of Liverpool (cf. pp. 169-180), the Colonial Office getting
some bitter criticism.

*!'The Colonial Office papers contain a large manuscript map. in size
5’x 2’ 4”, entitled “Plans of the Indian Territories, Comprehended between
the 46th and 53rd Degrees of North Latitude, and the 90th and 101st Degrees
of West Longitude from Greenwich. By Jos. Bouchette. Surv. Genl. &e.,
&e.” This map was in the Surveyor-General’s office at Quebec on December
3, 1816. It marks detail connected with the Red River troubles and was
probably sent to the Colonial Office to give information on that subject. It
shows the route from St. Louis River toward the Mississippi, and the route
from Grand Portage to Lake Winnipeg, called Lake Winegeg. It follows
the east shore of this lake to the narrows and then branches. One branch
follows the east shore to the top of the map. A North West Company post
on the way indicates that that company traded extensively in this region.
The other branch follows the west shore of the lake and throws off a branch
CHAPTER VII
LAST DAYS OF THE NORTH WEST COMPANY

The Red River colony was not, however, the sole theater of
dispute in these years. There was trouble in other regions,
particularly in regard to the Athabasca trade, in which the
Hudson’s Bay Company made a persistent effort to share. It
was beyond their charter limits, of course, but they asserted
that, being British subjects, they had as good a right as any
person to trade in that region. The North West Company had
no charter rights to adduce, but were determined that thev
would not tamely submit to the loss of their virtual monopoly of
trade in Athabasca.

In 1815, the Hudson’s Bay Company made a departure
from their long-established policy and sent an expedition from
Canada to Athabasca. They engaged Colin Robertson and John
Clarke, former clerks of the North West Company, to obtain
the men and lead them by way of Fort William and Lake Winni-
peg. At the latter place they were to obtain goods and sup-
plies from Hudson Bay. The expedition assembled at Terre-
bonne and not at Lachine, which was the departing point of
the North West Company’s canoes.*

Robertson left the expedition at Lake Winnipeg in order
to lead back to Red River the colonists who had fled thence
after the first dispersal of the colony. The other members of the
expedition pursued their way, but had a disastrous winter in
Athabasca. The Hudson’s Bay Company stated that a large
party of men in the employ of the North West Company attacked
their men and robbed them of a large quantity of goods. The
Indians were apparently afraid to supply them with provi-

1 Masson, Bourgeois, II, 56-58; MeTavish, Fraser & Co. to Goulburn, Suf-
folk Lane, London, November 12, 1819, Q, 153-4, pp. 1034-1051.
Last Days 157

sions. As a result, eighteen of the party were starved to death,
‘“by the machinations of the North West Company,’’ as the
Hudson’s Bay Company phrased it. About fifty of the others,
after being kept without food for two and even three days,
took an oath before one of the North West Company’s partners,
in his capacity as a magistrate, that they would not return to
that region. This caused the Hudson’s Bay Company a loss
of from £40,000 to £50,000. Of course the North West Company
claimed that the expedition had not been properly supplied
with provisions and that these deaths were therefore the fault
of the Hudson’s Bay Company.” Wentzel stated the following
year that the North West Company sent out four hundred
packs that year, which was an increase in their returns. The
Hudson’s Bay Company did not have five full packs in the
whole department, not one of their four establishments lasted
through the winter, and half of their party were dead or had
gone to Lesser Slave Lake or Fort des Prairies to avoid star-
vation.2 The Hudson’s Bay Company’s post of Fort Wedder-
burn was broken up by Archibald Norman McLeod, who had
charge of the neighboring North West Company’s post.* The
posts at Green Lake and Ile a la Crosse were seized and the
occupants imprisoned; and the posts of Isle a l’Outard, Lesser
Slave Lake, and Pierre aux Calumets, as well as the one at Lake
Athabasca, were plundered by the North West Company.® The

? Pelly to Bathurst, Hudson’s Bay House, September 13, 1819, Q, 153-4,
pp. 870-881; the same to same, enclosing copy of petition sent to the Privy
Council, Hudson’s Bay House, May 13, 1820, C.O. 42, vol. 186. The latter
states that the oath was for two years. The previous item says it was for all

time (McTavish, Fraser & Co. to Goulburn, Suffolk Lane, London, November
12, 1819, Q, 153-4, pp. 1034-1051.

* Masson, Bourgeois, II, 117-118.
*Pelly to Bathurst, Hudson’s Bay House, September 13, 1819, Q, 153-4,
pp. 870-881.

® Selkirk Papers, Canadian Archives, pp. 15795-15810, 15821 et seq., 16309-
16319. Green Lake post was first seized on December 21, 1816, and again
on March 20, 1817. Tle & la Crosse post was seized on March 17, 1817.
Fort Wedderburn was seized on March 23, 1817. Deer’s-Lake post was de-
158 The North West Company

latter brought about four hundred and thirty packs out of
Athabasca in 1818, while the Hudson’s Bay Company’s men
under Decoigne did not make a pack. They did, however, make
thirty packs at Green Lake, and thirty-two packs in the Rainy
Lake region.®

In September of 1818 the Hudson’s Bay Company’s men
again appeared in force at Fort Chipewean under Robertson.
Fort Wedderburn was re-established, and Clarke got away to
Peace River before the arrival of the North West Company’s
men from Rainy Lake. The North West Company claimed
that he made an unsuccessful attempt to seize provisions from
their post at Fort Vermillion.’ The party under McAulay,
who opposed Wentzel at Great Slave Lake, were kept busy
fishing for a living. The Mackenzie River Department had been
resumed the preceding year, after a temporary abandonment,
and had produced ninety packs, but the outfits for this region
and for Peace River were stopped by the ice in 1818. On
October 11, 1818, Robertson, while attending the funeral of
one of his men, was seized by a North West Company party
under Black and taken prisoner to Fort Chipewean. The Hud-
son’s Bay Company claimed that Robertson was unarmed and
that Black fired a pistol at him. The North West Company
claimed, on the other hand, that Robertson had threatened to
have the Indians attack Black’s men, and that he had fired a
pistol at Black when the latter arrested him. Robertson was
being taken to Canada in the spring of 1819 when, according
stroyed, and Little Slave Lake post was seized. Coltman reports thus (Blue
Book of 1819, pp. 236-244). The post at Green Lake was plundered and its
inhabitants imprisoned by a North West Company party led by Ogden and

Black in March, 1816 (Pelly to Bathurst, enclosing petition to the Privy
Council, Hudson’s Bay House, May 13, 1820, (.O. 42, vol. 186.

° Masson, Bourgeois, TI, 119.

*But the Hudson’s Bay Company stated that what was done was to res-
cue Mr. Chatellain, who had been sent in advance to obtain provisions and
was held a prisoner at Fort Vermillion (Berens to Bathurst, Hudson's Bay
House, London, February 24, 1820, C.O. 42, vol. 186).
Last Days 159

to the North West Company’s account, he broke parole and
escaped. The Hudson’s Bay Company made the countercharge
that an attempt was made to drown Robertson by upsetting
the canoe in which he was being transported in a bad rapid
in the Saskatchewan. Whatever the cause, the main point was
that Robertson clung to the canoe and escaped, but the two
North West Company men with him, although expert swimmers,
were both drowned.°®

The Hudson’s Bay Company now took action which seriously
threatened the communications of the North West Company to
Athabasca. Some of the bench warrants issued at Montreal
in 1818, at the instance of Lord Selkirk, came into the hands
of Governor Williams, the successor of Semple, who proceeded
to enforce them. He took station at the Grand Rapid of the
Saskatchewan in June, 1819, with a competent force, which in-
cluded some of the De Meuron colonists. The party had some
pieces of light artillery, and the men were well armed. Two
days later, on June 16, John D. Campbell and Benjamin Fro-
bisher, partners from Churchill River, were arrested with their
men. Four days later the fur canoes from English River
arrived. They were halted, and arrests were made of the men
for whom there were warrants. The others were then allowed
to proceed with the furs. The partners had been in advance
in light canoes in order to proceed to Fort William. On June
22 the arrested men were sent to Jack River, whence they
were taken to Hudson Bay in order to be sent to Canada by
way of Moose Factory and Michipicoton or Temiskaming, thus
avoiding Fort William. On June 23 three more partners, An-
eus Shaw, John George McTavish, and William McIntosh, were

s Masson, Bourgeois, II, 122-124; Pelly to Bathurst, Hudson’s Bay House,

September 13, 1819, Q, 153-4, pp. 870-881; McTavish, Fraser & Co. to Goul-
burn, Suffolk Lane, London, November 12, 1819, Q, 153-4, pp. 1034-1051.

* Berens to Bathurst, Hudson’s Bay House, London, February 24, 1820,
C.0. 42, vol. 186.
160 The North West Company

arrested. An Indian was also detained. On June 30 Robertson
and some others arrived. The North West Company claimed
that they brought a rumor that a large party of Indians and
half-breeds were mustering to attack Williams’ party and release
the prisoners. However that may be, Williams broke camp and
returned to Hudson Bay. McIntosh escaped on the way, and
the Indian was released. It is stated that there was no warrant
against either of them. Shaw and McTavish were sent to Eng-
land, reaching Dover on October 27. Campbell was sent to Can-
ada.

The North West Company’s papers seized at the Grand
Rapid were handed over to the North West Company on de-
mand.*® Frobisher, who was left for the winter at York Fac-
tory, escaped with two French Canadians, but perished a short
distance from Moose Lake Post of the North West Company.
None of the arrested men was ever brought to trial.1!  Rich-
mond, on hearing of the affair through North West Company
channels at Drummond Island, sent Major McLeod and Sir
Charles Saxton with dispatches commanding obedience to the
Prince Regent’s Proclamation of 1817. They proceeded past
Fort William, but returned when they heard Williams had left
the Grand Rapid for Hudson Bay, having sent forward their
dispatches.'? The North West Company asserted freely that a
repetition of such measures would meet with armed resistance, but
their assertion was never tested. George Simpson had charge of
Hudson’s Bay Company affairs in 1820, and only fifteen canoes
were taken into Athabasca. The North West Company thus had
a marked superiority of men and goods in that department.

Warrants were issued against Williams and others for the

* MeTavish, Fraser & Co, to Goulburn, Suffolk Lane, London, November
12, Q, 153-4, pp. 1034-1051; Masson, Bourgeois, II, 181-207.
* Masson, Bourgeois, II, 206-226.

* MeTavish, Fraser & Co. to Bathurst, London, February 12, 1820, C.0.
42, vol. 168.
Last Days 161

Grand Rapids affair, but apparently were never served.'* After
making strong protestations on the subject to the British govern-
ment,’* and after forwarding Bathurst a copy of the instructions
sent to their wintering partners to obey the Proclamation of
1817,"* the North West Company acted in the same manner at the
Grand Rapid in the summer of 1820. A party under J. G. Me-
Tavish, James Leith, Henry Mackenzie, and J. D. Campbell, part-
ners, proceeded inland from Fort William in May. They were
joined by two more partners, Charles Grant and George Keith,
and by some others, including several Indians. The whole party,
consisting of about sixty or seventy men, posted themselves in two
divisions at the Rapids of the Saskatchewan. Here they remained
about a month, halting all the Hudson’s Bay Company’s canoes
which came down the river. They permitted Alexander Macdon-
ald to continue on his way. On June 29 they arrested Colin Rob-
ertson, the Hudson’s Bay Company’s head in Athabasca. and took
him to Fort William, but his canoe eseaped. On July 2 fourteen
Hudson’s Bay Company canoes under Todd arrived. With
them was Spence, who had been sent up from Montreal with a
warrant, issued by Coltman on July 19, 1819, for the arrest of
Black and others concerned in the seizure of Robertson on Oc-
tober 9, 1818. He had arrested a clerk and three men at Fort
Wedderburn on May 21, 1820. Spence was taken and his pris-

*% Masson, Bourgeois, I, 140-141. Franklin stated in 1820 that the Hud-
son's Bay Company had no settlement north of Great Slave Lake. Their
post on that lake was Fort Resolution (Franklin, Narrative, 198, 201, Map
2).

“ MeTavish, Fraser & Co. to Goulburn, 2 Suffolk Lane, Cannon Street,
London, January 11, 1820; petition of same to Bathurst, February 12, 1820,
in Simon McGillivray to Goulburn of same date, ete., C.O. 42, vol. 168.

*MeTavish, Fraser & Co. to Goulburn, 2 Suffolk Lane, Cannon Street,
London, Mareh 21, 1820, C.O. 42, vol. 168. Bathurst sent a copy of these
instructions to the Hudson's Bay Company, according to an endorsement,
and in aceordance with his orders Maitland sent, by the Hudson’s Bay and
North West Company canoes from Montreal in 1820, new proclamations
dated Quebec, May 12, 1820, renewing the terms of the proclamation of
May 3, 1817, and enjoining the keeping of the peace (Maitland to Bathurst,
Quebec, May 16, 1820, C.O. 42, vol. 185).
162 The North West Company

oners were liberated, but the other men and the canoes were
apparently allowed to go on. Evidently the party had intended
to seize Governor Williams, but he had passed Grand Rapid the
day hefore their arrival. The Hudson’s Bay Company, in re-
porting the matter to the Colonial Office, pointed out that J. G.
MeTavish, a leader of the North West Company’s party, had
been in London after Bathurst’s intimation to the North West
Company on the subject of obeying the Proclamation of 1817,
that he had had ample time to consult William and Simon McGilli-
vray, and Inglis, Ellice & Co., and that he had then left England
with Bathurst’s dispatch in his pocket. They asked that the action
be punished, quoting Bathurst’s letter to them of the preceding
February 19, and likewise requested that a prompt decision
should be made in regard to the validity of their charter.'®

That same year Robertson reached England, and in an
affidavit he stated that the North West Company had tried to
drown him at Pin Portage in 1818; also that he had not been
under parole when he escaped at Cumberland House. He said
that his arrest at Grand Rapid was by Livingston, a half-pay
officer of the Indian Department, who claimed to be a peace
officer. The arrest was apparently on an indictment from which
he had been free by a nolle prosequi at Montreal in 1818; and
as Ross, the North West Company’s counsel, was acting for the
Attorney-General, then absent in England, he had escaped when
near Montreal. Bathurst evidently sent orders to Dalhousie to
have the partners concerned in the Grand Rapid affair of 1820
brought to trial. 37

The Hudson’s Bay Company had Simon McGillivray’® ar-

 

* Berens to Bathurst, Hudson’s Bay House, London, November 22, 1820;
same to same, December 30, 1820, C.O. 42, vol. 186.

“Copy of affidavit dated St. Dions Back Church, London, December 23,
1820, in Berens to Bathurst, Hudson’s Bay House, London, December 30,
1820, C.O. 42, vol. 186. An endorsement indicates the action taken by
Bathurst.

* Probably the clerk of that name.
Last Days 163

rested by a constable at Fort Wedderburn on October 23, 1820.
Three duels were fought at Lae La Cloche, Ile & la Crosse, and
Lae Cariboux in the early winter. In the latter duel Leslie of the
Hudson’s Bay Company was badly wounded. The returns of the
year promised to be good except for Mackenzie River, where
there had been a shortage of ammunition. There were prospects
that an opposition—no doubt the Hudson’s Bay Company—
would start in New Caledonia in 1821. Connolly drew his men
from Rat River for the winter of 1820-1821. There were re-
ports current among the North West Company winterers that
the Hudson’s Bay Company were preparing a covered ball-proof
barge to blockade the Grand Rapid in 1821.1®

The Hudson’s Bay Company does not seem to have attempted
seriously to enter the field of trade west of the Rocky Moun-
tains while the North West Company existed as a separate body.
It has been already pointed out that the latter company acquired
the property of the Pacific Fur Company, in addition to the
eligible trading position which they held on the upper Columbia
and to the northward in New Caledonia.

In 1815 the firm of Inglis, Ellice & Co., agents in London
for the North West Company, addressed various communications
to the Colonial Office. They observed that they were alarmed
at reports that British traders were warned off American soil,
and requested information in regard to the attitude of the Brit-
ish government. They were particularly insistent about the
trade of the Columbia River and the region northward to the
Russian settlements. They stated that they had always regarded
this country from the Rocky Mountains to the coast as being
British property, that they had established a colony on the Co-
lumbia, that they had in the preceding two years sent out three
vessels with £150,000 sterling in goods to that river, and that

J. G. MeTavish to the Wintering Partners of the North West Com-
pany, Fort William, April 22, 1821, copy in C. O. 42, vol. 367.
164 The North West Company

they were planning to engage in the fur trade with China. They
wished to know whether they could expect British protection
there, as otherwise they might have to combine with the Ameri-
cans or abandon the region altogether.”° They received no definite
answer, but persisted in the enterprise to which they were com-
mitted. The United States government claimed that Astoria, or
Fort George, as it was now called, should be restored in accord-
ance with the Treaty of Ghent. The North West Company
protested that it had been acquired by purchase and not by
conquest, that it had never been an official post, and that it
was not really on United States soil. Finally, after various diplo-
matic interchanges, American claims over Astoria were recog-
nized, and the United States flag was run up in 1818. The act
was not to be construed as affecting the claims of either side to
the possession of the country. The North West Company was
left undisturbed in its trade.?1

This trade apparently was fairly lucrative. At first the re-
turns had been sent across the mountains to Rainy Lake, whence
in due time they reached the London market. With the acquisi-
tion of Astoria, the situation was changed and furs were shipped
to China. The first vessel sailed for Canton in 1814.2? This
was the ‘‘Isaae Todd,’’ which also took all the furs that the
Americans had collected at Astoria and brought back a cargo
of tea to England for the account of the East India Company.
In 1814 the schooner ‘‘Columbia’’ was sent out. It reached Fort
George in the spring of 1815, delivered supplies, and then pro-

 

 

* Inglis, Ellice & Co. to Goulburn, London, July 25, 1815, Q, 134-2, pp.
385-387; the same to the same, London, July 28, 1815, Q, 134-2, pp. 388-389;
the same to the same, London, August 2, 1815, Q, 134-2, pp. 390-392.

“ Keith represented the North West Company. The articles of restitu-
tion were signed in triplicate at Fort George (Columbia River) on October
6, 1818. Barrow to Goulburn, Admiralty, August 10, 1819, C.O. 42, vol.
183, contains copies of the correspondence. There are other copies in Pelly
to Canning of December, 1825, F. O. 5, vol. 208.

” Harmon, Journal, 204-205.
Last Days 165

ceeded with furs to Canton, whence it returned to the Sandwich
Islands and the Columbia in order to carry the furs of the fol-
lowing season to Canton. The brig ‘‘Colonel Allan’’ carried
out the supplies from England in 1815. It reached Fort George
in the spring of 1816, and returned from there to England.

All these were British vessels, belonging to and fitted out by
the agents of the North West Company. Their outfits were
found expensive and unproductive, in consequence of the restric-
tion of British subjects from trading in China, except under
license from the East India Company. This company refused
to permit the North West Company to carry away tea in return
for the furs sold by them at Canton, while American ships and
traders, not being under similar restrictions, had the benefit of
freight both ways. Under these circumstances, the North West
Company in 1815 made an arrangement with a firm at Boston by
which the supplies of British manufactures required for the
establishments on the Columbia were sent from England to Bos-
ton, whence a ship was dispatched to convey them to the Colum-
bia, to take the goods from the Columbia to Canton, and to carry
the proceeds of their sale, in teas and other produce of China,
from Canton to Boston, where the American firm retained a
certain proportion of the net proceeds as compensation for the
freight. In this way, annual supplies were sent to the Columbia
River from 1816 to 1820 inclusive. In 1821 the companies united,
and after that the proceeds were brought to England in British
ships.** The Boston firm with which the North West Company

*Garry to Hay, Hudson’s Bay House, May 8, 1828, C.O. 6, vol. 6. Ross
mentions these ships (Ross, Fur Hunters of the Far West, I, 37-38, speaks
of the “Isaac Todd,” I, 41, speaks of the “Columbia,” I, 79-80, speaks of the
“Colonel Allan” and also of an unnamed schooner). But Ross states that
the “Colonel Allan” carried furs and specie to Canton in 1816. The specie
apparently came from South America. Ross merely suggests the change
when New England vessels carried the furs to China (I, 88). The North
West Company by 1817 employed three hundred Canadians on the Pacific
Slope (Narrative of Occurrences, 125). Willson, who uses these figures, also
states that the North West Company had a post in California, and makes
166 The North West Comvany

dealt was, so Garry reports, Perkins & Co., and the Canton firm
was J. & J. N. Perkins.?*

On May 9, 1820, Haldane reached Fort George with the re-
turns in good order, and on May 25 the ‘‘Levant’’ sailed with
a cargo of furs. On their return the boats met Donald McKenzie
and his party at the Nez Percé Forks. These were from the
Snake Country, which was abandoned for the time.”

The fur sales of the North West Company at Canton in 1815
appear to have amounted to $101,155.40.2* The figures of other
years are not given. Some furs, presumably the property of
the North West Company, were imported from the Columbia
River to London in 1817.7’. This is the only separate item of

a somewhat unintelligible statement about New Archangel (Willson, The
Great Company, II, 156). It looks as if he were making unwarranted as-
sumptions from the statement in the same pamphlet that the North West
Company “are now extending their inland trade southward to the Spanish
Settlements of California, and northward to those of the Russians at New
Archangel” (Narrative of Occurrences, 125). Further remarks about ship-
ping would also indicate that he had used this page rather too hastily.

* Diary of Nicholas Garry, Royal Society of Canada, Proceedings and
Transactions, Series II, vol. VI. Sec. 2, p. 81.

* From letter by Haldane dated Spokane House, September 10, 1820,
summarized in J. G. MeTavish to the Wintering Partners, Fort William,
April 22, 1821, 0.0. 42, vol. 367. The “Levant” carried 13,414 beaver, 860
otter, 266 beaver coating, 6770 muskrats, 259 minks, 104 foxes, 116 fishers,
and 37 sea otters. Faries was blockaded in the old fort at Kamloops by the
natives for some days and lost nine men. Haldane had trouble in equipping
his “Iroquois,” but sent fifty men off towards the Flathead lands. He did
not like the idea of the Fort des Prairies freemen getting to the Columbia.

* Selkirk MSS, part of vols. 30 and 31, pp. 9209-9210. The information
was probably obtained by Selkirk at Fort William in 1816. 34286 mus-
quash and 18 scrap land otters brought $2760. Fishers sold at 50c. each,
wolverines at 50c. each, lynx at $1. each, red fox at $1. each, common land
otter at $3.75 each, minks at 25c. each, and martens at 50c. each. 3439 fur
seal sold at $2. each, making $6878. 123 large sea otter sold for $22., $26.,
and $35. each, making $2870. Medium sea otter sold at $10. each, and 29
cub otter realized $115. 21,234 beaver sold at $3.80 and $3.90 each, making
$81,404.30. 1086 pounds of beaver coating sold for $1499.35.

* Their value was £1458-5-8, including five pounds’ worth of miscellaneous
articles. The most valuable item was six hundred and forty beaver skins
valued at £1121-15-0. 10,993 musquash were valued at £274-16-6. The duty
was £347-16-0, of which £16-15-10 was the shipping duty on the vessel which
carried the furs. She was of 335 80/90 tons (C. H. 4, vol. 12).
Last Days 167

imports from the Columbia River during the existence of the
North West Company. The Columbia River, by the way, is
listed in the British Custom House books as one of the Foreign
Continental Colonies until 1824, when it appears among the
British North American Colonies as one of the Settlements of
the Hudson’s Bay Company.?® There was a steady exportation
of goods from England to the Columbia from 1814 to 1821 with
the exceptions of the years 1816 and 1820. The official values
were over £1700 in 1814, £15,300 in 1815, £26,800 in 1817, £28,500
in 1818, £5900 in 1819, and £12,500 in 1821. These goods were
all carried in British vessels, one ship being specified in 1815,
and two ships in 1817 and 1818. A light export duty was paid,
being £196-18-11 in 1818.?°

The system of large trapping parties in the region south of
the Columbia was adopted about 1816, in which year two depart-
ments were created. One, under Keith, was for the coastal re-
gion; the other, under McKenzie, comprised the inland region.*°
Fort Nez Percé was built in 1818,°1 and in the same year the
first expedition went out to the Snake Indians.** The North
West Company worked up the Willamette and across to the Ump-
qua River.** The expeditions to the Snake country, while they
obtained furs, were usually accompanied by loss of life.

 

* C,H. 4, vol. 19.

*™C.H. 8, vol. 2-14; C.H. 10, vol. 6-12. The former lists British manu-
factures, and the latter lists foreign goods. The former gives both Official
Value and Real or Declared Value. The latter value is considerably higher,
as the following table will show:

1814 1815 1817
Official Value 2.064.005. £ 1,738- 9-10 £13,885-18-1 £17,184-12-5
Real or Declared Value... 2,396- 6- 0 19,327- 5-1 19,730- 5-4

1818 1819 1821
Official Value ........... £20,730-14-2  £5,955-10-6 £12,247-10-10
Real or Declared Value... 22,847- 6-2 6,653-18-1  12,620-13- 0
* Ross, Fur Hunters of the Far West, I, 73-77.
* Thid., 172-177.
* Thid., 184.
® Tbid., 196.
168 The North West Company

In view of the claim that the ruinous competition®* of the
North West and Hudson’s Bay companies caused their union in
1821, it may be worth while to consider the trade returns of
the preceding years. In the first place, there can be no question
that two companies meant more expense in wages, goods, equip-
ments, posts, and other ways than one company would have
meant. This was particularly the case since it was the recog-
nized policy of both companies to locate their posts near to-
gether. This gave high prices—and liquor—to the Indians, who
brought their furs for sale. It also, no doubt, caused a care-
less destruction of the fur-bearing animals, for furs would be
purchased which had been summer-hunted. Most irritating to
the natives in this respect were various Iroquois hunters. These
men had no interest in a section of country except to strip it
of furs to sell to the traders. Probably also some of the white
free traders and trappers were guilty of such short-sighted
action.

The years of competition were marked by a rise in the wages
paid to employees. Wentzel wrote in 1819 that a middle-man
received a thousand livres in Halifax currency, while a bowman
received fourteen hundred. Interpreters received from sixteen
hundred to two thousand, while clerks were paid from one hun-
dred and fifty to two hundred pounds in the same currency.
Wentzel also stated that Hudson’s Bay Company clerks were
paid about three hundred pounds sterling.**> When Mackenzie
wrote, a middle-man received eight hundred, and a bowman
one thousand two hundred livres, while a clerk received about
a hundred pounds. Various supplies of food and clothing were
also given. These are the figures for men who wintered. Those

* Ross states that the cost of the struggle to the North West Company
was £55,000 sterling (Ross, Fur Hunters of the Far West, I, 278). He does
not state where he got this figure.

* Masson, Bourgeois, I, 124.
Last Days 169

engaged in the transportation from Montreal to the place of
rendezvous received much less.*°

The Hudson’s Bay Company did not compete seriously with
the North West Company beyond the Rockies.27 This was also
seemingly the case in the region from Lake Superior to the
king’s posts to the south of the Height of Land between Hud-
son Bay and the St. Lawrence. Possibly there were independent
traders in portions of this region, though it has been asserted
that the North West Company monopolized the trade at a dis-
tance from the settlements. As has been already noted, the
Hudson’s Bay Company did not get very large returns from
Athabasca.

Yet on the whole the Hudson’s Bay Company was very suc-
cessful. Some figures have been given in the preceding chapter
for their returns up to and including the year 1808. With the
exception of 1810, when the amount was only about £8700, re-
turns steadily mounted from more than £20,800 in 1809 to
more than £29,000 in 1812. The books for 1813 are missing. In
1814, 1815, and 1816 the returns were low, decreasing from a
little more than £15,800 in the former to a little more than
£8100 in the latter year. From 1817 to 1821 they ranged between
£22,400 and £29,100. In 1822 they jumped to more than £39,000.

*° Mackenzie, Voyages, xxvii-xxviii.

* A Hudson’s Bay Company party under Joseph Howse wintered in 1810-
11 west of the Rocky Mountains, apparently in Montana. No other party
from that company appears to have traded west of the Rockies before 1821
(Elliott, “Columbia Fur Trade prior to 1811,” in Washington Historical
Quarterly, VI, no. 1, pp. 9-10).

* The following statement appears in the Selkirk Papers: “the N. W. Co.
without the shadow of claim to any exclusive privilege have obtained a real
and effective monopoly of the fur trade in Canada, except in the immediate
vicinity of the European Agricultural Settlements. On Lake Superior, Nip-
isying, the Grand River and St. Maurice, tho’ the trade is by law open to all
his Majys. Subjects, the N.W. Co. have no rivals. On the borders of the
settlements are a number of mere traders who carry on a petty traffic, but
not one of them dare venture to the distance of 100 miles from the settle-
ments or pretend to interfere with the great Coy.” It is dated 1810 (Sel-
kirk Papers, vol. 1, p. 16, Canadian Archives).
170 The North West Company

In 1826 they were more than £40,000, and in 1827 more than
£50,000. After this year the returns were all put together under
Settlements of the Hudson’s Bay Company, whereas previously
they had been listed under Hudson’s Bay. The duty charged
ranged between £1600 and £10,000.°° The exports of British
manufactures from England to Hudson Bay were officially valued
at more than £9500 in 1812. In 1814 they were a little over
£9000. In 1815, 1816, and 1817 they were something over £15,-
600, £18,200, and £11,100, respectively. Then they took an-
other sudden rise, being over £30,800, £23,700, £24,800, and
£29,500 in the years 1818 to 1821. These are official values. A
column marked ‘‘Real or Declared Value’’ from the year 1814
usually adds one-half and often two-thirds and more to these
values. Export duty amounting to a few pounds was charged
each year.*°

Besides the above values, between £1100 and £6600 worth of
foreign goods were shipped to Hudson Bay from England
in the years 1809 to 1821. The highest item was £6519-4-3
in 1818. In the following two years the items were in the neigh-
borhood of £5800.*1. These figures would seem to indicate that
the Hudson’s Bay Company had determined on energetic trade.
This was probably partly caused by the Hudson’s Bay Company’s
feeling the same need as the North West Company for inland ex-
pansion. In a letter of instructions in 1815 to Thomas Thomas,
their new superintendent of the Northern Department after
Auld, it was stated to be advisable to retrench in the factories

°C. H. 4, v. 5-22. The change in headings makes little difference in re-
turns, but makes it more difficult to trace exports.

“C,H. 8, vol. 1-14. The Real or Declared Value was £16,059-15-11 in
1814, £26, 180- 14-8 in 1815, £30,480-10-0 in 1816, £21,617-19-2 in 1817, £44,-
162-11- 7 in 1818, £34,797- 0- 0 in 1819, £40,936- ice 6 in 1820, and £38, 704- 8-3
in 1821.

“C,H. 10, vol. 1-12. The items totaled £1129-7-5 in 1809, £2035-1-10 in
1810, £4561- 9. 6 in 1811, £2945-15-0 in 1812, £3105-4-9 in 1814, £3682-8-7 in
1815, £4827-4-6 in 1816, £3595-3-5 in 1817, €6519- 4-3 in 1818, £5727-19-4 in
1819, £5888-6-5 in 1820, and £3823-0-2 in 1821,
Last Days 171

at the bay, which were all loss, while the inland ones gave good
profits. An officer’s share for three years was estimated to be
about £4000, but had the bayside been equal to the inland trade,
it would have been £10,000.42 The increase of the totals after
1814 suggests that the end of the Napoleonic Wars—for the
Hundred Days would hardly affect the figures of 1815—had
encouraged the company to greater efforts. The end of the
American phase of the struggle may also have had a similar
effect. However this may be, it is quite likely that the North
West Company was aware of the increased quantities of goods
which their rivals were importing, and this knowledge may have
had some connection with their determination to give up the
contest.

It is much less easy to determine the imports of merchandise
and the returns of furs for the North West Company. In the
first place, a certain amount of Canadian produce was consumed,
the figures for which are not available. Some of the furs and
other items in the returns, aside from those already indicated for
China, were no doubt disposed of in Canada and in the United
States. Moreover, the furs listed as being imported into Great
Britain from Canada include all those shipped from the port of
Quebec. This would mean many more furs than those belong-
ing to the North West Company. Many of these came from
the settlements in the St. Lawrence basin, and many came from
United States territory. This was especially true in the years
preceding the War of 1812, when the Michilimackinac Company
was still prospering. After the war the Americans obtained more
of these furs for themselves and for shipment from United States
ports.

The imports of castoreum, skins, and furs from Canada to
Great Britain during the existence of the North West Company
were valued by the Custom House as follows: In 1784 nearly

* Selkirk Papers, Canadian Archives, M, 736, pp. 1327-1375.
172 The North West Company

£72,000 worth was imported. In 1790 the value was nearly
£77,900, and in 1800 it was over £144,300. In 1801 it was back
to £68,500. The next year it was £82,100, and the following year
£70,700. The figure was nearly the same in 1804, being £71,500.
In 1805 it was £64,300, and in 1806 it was £51,600. It dropped
to £27,400 in 1807, but rose to £81,400 the following year. In
1809 it dropped again to £21,300, but in 1810 it was £59,500.
The figures are noticeably lower after this date. In 1811 the
value was £14,400, in 1812 it was £30,200, and in 1814 it was
£48,300. In 1815 the total was £23,400. The following year it
was £29,600. In 1817 it was £47,200, and the following year
somewhat less, being £48,000. In 1819 the total was £34,700,
and in 1820 it was £46,000. In 1821, the year of the union
with the Hudson’s Bay Company, it was £33,100. There is a
sharp drop after this. In the years 1822 to 1826 the figures
were £10,500, £6400, £7400, £11,900, and £10,400.** The same
official values being used throughout the whole period, they give
a good idea of the relative values of the trade in the respective
years, aside from the market fluctuations.** Apart from the loss
of the American trade, which would not particularly affect the
North West Company, it would look as if the amount of this
Canadian trade was not markedly lessening before the union
of the two companies.**

 

 

*C. H. 17, vol. 8-30; C. H. 4, vol. 5-21. The totals are my own, given to
the nearest hundred pounds. The Custom House valuations in 1790 were as
follows: castoreum, 7/ per lb.; bear, black, 6/6 each; beaver, 3/6 each; deer
in hair, 2/6 each; elk, 5/6 each; fox,1/3 each; marten, 5/ each; mink, 1/6
each; musquash, 6d. each; otter, 3/6 each; raccoon, 6d. each; seal, 10d. each;
wolf, 5/ each; and other skins not stated. These same figures were used in
1772 and in 1826.

“ For example, a report of Lieutenant-Governor Milnes enclosed a state-
ment of the furs exported from Quebec in 1801 with the average prices at
which they sold in London, amounting to £371,139-11-4 (Milnes to Hobart,
a October 30, 1802; extracts are to be found in B.T. 1, vol. 20, no.

“A committee of the House of Representatives of the United States had
a resolution referred to it on December 19, 1820, directing an inquiry into
the situation of the settlements on the Pacifie Ocean and the expediency of
Last Days 173

The foreign market for furs exported from Great Britain was
still taking its regular quota. In fact, it was absorbing an in-
creased quantity of almost all of them. The values of the furs
thus exported in 1814, 1815, and 1816 were £28,300, £22,400, and
£30,700. The total for 1817 is not given, but amounted to £26,-
700. The next year the value was £35,100. In 1819 it was
£41,800. In 1820, 1821, and 1822 the values were £43,700, £35,-
300 and £35,500.** With the exceptions of hare and raccoon,*?
the number of skins exported in the years 1809 to 1812 was not
equal to the exports of the later years.

According to the figures so far given, the fur trade was not
declining markedly in value. The returns of the Hudson’s Bay
Company were certainly good, whatever those of the North West
Company may have been. The presumption would be that these
also were not declining. In this connection, various complaints
of the volume of trade, made by members of the Canadian com-
pany, must be considered. In 1812 the wintering partners wrote
that the returns were not so good as in the preceding year,
though presumably the quality was better in some departments.
Much of the country, they said, was fast being ruined and
would need to lie fallow for two or three years, and there was
no hope of increasing the trade in the regions then hunted.**
Letters of the time speak of poor returns from Athabasca and

occupying the Columbia River. Its report was read January 25, 1821.
Among other items it stated that the exports of the North West Company
from Quebee alone were valued at more than a million dollars annually,
without reference to those brought to the United States and shipped from
New York and Philadelphia direct to China, rather than incur the cost and
delay in procuring them a passage to London and thence to India in the
ships of the East India Company. It mentions the reshipment at Botson of
British manufactures for the Columbia (printed copy in Canning to Castle-
Teagh, no. 4, Washington, February 5, 1821, F.O. 5, vol. 157). The figure
for the Quebec trade is high. The mention of the New York and Philadel-
phia trade is unique and valuable, if correct.

“°C. H. 11, vol. 5-13. The amounts are to the nearest hundred pounds.

“Tbid., vol. 1-4.

‘8 Twelve partners to William McGillivray, Fort William, July 18, 1812,
Selkirk Papers, part of vols. 27 and 28, pp. 164-166.
174 The North West Company

Mackenzie River for the years 1814 and 1815.* Fort Nelson
had been surprised by the natives in the winter of 1812-1813
and’ several traders killed.*° In 1815 the North West Company
apparently withdrew its posts in the Mackenzie River region
and reduced the posts in Athabasca from fifteen to eight in
number.*! After this the resistance to the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany’s advance increased the returns, and in 1818 the posts in
Mackenzie River were again occupied.*? Similar data are lacking
for other districts. However, Sir Alexander Mackenzie, writing
in January, 1819, stated that the losses occasioned by the diffi-
culties with Selkirk and the Hudson’s Bay Company had been
compensated to a considerable degree by the high prices for furs
obtained the preceding year in the London market. He estimated
that the income would thus be £50,000 greater than had been
estimated. Similar good prices and returns were expected in
1819. At the same time, Mackenzie made the interesting state-
ment that the agents of the North West Company had never paid
him a shilling of interest or principal since he became a partner
under the firm of Sir Alexander Mackenzie & Co. *? The amount
owing to him was probably considerable.

The business dealings of the North West Company with the
American Fur Company were apparently trivial. At least, the
items on the journals of the latter would indicate that such was
the case.**

* Masson, Bourgeois, I, 109, 114; II, 129.

* Tbid., I, 109; II, 125.

*t [bid., I, 113-115.

° Tbid., I, 116-124; II, 131.

“Ibid., I, 53-54.

* The journals of the American Fur Company from April 1, 1817, to
September 20, 1834, are in the Canadian Archives. They contain a brief
account to the following effect: The North West Company is debited in
1817 to Cash $94.88; to Merchandise $7.50; to Albion T. Crowe $5.00; to
Adam D. Stewart $9.00; to Retail Store $2.33; and on May 25, 1818, tc
Profit and Loss $5.37. On the same date the North West Company is ered-
ited under the caption “Contra,” “By South West Company, $124.08”. This
Last Days 175

The term of agreement of the North West Company was
nearing expiration. According to the agreements of 1802 and
1804, it was to come to an end on November 30, 1822. There seem-
ingly was a determination reached at the general meeting in
the summer of 1820 at Fort William to continue the company.
It is stated that an agreement was executed by the agents and
some of the wintering partners to continue the company for ten
years longer ; that is, from 1822 until 1832. Some of the partners
who were not consulted, and others who would not attend, sent
two of their number to London, as delegates. These were seem-
ingly Dr. McLaughlin and Angus Bethune. The dubious claim
was even made that they were the persons really responsible for
the union of the Hudson’s Bay and North West companies. It
was thus argued from the fact that they and those whom thev
represented became chief factors and retained their inventory
and other rights in the Northwest.°° Henry Mackenzie, a part-
ner in the firm of McTavish, McGillivrays and Company of Mon-
treal, in a remonstrance dated November 24, 1819, stated that
proposals had been recently submitted to the partners at Fort
William for a new association, these never having been submitted
to the partners in Montreal. In the same letter in which a copy.
of this remonstrance is printed Mackenzie said that an agree-
ment had been made in triplicate at Fort William in 1820 to
continue the North West Company until the returns of the outfit
of 1832 were received.*®

 

 

balances both sides and it is so lined out. Then below this in the debtor
column appears, on October 16, 1818, “To Louis Deschamps $11.00,” and in
the opposite column, on September 24, 1819, “By Deserters & Delinquents
$11.00.” This is all of the account.

> Letters Addressed to the Editor of the Canadian Courant by a Creditor
of the Agents of the North West Company, 10-11, 51. These letters, which
are to be found among the Masson Papers in the Canadian Archives, were
written in 1830 in regard to an assignment made in 1826. Possibly Me-
Laughlin should be McLoughlin.

* Letter to Simon McGillivray . . . by Henry Mackenzie, p. 3. This is
pamphlet 457A in the Canadian Archives. The letter is dated Montreal,
June 19, 1827. Mackenzie complains of not being properly apprized of the
176 The North West Company

Notwithstanding this agreement, Simon McGillivray, accord-
ing to his own account, entered into negotiations with the Hud-
son’s Bay Company in December, 1820. In these he was aided
by Edward Ellice of London, but seemingly was acting entirely
upon his personal responsibility, not having been granted author-
ity by the partners of the North West Company or even by
the other members of the firm of McTavish, MecGillivrays and
Company, the Montreal agents.*’ The negotiations resulted in an
agreement to unite, dated March 26, 1821. This agreement was
by indenture, and a Deed Poll bearing the same date was en-
grossed to the same effect and bore the seal of the Hudson’s
Bay Company. It named twenty-five persons who were to be
appointed chief factors, and twenty-eight who were to be ap-
pointed chief traders; also forty-two persons who might retire
and retain shares for seven years, and nine persons from whom
their successors should be appointed. No expense for coloniza-
tion or other activity unconnected with the fur trade was to be
chargeable on the joint concern.*®

The agreement provided for conducting the fur trade for
twenty-one years, commencing with the outfit of 1821 and end-
ing with the returns of the outfit of 1841. William and Simon
MeGillivray and Edward Ellice were to have the appointment
of two out of five members of the board of directors. The net
profits were to be divided into one hundred equal shares. Twenty
of these were to belong to the Hudson’s Bay Company’s gov-
ernor and directors; twenty to the McGillivrays and Ellice.
Forty shares were to go to the men named as chief factors and

actions of the firm of which he became a member November 1, 1814. He
makes various charges also.

A Letter from Simon McGillivray, Esq., to the Creditors of the Firms
of McTavish, McGillivrays and Co. and MecGillivrays, Thain and Co. of Mon-
treal, in the Province of Lower Canada, dated London, February 26, 1827,
pp. 5-6. The letter was in explanation of the declaration of the insolvency
of these firms at Montreal, December 27, 1825. It is Pamphlet 457B in the
Canadian Archives.

* Printed copy of date 1821 in C. 0. 42, vol. 186.
Last Days 177

chief traders by the Hudson’s Bay Company. Five shares were
to be at the disposal of the Hudson’s Bay Company, to carry
out their arrangements with the heirs of Lord Selkirk; five shares
were to go to the McGillivrays and Ellice as compensation for
the relinquishing of the agency and commissions of their houses
in London; and the remaining ten shares were to be invested by
the Hudson’s Bay Company in parliamentary stocks, government
securities, or public funds, the income to be used for unforeseen
losses and emergencies, for increasing the capital stock of the
company, or upon trusts specified in the agreement.*®

On March 28 the Hudson’s Bay Company appointed fifteen
men as chief factors, and seventeen men as chief traders.° By
the agreement of March 26, the block of forty shares provided as
remuneration for these men was divided into eighty-five parts,
of which each chief factor should receive two, and each chief
trader should receive one. Three more of these parts were to
be given by the McGillivrays and Ellice for seven years to any
persons lately in the service of the North West Company to
whom they saw fit to grant them. The Hudson’s Bay Company
had the similar disposal of four shares. The matter of promotion
from the position of clerk to chief trader, and from chief trader
to chief factor, was duly provided for. So were the questions
of retirement, disposal of shares, furlough, and other matters of
detail.®

Through the influence which both parties had at the Colo-
nial Office, an act of Parliament®® was passed in 1821 by which
the Crown was empowered to grant to ‘‘any body corporate or
company, or person or persons,’’ the exclusive privilege of trad-
ing within lands and territories not previously granted to the

* Partly printed in Letter to Simon McGillivray, Pamphlet 457A, Cana-
dian Archives, 11-13.

© Release of claims by the Wintering Partners, 6-7.

* A copy of the Deed Poll was printed in London in 1821,

?1 & 2 Geo. IV, c. 66.

 
178 The North West Company

Hudson’s Bay Company, not belonging to the British provinces
in North America, and not part of the United States, for a period
of twenty-one years. This was not to infringe upon the rights
of American traders west of the Rockies as guaranteed by the
Convention of 1818.°* Incidentally this act took occasion to
regulate the question of the administration of justice, particu-
larly as it applied to British subjects in the extensive lands where
the fur traders roamed. It was specifically stated that the Act
of 43 Geo. III was valid in the lands granted to the Hudson’s
Bay Company.** At the same time all chartered rights and juris-
diction of the Hudson’s Bay Company were guaranteed. The
charter was granted at Carlton House, December 5, 1821, and was
signed by Bathurst. It granted the exclusive right to trade for
twenty-one years in lands northward and westward of the United
States which were neither a British North American province
nor belonged to any European power. It required no rent, but
demanded that a register of employees be kept, and made other
stipulations. The grant was made to the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany and to the McGillivrays and Ellice.®

By a covenant dated on the same day as the royal license of
trade. December 5, 1821, the Hudson’s Bay Company and the
McGillivrays and Ellice bound themselves to submit annual reg-
isters of the persons in their employ. They also bound them-
selves in the penal sum of five thousand pounds to ensure the
due execution of criminal and of civil process above two hundred

* An anonymous writer later made the claim that it was understood that
this privilege was to be given to William and Simon McGillivray and Ed-
ward Ellice, the leading members of the North West Company, who were
later to transfer it to the Hudson’s Bay Company, which was done (The

Hudson’s Bay Company versus Magna Charta, 17). The statement was er-
roneous.

* The same recognition of no other jurisdiction in North America than
those of Upper and Lower Canada and the United States, occurs once more.

"= C.O. 42, vol. 276; copy in Q, 241-1-2-3, pp. 350 et seq.; Draft in C.0.
42, vol. 189. The Board of Trade was apparently not consulted in regard to
any of the questions connected with the union of the two companies,
Last Days 179

pounds in the territories where trade was granted them by the
license. They also agreed to limit the supply of liquor. But it
was declared that the Hudson’s Bay Company, the McGillivrays,
Ellice, their successors, heirs, ete., could be prosecuted only by
His Majesty’s Attorney-General in England or in his name, and
that they could plead the covenant in bar of any other action
against them for breach of the same.**

Simon MeGillivray now had the task of getting the consent
of the other parties concerned in the North West Company. His
brother, William McGillivray, apparently gave his consent read-
ily. This practically meant the consent of the firm of McTavish,
MeGillivrays and Company, for Henry Mackenzie, who had been
a persistent minority opposition for some years, could be over-
ridden, especially as there seems to have been no opposition to
the actions of the leading partners by any other member of the
firm.** The formal agreement was evidently in the form of a
deed dated April 6, 1821.°°

In the Public Reference Library at Toronto there is a docu-
ment which purports to be a copy of a release to William and
Simon McGillivray and Edward Ellice, accorded by the winter-
ing partners, and covering their claims for the returns of the
outfits of 1821 and 1822. It bore the date of March 28, 1821,
which, it will be observed, was two days later than the agree-
ment, or Deed Poll, between the two companies. According to
this document, inventories were to be taken on the following
first day of June, and compensation for the loss of income from
the outfits of the years 1821 and 1822 was to be made to the
retired partners and others who held fifteen shares in the North
West Company, interest from June 1, 1821, to be added. The

The deed of covenant is in C. O. 42, vol. 192.
* Letter to Simon McGillivray ... by Henry Mackenzie, Pamphlet 457A,
Canadian Archives, records his opposition in these years.

Letter to Simon McGillivray . . . by Henry Mackenzie, Pamphlet
457A, Canadian Archives, 22.
180 The North West Company

appointed chief factors and chief traders released all their
claims on these outfits, which were not to be sent by the North
West Company. This release was between thirty-three factors
and traders whose names are cited,*® and William McGillivray,
Esquire, of Montreal, Simon McGillivray, merchant, of Suffolk
Lane, London, and Edward Ellice, of New Street, Spring Gar-
dens, in the County of Middlesex. These same appellations were
used in the Deed Poll. Signatures, or copies of the signatures,
are not attached to the document. It bears the accession date of
July 9, 1900, but the Reference Library has no record of the
source from which it was obtained. Whatever value this docu-
ment may have, Simon McGillivray later stated that he carried
the arrangement into effect the following summer—probably of
1821—throughout the interior country.”

It is difficult to determine, from the scanty material available,
exactly what was the reason for the North West Company’s
merging into the Hudson’s Bay Company. It is true that the
agricultural colony on Red River was evidently firmly planted
across their line of operations. It must have been inimical to
the fur trade in various ways, and it was likely to render as-
sistance to the Hudson’s Bay Company. The question of trade
returns has been discussed. Apparently the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany was gaining somewhat in this respect. The advantages of
united action in the prosecution of the fur trade were of course
obvious. Government support was certain to be rendered to

They appear as John Thomson, John Macdonald, James Leith, John
Haldane, Alexander Stewart, John George MeTavish, George Keith, John
Dugald Cameron, John Stuart, Edward Smith, John McLoughlin, James
Keith, Angus Bethune, Donald Mackenzie, John McBean, William Mackin-
tosh, Thomas McMurray, Donald Mackintosh, Allan McDonell, Hugh Faries,
Roderick Mackenzie, Daniel Williams Harmon, John Warren Dease, Angus
Cameron, Simon McGillivray, Joseph McGillivray, Wm. Connelly, Peter
Warren Dease, John Rowan, Joseph Felix La Rocque, James MeMillan,
Alexander Roderick MeLeod. These were the men who were appointed chief
factors and chief traders on March 28, 1821.

"Letter from Simon McGillivray, Pamphlet 457B, Canadian Archives,
Appendix, 5.
Last Days 181

any action which would put a stop to the scenes of violence
and bloodshed which had been occurring. And two men who
might have created serious opposition had both died in the same
year. The death of Selkirk in southern France removed the
man who had the most right to feel bitter towards the North
West Company, and the death of Sir Alexander Mackenzie in
Seotland on March 12, 1820,71 removed the high-spirited indi-
vidual on the other side, who might have been expected to dislike
the thought of the extinction of the company in the service of
which he had acquired fame. Incidentally he was the man whom
the wintering partners had trusted at the time when he played
an active part in the affairs of the company. Judicial pro-
ceedings, which were pending, may have helped influence
the Hudson’s Bay Company to grant liberal terms to their
opponents.

On May 3, 1820, the Hudson’s Bay Company sent a petition
to the Privy Council, citing the difficulties which had arisen
with the North West Company, and requesting, among other
items,

That your Majesty will be graciously pleased to declare, that by virtue of
the said Letters Patent of His said Majesty King Charles the Second, your
Petitioners are the sole and absolute Lords Proprietors of all Lands between
the extreme heights from which any waters flow into the Seas within Hud-
son’s Streights, and the said Seas, and that your Majesty will be pleased to
appoint Commissioners to run a line along the said Heights or will otherwise
determine more precisely the said Boundary, and that your Majesty will also
be graciously pleased to declare, that your Petitioners are justly entitled to
have, hold, enjoy and exercise all the lawful rights of Territory and Juris-
diction granted in the said Charter, within the Boundary so defined or here-
after to be more precisely determined, and that means may be taken to stop
further outrages both within and without the aforesaid Territory; and that

such further relief may be granted to your Petitioners in the Premises, as to
your Majesty in your Wisdom may seem fit.”

4 Masson, Bourgeois, I, 57.
Copy in Pelly to Bathurst, Hudson’s Bay House, May 13, 1820, C.O.
42, vol. 186.
182 The North West Company

The Hudson’s Bay Company’s petition was read by the Privy
Council on May 29, 1820, and referred to committee.”*

Selkirk’s executors also formulated a petition to the Privy
Council in which they requested the same items in connection
with the title of the grant to Lord Selkirk by the Hudson’s Bay
Company.’* It was referred to committee by the Privy Council
on July 1.%

In the meantime, early in February, 1820,** the North West
Company had petitioned the Privy Council for a writ of scire
facias to determine the validity of the Hudson’s Bay Company’s
charter. The petition was formulated by Kaye, Freshfield &
Kaye, solicitors, in the name of Inglis, Ellice and Company.”
It was read by the Privy Council on February 12 and referred
to committee.** On May 8, 1820, it was sent to the Attorney- and
Solicitor-General for their opinion.7® On May 30, 1820, Kaye.
Freshfield & Kaye wrote to the Colonial Office in reply to a letter
to MeTavish, Fraser and Company, enclosing a copy of their
petition to the Privy Council requesting scire facias proceedings.
This copy was altered so as to leave it open to the Privy Council
to grant other relief if it were deemed inexpedient to grant a
writ of scire facias. It was sent to the Privy Council by the
Colonial Office.®°

On August 2, 1820, the Hudson’s Bay Company again peti-

* Privy Council Register, vol. 202, p. 363.

™ James Montgomery, Bart., John Halkett, and Andrew Colvile to the
King in Council. George St. Adelphi, London, June 10, 1820; copy in same
to Bathurst of same date, C. O. 42, vol. 186.

™ Privy Couneil Register, vol. 202, p. 446.

*MeTavish, Fraser & Co. to Bathurst, 2 Suffolk Lane, Cannon Street,
London, February 12, 1820, in Simon McGillivray to Goulburn of same date.

™ Kaye, Freshfield & Kaye to Goulburn, New Bank Building, May 30,
1820, C.O. 42, vol. 186.

* Privy Council Register, vol. 202, p. 93.

™ Ibid., pp. 315-316,

* Kaye, Freshfield & Kaye to Goulburn, New Bank Building, May 30,
1820, C.O. 42, vol. 186.
Last Days 183

tioned the Privy Council. They referred to their earlier petition
and said they had been informed that the North West Company
had petitioned that the Attorney-General should be instructed to
cause a writ of scire facias to be issued in the king’s name to
repeal the Hudson’s Bay Company’s charter. They requested
prompt attention to the North West Company’s petition and
asked that they might be represented by counsel before and sub-
mit evidence to the Attorney- and Solicitor-General, to whom
the petition had been referred.*1 This petition was read by the
Privy Council on October 10, 1820, and referred to committee,*?
who referred it to the Attorney- and Solicitor-General on Octo-
ber 14.83 This apparently ended consideration of the matter
until the union of the two companies made the question valueless
to the North West Company, although Kaye, Freshfield & Kaye
again requested Bathurst’s consideration on December 2, 1820.**
Both the North West Company and the Hudson’s Bay Company
withdrew their memorials, and on June 7, 1821, Buller, the clerk
of the Privy Council, wrote to the Attorney-General that there
was no need for the reports previously requested.**

But the business affairs of the North West Company were
not concluded in a manner which was satisfactory to all con-
cerned.®* It would appear that the Montreal agency in the earlier

“ Copy in Pelly to Bathurst, Hudson’s Bay Co., August 2, 1820, C.O. 42,
vol. 186.

* Privy Council Register, vol. 202, pp. 503-504.

8 Ibid., p. 508.

“% Kaye, Freshfield & Kaye to Goulburn, New Bank Building, December
2, 1820, C.O. 42, vol. 186. Bathurst ordered that the letter be referred to
the Privy Council.

® Privy Council Register, vol. 203, p. 206.

8 The chief authorities for this are three items in the Canadian Archives,
two printed and one manuscript. The first is entitled: A Letter from
Simon McGillivray, Esq. to the Creditors of the firms of McTavish, McGilli-
vrays and Co. and McGillivrays, Thain and Co. of Montreal, in the Province
of Lower Canada, dated London, 26th February, 1827. With an Appendix
containing statements in explanation of the cireumstances under which the

Insolvency of these Firms was declared at Montreal, on the 27th of Decem-
ber 1825. This was printed at London, 1827, There is a copy in the Cana-
184 The North West Company

days of the North West Company had been in the hands of
MeTavish, Frobisher and Company. This firm was succeeded by
that of McTavish, MecGillivrays and Company. The date of this
change is somewhat uncertain. The membership of the firms
apparently varied even when the title remained the same. The
London agents, in the later years of the North West Company
at least, were McTavish, Fraser and Company and Inglis, Ellice
and Company.

The firm of McTavish, MeGillivrays and Company expired
by effluxion of time on November 30, 1828, its existence being
connected with the North West Company’s agreement. But there
were various business matters of the North West Company to
be settled. Chief among these were the returns which were still
coming in from interior posts on ventures of the North West
Company. Seemingly there was also inventory and financial
business to transact. So the firm of McGillivrays, Thain and
Company was formed for the express and sole purpose of wind-
ing up these affairs. Its origin can be dated as November 30,
1822, and its members were William and Simon McGillivray and
Thomas Thain. The two former had long been prominent in
the affairs of the North West Company; the latter had been in
charge of its accounts in the last years of its existence, or at least
had had that position for the firm of McTavish, McGillivrays
and Company. Three years passed by, and Simon MeGillivray
had come to Canada on some of this business, when he heard of

dian Archives listed as Pamphlet 457 B. The second item is entitled Letter
to Simon McGillivray, Esq. in answer to one addressed by him to the Cred-
itors of the late Firms of McTavish, McGillivrays § Co. and McGillivrays.
Thain § Co., dated London, 26th of February, 1826 [corrected to 1827 by
pen on Canadian Archives copy], by Henry Mackenzie, late Partner of the
former Firm. This was printed at Montreal, 1827. There is a copy in the
Canadian Archives which is cited as Pamphlet 457 A. The third item is en-
titled: Letters Addressed to the Editor of the Canadian Courant by a Cred-
itor of the Agents of the North West Company. These are in the Masson
Papers, vol. 1, in the Canadian Archives. They comprise about fifty-three
pages of manuscript and were written in 1830.
Last Days 185

the death of his elder brother, William, near London on October
16, 1825. This event may have further embarrassed the finances
of the firm, though the charge was made that it was merely
taken advantage of by Simon McGillivray. Be that as it may,
he called a creditors’ meeting on December 27, 1825, and declared
a suspension of payment. A second meeting was held on Janu-
ary 25, and a third on February 2, 1826. At the latter he exe-
euted an assignment in favor of the creditors of the firms of
MeTavish, MeGillivrays and Company, and MceGillivrays,
Thain and Company. Then he returned to England.

Comment upon his assignment, and reports of further pro-
ceedings to be taken, especially on the part of the Bank of Mon-
treal, caused Simon McGillivray to make a printed statement in
1827.s* In this he said that the pressure on his finances in the
fall of 1820, in order to meet the bills of exchange on London,
was very severe, and that failure to meet them would have irre-
trievably ruined the North West Company. Nearly all the win-
tering partners and some of the Montreal partners were indebted
to the Montreal firm. Some of them relaxed their efforts; nearly
all of those with savings retired. Some thought of changing
sides and sent delegates to London; others again simply con-
tinued in their extravagance. Under these circumstances Simon
MeGillivray took it upon himself to come to terms with the
Hudson’s Bay Company. Complaints, he said, were made only
by young wintering partners and by retired partners. The for-
mer, instead of being at the mercy of a victorious Hudson’s Bay
Company, became chief traders and factors; the latter realized
on their scattered North West Company property, which would
have been difficult to accomplish had no arrangement been made.
These inventories realized three-fourths of £164,000, or £123,000
sterling. The North West Company was to contribute this £164,-
000, and the Hudson’s Bay Company was to contribute the

* Letter from Simon McGillivray, Pamphlet 457 B, Canadian Archives.
186 The North West Company

same. William and Simon McGillivray were to put in one-half
of this £164,000 and in return were to receive certain shares in
the trade.**

The debts of McGillivrays, Thain and Company were £196,000
currency, as stated in Schedule A attached to the Deed of Assign-
ment. Certain other items brought the total of the debts under
the deed to £230,000. In reality the total debts were £253,600 if
there were figured in certain debts to Dunn, the receiver-general
of Upper Canada, and Samuel Gerrard, which were secured by
£9000 of Hudson’s Bay Company stock. This Hudson’s Bay
Company stock, which could be valued at a high premium, would
raise the estimated assets from £143,750, which was an estimate
of 12s. 6d. in the pound, to £168,050.°° This stock was a portion
of that which William and Simon McGillivray had received when,
in 1824, they gave up their shares and other interests in the
fur trade to the Hudson’s Bay Company.®? Simon McGillivray
claimed that he was surprised at the extent of the obligations
which had been assumed by the Montreal firm, stated that he had
no control over their financial expenditures, but admitted his
liability for their debts.°1 He said that not until 1813 did he
become a partner of that firm, but he had announced his ad-
vancement to that position in 1812.°? In a letter written at Lon-
don, July 25, 1826, he explained that his brother’s death had
tied up part of the Hudson’s Bay Company stock, that other
portions of it had been transferred by his attorneys, while he
was in Canada, to McTavish, Fraser and Company and to Ed-
ward Ellice, though possibly the latter may mean to Inglis, Ellice

Letter from Simon McGillivray, Appendix, 3-6. The Deed Poll simply
called for equal capital. It did not state the amount.

“ Letter from Simon McGillivray, Appendix, 5-6.

” Tbid., 6-7.

* Tbid., 8-11.

“«Simon MeGillivray to the Wintering Partners of the North West Com-

pany,” London, April 9, 1812, printed with reply in Letter to the Earl of
Liverpool, 202-206.
Last Days 187

and Company. This was also a period of financial panic. As a
result, £18,000 out of £29,000 in bills of exchange on McTavish,
Fraser and Company, which he had sold to the Bank of Montreal,
were protested for non-aecceptance. The bank agents, Messrs.
Thomas Wilson and Company, took these up, and a prosecution
was instituted against McGillivray and Thain. This held them
in London and prevented their going to Canada to settle affairs
there. McGillivray said that bankruptcy and chancery proceed-
ings would be the inevitable result of further pressure by his
creditors, and that this would postpone indefinitely any settle-
ment of the tangled claims and liabilities of McTavish, MeGilli-
vrays and Company, McGillivrays, Thain and Company, Mc-
Tavish, Fraser and Company, and of the several partners of these
firms.**

This publication elicited a reply®* by Henry Mackenzie, a
member of the firm of McTavish, McGillivrays and Company.
He stated that on November 1, 1814, he entered the association
then formed under the continued title of McTavish, McGillivrays
and Company as co-agents, with Sir Alexander Mackenzie and
Company, for the North West Company. He had been in the
employ of the firms of McTavish, Frobisher and Company, and
MeTavish, McGillivrays and Company, and had also had busi-
ness relations with them as a member of the firm of Mackenzie,
Oldham and Company of Terrebonne. He therefore anticipated
that the fur trade would continue to be very lucrative, as it had
been under these firms. He soon found himself excluded from
access to the books and from consultation on policy. He gives a
record of written remonstrances which he made on May 1, 1816,
in June, 1819, and on November 24, 1819. In the latter, among
other items, he stated that office expenditure was nearly twice

" Letter from Simon McGillivray, Appendix, 9-15.
“ Letter to Simon McGillivray ... by Henry Mackenzie, Pamphlet 457A,
Canadian Archives.
188 The North West Company

that of the old firms for the same service and would
amount with interest to nearly £30,000 at the end of the con-
cern. He further stated that extra remunerations since the co-
partnership would amount with interest to about £20,000 at the
end of the concern. He also complained that proposals for a
new association had been made at Fort William without being
submitted to the Montreal partners.** After protesting against
the high powers assumed by Simon McGillivray and Edward
Ellice in making the agreement with the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany, Mackenzie stated that an attempt had been made, as the
result of secret deliberations, to publish on November 15, 1821,
a notice that the functions of the agents of the North West Com-
pany and of the agents of Sir Alexander Mackenzie had termi-
nated, and also a notice that McLeod had ceased to be a partner
of the firm of McTavish, McGillivrays and Company. Macken-
zie promptly warned the printers not to publish these.*® Cor-
respondence followed, and then the McGillivrays went to London,
leaving Thain in full charge, an arrangement against which
Mackenzie also protested. Simon McGillivray returned in 1822.
Mackenzie wished to see the books, as the firm was nearing its
end, but he was refused, it being stated among other things that
the outstanding adventures could not be realized before the sum-
mer of 1824. Accordingly, on November 29, 1822, Mackenzie
accepted an advance of money on account and agreed that notice
of the termination of the firm of McTavish, McGillivrays and
Company should be published on November 30, 1822, and that
all papers should be in the charge of Thain until November 30,
1825, on which date he should render a full statement of the
affairs of the firm, arbitration being provided for in ease of
dispute.*7

* Letter to Simon McGillivray, 1-3, 11.
 Toid., 3-4.
"Tbid., 4-6.
Last Days 189

After reciting these events, Mackenzie said he did not believe
that the firm of McTavish, McGillivrays and Company was in-
solvent on November 30, 1822, or even at the time of the declara-
tion of insolvency. He charged that its assets had been used
to liquidate the debts of the later firm of McGillivrays, Thain
and Company, which might have been insolvent, but of which he
was never a partner, and that he was still denied access to the
books.°* He stated that the other members of the firm were given
to profuse expenditure, and that, possibly as a result, Mr. Thain’s
debts to the several firms of McTavish, McGillivrays and Com-
pany and their successors, and to Sir Alexander Mackenzie and
Company, on November 30, 1825, as he had learned from an au-
thentic source, amounted to £96,018-4-8; those of William Mce-
Gillivray on November 20, 1824, amounted to £28,325-2-4, in-
cluding £22,000 advanced to him to meet the demands on him of
his former concern; and those of Simon McGillivray on Novem-
ber 30, 1824, amounted to £42,190-10-6, and on November 30,
1825, to £50,000 or more. These sums, he stated, if forthcoming,
would obviate the question of insolvency.®® He said that he had
instituted a suit in the Court of King’s Bench at Montreal
against the partners of the firm of McTavish, McGillivrays and
Company, who had assumed charge of its finances, to compel the
rendering of an account to him.?%

From a protest drawn up by Mackenzie at Montreal on Novem-
ber 15, 1821, it would appear that the firm of McTavish, McGilli-
vrays and Company was organized on December, 1813, and was
to end on November 30, 1822. William McGillivray, Simon Mce-
Gillivray, Archibald Norman McLeod, Thomas Thain, John Mc-
Tavish, and Henry Mackenzie were the members at the start.
McTavish retired in the summer of 1818. McLeod retired, so

%Letter to Simon McGillivray, 6-7, 9.
Ibid., 7.
1” Tbid., 9.
190 The North West Company

Mackenzie claimed, in May or June of 1821.° McTavish doubt-
less was the man about whom it was stated later that his share
of the profits for five years was £12,166-12-3. He is described as
being succeeded in charge of the books by Thain,?°? who was evi-
dently agent for Sir Alexander Mackenzie and Company for some
years.*°? By the counter-protest of the McGillivrays and Thain,
also dated Montreal, November 15, 1821, it would appear that
the firm of MeTavish, McGillivrays and Company was organ-
ized on November 1, 1814. As the names of partners are the
same and as Mackenzie himself elsewhere uses this same date, it
is probable that November 1, 1814, is the correct date.°%* The
same firm-name apparently had been used before, however.

It seems that claims for returns from the outfits of 1821 and
1822 were recognized and that stipulations were entered into
to balance inventories with the Hudson’s Bay Company on June
1, 1823, and for payment to McTavish, McGillivrays and Com-
pany of certain shares of profits on the outfits of 1821 and 1822
in full discharge of all claims of that firm to the trade or con-
cerns of the North West Company or in any way relating there-
to. It was figured that these returns could not be estimated until
1824.10

The question was still unsettled in the year 1830, according
to an anonymous manuscript among the Masson Papers in the
Canadian Archives, entitled, Letters addressed to the Editor of
the Canadian Courant by a Creditor of the Agents of the North
West Company.?°® In the first of these letters, dated Ottawa,
September 26, 1830, the writer gives a sketch of the early career
of Simon McGillivray.

“Letter to Simon McGillivray, 14.

1? Letters Addressed to the Editor of the Canadian Courant, in Masson
Papers, vol. 1, 29.

8 Letter to Simon McGillivray, 14.

% Tbid., 1, 15.

1% Thid., 22.
6 Masson Papers, vol. 1.
Last Days 191

According to this, McGillivray came to America early in the
century and was put in a counting-house in New York. Three
years later he joined his relatives in Montreal and was occasion-
ally employed about the counting-house of McTavish, Frobisher
and Company. His uncle, Mr. McTavish, died in 1804, and the
next year his brothers sent him to England to the office of Me-
Tavish. Fraser and Company. In 1806, when the firm was re-
newed. Simon became a partner, the head of the firm getting for
this a bonus of £500 yearly from the funds of the firm. In 1808
Simon McGillivray was allowed a pension of £200 by the Mon-
treal house. His brother Duncan died in the spring of the same
year, and in 1810 Simon was formally introduced to the Montreal
firm to fill the vacancy. In 1813, on the renewal of the firm,
Simon was a partner next to his brother William, resigning his
emoluments in the London firm to the Montreal firm. Three or
four vears later, when Fraser, the head of the London firm, re-
tired, young Fraser and Simon McGillivray were the only mem-
bers. Young Fraser’s share was now two-ninths, and the Mon-
treal firm held seven-ninths. Simon McGillivray shared in the
latter, but, as Fraser’s successor in the chief command, he took
for himself, possibly with the consent of William McGillivray
and Thain, the above annual bonus of £500 until the end of the
firm in 1822. In 1821, after the agreement with the Hudson’s
Bay Company, he visited Canada to finish the arrangements of
that year. In 1822 the firm of McTavish, McGillivrays and
Company expired by effluxion of time. Then William and Simon
McGillivray and Thomas Thain reunited as McGillivrays, Thain
and Company to wind up the business of the old concern, as well
as to manage Hudson’s Bay Company affairs in Canada, for
which they received £1500 a year. Then came the suspension of
payments after the death of William McGillivray. Simon prom-
ised to realize on the English estate he inherited from his brother
and the North West Company and pay up. He stated that this
192 The North West Company

would require four or five months, but until date of 1830 he had
reported nothing.?%"

The writer then proceeded with a discussion of Simon Mc-
Gillivray’s letter to the creditors and pointed out that the latter
had said nothing in regard to the annual shipments of furs to
London to meet the bills of exchange of the Montreal firm. He
claimed that these shipments in 1820 and 1821 and some other
shipments not accounted for in England amounted to £221-
089-15-8 and that the returns from the Columbia and Macken-
zie rivers on hand in 1820 amounted to £46,987-6-4, making a
total of £286,077-2-0. He charged that these proceeds had not
been properly accounted for at date ten years later, though it
had been the regular custom of the North West Company to bal-
ance its books on November 30 of each year. Moreover, he stated
that the results of the last two outfits of the North West Com-
pany were still involved in obscurity, but that it was known from
undoubted authority that McGillivrays, Thain and Company re-
ceived, from November 29, 1823, to November 30, 1827, property
of the North West Company valued at £433,613-16-7, none of
which had so far become tangible to the creditors.1°> The writer
continued that the creditors’ claims by the assignment of Febru-
ary 2, 1826, were as follows: £1222-12-9 due in promissory notes
in 1821 and 1822; £8935-1-8 due in promissory notes in 1823 and
1824; £81,519-18-4 due in promissory notes in 1825; and £128,-
491-7-1 due by account or open accounts. This made a total of
£220,168-19-10. Of this amount £96,216-8-9 was due to retired
partners, including £56,712-11-4 belonging to the estates of de-
ceased partners whose heirs had received nothing since the as-
signment. There was also £11,009-7-10 due to the retired, the
superannuated, the aged, and to the estates of deceased clerks,

*” Leiters Addressed to the Editor of the Canadian Courant, in Masson
Papers, vol. 1, 1-6.

“57 bid., vol. 1, 11-13.
Last Days 193

guides, interpreters, ete. The balance was sums borrowed upon
interest. If interest were figured upon £220,168-19-10 from the
suspension of payment on November 30, 1825, to November 30,
1830, it would amount to £74,468-11-4. This sum was lost to the
ereditors. A composition of 13s. 4d. in the pound was apparently
then being offered to the creditors. This would mean a loss of
6s. 8d. in the pound, or £73,389-13-4, which, added to the inter-
est. would make a total loss of £147,858-4-8.1°° It does not appear
whether this offer was ever carried out.!?°

The writer of these letters indulged in some speculation in
which he suggested that the Canadian funds had been dissipated
in London speculations, and that Simon MeGillivray’s failure to
get a loan of £60,000 or £70,000 from a friend in New York pre-
cipitated the suspension of payment on November 30, 1825."?
He also estimated the profits of the North West Company for
eighteen years as being £1,185,403-10-5.12? If at all accurate, it
is a valuable item, but it cannot be checked, since the business
papers of the North West Company are not extant.

1 Letters Addressed to the Editor of the Canadian Courant, in Masson
Papers, vol. 1, 13-14.

2° Ross later stated that William MeGillivray wrote to him, after the
union of 1821, that £500 sterling was placed to his credit on their books.
Of this he never received a penny. When McGillivrays, Thain & Co. went
insolvent, Ross lost £1400 and was almost penniless (Ross, Fur Traders of
the Far West, I, 279-280).

™ Letters Addressed to the Editor of the Canadian Courant, in Masson
Papers, vol. 1, 39-40.

™° Toid., 51.
CHAPTER VIII

THE TRADE AND TRADING METHODS OF THE
NORTH WEST COMPANY

The fur trade of the North West Company necessitated im-
portant activities in London, as well as in Canada and the in-
terior regions of North America. Probably the bulk of the furs
was sent to England! and disposed of by public auction.?> Some
were manufactured and used in the British Isles. Others were
exported in a manufactured or unmanufactured state to the va-

1The expenditure in the wars with France caused various changes in du-
ties and port dues. The following items give some idea of what was oc-
curring: In 1797, Pitt introduced new duties on imports and exports which
were called the Convoy Tax. These went into effect in “The Triple Assess-
ment of 1798” (Dowell, Taxation and Taxes in England, I, 222-223). A new
tax on imports and exports was substituted in 1802 for the Convoy Tax
(ibid., 230). In 1804 an advance of £12-10-0 per cent was made on the
produce of the port duties generally. These duties, though re-enacted in
1809 as temporary duties, were made perpetual after the war (ibid., 232).
A fourth rise of £2-10-0 per cent was made generally on the port duties in
1805 (ibid., 233). A fifth rise of £8-6-8 per cent was made on the port
duties generally in 1806 (ibid., 235). A consolidation of the port duties,
which, though simplified and consolidated in 1803, had again become com-
plicated, was made in 1809 (Customs, 49 Geo. III, c. 98). The duties were
arranged in two columns, as permanent and temporary war duties, but the
latter continued and were made perpetual after the Peace of Paris (Dowell,
Taxation, II, 237). In 1813 the sixth general rise in port duties took place.
It was 25 per cent on the produce of duties (ibid., 243). There were some
new port duties in 1816, and the revenues of Great Britain and Ireland were
consolidated, this going into effect January 17, 1817, as 56 Geo. III, ¢. 98
(ibid., 262-266). The customs were consolidated in 1819 (ibid., 267).
MacPherson, however, states that furs and skins imported from the British
colonies in North America and all goods imported and exported by the
Hudson’s Bay Company were exempted from the new duties of 1798 (Mac-
Pherson, Annals of Commerce, IV, 448).

* The Sales Books of the Hudson’s Bay Company from December, 1787, to
December, 1789, are in the Public Record Office, London. They may be
cited to show the form of fur auctions at that time. The first one is headed:

“Sale Book of 183 December 1787. The Hudson’s Bay Company will ex-
pose to Sale by the Candle at their House in Fenchurch-Street, 1787, at
Eleven of the Clock in the Forenoon precisely, the following Goods (in
Time). To be seen at their Warehouses, from Monday next, to the Time of
Sale.” The lots of furs were printed, and the prices paid were entered in
ink. There were also entered the initials or some other sign of the pur-
Trade and Trading Methods 195

rious countries in Europe, and some even reached the continent
of Asia.* There is no evidence that any went to Africa. Draw-
backs on duties paid were allowed on re-exportation from Eng-
land.

chaser. From these books it appears that beaver, bed-feathers, whale-fins,
and eastoreum sold by the pound. Train oil sold by the ton. Goose-quills
sold by the thousand. Wolverine, bear, wolf, fisher, mink, musquash, squir-
rel, elk, deer, marten, otter, cat, and fox sold by the single skin. Coney
sold by the dozen skins. Beaver appears under the following captions:
coat beaver, damaged and stage coat beaver, parchment beaver, damaged
and stage parchment beaver, cub beaver, damaged and stage cub beaver (C.
O. 135, vol. 4).

SA petition to the Board of Trade of the following London firms inter-
ested in the Canadian trade indicates the situation in 1806. The petition is
dated London, December 12, 1806, and signed by Inglis, Ellice & Co., Me-
Tavish, Fraser & Co., Brickwoods, Daniell & Co., and Mackenzie, Gillespie,
Parker & Co. It recites that “several Articles of British Manufacture and
Imports, heretofore admissable in Russia, have been prohibited since 1st
January, 1798 by a Tariff dated 12th October preceding; and higher duties
than formerly were then laid upon others, particularly, Certain Articles of
Furrs imported from Canada and formerly exported direct to St. Peters-
burg.

Those Articles by a Tariff dated the 1st Sept. 1766 and subsequent Tar-
iffs were admitted upon payment of the following duties, viz.,

Beaver Skins at 420 Copecks for 10 Skins.

Otter Skins at 18 Copecks—ditto.

Furrs not enumerated at 30 per Cent ad Valorem.

By the Tariff above mentioned Beaver, and Otter Skins, are still admis-
sible, upon payment of a duty of 10 Rubles for 10 Skins, which is a great
advance, but yet, not amounting to a Prohibition, and all Furrs not enumer-
ated are Prohibited, which has been a great Loss to the Trade of Canada,
especially, in the Articles of Black Bear, and Raccoon Skins, and it is be-
lieved with no advantage to Russia; their own produce of Furrs is more val-
uable, and sells for higher prices in this Country, and other parts of Europe,
especially Grey & White Bear Skins, which are now much in fashion here.

That this Prohibition of Canada Black Bear and Raccoon Skins in Russia
has for some years past greatly reduced their price while the value of Russian
Imports has increased and further that if the Communication to the Con-
tinental Markets through the Port of Hamburg continue suspended Your
Memorialists will be deprived of the means of transporting their Furs and
Skins imported from Canada to the only remaining Markets, the German
Fairs, by which their Trade will be entirely suspended unless they can be
admitted into the Russian Ports.” They requested that the Foreign Secre-
tary be recommended to obtain a revision of the tariff on such furs from
America via Great Britain or, failing that, higher duties on imports of Rus-
sian furs (B.T., vol. 31, no. 36). Instructions were sent to the British Am-
bassador at St. Petersburg to press for the requested revision of the tariff
(B. T. 5, vol. 17, pp. 3-4).

On August 10, 1792, the Merchants of London trading to the Province
196 The North West Company

Various firms appear to have been in charge of the disposal
of these furs. Possibly even individual merchants may at some
period have done the same.‘ It is difficult to ascertain just who
these London agents—the term is a convenient one—were and
what powers they possessed.* The firms of Phyn, Inglis and
Company, Inglis, Ellice and Company, and McTavish,
Fraser and Company are mentioned in the later years
of the company. For its earlier years there is great
uncertainty. Mackenzie is indefinite on the subject. He
speaks of the formation of the company in the winter of 1783-
1784 as the forming of a copartnership by the traders in the
country and the merchants at Montreal. He leaves the same
impression when he speaks of the union of July, 1787, and the
action taken in 1798.6 But in reference to the trade of the
latter year he introduces a novelty. After giving the amount
of the returns of 1798,” he says that there had been sent through
the United States to China a considerable number of beaver,
otter, and kit fox skins. He does not state how these got to the
United States,—merely that the furs were diverted from the

of Quebec petitioned that Lord Macartney should be instructed to negotiate
a favorable treaty for the admission of furs into China (Q, 61-2, p. 463
et seq.).

* At least since McGillivray writes in 1827 of commissions which he had
received “as a London merchant, previous to 1813” (Letter from Simon Mc-
Gillivray, Appendix, 7, pamphlet 457 B, Canadian Archives).

°It is hard to decide just what emphasis to put on the following state-
ment: “From the conquest of Canada to the present time, the same parties,
resident in England and Montreal, have invested and risked the capital
which has enabled the Traders in the Interior, with success to extend their
commerce from the limits of Canada to the Frozen and Pacifie Oceans,” etc.
(Narrative of Occurrences, 120). It would be interesting to know who the
earlier parties were and what was the relative importance of those in Mon-
treal and those in England.

° Mackenzie, Voyages, xvii-xviii, xx, xxili.

"From the context, it is evidently this year, though he does not definitely
state such to be the case.

*He gives the figures as 13,364 beaver skins, weighing 19,283 pounds,
1250 otters, and 1724 kit foxes (Mackenzie, Voyages, xxvi). A kit fox, as
the name would indicate, was a small or cub fox. The same adjective was
applied to the skins of some other animals.
Trade and Trading Methods 197

British market. Advantage was probably being taken of Jay’s
Treaty. Mackenzie then explains that such an adventure in
the China trade was undertaken by ‘‘a respectable house in
London, half-concerned with the North West Company, in the
year 1792.’’ The item indicates the existence in England of
some kind of agency at that date, but this is the only mention
of such a firm in Mackenzie’s printed work.

The history of this experiment in the China trade was as
follows: Picked furs were sent to the annual value of £40,000
in the years 1792 to 1795 inclusive. In 1796 these furs were
disposed of in the London market, and in 1797 the affair was
concluded. As a result, the North West Company experienced
a loss of £40,400 on their half-interest. This was principally due
to the difficulty of getting home from China the produce ob-
tained for the furs in the East India Company’s ships, together
with the duty payable and the various restrictions of that
company.® Mackenzie probably related this incident to support
his suggestion of an extensive fur and fishery company with the
privilege of engaging in the trade with China. The American
handling of North West Company furs in 1798 is of great in-
terest. Evidence is not extant to show whether this was con-
tinued in the years immediately following, though the possibility
is recognized in the Agreement of 1802.1° There is a scarcity of
evidence in connection with the English firms and individual
merchants who were interested in the trade of the North West
Company in the earlier years of its existence. No doubt there
was some agency for the marketing of the furs and the purchas-
ing of trading goods.

In 1785 John Strettell of Riches Court, Lime Street, and
Dyer, Allan and Company of Mincing Lane wrote to Haldimand
that they had been requested by Grant and Blackwood, Benjamin

® Mackenzie, Voyages, xxvi.
Masson, Bourgeois, II, 465.
198 The North West Company

and Joseph Frobisher, and Simon MeTavish to support the re-
quest of the North West Company for a ten years’ monopoly
of the trade in connection with the exploration which was being
conducted under the direction of that company. This might indi-
cate that these London merchants had some financial interest
in the fur trade of the North West Company.’

The existence of London agents is not recognized in the Agree-
ment of 1802, which accords great powers to the Montreal firm
of McTavish, Frobisher and Company.’? But the firm of Phyn,
Inglis and Company, consisting of Alexander Ellice, John Inglis,
and James Forsyth of London, is recognized in the Agreement of
1804 as forming part of the New North West Company’s in-
terests. John Richardson and John Forsyth of the Montreal
firm of Forsyth, Richardson and Company were the attorneys
at the formation of the agreement. It was stated that these cor-
respondents, as they were termed, should furnish to the agents
of the New North West Company one-quarter of the goods nec-
essary for the joint trade. To them should be consigned likewise
one-quarter of the total returns, and they should effect the in-
surance upon these goods and these returns.1* This Agreement
of 1804 continued. in force until the end of the North West Com-
pany. The firm of Inglis, Ellice and Company was apparently
the successor of Phyn, Inglis and Company in this interest.’
The firm of McTavish, Fraser and Company in London is men-

« John Strettell and Dyer, Allan & Co. to Haldimand, London, January
12, 1785, Add. 21736. Blackwood was particularly concerned in the Ameri-
can trade, at least at a later date (Blackwood Papers, McGill University).
Grant probably had an interest in the Northwest trade.

” Masson, Bourgeois, II, 459-481.

“Tbid., II, 483, 489-490.

“There is mention of a firm of A. Ellice, J. Inglis & Co., owning the
ship “Carleton” in 1789 (C.O. 47, vol. 80). John Inglis wrote to Grenville
[?] from Mark Lane, May 31, 1790, about the Indian trade. He enclosed
a statement of the same date on the subject, signed by Phyn, Ellice, and
Inglis (C.O. 42, vol. 72). It is not quite evident whether this was North
West Company trade. It speaks of Lake Superior, but not of the North-
west.
Trade and Trading Methods 199

tioned as early as the year 1805, when Simon McGillivray was
sent by his brother from Montreal to its office.1> Henry Mac-
kenzie, writing in 1827, states definitely that the London firms
were Inglis, Ellice and Company, and MeTavish, Fraser and
Company, in terms which indicate that they held that position
in the last years of the North West Company.?*

These firms were interested in other Canadian and American
fur trade than that of the North West Company. On May 30,
1812, they addressed a memorial to the Treasury on behalf of
their correspondents in Canada who had formed the Michilimack-
inac Company. They requested damages of £26,842-5-6 for the
delay caused by American seizure of their batteawxr and goods
near Niagara on May 21, 1808. These had been restored in 1809,
but the company had been compelled to go out of business in
1810.17 It is evident from petitions that four Canadian firms
concerned were Forsyth, Richardson and Company, McTavish,
McGillivrays and Company, James and Andrew McGill and
Company, and Parker, Gerrard, Ogilvy and Company.'* The
first two of these firms were Montreal agents of the North West
Company, and more is said of them later in the chapter.

The agents at Montreal were more prominent from the be-
ginning. Mackenzie speaks of Messrs. Benjamin and Joseph
Frobisher and Mr. Simon McTavish as two distinct firms to
which was given the management of affairs on the formation
of the company in the winter of 1783-1784.1° Mackenzie does
not give definitely the terms of the union with the opposition
company of which he was a member in July, 1787, merely re-

% Letters Addressed to the Editor of the Canadian Courant, in Masson
Papers, 1.

%® Mackenzie, Letter to Simon McGillivray, 9.

Copy in F. O. 5, vol. 103. Damages were refused (Harrison to Atcheson
& Morgan, Treasury Chambers, September 25, 1812, F. 0. 5, vol. 103).

48 Michilimackinae Company to Craig, Montreal, October 20, 1808; copy
in Atcheson to Castlereagh of February 8, 1814, F.0O. 5, vol. 103.

Mackenzie, Voyages, xviii.
200 The North West Company

marking that the North West Company was compelled to allow
them a share of the trade. His cousin, Roderick McKenzie, gives
the name of Gregory, McLeod and Company, stating that it was
founded in the winter of 1784-1785,” but not whether it con-
tinued in existence or whether its individual members were guar-
anteed a portion of the profits of the joint trade. However that
may be, the firm of McTavish, Frobisher and Company was
evidently in existence in 1790, when an agreement was made in
regard to a continuance of the trade. This company was ac-
corded the largest number of shares of the trade, six out of
twenty. It is apparently ‘‘the house below’’ which was to be
paid five per cent on the invoice for the goods imported. Gregory,
Pangman, and Alexander Mackenzie, all members of the early
opposition company, were each to have two shares. Of these,
however, Mackenzie had to purchase one from McBeath, and
Gregory and Pangman had to purchase their shares from Holmes
and McLeod. McLeod had been a dormant partner in the oppo-
sition company; McBeath and Holmes were evidently retiring
members of the North West Company, and McLeod was evidently
also retiring from the fur trade. Ross had been killed before
the union of 1787, but all the other partners are mentioned in
connection with this arrangement. Nevertheless, the fact that
Gregory and Pangman had to purchase their shares forbids a
surmise at the agreement of 1787. Montour, Grant, and Small
had two shares each, and McGillivray and Sutherland became
partners with one share each.*?

The firm of Forsyth, Richardson and Company was engaged
in opposition trade to the North West Company in the latter

* Masson, Bourgeois, I, 7.

*Ibid., I, 38-39. This is probably William McGillivray, who became im-
portant in the North West Company at a later date. MeTavish, Frobisher &
Co. signed a memorial to Dorchester in regard to the western fur trade dated
Montreal, December 28, 1790. This was particularly concerned with the ques-

tion of the surrender of the posts in the west (In Dorchester to Grenville,
no. 79, of January 23, 1791, C. O. 42, vol. 73).
Trade and Trading Methods 201
years of the eighteenth century.*? It is recognized in the Agree-
ment of 1804 as one of the components of the New North West
Company. its membership then being Thomas Forsyth, John
Richardson, and John Forsyth. It was to be recognized as act-
ing for the quarter-interest of the New North West Company
in the joint concern. For example, it was to be the financial
agent, together with the firm of McTavish, Frobisher and Com-
pany, for the united company. The firm of McTavish, Frobisher
and Company,”* after an existence of at least fourteen years,
appears to have given way to the firm of McTavish, McGillivrays
and Company, although it is uncertain just when this change
oceurred. The firm of McTavish, Frobisher and Company signed
a petition dated Montreal, November 8, 1805.2 The change must
have been mace between this date and December 16, 1806, when
an agreement was entered into at Montreal between Joseph Fro-
bisher and the firm of MeTavish, McGillivrays and Company.
The agreement had reference to a North West Company share
which had been transferred on November 30, 1802, by the late
firm of McTavish, Frobisher and Company to Joseph Frobisher

 

“Masson, Bourgeois, I, 46. It was engaged in the trade south of the
Lakes at an even earlier date. Its name appears in 1791 among the signa-
tures of a letter reporting that the traders had suffered the loss of their
houses and part of their goods by the burning of the Miamis village. In
1791 merchandise was imported from Great Britain and forwarded to De-
troit to the value of upwards of £40,000 currency (North West Traders to
Sir John Johnson, Montreal, August 10, 1791, signed by Forsyth, Richard-
son & Co. and by Todd, McGill & Co. for themselves and their correspon-
dents at Detroit; copy in Dorchester to Grenville, no. 102, of August 17,
1791, C.O. 42, vol. 83). Both these firms had also signed a report on the
western trade dated December 28, 1790 (C.O. 42, vol. 73).

* Its membership in 1795 was Simon McTavish, Joseph Frobisher, John
Gregory, and William McGillivray (Masson, Bourgeois, II, 459). In 1798
it contained the same persons and Alexander Mackenzie (Memorial of Mc-
Tavish, Frobisher & Co. fora grant of land at Sault Ste. Marie, C. O. 42, vol.
112). In 1802 its membership was Simon MeTavish, John Gregory, William
McGillivray, Dunean McGillivray, William Hallowell, and Roderick Me-
Kenzie (Masson, Bourgeois, II, 460, 461). In November, 1804, its member-
ship was the same, lacking Simon MeTavish (Masson, Bourgeois, II, 483).
The latter had died earlier in that year.

* Copy in B. T. 1, vol. 28, no. 16.
202 The North West Company

for the use and benefit of his son, Benjamin Joseph Frobisher.
The share at that date was worth £3282-2-5 in Canadian eur-
rency.”> This share was now released. McTavish, McGillivrays
and Company were to pay any balance which might be due, with
compound interest, and also £500 annually for seven years in
semi annual installments. The membership of the firm at the
date of the agreement was stated to be William McGillivray,
Dunean McGillivray, William Hallowell, and Roderick McKen-
zie.2° The firm bore the same name in 1814," and was in exist-
ence when the union with the Hudson’s Bay Company took place.
The firm of Sir Alexander Mackenzie and Company, the inter-
ests of which were handled by Thomas Thain, appears to have
been in existence then too. But evidence is not forthcoming to
show what had become of the firm of Forsyth, Richardson and
Company, or who exercised the important powers accorded to it
by the Agreement of 1804.

* Canadian currency and Halifax currency were the same. They were in
pounds, shillings and pence. These were of lesser value than English ster-
ling money. A pound in Canadian currency was equal to eighteen shillings
currency, or four Spanish or American dollars. The French or old currency
was reckoned in livres and sols. A guinea was reckoned as equal to twenty-
eight livres. This would mean that a livre was about seven-eighths of au
English shilling. In practice, a dollar was equal to five Canadian shillings
or to six livres. A louis d’or was twenty-seven livres ten sols, or slightly
less than a guinea. York currency was in popular use in the southern and
western portions of Upper Canada from a little east of Toronto. It was
based on New York currency. By it an English sixpence was equal to a
York shilling (C.O. 47, vol. 123; Gourlay, Statistical Account of Upper
Canada, I, 215-217; Kingsford, History of Canada, IX,80, n.).

6 Masson Papers, Canadian Archives, vol. 3.

* Letter to Simon McGillivray, p. 15. Its membership was given as Wil-
liam McGillivray, Simon McGillivray, Archibald Norman MeLeod, Thomas
Thain, John McTavish, and Henry Mackenzie. It reorganized either in 1813
or 1814. There are some stray references to a firm of MeTavish, McGilli-
vray & Co., but not esough to determine whether such a firm held the Mon-
treal agency or whether it is a case of misspelling. The firm of McTavish,
McGillivrays & Co. is evidently the Montreal firm which Selkirk speaks of as
holding thirty shares. He calls them “the successors of those who planned
the original coalition in 1783” (Selkirk, Sketch, 12). This may mean that
the Frobishers were the persons who really organized the North West Com-
pany.
Trade and Trading Methods 203
Mackenzie states that the Montreal agents had to import the
necessary goods from England, store them at their own expense
in Montreal, get them made up into articles suited to the trade,
and pack and forward them. They had to supply the cash
needed for the outfits as well. For all this they received, besides
the profit of their shares, a commission on the amount of the
accounts, which they were obliged to make out annually, keeping
the adventure of each year distinct. Two of them went each year
to Grand Portage to manage and transact the business there, and
on the communication at Detroit, Michilimackinac, St. Marys,
and at Montreal, where they received, stored, packed up, and
shipped to England the company’s furs, on which they also had
a small commission.?®
The Agreement of 1802 also indicates that the Montreal
agents had the power to engage employees and purchase liquor,
provisions, and other required commodities, which would be
largely done in Canadian or American territory; and, further,
that furs might be disposed of in the United States or sent that
way to some other country.2 The agents were accorded very full
powers to act as attorneys for the North West Company and
also in the names of the individual partners.*° The duties of the
agents were not changed by the Agreement of 1804 beyond the
recognition that the New North West Company should have a
quarter-interest in the joint trade and that their agents should
enjoy the same ratio in ordering supplies and transacting busi-
ness. This guarantee gave a definite standing to the partners
who thus entered the North West Company, which would have
to be recognized during the existence of that company, and might
even give them a claim to special consideration in case it merged
with another company.

8 Mackenzie, Voyages, xx-xxi.
> Masson, Bourgeois, II, 463-466.
3% Ibid., 473-474.
204 The North West Company

The annual meeting of the wintering partners with the Mon-
treal agents was of great importance from the earliest years of
the company. These meetings were first held at Grand Portage.
Later, with the rediscovery of the Kaministikwia route, they
were held at the New Fort, later called Fort William. At least
two of the Montreal agents were expected to be present, and
the wintering partners seem to have made it a point to be present
whenever possible. The meetings were held in June and July,
and the place of general rendezvous was a scene of much activity
during this period. Besides the agents and partners, there were
always present numerous clerks, guides, interpreters, mechan-
ies, and canoe men employed by the North West Company.

The packs of trading goods and provisions now had to be
sorted and dispatched to the interior. When the meetings were
held at Grand Portage, this necessitated toilsome transportation
over nine miles of rough country. It was supposed to be com-
pleted by the time the north men, as they were termed, arrived
from their winter quarters. Some of the goods had then to be
transported in the north canoes to Rainy Lake, which was as far
as the Athabasca canoes came. These canoes then brought back
the Athabasca furs to Grand Portage.

The furs having been received and checked,*?! agreements
were made with any employees who wished to continue in the
interior; their accounts were settled, and their savings, if any,
disposed of as they wished. In about two weeks they would be
on their way back to their wintering stations.*?. In the mean-
time the partners and the agents would have discussed the situ-

“The following statement in a letter from Alexander Mackenzie to his
cousin, Roderick McKenzie, dated London, November 7, 1806, is of value in
regard to the annual values of the returns. He says: “I understand the re-
sult of the returns from all quarters is estimated at from £130,000 to £140,-
000, which must leave a handsome profit upon the outfit of the year” (Mas-
son, Bourgeois, I, 51). The statement might indicate that this wag an ex-
ceptionally high return even in view of the expectations which no doubt had
been aroused by the union of the competing companies two years earlier.

% Mackenzie, Voyages, xliv-xlv.
Trade and Trading Methods 205

ation of the trade and determined on measures for the ensuing
year. These would include the locating of employees; the open-
ing, continuance, or abandonment of trading regions, and all the
details connected with the apportionment of goods and provi-
sions. An annual report was submitted by the agents from Mon-
treal. Copies of current accounts were sent to Grand Portage,
Temiskaming, and to any other department from which the part-
ners could not conveniently reach the general meeting. Objec-
tions had to be delivered in writing within ten days after re-
ceipt.** The annual meeting passed upon promotions, retire-
ments, leaves of absence, and penalties for misconduct. Each
share in the concern was entitled to one vote. By the Agree-
ment of 1802. fifty-two votes were required to form a legal
majority, or, if all shares were not appropriated, in the propor-
tion of fifty-two to ninety-two. The same proportion was ob-
served in the Agreement of 1804. An absent partner’s vote could
be cast by the man who held his power of attorney. The annual
meeting had the power to make new rules and regulations for the
trade and to alter the powers of attorney granted to the Montreal
tirm in case they were not making proper use of them. The
clearest statement of the powers of the annual meeting is given
in the Agreement of 1802. These rules were adopted in the
Agreement of 1804, with the allowance necessary for the inter-
ests of the incoming partners from the New North West Com-
pany.** The latter agreement was apparently not superseded
before the union with the Hudson’s Bay Company.

The Montreal agents were evidently responsible for the re-
turns of furs and other articles after these were delivered by
the wintering partners. It would seem from Mackenzie’s account
that they even had to arrange for getting them across Grand
Portage.** The furs had been brought from the interior in packs.

 

 

*% Masson, Bourgeois, II, 466.
*Tbid., II, 459-499.
* Mackenzie, Voyages, xlvi.
206 The North West Company

These were of different values, depending upon the relative num-
ber of fine furs which they contained. Packs from the northern
departments were usually more valuable than those from the
Red and Saskatchewan rivers.*°

Mackenzie states that the lower end of the bay at Grand
Portage was cleared of wood and enclosed. On its left corner
was situated the fort, which was surrounded by cedar palisades
and enclosed wooden houses covered with shingles. One of these
contained a hall in which more than a hundred men could dine
at one time.*”

In the preceding chapter the question of the transportation of
furs from the Pacific Coast to Canton and of the return cargoes
from that port has been discussed. It was shown how American
ships took the place of the ‘‘Isaac Todd’’ and other vessels sent
from England by the North West Company. The problem of
the vessels which transported the trading goods and furs be-
tween England and Canada is less easily solved.

Quebec was the Canadian port from which the furs were
shipped and to which the goods came.** This was necessarily
the case, since there was a custom-house here and none at Mon-
treal. It is probable that the furs were always shipped to the
port of London®® and that the bulk, if not all, of the goods were
shipped from there. But of this there is little proof. Presum-

*In 1810 the packs from Nipigon, Rat River, and east and north of
Lake Winnipeg were estimated at £50 each, while those from the Upper and
Lower Red and the Saskatchewan rivers were valued at only £30 each (Sel-
kirk Papers, Canadian Archives, vol. 1, p. 192).

™ Mackenzie, Voyages, xliii-xliv.

* St. John’s, Coteau du Lac, and Chateauguay are mentioned as ports in
the year 1820 (C.O. 47, vol. 122). But these would hardly grant clearances
for sea-going vessels.

*” According to the Navigation Act, 12 Car. II c. 18. s. 18 and 8 Geo. I.
ce. 15. s. 24., beaver and other skins, the produce of any British plantation
in America, Asia, or Africa, could be carried only to Great Britain or some
British plantation. The penalty was forfeiture of ship and goods or their
value. This still held when the North West Company was organized.
Trade and Trading Methods 207

ably these furs and goods were carried in ships belonging to
the North West Company or to its Montreal and London agents
in preference to paying freight charges to outsiders.

Some figures may be given in regard to the ships carrying
furs from Quebec during this period. In 1784 six vessels, the
““Naney,’’ the ‘‘Harvey’’ (or ‘‘Hervey’’), the ‘‘Euretta,’’ the
“Integrity.’’ the ‘‘Polly,’’ and the ‘‘Maria,’’ carried furs from
Quebec.*® Three ships are listed for 1786, eight for 1787, eleven
for 1788, eight for 1789, and nine for 1790.41 Two ships are
given in 1792, but this is only for the quarter ending July 5.
Seven ships are mentioned in 1800, nine in 1801, fifteen in 1802,
eight in 1804, two in 1805 for the quarter ending October 10
only, two in 1806, and twelve in 1807.4? Thirteen ships are
mentioned in 1808, seventeen in 1809, eleven in 1810, and nine
in 1811.4° Seven ships are given in 1812, and five in 1813.*4
The bulk of the furs were shipped, as a rule, in the last quarter
of these years. The lists do not cover every month of some of
these years, but they are complete for the years 1808 to 1813
inclusive. The furs are entered under bales, puncheons, casks,
packs, loose, and on one occasion a trunk. This list indicates
the forms in which they were shipped. Nearly all of the furs
went to London. A few are listed to Liverpool, Greenock, Aber-
deen, and Kirkaldy, and some to St. Johns, Newfoundland, and
to Halifax. A few items of furs entering Quebec from lower
St. Lawrence ports are given. It is impossible to tell, from the
lists of goods on incoming ships, what quantity of commodities
was destined for the Indian trade. These ships mounted guns,

0 Manifest of the Export of Furs from the Port of Quebec in 1784
(Add. 21881, f. 29). The “Euretta” may possibly be the “Everetta” men-
tioned later.

*C. 0. 47, vol. 80.
* Ibid., vol. 81.
* Toid., vol. 82.
* Thid., vol. &3.
208 The North West Company

sometimes a dozen of them. This, however, was not the case with
those listed before the war with France.

The names of certain ships and of certain owners occur quite
regularly in these lists. The ship ‘‘Everetta,’’ owner James
Phyn and Company, is listed in 1786 as carrying six hundred
and twenty bales, thirteen puncheons of furs. An ‘‘Everetta,’’
from its description apparently the same vessel, is mentioned in
1788 with its owners, A. Ellice, J. Inglis and Company. It
carried eight hundred and seven bales of furs to London. The
‘‘Everetta’’ is given right through to 1813. Its owner in these
later years was Phyn, Ellice and Company, this name first defi-
nitely appearing in 1807. Preceding this, after 1800, the own-
ers’ names are given as J. Phyn, A. Ellice, and others. The
firm is listed in 1810 as Jas. Phyn and Company. The “‘ Carle-
ton’’ was owned by A. Ellice, J. Inglis and Company in 1789
and probably the preceding year. The firm J. Phyn, J. Inglis
and Company first appears in 1789 as owner of the brig ‘‘Mary
Ann.’’ The ‘‘Montreal,’’ which had been listed in 1789 under
the ownership of J. Phyn and J. Inglis, appears in 1800 under
the ownership of J. Fraser and 8. McTavish. In 1804. after the
death of Simon McTavish, its ownership is stated as J. Fraser
and others. It does not occur again. John Fraser’s name ap-
pears in 1807 and 1808 as one of the owners ef the ‘‘ Mary.”
In 1810, its last appearance, this vessel was owned by S. Me(ul-
livray and Company. It carried only a few furs that year.
J. Forsyth is indicated in 1800 and 1801 as one of the owners of
the ‘‘Reliance’’; in 1802 and 1804, as one of the owners of the
‘“Adeona.’’ Inglis was interested in various ships, besides those
already mentioned in connection with his name, such as the
‘«Adeona,’’ the ‘‘Adriatie,’? and the ‘‘Reliance.’’ John Me-
Tavish in 1811 and 1812 was owner of the ‘‘Isaac Todd,’’ a
vessel built at Three Rivers. The ‘‘Everetta’’ regularly carried
good cargoes of furs. There was a drop in the furs which these
Trade and Trading Methods 209

vessels carried after the Michilimackinae Company went out of
business.*®

The items show a presumption that there was some distinct
connection between shipping interests and the fur trade. It is
not possible to determine just which cargoes of these furs be-
longed to the North West Company. No mention is made of the
““Beaver,’’ which was sent to Hudson Bay on MeTavish’s ven-
ture, as engaging in this trade from Quebec to London. Selkirk,
in his publication of 1817, speaks of three ships being employed
in the North West Company’s trade,** but a later publication
states that the North West Company’s trade gave employment to
only one vessel, of three hundred and fifty tons burden, to and
from the St. Lawrence. This should represent the situation
around 1818.*”

It is possible that some of the North West Company’s furs
were sold from time to time in Canadian markets. Certainly
furs from the West were sometimes disposed of in this manner.
For example, the Nipigon furs of 1788 were thus sold for £4000
eurrency.*®

After reaching Quebec, the goods had to be transported to the
different trading posts. The goods for the King’s Posts probably
came from Quebec. The supplies for the St. Maurice may have
come from either Quebec or Montreal. In fact, there is little

* C.O. 47, vols. 80-83. One of the most provoking gaps in this list is that
of 1805, the year following the absorption of the X Y Company.

“6 Selkirk, Sketch, 122.

Letter to the Earl of Liverpool, 10. In the same connection it was
pointed out that the average annual duties paid by the company did not
equal those paid by an ordinary East Indiaman. The writer also claimed
that many commercial houses at Montreal and Quebec imported far more
goods for ordinary trade than did the North West Company for its trade.

“R. Mathews to ...... , Plymouth Barracks, [17]90, C.O. 42, vol. 72.
Some of the furs from Michilimackinae also were sold this way. The fol-
lowing are some of the market prices of furs at Montreal in the year 1819:
North beaver £1-0-0 to £1-1-0 per pound; marten £0-4-1 each; muskrats
£0-0-9 to £0-1-0 each (Montreal wholesale prices current quoted in James
Strachan, A Visit to Upper Canada in 1819, p. 218).
210 The North West Company

information regarding the fur-trade procedure in the lands north
of the St. Lawrence. Montreal was the chief depot for the sup-
plies of goods to the Indian countries of the interior. It is
likely that the goods came by ship from Quebec to Montreal.*

The Ottawa River provided the regular channel for these
goods. which were carried in canoes.*° These canoes did not,
however, depart from Montreal, but from Lachine, which was
connected with Montreal by a road that was sometimes in a very
bad condition. Each canoe, according to Mackenzie, was manned
by eight or ten men. It carried their baggage and sixty-five
packages of goods, six hundredweight of biscuit, two hundred-
weight of pork, and three bushels of peas for provisions. It was
provided with two oilcloths to cover the goods, a sail, an ax, a
towing line, a kettle, a sponge to bail out water, and some gum,
bark. and watape™ for repairs. Thus loaded, a canoe sank to
within six inches of the gunwale, but the skill of the Canadian
voyageurs was such that accidents were few in number. Each
canoe cost about three hundred livres."

The canoes usually left Lachine early in May and did not
return until September. The navigation of the Ottawa and
other rivers was broken by rapids and various obstacles, which
necessitated portages and décharges. A portage was a spot where
both the canoe and its loading had to be carried overland. A
décharge was a spot where a portion or all of the loading had
to be transported. The canoe could “then be towed past the ob-

* Palmer, who visited Lower Canada in 1817, speaks of the “Ewereta”
[in all probability this is the “Everetta’], a large ship from London, as
loading entirely with furs and skins at Market Wharf, apparently at Mon-
treal (Palmer, Journal, 213).

_ "North West Company canoes carried goods by way of the Ottawa
River in 1784, i.e., during the first year of the company’s existence (Add.
21735-2, ff. 446-447).

* Watape, or wattape, was the fine roots of the spruce or some similar
tree. It was used to sew the birch bark of the canoes. Gum was used on the
seams or around the edges of patches of bark.

8 Mackenzie, Voyages, xxviii-xxix.
Trade and Trading Methods 211

struction, or, in case of descending a river, a rapid might be run
by the lightened canoe in comparative safety. The goods were
carried on the men’s backs in slings which passed over the fore-
head. The ordinary load was two packs of about ninety pounds
each, although more were sometimes carried.52? Mackenzie re-
cords a startling feat in this line. He states that there had been
instances when men carried seven packs weighing ninety pounds
each across Portage du Bonnet without stopping. The portage
was half a league long.®?

At Mattawa the canoe left the Ottawa and proceeded by way
of Lake Nipissing and French River to Georgian Bay. It is prob-
able that the goods for Lake Temiskaming were forwarded from
Mattawa. From the mouth of French River the canoes followed

* Mackenzie, Voyages, xxx-xxxi. In a journal written in 1793 this list
appears: “The following are the names of the portages from Montreal here
in the order in which they occur in ascending the Ottawa River &c. to Lake
Huron, viz., lst Chute a Blondeau, No. 2-3-4 Long Sault, No. 5-6-7 Les
Chaudieres, No. 8 Les Chats, No. 9 Portage du Fort, No. 10 La Montagne,
No. 11 D’argy, No. 12 Le Grand Callumet, No. 13 Allumettes, No. 14 Les
Joachims, No. 16 La Roche Capitaine, No. 17 Les deux Rivieres, No. 18
Le Troue. Those of the Little River, No. 1 Le plain Champs, No. 2 Les
Roses, No. 3 Campion, No. 4 La Gross Roche, No. 2 La Paresseu, No. 6 La
Prairie, No. 7 La Cave, No. 8 Talon, No. 9 and 10 Le Musiques, No. 11 La
Tortue, No. 12, 13, 14, Les Vases. And the portages in the French River:
No. 1 La Chaudiere des Francais, No. 2 Parisiens, No. 3 Le Grand Recol-
let, No. 4 La Petite Fausille.

18 portages in the Ottawa.

14 portages in the Little River & Vases.

4 portages in the French River.
In all 36 portages to the entrance of Lake Huron and there are besides
these about an equal number of Décharges” (Masson Papers, no, 2352, Me-
Gill University). In 1781 Lieutenant-General Hope reported 16 portages on
the Grand River, 15 portages up the Little River to Lake Nipissing, and 3
portages on French River (Hope to Haldimand, Quebec, October 19, 1781.
Add, 21758, f. 178).

In 1821 Lieutenant-Colonel Cockburn made various observations while in
attendance on Dalhousie, who was making a tour of inspection. Among
these is a detailed account of the route from St. Mary’s to Montreal via the
north bank of Lake Huron, the French River, and the Ottawa River. It
mentions that the North West Company kept up a dam near the head of the
river which emptied into Lake Nipissing. An Indian was caretaker (Re-
port 1897, pp. 75-78, printed in Canadian Archives). This dam would help
the canoes.

* Mackenzie, Voyages, Ixi.
212 The North West Company

the north shore of Georgian Bay and Lake Huron to Sault Ste.
Marie. From here, according to Mackenzie, the canoes were
transported over Lake Superior with only five men in each, while
the other men were sent to Michilimackinae for additional canoes
which were needed for the trade. These would take a lading
either at Michilimackinae or Sault Ste. Marie and then follow
the others to Grand Portage.**

The cost of canoe transportation by the Ottawa route was
estimated by Joseph Frobisher in 1785 to be about twenty per
cent on the canoes assorted for the trade. In the case of pro-
visions and other articles of small value, he stated that the
freight on every package of a hundred pounds in weight was
from fifty to sixty livres, and to Grand Portage it was from
eighty to ninety livres.

A portion of the goods was also transported by the lake route.
These goods, when Mackenzie wrote, were sent in boats from
Montreal to Kingston®® and thence in vessels®’ to Niagara. They
were then carried overland about ten miles to a water connection
to Lake Erie. Here they were again placed in boats and taken
to Sault Ste. Marie, carried above the falls, and then shipped
to Grand Portage. This was less expensive than the canoe

*'Mackenzie, Voyages, xl.

* Benjamin Frobisher to Hamilton, Montreal, May 2, 1785, C.O. 42,
vol. 47.

*° A manuscript map in the British Museum, drawn by W. Chiwett in
1789, bears a legend to the effect that it took nine days to go from Lachine
to Kingston in batteaua set with poles all the way, the distance being 196
miles. This map shows various portages to the north of Lake Ontario, in-
cluding the “Carrying Place from Toronto,’ which meets a river flowing
into the southeast of Lake La Clie, and portages from the northern bay of
this lake to Lake Huron (Add. 31866, I).

* A committee of the Merchants of Montreal reported January 23, 1787,
in favor of lowering freight charges on the lakes, saying: “On Lake On-
tario a Barrel Bulk of 36 Gallons is to pay 10/ York or 6/3 Currency and
on Lake Erie 15/ York or 9/4% Currency which on an average is 7/9 5/8
Curry. The freight from London is 55/6 Currency per ton or say 9/3 per
barre] for at least a 4 months voyage.” A month was required on the lakes.
The traders’ goods were still required to go in the royal ships (Enclosure C
in Dorchester, no. 5, of July 4, 1787, C.O. 42, vol. 11).
Trade and Trading Methods 213

route, but much slower and attended with more risk. These
goods had to be sent from Montreal the preceding autumn. The
North West Company also obtained provisions, such as flour
and corn, at Detroit, and considerable supplies of maple sugar,
tallow, gum, and other articles at Michilimackinac. For this
transportation they had two vessels on lakes Erie and Huron,
and one on Lake Superior, of from fifty to seventy tons burden.
The water at Grand Portage was so shallow that the ship had
to anchor nearly a mile from the shore.*®

The North West Company had various vessels navigating the
upper lakes, but there is no record of any on Lake Ontario. In
1784 permission was granted them to build a vessel at Detroit
to be taken up the Falls of St. Marys and used on Lake Supe-
rior.’ This vessel, the ‘‘Beaver,’’ could not be taken up the
falls in the spring of 1785,°° but seems to have been allowed to
navigate Lake Huron by special permission. It is uncertain
when the first North West Company ship was constructed on
Lake Superior.®** A list, which was probably drawn up early in
1790, speaks of ‘‘two small vessels belonging to the company
trading to the northwest about twelve and fifteen tons,’’ as being
on Lake Superior.*? The ‘‘Otter’’ was built by Nelson at Point
aux Pins on Lake Superior in 1793. She was launched in July,
and reached Grand Portage on August 2. Her master’s name was
Bennett. The ‘‘Athabasea,’’ which had previously sailed Lake

- “% Mackenzie, Voyages, xxxix-x].

Add, 21724.

°Q, 25, pp. 119 et seq.

Tt igs said that the French had an only vessel on this lake, which was
lost or destroyed about the date of the conquest (Frobisher to Mabane, Mon-
treal, April 19, 1784, Add. 21735, ff. 421-424). The traders to the North-
west possessed a periauger or perriauger on Lake Superior in 1776 (James
Bannerman to William Edgar, Michilimackinac, June 23, 1776, Edgar Let-
ters, 21-25).

“ Enclosure bearing endorsement “List of Ships on the Lakes. R. from
Capt. Schank May 31-1790.” It is in Phyn, Ellice & Inglis to Grenville (7),
Mark Lane, May 31, 1790, C. O. 42, vol. 72.
214 The North West Company

Superior, was floated down the Falls of St. Marys to help the
‘‘Beaver’’ bring supplies from Detroit and Michilimackinac to
the Sault.*? The ‘‘Otter’’ was a vessel of seventy-five tons.%4
It is listed in 1799,°° and in 1803 Henry records that this vessel
and the ‘‘Invincible’’ were at the New Fort at the mouth of the
Kaministikwia.°* The schooner ‘‘Beaver’’ is mentioned by John
McDonald of Garth as being on LakeSuperior in 1812.°° M’Cargo
was the master of the North West Company’s schooner on Lake
Superior in 1815.°° <A vessel on the stocks was part of the
property which Daniel Mackenzie purported to transfer to Lord
Selkirk in October, 1816.°° The schooner ‘‘Invincible’’ was
totally lost in a gale on Lake Superior November 13, 1816.°° Me-
Tavish, writing at Fort William on April 22, 1821, speaks of
sending the dispatches, which had arrived the preceding day
from the north, by the ‘‘Recovery’’ to St. Marys.™

The ‘‘Beaver’’ and the ‘‘Arabasca’’ are listed as North
West Company vessels on Lake Huron in November, 1793. The
former was a vessel of forty-five tons, and the latter of forty
tons. The former carried a crew of five men, and the latter a
erew of four men. Both could mount four four-pounders and
six swivels.7?. The ‘‘Arabasca’’ is probably the ‘‘ Athabasca’’
already mentioned. The ‘‘Nancy’’ is mentioned in the Agree-

°° Masson Papers, no. 2352, McGill University. Masson says the “Atha-
baska” was also built at Pointe aux Pins (Masson, Bourgeois, II, 149, note

1).
* C. O. 42, vol. 318.
°° Masson, Bourgeois, I, 65.
°° Coues, Henry-Thompson Journals, I, 244-246.

* Masson, Bourgeois, II, 42. But MeDonald’s memory was sometimes
treacherous.

*S Letter to the Earl of Liverpool, 192.

* Narrative of Occurrences, 82-83.

Tbid., 110.

™ C. O. 42, vol. 367.

“Ibid., vol. 318. Both are termed sloops, as is the “Otter,” in this return.
Trade and Trading Methods 215

ment of 1804 as if a three-eighths interest in it was to be the
property of the joint concern."? The North West Company’s
brig ‘‘Caledonia’’ was used as a transport at the capture of
Michilimackinae in 1812, but she was lost later in the same
year.‘* The ‘‘Nancy’’ was burned at Nottawasaga River early in
August, 1814.77 Two new schooners built on Lake Superior were
also lost. The ‘‘Mink,’’ of forty-five tons, was captured on Lake
Huron, and somewhat later the ‘‘Perseverance,’’ of eighty-five
tons, was burned at Sault Ste. Marie.7* The government compen-
sated the North West Company for these last three.7 It is not
known whether the North West Company constructed new vessels
to replace these losses.

It would appear that the North West Company made some
use of the route between Lake Ontario and Georgian Bay. In
1784 Captain Robertson applied for the grant of a tract of land
along this route with Frobisher, McTavish, and others, in order
to carry on the Northwest trade.*® The grant was evidently not
made.

The administrative and judicial events which transpired at
York in connection with the Red River troubles must have
caused some use to be made of this route. A traveler named
Head, who spent four months in the woods on the borders of
Lake Simcoe and Georgian Bay, speaks of his house on Kempen-
feldt Bay as being a little way out of the line of march of the
Northwest traders. He also speaks of North West Company
stores, as well as government stores, arriving on their way to Lake
Tfuron in the early part of June, but he does not give the year.

3 Masson, Bourgeois, II, 493.

4 Christie, History of the Late Province of Lower Canada, II, 20-21, 43;
Gourlay, Statistical Account of Upper Canada, I, 54-55,

™ C. O. 42, vol. 167.

© ©, 363, pp. 80-81; C. O. 42, vol. 161.

™ Treasury to Goulburn, November 28, 1815, C.O. 42, vol. 164.

78 Robertson to Haldimand, Michilimackinae, July 10, 1784, printed in
Canadian Archives, Report 1888, note E.

 
216 The North West Company

A man at Newmarket, thirty miles from York, was the North
West Company’s agent. Head gives the route of some of the
government stores as being from York by land to Holland River,
thence by water to the head of Kempenfeldt Bay, an outlet of
Lake Simeoe. A portage of eight miles led to the Nottawasaga
River, which provided a water route to Georgian Bay.”? Prob-
ably the North West Company’s goods went the same way. Goods
must still have been going by the Niagara route, for a writer who
left Upper Canada in June, 1820, tells of the North West Com-
pany’s forwarding stores by the carrying places from Queens-
ton to Chippewa.*®

The canoes used in the fur trade were of various sizes, the
two chief types being the one used on the route between Lachine
and Grand Portage or Fort William, and the smaller ‘‘North
eanoe’’ used beyond the latter places. The first type could carry
about four tons.*t Colonel Landmann, who traveled from Lachine
to St. Josephs in one of these canoes with William MeGillivray in
1798, has left a good description, which reads as follows:

These canoes were exceedingly strong and capacious, they were about
thirty-six feet in length, by six feet wide, near the middle; and although the
birch bark which formed a thin external coating over their ribs of white ce-
dar, and their longitudinal laths of the same wood, appeared to compose but
a flimsy vessel, yet they usually carried a weight of five tons. It may be as
well to state that this cargo was very carefully stored, in order to remove any
unequal pressure, which would have been fatal to such a vessel. Four poles,
three or four inches at their thickest ends, denominated by the Canadians,
grand-perch, were laid side by side in the middle of the bottom of the canoe.
On these poles, the cargo was carefully arranged so that all the weight rested
on them, and none allowed to press against the bare and unprotected sides of

* Head, Forest Scenes, 178, 229, 247-248, 318-319. Head does not give a
single year date in his whole work, which was published at London in 1829,
but in his preface he speaks of the “‘few years which have intervened” since
the events.

* Howison, Sketches of Upper Canada, 72, 273.

“Benjamin and Joseph Frobisher to Haldimand, Montreal, October 4,
1784, Add. 21877, ff. 398-401.
Trade and Trading Methods 217

the canoe. Every package was made up of the weight of ninety pounds and
none heavier.

The five tons included the provisions for ten men, sufficient to support
them during about twenty to twenty-two days. Each canoe was provided
with a mast and lug-sail, and also each man had a ten-foot setting-pole, of
good ash, shod with an iron ferrule at each end, for assisting the men towing
with a strong Jine in ascending the rapids. The paddles were supplied by
the canoe-men, each bringing his own. Each canoe had also a camp-kettle,
provided by the owners, as also a few Hambro lines, a bundle of watap,
roots of the pine tree, for stitching up any seam that might burst, a parcel
of gum of a resinous nature, for paying over the seams when leaky, a piece
of birech-bark for repairs, hatchet, crooked knife, and a few more indispen-
sable articles.

In speaking of portaging, Landmann said that a canoe
weighed fifteen hundred pounds and that six men were expected
to reverse, shoulder, and carry it.8? This weight is probably
wrong. Gourlay stated that one of these canoes weighed five
hundredweight,** which sounds more reasonable.

The North canoes were about half the size of the Montreal or
Ottawa River canoes, and when loaded to their utmost capacity
could carry a ton and a half. The number of men required
to navigate them was four or five, the lesser number being for
‘posts near at hand. A partner or chief clerk was allowed by the
company to have an extra man in his canoe to wait upon him.
Complaints were sometimes made of partners who, from motives
of vanity, took a needless number of picked men in their canoes.**

The canoe which was constructed for Franklin at Fort Chipe-
wean in the summer of 1820 was doubtless a good specimen of
the North canoe. Its extreme length was thirty-two feet six
inches, including the bow and stern pieces. Its greatest breadth
was four feet ten inches, but it was only two feet nine inches
forward where the bowman sat, and two feet four inches behind,

* Landmann, Adventures and Recollections, 1, 303-306.

®% Gourlay, Statistical Account of Upper Canada, I, 595-596.

* Masson Papers, no. 2352, McGill University. This journal was written
in 1793.
218 The North West Company

where the steersman was placed. Its depth was one foot eleven
and a quarter inches. There were seventy-one hoops of thin
cedar, and a layer of slender laths of the same wood within the
frame. Its weight was about three hundred pounds, and it could
carry twenty-five pieces of goods each weighing ninety pounds,
besides its crew and their provisions and baggage.** Fewer men
were required to carry a North canoe than an Ottawa or Grand
River canoe. Peter Grant, a partner, stated that the bowman
and steersman were expected to carry it, the middle-men being
exempt from that task.*° Birch bark of a yellowish color and
free from wrinkles was considered the best and most lasting for
canoes.§?

The time occupied in these trips was sometimes very brief,
but the work was fatiguing and long-continued. Landmann
states that he knew the canoemen to work about twenty hours a
day for two or three weeks, resting only every two hours for five
or ten minutes to fill their pipes.*® Roderick McKenzie made the

% Franklin, Narrative, 163.

% Masson, Bourgeois, II, 313.

"McTaggart, Three Years in Canada, I, 305. According to Ross, the
North West Company carried its policy of using birch bark canoes on the
Columbia to the extent of shipping a stock of bark from Montreal to Lon-
don, whence it was taken to Fort George via Cape Horn, in case there was
none of equal quality on Pacifie waters (Ross, Fur Hunters of the Far
West, I, 72). This is probably the cargo which the “Isaac Todd” took from
Quebec, October 26, 1812, on her last trip before going to the Columbia
River. She carried, among other items, 81 rolls of bark, 51 bundles of
watape, and 2 kegs of gum (Naval Officer’s Returns of Lower Canada, C. 0.
47, vol. 83).

“Landmann, Adventures and Recollections, I, 309. The passage is in-
teresting. It reads as follows: “No men in the world are more severely
worked than are these Canadian voyageurs. I have known them to work in
a canoe twenty hours out of twenty-four, and go on at that rate during a
fortnight or three weeks without a day of rest or a diminution of labor;
but it is not with impunity they so exert themselves; they lose much flesh in
the performance of such journeys, though the quantity of food they con-
sume is incredible. They smoke almost incessantly, and sing peculiar songs,
which are the same their fathers and grandfathers, and probably their great-
grandfathers sang before them; the time is about the same as that of our
military quick marches, and is marked by the movement of their paddles.

They rest from five to ten minutes every two hours when they refill their
Trade and Trading Mcthods 219

trip from Rainy Lake to Fort Chipewean in a month and four
days in 1799. He had six men in a light canoe, and arrived
September 4.*°

Partners, traveling light with picked crews and only baggage
and provisions in their canoes, made much faster trips than the
heavily laden canoes. They would save much time at the por-
tages especially. The record time of the North West Company
from St. Josephs to Montreal was probably that of Simon Me-
Tavish, who performed that journey in seven and three-quarter
days. The record for this journey held until Landmann, as a
young man in the military service, reduced it to seven and a
quarter days in July, 1800. Landmann used a light, twenty-five-
foot canoe with a crew of ten picked men. The baggage was
arranged so that everything could be portaged in one trip, a most
unusual advantage. He had a favoring wind on Lake Huron,
and his chief discomfort was from the smoke of the forest fires
through which the party raced.°°

There was a regular system of expresses to carry correspond-
ence, reports, and news to and from the different posts in the
Northwest. Masson states that ‘there were two expresses annu-
ally. The winter express left the farthest posts in the north
about the end of November, passed through the whole country on
sledges and snow-shoes and reached Sault Ste. Marie in March.
The summer express hurried down to the place of rendezvous
with the results of the winter’s trade,*? apparently in advance
of the canoes with the furs. The dispatches from Mackenzie
pipes: it is more common for them to describe distances by so many pipes,
than in any other way. In regard to the use of spirits they are always al-
lowed a dram of high wines, a strong distillation from corn, in the morning
and one at night. They are short-lived and rarely are fit to voyage after

they have attained their fortieth year, and sixty years seems to be the aver-
age of their existence.”

* Journal of James McKenzie, Masson Papers, no. 2538, MeGill Univer-
sity.

” Landmann, Adventures and Recollections, II, 168-171

** Masson, Bourgeois, II, 387, note 1.
220 The North West Company

River were ready to be transported by two Canadians to Slave
Lake on January 29, 1801.°? From there they would go to Fort
Chipewean. The dispatches from Great Bear Lake were sent
by way of Mackenzie River on January 30, 1806.°* The winter
express from the north reached Fort William on April 21, 1821,
which séems to have been later than usual.®*

Ross says that the express from the Columbia left the mouth
of that river on Apvil 1 and arrived at Fort William on July 1
with great regularity. Leaving Fort William on July 20, it
reached Fort George on October 20. Similarly, a ight canoe from
the mouth of the Columbia could reach Montreal in a hundred
days.

The British goods used in the Indian trade were stated by
Mackenzie to be coarse woollen cloths of different kinds, milled
blankets of different sizes, arms, ammunition, twist, and carrot
tobacco, Manchester goods, linens, coarse sheetings, thread, lines,
twine, common hardware, several varieties of cutlery and iron-
mongery, brass and copper and sheet-iron kettles, silk and cotton
handkerchiefs, hats, shoes, hose, calicoes, printed cottons, and
other items.*°

According to a statement made about ten years later, in 1811,

“ Masson Papers, no. 2362, McGill University.

*’ Journal of Great Bear Lake by A. McKenzie, Esq., Masson Papers, no.
2353, MeGill University. Mackenzie left Fort Chipewean on September 15,
1805, for his post, which he later terms Great Bear Lake Castle. He re-
turned August 23, 1806. The returns from Mackenzie River that year were
117 small packs. Mackenzie mentions Rocky Mountain Fort as being de-
serted, He had charge of Mackenzie River, to which 61 pieces of trading
goods were sent in 1805. He stated that the Dog Rib Indians were poor
hunters, as they hunted beaver only in the spring and fall. The Hare In-
dians, about 300 men, were very indolent. They killed very little beaver,
their prineipal hunt being martens and muskrats. It was only three years
since they first had had traders. Seemingly there was no trade with the
Loucheux and Rapid Indians that year.

“J. G. MeTavish to the Agents and Proprietors of the North West Com-
pany, Fort William, April 22, 1821, C.O. 42, vol. 367.

* Ross, Fur Hunters of the Far West, I, 304.
" Mackenzie, Voyages, xxv.
Trade and Trading Methods 221

the principal items were blankets, which were manufactured at
Witney, Oxfordshire; Yorkshire woollen goods, comprising
strouds, coatings, meltons, serges, flannels, common blue and
scarlet cloth; Manchester cotton goods, comprising striped cot-
tons, dimities, janes, fustians, printed British cottons, shawls,
handkerchiefs, gartering, and ferreting; large quantities of
hardware; Irish and other linens; Scotch sheetings; osnaburgs;
large quantities of nets, twine, birdlime, thread, and worsted
yarn; brass, copper, and tin kettles; Indian fusils, pistols, pow-
der, ball, shot, and flints; painters’ colors, vermillion, etc.; sta-
tionery, beads, drugs and large parcels of all kinds of Birming-
ham manufactures.7 A special permit from the Privy Council
was necessary for the exportation of worsted yarn.** Selkirk
estimated the annual value of the British goods exported for the
trade of the Northwest to be about £30,000.

There are definite figures of the amount and value of the
articles exported to the Columbia River in years when the North
West Company controlled the trade of that region. In the year
1814, these show the following items of British manufacture:
wearing apparel, felt hats, slops, haberdashery, butter, cheese,
pickles and sauces, suet, candles, gunfiints, gunpowder, guns,
military stores, saddlery, fishing tackle, playing cards, station-
ery, tobacco pipes, wrought brass, copper, iron and leather, pew-
ter, tinware, turnery, grindstones, soap, seeds, painters’ colors,
various packages and woollen goods comprising long cloths,

" Origin and Progress, 14, n.

% This requirement was embodied in an act of 47 George III, and re-
enacted five years later. On March 9, 1808, McTavish, Fraser & Co.,
Inglis, Ellice & Co., and others named were granted a permit “to export
4900 lbs. of Worsted or Woollen Yarn to Quebee or Montreal for the Indian
Trade” (Privy Council Register, vol. 176, pp. 63, 64). These permits ap-
pear regularly during the remaining years of the North West Company’s
existence. The amount never reached 20,000 Ibs. and was usually much less
than that (Privy Council Register, vol. 176, pp. 192, 194-203). No other
article required such persistent licenses.

* Selkirk, Sketch, 20.
222 The North West Company

double baize, blankets, stuffs, and stockings.1°° In 1815 there
were exported similar types of goods and also apothecary
wares; beer and ale; cotton goods, comprising white or plain,
printed, and checked calicoes, white or plain muslins; fus-
tians; velvets; stockings; sewing cotton; earthenware; window
and bottle glass; hardware and cutlery; jewelry; lead and shot;
linens, comprising British and Irish white or plain linen and sail
cloth; machinery; brass and iron ordnance; perfumery; pistols;
silk stockings and gloves; silk stuffs mixed with worsted; snuff;
unwrought steel; umbrellas; and woollen goods comprising, be-
sides the varieties of the preceding year, short cloths, napped
coatings, kerseymere, flannel, and woollens mixed with cotton.’
In 1817 there were also cordage and cables, twist and yarn cot-
ton, cotton lace and net, pitch, tar, salt, saltpetre, silk ribbons,
swords, tobacco, and vinegar.’°? In 1818 there were in addition
brushes and brooms, chalk, castor hats, lime juice, mathematical
instruments, musical instruments, plated and gilt ware, sugar,
and twine.’°? The year 1819 saw also ships’ blocks, cabinet and
upholstery ware, carts and wagons, white lead, linseed oil, and
various trunks and boxes.1°* There were no shipments in 1820.

In 1816 there were exported to the Columbia River from Great
Britain the following foreign goods: great bugle; bar iron; Russia
linen; pepper; Indian calico; prohibited piece goods; prize silk;
1000, H, 8, vol. 2. The official value was £1738-9-10, and the real or de-
clared value £2396-6-0.

11 C,H. 8, vol. 3. The official value was £13,885-18-1, and the real or de-
clared value was £19,327-5-1. There was a duty on the lead and shot of
£9-16-0. All went in one British vessel.

 C. H. 8, vol. 6. The official value was £17,184-12-5, and the real or de-
clared value £19,730-5-4. There was a British shipping duty of £26-17-4, a
dock duty of £15-12-8, and a percentage duty of £118-16-5, totaling £161-
6-5. The goods went in two British vessels.

°C. H. 8, vol. 8. The official value was £20,730-14-2, and the real or de-
clared value £22,847-6-2. The duties, similar to those of 1817, totaled
£196-18-11. The goods went in two British ships.

™ C,H. 8, vol. 10. The official value was £5955-10-6, and the real or de-
clared value was £6653-18-1. No duty is indicated.
Trade and Trading Methods 223

tar; brandy; Geneva spirits; British plantation rum; Canary,
Portugal, and Spanish wine.’”° In 1817 there were also glass,
nankeens, steel, tea, toys, British plantation sugar, and an un-
usual item of about eleven tons of quicksilver. The list that year
was directed to the Columbia River and Northwest Coast.1°* There
were over twelve and a half tons of quicksilver exported to the
same region in 1818. French wine is a new item. Only in
1819 were cocoa and coffee exported.1%

The lists of goods exported to Hudson Bay show similar ar-
ticles of British manufacture and foreign goods. The amounts
are greater and there are more articles of food and liquor, teas
and tobaccos.

Liquor and provisions were purchased in Canada and in
the American settlements on the south side of the Great Lakes.
Some tobacco was also obtained from the United States.1°° Other

1” C,H. 10, vol. 6. The total value was £1423-10-9, of which £35-8-0 was
prize. .

6 C.H. 10, vol. 8. The total value was £9691-1-11, with a duty on
Russia linen of £3-18-0. . . . All went in British shipping.

7 CH. 10, vol. 9. The total value was £7776-18-2. It went in British
shipping.

*S C,H. 10, vol. 10. The value was £24-1-9.

° Masson, Bourgeois, II, 494. Some of this tobacco was consigned by
the firm of Caldwell, Fraser & Co. of Albany. MeTavish, Frobisher ¢ Co.
petitioned at Montreal, May 15, 1802, stating that the preceding year
Messrs Caldwell, Fraser & Co., merchants residing at Albany, U.S. A., con-
signed 12,879 pounds of manufactured tobacco to Grand Portage, also in
the United States, “for the purposes of the trade carried on by the Memori-
alists there and in other parts of the Indian Country.” The collector of the
revenue at Niagara demanded and received of Mr. Robert Hamilton, agent
of the Memorialists, a bond for the payment of one penny sterling and
three pence provincial duty per pound, making £220-11-71%4 Halifax cur-
rency. They requested that they should be excused from paying this duty.
Before hearing of this demand, they had ordered two more large consign-
ments of tobacco from the same Albany firm: one for themselves at Grand
Portage, and the other for Toussaint Pothier at Michilimackinac. It was
considered in the Council Chambers at York, June 9, 1802, and left to the
regular courts for decision (C.O. 42, vol. 332, pp. 80-84). When inquiries
were being made in regard to the Red River troubles, Pritchard in a sworn
statement asserted that a fathom of tobacco weighed about three-quarters of
a pound. An Indian would receive this, or two horn combs, or twenty
charges of powder and ball, for a buffalo (Blue Book of 1819, p. 91).
224 The North West Company

articles of Canadian and American produce and manufacture
were no doubt also utilized in the trade.

The liquor was seldom formally sold to the Indians, but was
presented to them??? when they brought furs for barter and on
other occasions. In spite of the fact that the liquor was diluted,
the boissons, or drinking bouts, which resulted were bestial af-
fairs and not infrequently resulted in mutilation and loss of
life? The policy of supplying the Indians with liquor was
defended by the North West Company on the plea of necessity.
For example, in the year 1808 they presented a petition in oppo-
sition to a bill prohibiting the use of liquor, which Wilberforce
and others were bringing before the British Parliament. The
company gave some figures on the extent of the trade and the
quantity of liquor used. They submitted that the custom of
making liquor presents was so firmly established that they would
be compelled to abandon three-fourths of their trading territory
if they could not give liquor to the Plains Indians on whom
they depended for food, since the United States boundary now
reached those Indians, and Americans would get the trade.1"?

4° Origin and Progress, 12.

41 Por example, Eneas McDonell wrote to Roderick MeKenzie from Lac
Seul, June 15, 1807, and stated among other items: “In the Fall 1803, when
I first came to this Country, there were 40 Indians in Monontogue (ex-
elusive of Boys) then independent of Red Lake, 10 of that number are now
dead, 7 of them were killed by their relations in their drunken frolies, the
other 3 died a natural death. . . . They appear to be a Tribe of the Misis-
sagues, at least, their language and manners much resemble each other, and
seem to be a mixture of the Sauteux and Maskigon. . . . their lands are so
poor and drained of beaver & c. that they can hardly pay for their absolute
necessaries in good peltries. . . ” (Masson Papers, No. 2370, item 8, pp.
4-5, McGill University).

™ Craig to Castlereagh No. 48, memorial in Quebec, November 15, 1808,
C.O. 42, vol. 137. It was stated that the duties accruing to the Crown
exceeded £20,000 annually on the furs exported from Quebee alone. The
British manufactured goods exported for that trade, exclusive of those for
the Hudson’s Bay Company, had an annual value exceeding £40,000. More-
over, the North West Company paid upwards of £1000 a year for their lease
of the King’s Posts which had still fourteen years to run. The liquor used
by the North West Company amounted to 13,500 gallons of high wines in
1805, 10,800 gallons in 1806, 9500 gallons in 1807, and 9000 gallons in 1808.
Trade and Trading Methods 225

Liquor was not the only thing presented to the Indians. To-
bacco and articles of clothing were often given, and sometimes
a variety of other goods.1!® In his journal, written in Athabasca
during the winter of 1799-1800, James McKenzie says about the
presents given when the Indians arrived at a fort, that the to-
bacco was always rotten and the rum mostly water."* But Me-
Kenzie’s writings are imbued with a certain animus against the
ways of the North West Company and of its Canadian engagés.

The goods were ordered from England in October and shipped
from London the following spring. They arrived in Canada
during the summer. In the course of the succeeding winter they
were made up into articles which were required by the Indians,
and were then packed into parcels weighing ninety pounds each.
These would leave Montreal in May and be exchanged for furs
the next winter. The following September the furs would reach
Montreal, whence they were shipped, chiefly to London. Here
they were sold in March and April, and were paid for in May
or June. This was three and a half years after the goods were
ordered in Canada, three years after they were shipped from
London, and two years after they were forwarded from Mon-
treal. Thus the merchant, allowing a year’s credit, did not

This was an average of 10,700 gallons per annum for posts from the Straits
of Belle Isle to Great Bear Lake, in which region there were at least 60,000
savages, besides 1000 or 1200 partners and servants of the North West
Company. The memorial was signed by McTavish, MeGillivrays & Co., Jobn
Ogilvy, and Thomas Thain, as agents of the North West Company. The
figures quoted were in an accompanying paper.

*8The following articles were presented by Malhiot to the Indians
around Lac du Flambeau from July 25, 1804, to May 21, 1805: eau de vie
par gros baril 7, eau de vie par chopine 107, eau de vie par demi chopine
30, habits de chef 4, chemises de chef 11, plumets de chef 4, chapeaux de
chef 4, capots galonnés 5, tabac en carotte 1, tabac par brasse 25, tabac par
demi brasse 34, tabac par pied 50, tabac par pouce 61, tabac par jointe 42,
balles 1127, plomb par poigne pierre a feu 161, tire-boues 46, bat-feu 42,
atenes (?) 60; aiguilles 154, petits grelots 78, vermillion par prise 99,
tavelle par brasse 57, grands couteaux 28, petits couteaux 24, peigqnes 32
(Masson Papers, McGill University).

™ Masson, Bourgeois, II, 382.
226 The North West Company

receive a return to pay for these goods and for the expenses
connected with them, which were about equal to the value of the
goods themselves, until two years after they were considered as
cash. This made the trade a heavy business to finance. Some of
the goods were a year longer in realizing payment because of the
great distance to which they were carried.1**

It was stated in the Agreement of 1802 that the following
valuation, which had previously been used, should be followed in
accounting to a retiring partner for his share of the goods in the
interior. Goods at Grand Portage were to be accounted for at
the rate of twenty-five per cent on the Montreal cost and ad-
vances; those at every other post in the Northwest, except Eng-
lish River and the districts beyond it, were to be valued at the
rate of fifty-seven per cent on the cost and advances of Grand
Portage; and those of English River and more remote posts at
the rate of ninety per cent on the cost and advances of Grand
Portage. It was not as vet ascertained what it would cost to
earry goods beyond the Rocky Mountains.11° These rates were
probably fairly representative of the extra cost entailed by the
distances to which the goods had to be carried.

The highest rank among the persons engaged in the actual
trading was that of partner.17 The partners had charge of the
various trading departments, at least of the more important
ones.1'* They were paid by shares in the trade. If they obtained

5 Mackenzie, Voyages, xxiil-xxiv.

 

4° Masson, Bourgeois, II, 477.

“7 Mackenzie terms them proprietors (Mackenzie, Voyages, xx, ete.).
The same term appears in Masson, I, 61-66. The French employees used
the term bourgeois. But this practically had the significance of the collo-
quial term boss.

“A list of Old Company men in 1799 locates partners at Athabasca,
Upper English River, Lower English River, Fort Dauphin, Upper Fort des
Prairies and Rocky Mountains, Upper Red River, Lower Red River, Lac
Winipic, South of Lake Superior, Fond du Lac, and Lac La Pluie. Lower
Fort des Prairies, Nipigon, Pic, Michipicoton and the Bay, Sault and Sloop
“Otter,” and Grand Portage were in charge of salaried men, usually clerks
Trade and Trading Methods 227

any capital in this manner, it was to remain in the hands of the
agents, and the partners were allowed interest for it. Some of
them. for long service and great interest, held double shares in
the trade and might retire with one of these, naming any younger
man in the service to succeed in the other. The consent of the
majority of the partners was necessary, however, and thus the
claim of seniority and merit was recognized. No one could be-
come a partner who had not served his time to the trade. A
retired or dormant partner could, of course, dispose of his share
to any person, but if the transaction were not acknowledged by
his associates, the purchaser could be considered only as his
agent or attorney.’’® The income from the retired share could
be enjoyed for seven years. The shares of partners dying in
the service reverted to the company, but their heirs were guar-
anteed one-half of the proceeds of these shares for the period of
seven vears. Notice of intention to retire had to be given a year
In advance.!?°. Every partner had a vote at the annual meeting,
but no doubt the more influential men, especially the agents,
usually had their own way. It would be interesting to know
what real authority was possessed by the small French minority
among the partners. The name of Charles Chaboillez appears in
1802, and again in 1804 with that of Pierre de Rocheblave, among
the signatures to the agreements of those years. The other names
are Scotch or English, mainly the former.?*?

The next grade in the service was that of clerk. Clerks were
apprenticed to the trade for five or seven years and had the
(Masson, Bourgeois, I, 61-66). But the list is obviously incomplete, since
it lists only fourteen partners and ninety-six paid men.

“° Mackenzie, Voyages, xxi-xxii.

'™ Masson, Bourgeois, II, 474-476. A special exception is made in this
Agreement of 1802 in favor of one partner who held four shares. He could
retire when he pleased (ibid., 476). This may have been Simon McTavish,
who was planning to enjoy his wealth in a fine residence on the slopes of
Mount Royal when death claimed him, two years later.

“bid. II, 481, 498-499.
228 The North West Company

prospect of becoming partners in due course of time. This was
an incentive to activity and consideration for the prosperity of
the company. The approval of the annual meeting was neces-
sary for promotion to partnership. A clerk received specified
wages. At the end of the eighteenth century, the apprenticed
clerk received one hundred pounds, food, and clothing for his
period of service. Those who could not receive partnerships at
the end of their apprenticeship were paid from one hundred to
three hundred pounds per annum and all necessaries until they
were provided for. The men who acted in the double capacity
of clerks and interpreters, or were so denominated, had no other
expectation than the payment of wages ranging from one thou-
sand to four thousand livres per annum, with clothing and pro-
visions.’??_ It was estimated in 1799 that the value of a clerk’s
equipment and necessary supplies was twenty pounds.??

Competition raised the standard of wages. In 1819 Wentzel
wrote that the wages of a clerk were from one hundred and fifty
to two hundred pounds in Halifax currency. At the same time
Hudson’s Bay Company clerks received as much as three hun-
dred pounds.?7* Wages dropped after the union of the companies
in 1821, nobody being allowed an equipment, and salaries not
exceeding a hundred pounds sterling.”

Clerks had charge of posts and performed other important
services. Their location was fixed by the annual meeting.’ Like
the partners, they were expected to keep journals and to send to
Grand Portage, or later to Fort William, annual accounts of the
expenditure of goods entrusted to their charge, the balance of

= Mackenzie, Voyages, xxvii-xxviii.
eo ,

*8 Masson, Bourgeois, I, 61-66. According to these figures, one pound
was equal to twelve units of Grand Portage currency. The name of this
unit is not given.

*** Masson, Bourgeois, I, 124,
15 Tbid., 147-150.
™Tbid., 468.
Trade and Trading Methods 229

goods, provisions, and other effects on hand, the debts due by
Indians and canoemen left in the interior, and similar items of
information.’?’7 Mackenzie stated that there were fifty clerks
and seventy-one interpreters and clerks in the services when he
wrote. Five of these clerks were employed for the summer sea-
son in going from Montreal to Grand Portage.'8

While promotions were regulated in this manner, the agents
were evidently able to send in any man they wished to a position
on a fixed salary with no prospect of promotion. Thus McKenzie
was sent to the Columbia for five years at a salary of five hundred
pounds per annum.’?®

The guides were a useful and intelligent set of men, who also
acted in the capacity of interpreters. They had a stated quan-
tity of goods supplied to them, and received from one thousand
to three thousand livres in wages. When Mackenzie wrote there
were thirty-five of them, eighteen being engaged with the esnoes
from Montreal, for which service they received from eight hun-
dred to a thousand livres and a suitable equipment.'*° At the
same time there were one thousand one hundred and twenty
eanoemen, or voyageurs, in the North West Company’s service,
of whom three hundred and fifty were engaged in the annual
transportation of goods from Montreal to Grand Portage, some
of them going as far as Rainy Lake.**t A foreman, or bouthe,

17 Masson, Bourgeois, II, 469-470.

18 Mackenzie, Voyages, XXVi-Xxvii.

2 Ross, Fur Hunters of the Far West, I, 100.

19 Mackenzie, Voyages, xxvii.

11 4 list submitted by MeTavish, Frobisher & Co. in 1801 and forwarded
to the British government by Milnes listed 20 partners, 161 clerks and in-
terpreters and 877 canoemen. Eighty to one hundred Canadian and Iroquois
hunters were mentioned. The king’s posts were not included. It was stated
that 540 men were annually employed on the Ottawa River in canoes, of whom
400 went to the place of rendezvous, stayed from six to eight weeks, and
returned to Montreal with the furs (copy in B.T. 1, vol. 20, no. 93). The
returns sent from Fort Chipewean to Rainy Lake in the spring of 1807 were
694 packs. Of these, the Grand River packs were observed to be too light
by two pounds each (Masson Papers, no. 2363, McGill University).
230 The North West Company

received from four to six hundred livres for this trip. <A steers-
man received the same. A milieu, or middle-man, received from
two hundred and fifty to three hundred and fifty livres, with an
equipment of one blanket, one shirt, and a pair of trousers. These
men were maintained at the expense of their employers and were
allowed to traffic, many of them earning as much as the amount
of their wages. About a third of these went to winter. They
were engaged by the year, or sometimes for three years. Their
pay and equipment were more than double that mentioned. A
foreman or steersman received annually twelve hundred livres
and had an equipment consisting of two blankets, two shirts.
two pairs of trousers, two handkerchiefs, fourteen pounds of
earrot tobacco, and some trifling articles. A muliew received
eight hundred livres and a similar equipment with the ex-
ception of tobacco. Of this he received only ten pounds. These
men were called north men, hommes du nord, or winterers.
To this class were attached upwards of seven hundred Indian
women and children, victualed at the expense of the company.?*
The canoemen who made the trip to Grand Portage and Rainy
Lake only were called goers and comers, bangeurs du lard, or
pork eaters. The latter was a belittling term applied by the
north men and corresponded to the more modern terms tender-
foot, cheechalko, or new chum. The north men boasted that they
could travel hard, eat dog, and otherwise endure privations, and
pointed with derision to the use of pork by the Montreal canoe-
men. In reality, the food supplied to the latter was chiefly
hulled Indian corn and melted fat. This was also their food at
Grand Portage. A bushel of corn cost about a pound sterling at
Grand Portage, which would mean that one man’s allowance was

™' Mackenzie, Voyages, xxvii-xxviii. Thomas Ainslie, who had been col-
lector of customs at Quebec for twenty-seven years, gave evidence before
the Board of Trade March 14, 1789, that laborers in the province of Quebec
were worth from 10d. to 1s. 4d. sterling in winter and from 2s. to 2s. 6d. in
summer (B.T. 5, vol. 5).
Trade and Trading Methods 231

not more than ten pence. This was likewise true of the north
men, who also received a feast of bread, butter, pork, liquor, and
tobacco on their arrival. The proprietors, clerks, guides, and
interpreters messed together at several large tables in one large
hall, to the number of a hundred at times. They were provided
with bread, salt pork, beef, hams, fish, venison, butter, peas,
Indian corn, potatoes, tea, spirits, wine, ete. They had plenty of
milk, since milch cows were kept at Grand Portage. The mechan-
ies had rations of similar food. The north men slept in tents;
the pork eater lodged beneath his canoe.

The canoemen had to sign articles before notaries public at
Montreal, and were therefore termed engagés. This was done as
a rule in the winter preceding the voyage. On arriving at Grand
Portage, each man had to carry eight packs over the portage.
For any more, he was allowed a Spanish dollar per pack. The
winterers were among the men who made the further journey to
Rainy Lake.*%*

The Grand Portage, which was quite hilly, was divided by
the voyageurs into sixteen posts, or stops. Its soil was chiefly
a copper-colored clay.%* The Fort William route, which was
later used, was superior in various respects. It was not within

 

8 Mackenzie, Voyages, xliv-xlv. The following are typical instances of
engagements: Joseph Lemire engaged to serve as milieu de canot for Vee.
St. Germain and winter at Riviere 4 la Biche. His pay was to be 300 livres
in silver, or double that at Montreal, with an equipment of a 3 point blank-
et, a 2% point blanket, two shirts, two brayets, two prs. [sic] milasses, 3
carots of tobacco. It was signed at Grand Portage, July 16, 1792 (Edgar
Papers, 85).

Jean Cantara of Yamaska engaged to go as gouvernail to Grand Portage
—or to Rainy Lake for 150 livres extra—and return for McTavish, Fro-
bisher & Co. This engagement was signed in presence of Alexander Mac-
kenzie at Montreal, November 6, 1798 (Edgar Papers, 89).

Jean Amelot of Montreal engaged to serve as a miliew for McTavish,
Frobisher & Co., to winter, and on returning to pass eight pieces over the
Grand Portage. His pay was to be 600 livres or shillings of the old eur-
rency of the province, payable a month after his return to Montreal.
Signed at Montreal, December 18, 1792 (Edgar Papers, 89). The illiterate
voyageur frequently marked.

4 Masson Papers, no. 2352, McGill University.
232 The North West Company

the American line, for one thing. Then the expense of the Grand
Portage was obviated, the other portages being about equal.
There were fewer lakes on this route, which meant less detention
of the canoes by high winds.

The North West Company’s shipping on the lakes provided
employment for a few men, both as crews and on land. For ex-
ample, it was provided in the Agreement of 1804 that Angus
McTavish, the agent of the Old Company at Sandwich, should
continue in the same position for the joint concern.'**

Various free trappers were outfitted from time to time at the
North West Company’s posts, and paid their debts in peltries
and sold the balance at these posts. These trappers were usually
half-breeds. The North West Company introduced some Iro-
quois trappers into the Northwest, but they were much disliked.
Around some of the posts were occasional ‘‘freemen.’’ These
were old servants, usually French, who had spent their best
years in the service and preferred to spend their remaining days
in the Northwest rather than return to the settlements. Their
wives were Indian or half-breed women, to whom they were mar-
ried according to the custom of the country, since there were no
clergymen to perform a marriage ceremony except at Red River,
and that only near the end of. the North West Company’s exist-
ence.

Canoemen, clerks, and even partners had native wives. Toa
lesser degree, this was also true of the members of the Hudson’s
Bay Company. The bond was easily broken ;1** and the fur trad-

*% Masson, Bourgeois, II, 493.

“The matter-of-fact tone of the following entries is typical: John
Thomson, the writer of the journal, was wintering at Grand Marais or Ri-
viere Rouge in 1798-1799. On November 18 he states, “in the evening
Vivier with all his family arrived; gave him a dram. I asked him what he
meant by leaving the Indians. He says that he cannot live with them any
longer and that all the devils in Hell cannot make him return . . . (Nov.
19th). He has made an offer of his wife and child to Desmarrais who will

take his place but cannot get Madame to consent” (Journal of John Thom-
son, Masson Papers, Canadian Archives, vol. 4).
Trade and Trading Methods 233

ers, on returning permanently to the settlements, frequently left
wife and children in the interior. As a result of such more or
less permanent unions, there developed a considerable half-breed
population in the Northwest, which made its presence felt by
Lord Selkirk’s colonists and at a later date was concerned in still
more noteworthy disturbances.

It was stated in 1811 that the North West Company spent
annually about £50,000 sterling in Canada in salaries and wages
and for various articles of colonial produce.1?7 The debts owed
by employees and others to the North West Company were often
very considerable.1**

Life in the interior was described as follows by a North West
Company partner at Athabasca in 1795:

We dress in the Canadian fashion and the men outvie their masters in
this article. We live on fish and flesh, to which we sometimes add a few

87 Origin and Progress, 15.
8 A comparatively full list is extant for 1805. According to this, the

men’s accounts were:
Drs. to N. W. Co. Crs.

Athabasca River Dept. ........... 18,144- 2 7,691- 0
Upper Fort des Prairies .......... 8,433-11 24-10
Fort des Prairies ...c.s0d08 oriens 44,423- 4 2,169- 9
Lower Fort des Prairies........... 30,665-11 51-11
Fort des Prairies (Summer Men)... 10,426- 7 13,428- 1
English River (Freemen & ¢.)...... 42,036- 3 19,734- 6
Lower Red River ................. 42,465-10 8,318- 1
Upper Red River ................. 66,097-11 12,964- 3
Fort: Dauphin gayascive pagack cwacn i niws 32,960- 7 1,225- 6
Rag. Rivero otei..cis ciensad igeloias ath anes ane 3,995-17 1,293-12
Lake Ouinipique ................. 50,751-10 3,768-13
Mille: Tiaes: ocsi3 sare. t airiardis srsvetusie VO28U19 wissen
Lake Nipigon, Lake of the Islands

and its Dependencies............. 31,596- 3 9,630- 1
Red Lake and Lac Seul............ 25,967-18 305- 3
Pie Department ................6. 5,927- 1 1,259-15
Pond: du Tat: csccsiscrn insane date Paes 25,112-17 1,992-13
River des Sauteux ................ 5,360-14 298-13
Point Chagouamigon .............. 2,864-13 ........
Lac des Flambeaux ............... 7,444- 7 4,259-17
Tae la, Pluie: sssnscecivnces veeer ae 27,972- 6 2,930- 5
Kamanistiquia ...... cece cece ee cee eens nett eee

There were five men at Chagouamigon, 18 men at Lac des Flambeaux, and
35 men at Kamanistiquia (Masson Papers, no. 2370, McGill University).
234 The North West Company

Canadian douceurs by way of Sauce. We take a glass of liquor perhaps once
a week; and get drunk, perhaps, ouce in seven years. We satisfy our other
appetites according to the dictates of Nature or as best suits our conveniency.
The one half of our time we have to ourselves, which we employ either in
useful studies or innocent amusements. Gentlemen in Canada seem very fond
of recommending their youthful friends to this country; but if they knew
and considered the many disadvantages attending a young man in these dis-
tant regions they certainly would rather keep them at home. A Clerk here
must serve a long time for a trifle, and after all in spite of abilities, friends
or money, must either remain dependent on the Company’s pleasure, leave the
country or take the road to ruin.

The same writer said that men in the North West Company’s
service received from six to twelve hundred livres, with a double
suit of clothes. Guides and interpreters received from one to
three thousand per annum, and clerks from one hundred to five
thousand, with all necessaries. He also stated that there were
more than forty posts in the various departments of the north as
compared with the eight or nine of ten years earlier. He then
makes the following important statement:

The profits arising yearly from a share in the N. W. Co. have been vari-
ous these eleven years past,—being from worse than nothing to about sixty
thousand livres:—but now owing to the new modification of the Company,

the low prices of furs, the war and the oppositions, I should think our in-
come was again at a very low ebb.”

The full amount of the employees’ wages was of course not
met by the North West Company in cash. The employees were
allowed, and indeed encouraged, to run accounts. They were of
necessity dependent upon the company for articles which they
wished to purchase when in the interior. These were rated at
advanced prices in accordance with the distance from Montreal.
The profit upon liquor and tobacco was doubtless great, and the
sales of articles of clothing and ornaments for the native women

*® Masson Papers, no. 2370, item 3, pp. 51-52, McGill University.

“° Ibid., pp. 49-51, McGill University. This author states that returns
came to Grand Portage until the end of August.
Trade and Trading Methods 235

must also have been lucrative. Moreover, the Northwest currency
standard lent itself to skilful manipulation since it was just
double the value of the Canadian currency. A voyageur would
thus be tempted to purchase articles at a nominal price which
might be temptingly low, only to find, in settling his accounts,
that one shilling in the interior was counted as two shillings at
Montreal. It would therefore be rather unlikely that an em-
ployee would save anything from his wages.

The charge was also made that the North West Company en-
couraged extravagance and vice on the part of its employees, in
order to get them into debt. A man deeply in debt to the com-
pany would be practically at its mercy. Selkirk made an espe-
cially bitter denunciation of this policy, quoting Andriani and
current opinion as his authority. In spite of the partisan nature
of Selkirk’s pamphlet, the accusation merits attention. He stat-
ed that a large number of employees was essential to the mon-
opoly of the company and estimated that there were two thou-
sand voyageurs in its employ at an average wage of £40 or more,
which would mean a total of £80,000 or £90,000. The gross re-
turns of the trade, he said, seldom exceeded £150,000. It would
therefore be impossible to pay these wages in cash. The prime
value of the goods used instead, according to Selkirk’s inform-
ants, could not exceed £10,000 sterling. Asa sample of advanced
prices, he cited that spirits were sold to the employees in the in-
terior at the rate of eight dollars a quart, having cost the North
West Company little more than one dollar a gallon at Mon-
treal.1#!_ The prices of goods given to the Indians in exchange
for furs were likewise high. There was, of course, always the
possibility of bad debts, which would partially justify such prices.

“1 Selkirk, Sketch, 36-41. Selkirk cites Andriani’s account as it appears
in La Rochefoucauld Liancourt, Voyages dans V Amérique, II, 225, Paris,
An, 7. Andriani, who visited Grand Portage in 1791, stated that there
were more than 900 employees who owed the North West Company more
than twelve or fifteen years of their wages. If true, this would hardly be
good business on the part of the North West Company.
236 The North West Company

But this possibility would be greatest in the regions where oppo-
sition trade tended to enhance the prices paid for furs.

The North West Company possessed permanent property of
considerable value in the shape of forts and other buildings. It
does not appear whether it possessed or leased any buildings in
London. The returns must have been stored somewhere,?*? and
it is not likely that they could always have been in public ware-
houses. They required considerable space for resorting, which
was necessary for market purposes, the fine furs being sur-
rounded by coarse pelts in transportation. The furs also re-
quired handling to keep them from spoiling.*** Business proce-
dure was probably accomplished in the offices of the London firms
interested in the trade.

The business headquarters in Montreal were, for some time at
least, in St. Gabriel Street. In 1824 the building which had been
used for offices and other purposes by the agents of the North
West Company was advertised for sale.’**

“The Hudson’s Bay Company had a warehouse at Ratcliff Cross in
1768 (State Papers Domestic Entry Books, vol. 142, pp. 128-130). It was
at the same place in 1789 (Hudson’s Bay Sale Books, 1787-1789, C.O. 135,
vol. 4).

“8 The necessity for granting facilities for breaking packages of furs
and deer skins in the storage warehouses without its being necessary to pay
the duties, was emphasized in remarks enclosed by John Bainbridge and
William Huskisson, president of the Board of Control, in a letter dated
Broadstreet, April 11, 1823, to the Board of Trade. It was necessary for
preservation and for sorting for the home and foreign market. It was
pointed out that the duties of the last consolidation act were high and that,
unless such facilities were granted, the trade would be driven to Hamburg
(B. T. 1, vol. 179, no. 12).

“In the Montreal Herald, vol. XIII, no. 93, Saturday, September 25,
1824, the following notice commences:

“Hotel to Let.

To Let, for Three or Five Years, and Possession immediately given, that
Extensive Building in St. Gabriel Street; lately occupied as Offices & ¢. by
the Agents of the North West Company, now fitted up for an Hotel, or
Boarding House. The House contains Twenty Bed Rooms, and Four Par-
lours and Dining Rooms, all well finished.—Apply to

M’Gillivrays, Thain and Co.

24th September, 1824,—z”

This advertisement was still running April 30, 1825, but disappeared later
in that year.
Trade and Trading Mcthods 237

The buildings at Grand Portage are only briefly mentioned by
Mackenzie. There is a much better description in a journal writ-
ten in 1793, which reads as follows:

The Grand Portage is situated at the bottom of a shallow Bay perhaps
three miles deep and about one league and a half wide at its mouth from
Pointe aux Chapeaux to pointe a la Framboise having a small Island just
opposite the fort about half way from one of these points to the other: on a
low spot which rises gently from the Lake. The pickets are not above fif-
teen to twenty paces from the water’s edge. Immediately back of the Fort
is a lofty round Sugar loaf Mountain the base of which comes close to the
Pickets on the North West side.

The Gates are always shut after sunset and the Bourgeois and clerks
Lodge in houses within the Pallisades, where there are two Sentries keeping a
look out all night chiefly for fear of accidents by fire. A clerk a guide and
four men are considered enough (These are Montreal engagees).

The North Men while here live in tents of different sizes pitched at ran-
dom, the people of each post having a camp by themselves and through their
camp passes the road of the portage. They are separated from the Montre-
alists by a brook. The Portage is three leagues from one nagivation to the
other which caused great expense and trouble to the company. The men have
Six Livres of this currency for every piece of goods or Pack of Furs they
carry from one end of it to the other. The currency of the North west is
double that of Canada which currency had its origine, I presume, from the
men’s wages being formerly paid in peltries and it was supposed that one
liver’s worth of Furs would be worth two livers to the person that took it to
Montreal to be paid. The currency existed long before the North West
Company had a being and I believe before Canada was taken from the
French.

All the buildings within the Fort are sixteen in number made with cedar
and white spruce fir split with whip saws after being squared, the Roofs are
covered with Shingles of Cedar and Pine, most of their posts, Doors and win-
dows, are painted with Spanish brown. Six of these buildings are Store
Houses for the company’s Merchandise and Furs &c., the rest are dwelling
houses shops compting house and Mess House—they have also a wharf or
quay for their vessels to unload and Load. . . . Every Improvement about
this place appertains to the North West Company. Between two and three
hundred yards to the East of the N. W. Fort beyond the pork eaters camp is
the spot where Messrs. David and Peter Grant have selected to build upon,
as yet they have done nothing to it but marking out the four corners of the
giound they mean to oecupy with posts. They are now off for the interior
without leaving any vestige of their having been here but the four posts
238 The North West Company

above mentioned. . . . A full allowance to a voyageur while at this Post is
a Quart of Lyed Indian Corn or maize and one ounce of Grease."*

The buildings at Fort William in 1817, according to Cox, eon-
sisted of a large house, which contained a spacious dining hall;
the council house; the doctor’s residence; store houses for furs
and merchandise; a forge, and various workshops, with apart-
ments for the mechanics. There was a prison for refactory voya-
geurs. All these were surrounded by wooden fortifications,
flanked with bastions. There was a shipyard as well. A certain
amount of agriculture was carried on. There were a garden and
extensive fields of Indian corn and potatoes. There were some
cattle, horses, and other domestic animals. The temporary habi-
tations of the voyageurs, Indians, and other non-privileged per-
sons were located outside of the fort. From a somewhat rickety
observatory in the courtyard, an extensive view could be had of
the level, wooded land and of Lake Superior in the distance.'**

The forts of the interior varied from permanent and exten-
sive structures at important points to temporary posts located in
regions where a season’s trade would exhaust the supply of furs
for a year or more. Some were of more importance for obtaining
provisions than for obtaining furs. Franklin described some of
these posts as they appeared in the latter years of the North West
Company. Cumberland House was built of logs without much
attention to comfort. It was surrounded by lofty stockades and
flanked by wooden bastions. Instead of glass, parchment made
by the native women from the skin of the reindeer was used in
the windows. The Knisteneaux, or Crees, frequented the post.
Fish obtained at Beaver Lake formed a staple article of food for
the families there.1#*

At Carlton House and La Montée, establishments on the Sas-

*“° Masson Papers, no. 2352, McGill University.
“* Cox, Adventures on the Columbia River, 288-289.
“7 Franklin, Narrative, 55-56, 84.
Trade and Trading Methods 239

katchewan of the Hudson’s Bay and North West companies re-
spectively, few furs were obtained. These were provision sta-
tions. each of which put up between three and four hundred bags
of pemmican during the winter of 1819-1820. There were about
seventy Canadians and half-breeds, and sixty women and chil-
dren at La Montée. They consumed about seven hundred pounds
of buffalo meat daily, the allowance being eight pounds per
man.’*S The forts at [le a la Crosse were on the south side of
the lake. They no longer sent the furs which they once had pro-
cured, but the location was an important one.'*® The posts which
Franklin saw at Methye Lake were mere huts hastily constructed
during the winter of 1819-1820.1°° Fort Chipewean was situated
on a rocky point on the northern shore of Lake Athabasca. It
possessed a tower built about eight years previous to 1820 for the
purpose of watching the Indians. The post was an important
center for receiving furs from, and supplying goods to, the Slave
and Peace rivers. About two hundred and fifty hunters carried
their furs to Fort Chipewean."*! Fish was the chief article of
diet, though considerable meat was also obtained from the Indian
hunters. Fish was also the chief food at the posts on Great
Slave Lake, north of which lake the Hudson’s Bay Company had
no posts.’*? Few furs were collected at Fort Providence, the North
West Company’s post on the north of Great Slave Lake. This
post depended on its autumn fishing. The post at Martin Lake
had been abandoned.'** Fort Good Hope, three days’ travel be-
low the confluence of Bear Lake River with the Mackenzie, was
the most northerly post of the North West Company. The Lou-
cheux, or Quarreller, Indians traded there for blue and white

MS Franklin, Narrative, 116-117.
“° Tbid., 125-126.

Tbid., 129.

 Tbid., 152-155.

 Thid., 199-201.

8 Thid., 209.
240 The North West Company

beads. Some small pieces of Russian copper coin once made their
way there across the continent from the westward.***

The provisions, such as pemmican, obtained at the posts on
the Saskatchewan, were evidently brought to Cumberland House
for the use of the northern departments. The provisions from
the Red and Assiniboine rivers were transported to Fort Alexan-
dria, at the mouth of Winnipeg River, where the brigades picked
them up.**®

Agriculture was carried on more or less around some of these
posts. During the early years of the nineteenth century, the ag-
ricultural operations at the posts on the water communication
between Fond du Lae and Red River were comparatively exten-
sive.1°6
- ‘MP panklin, Narrative, 292.

*° Masson, Bourgeois, II, 218.

6 A good description of the region, which was written early in 1807, has
been left by George H. Monk. It was apparently intended for the perusal
of Roderick McKenzie in answer to a letter dated Kamamtiqua, June 27,1806,
enclosing a printed circular of queries intended to elicit information for a
publication. The account is accompanied by a letter from Monk dated Leech
Lake, April 18, 1807. After referring to Thompson’s visit to the region, he
continued: “From Fort William to the River St. Louis boats are more
Commodious, safer and cheaper Conveyance than large birch Canoes. River
St. Louis disembogues itself into Lake Superior in 47° N. Latitude 92° 40’

west Longitude . . . [He speaks of a Grand Portage past the first lake up
the river apparently about 27 miles up.] . . . From this place we send back
our boats to winter at Fond du Lac post.. . The portage is 27 miles from

the entrance and 13 miles long. At the rate of 14 pieces per man we gen-
erally take from 7 to 8 days to cross it. At the westerly end of the portage
to every two men we give a Canoe 20 pieces and their provisions. The
canoes are 24 feet long and built wide and flat, the shallow and narrow
rivers which we have to navigate make this construction, so much disap-
proved of by N. Westers, Necessary. . . . [More portages follow to River
La Savanne, a distance of 45 miles] here River St. Louis takes a northerly
Course and we continue a southerly course to Sandy Lake. Three miles up
the River St. Louis on the south side, the N. West Company has an estab-
lishment, of which the situation is low, but commands a beautiful and ro-
mantic view of Lake Superior, of the River and the small Lake. . . . There
are two horses, a Cow, a Bull, and a few pigs; with the manure of these
animals a garden of 3 acres of pure sand is Cultivated, which produces about
220 Bushels Potatoes. . . . Formerly this quarter was very productive in
furs but is now dwindling away to a mere trifle and the wretched Inhabi-
tants, say 30 Families, proeure but a very scanty share of the necessaries of
life; . . . [There follows a deseription of Portage La Savanne, 24 miles
Trade and Trading Methods 241

Franklin's deseription of the methods and standard of trade
around Cumberland House in 1819-1820 is typical of the process
of barter by which furs were obtained. The standard of ex-
change was the beaver skin. The relative value of this, as first

up River La Savanne. It was a difficult one, about seven miles long, usually

oceupying five days with twelve pieces per man.] . . . At the west end of
the portage is a small river also called La Savanne, and five leagues to the
entrance where it disembogues into Sandy Lake . . . [which] empties itself

into the Mississippi by a river four miles long... .

“Beaver formerly abounded here but is now very scarce, and dangerous
to hunt; being in the neighbourhood of the Sioux, the implacable enemy of
the Sauteux. . . . On the South side of the lake the N. W. Company has a
fort and garden; the latter produces about 1000 bushels potatoes, some
beans and peas. The Company has introduced horses and pigs into that
quarter. Stationary warriors are not numerous; from their continual war
with the Sioux, popolation is on the decline. While the men hunt beaver in
the spring, the women make maple sugar on which they and their children
subsist. . . . [There follows a description of the course from Sandy Lake to the
Mississippi, on this to Little Ouinipique branch apparently about 225 miles,
then three miles to a muddy lake two miles wide, and thence 70 miles to
Leech Lake.] Leech lake is 15 miles long and 12 broad, situated in 47° 16’
13” North Latitude. The little Ouinipie is 6 miles east of Red Cedar Lake.
These three lakes form the great source of the Mississippi and are con-
sidered as such by General Pike. Otter tail lake is situated 200 miles
Southwest by South from Leech Lake. Red lake is described by Mr. Thomp-
son. Lakes, Rivers and swamps are numerous in this quarter... . Many
of the lakes, Bays & Rivers are muddy and spontaneously produce vast
quantities of wild rice, of which the natives gather but a small part. Bea-
ver was formerly very abundant but is now very scarce, and dangerous to
hunt, being in the neighborhood of the Sioux Tribes.

“ . . . In the latter end of October and beginning of November a fall
fishing is made. [Fish were also abundant in April, May, July, August, and
September.} . . . a hundred warriors are stationed here, who hunt beaver

in the spring, while their women make sugar, on which they and their chil-
dren subsist.

“The North West Company have an establishment at the West end of
Leech Lake, where five acres of ground produce 1000 bushels potatoes, 30
bushels oats or rice, cabbages, carrots, beets, Beans, Pumpkins and Indian
Corn, The Company have introduced horses, cats and hens in this quarter.
Hunters’ meat is scarce in this country, every possible effort is made in the
fall to lay in the necessary stock of provisions for the winter; consequently
a quantity of wild rice is purchased from the natives.

“Round lake, situated 60 miles north of Leech lake. is the source of the
large fork of Rainy River, and is inhabited by 15 or 20 warriors. On the
North side of Upper Red Lake two freemen cultivate small spots of ground
and some more talk of following their example; the natives woul I'ke this
. . .” (Masson Papers, no. 2370, item 5, pp. 7-18, MeGill University). The
account is entitled: “Some account of the Department of Fond du Lae or
Mississippi by George Henry Monk Esq.”
242 The North West Company

established by the traders, differed considerably from the exist-
ing worth of the articles it represented, but the Indians were
averse to change. Three martens, eight muskrats, one lynx, one
wolverine skin, were equivalent to a beaver. A silver fox, white
fox, or otter was equal to two beavers, and a large black bear or
a black fox was equal to four beavers. This valuation had little
relation to European prices. The same was true of European ar-
ticles. A coarse butcher’s knife was estimated as one skin; a
woollen blanket or a fathom of coarse cloth, as eight skins; and a
fowling piece, as fifteen. The Indians received their principal
outfit of clothing and ammunition in the autumn, on credit, to be
repaid by their winter hunts. The amount entrusted to each
hunter varied, with his reputation for industry and skill, from
twenty to one hundred and fifty skins. Each of the rival com-
panies had men constantly engaged in traveling over the country
during the winter to collect the furs from the different bands of
hunters as fast as they were procured. These men frequently in-
duced the Indians, by presents of liquor, to give up skins which
they really owed to the opposing company. Such tactics ocea-
sionally caused armed conflicts and always meant the expense of
employing a great number of men by both parties.**7

Some consideration may be given to the social status of the
members of the North West Company. The London interests ap-
pear to have been solid, respectable merchants and shipowners.
Simon McGillivray is simply cited as such in the Deed Poll of
the union of the two companies in 1821. The county residence
assigned to Edward Ellice implies an additional status.

Some of the retired partners were able to purchase estates in
Scotland and set up as country gentlemen. The most respectable
of these was Sir Alexander Mackenzie, whose services to explor-
ation well merited the degree of knighthood which he possessed.

*? Franklin, Narrative, 83-84.
Trade and Trading Methods 243

He resided on the estate of Avock in Rosshire.°8 William Me-
Gillivray purchased an estate in Argyllshire for £20,000.1*°

The agents and some of the more affluent partners of the
North West Company ranked high in Montreal society and enter-
tained extensively. Books of travel descant on the hospitality of
Montreal in those years. Some of the partners received a cer-
tain recognition in learned societies. Alexander Mackenzie’s at-

*S Masson, Bourgeois, I, 53, 57.
9 Toid., 54.

1° For example, Maude writes that on September 20, 1800, he dined with
Mr. Frobisher at his town house. There were twenty-two persons at table,
among the guests being Gouverneur Morris of Morrisania, Edward Livingston
of New York, member of Congress, Dr. Selby, the Honorable James McGill,
the Honorable John Lees, member of the Executive Council, Messrs. Mce-
Tavish, Cuthbert, Todd, Henry, and Lister. On leaving Montreal he wrote:
“T am now going to take leave, most probably forever, of Montreal. Never
place had so won, in so short a time, upon my affections. During the ten
days of my ever-to-be-remembered stay here, I have not been allowed to take
a single meal at my Inn, except at breakfast, a liberty I would not give up.

. . This kindness was the more flattering as I did not come recommended.

. . [had often heard of the hospitality of Montreal; I now experienced
it” (Maude, A Visit to the Falls of Niagara in 1800, pp. 234, 238).

Colonel Landmann has left a good description of a dinner at the resi-
dence of Alexander Mackenzie and William McGillivray, who dwelt to-
gether. He writes: “After many days of feasting and hard drinking, I
was engaged, as also Humfrey and Lacy, to dine with Sir Alexander Mac-
kenzie and McGillivray. The party . . . amounted to about twenty in
number.

“In those days we dined at four o’elock and after taking a satisfactory
quantity of wine, perhaps a bottle each, the married men, viz., Sir John
Johnson, McTavish, Frobisher, O’Brien, Judge Ogden, Tom Walker, and
some others retired, leaving about a dozen to drink to their health. We now
began in right earnest and true highland style, and by four o’clock in the
morning, the whole of us had arrived at such a degree of perfection, that
we could all give the war-whoop as well as Mackenzie and McGillivray... .

“Tt had been settled at Sir Alexander Mackenzie’s party, that on the
following morning, Lacy and myself should proceed to Quebec, distant about
one hundred and eighty miles, in consequence of which, by nine o’clock he
came to press me to rise and prepare for the journey. Lacy was quickly
followed by Mackenzie, W. McGillivray and others who had been of the
drunken party. By twelve o’clock we started, accompanied by Mackenzie
and MeGillivray, as far as Point-au-Tremble, where they took leave and re-
turned to town, whilst Lacy and myself continued our journey with post-
horses and sleighs. We had both suffered so much through this heavy de-
bauch, that it was not until late on the fourth day that we arrived at Que-
bee (31st December, 1797).

“I was afterward informed that one hundred and twenty bottles of wine
244 The North West Company

tainments have been indicated. His cousin Roderick McKenzie
planned a literary work, which was not completed.*" It is stated
that Pierre de Rocheblave had a seat in the Legislative Assembly
at Quebec.’°? Alexander Mackenzie had been a member for some
vears.1°% Together with Joseph Frobisher, John Richardson, of
the firm of Forsyth, Richardson and Company, represented the
East Ward of Montreal in the first Parliament of Lower Canada.
He took the oath as a legislative councillor at Quebec, January
31, 1821.1°%* Simon McTavish owned the seigniory of Terrebonne,
besides other wide lands in Lower Canada.’ Other evidences
might be given of magnates in the western fur trade who rose to
positions of dignity and public trust.

The Beaver Club was the social organization of the North
West Company partners at Montreal. It was formed in 1785,
with a membership of only nineteen, all tried winterers. No one
could be admitted who had not passed the test of a winter in the
pays d’En Haut and received the unanimous vote of the mem-
bers of the club. Its table was always open to strangers of dis-
tinction and to partners from the interior. It entertained in a

had been consumed at our convivial meeting, but I should think a great deal
had been spilt and wasted” (Landmann, Adventures and Recollections, I,
233-238).

1 There is a bound manuscript volume among the Masson Papers in Me-
Gill University which bears on the first page the following inscription:
“Some account of the North West Company containing Analogy of Nations
Ancient and Modern. By Roderick MacKenzie, Esq., A Director; Member
of the Legislative Council of Lower Canada; Lieut. Col. of Militia; Mem-
ber of the Litty & Hist Society of Quebec; Member of the American Anti-
quarian Society; & Fellow of the Royal Society of Northern Antiquarians
of Copenhagen.” This shows the recognition which was accorded to Me-
Kenzie. It also explains the presence of a heterogeneous mass of notes on
American, Asiatic, and European peoples in the Masson Papers at the Cana-
dian Archives. McKenzie apparently planned to dedicate his book to Ben-
jamin and Joseph Frobisher, as the McGill University volume shows (Masson
Papers, no. 2370, McGill University).

* Wisconsin Historical Society, Collections, VII, 133.

8 Masson, Bourgeois, I, 50.

™ Campbell, History of the St. Gabriel Street Church, Montreal, 87.

© Thid., 243.

 
Trade and Trading Methods 245

brilliant, expensive, and perchance noisy manner. During the
winter season its members congregated every fortnight. Its mot-
to, ‘‘Fortitude in distress,’’ appeared on the large gold medals
which the members wore on special occasions.

The club declined about 1824, when Montreal lost its pre-
eminent position in the Northwest trade. Simpson made some
tentative suggestions about reviving it in 1827, but these seem to
have had no fruition.1®

French Canadians seldom rose to the higher ranks of the
North West Company, but they formed the chief element of the
lower grades. Their customs and language colored the trade.
Many French terms were used by the traders. A common unit
of value was a plus, which, according to Masson, was the equiva-
lent of one good beaver skin.*** Accounts kept by Malhiot at Lac du
Flambeau indicate, for example, that he sent goods to the value
of nine hundred and thirty-six and a half plus to the Wisconsin
River from October, 1804, to May, 1805.1°% <A habillement wasa
suit of clothes, which was sometimes given to the North West
Company’s servants as a recompense for a special service. It

 

“6 Masson, Esquisse, 92-94; Bourgeois, I, 58. It may be remarked that
many travelers who praise the hospitality of the Northwest fur magnates
never mention the Beaver Club. Palmer mentions it briefly as follows:
“Some of the members of the North West Company have established a con-
vivial society, called the Beaver Club, in which the calamut, or pipe of peace,
is handed round, and the Indian manners, customs, and language, closely
imitated. The members generally stand, but visitors have the privilege of
sitting” (Palmer, Journal, 215-216).

** Masson, Esquisse, 7, note 1.

** These trading goods were in charge of J. Bte. Bazinet and R. G.
Racicot. Most of the goods are listed October 4, 1804. Others were sent in
February and May. In a Livre de Drouine appear various items recorded by
Malhiot in regard to outgoing goods and incoming returns, of dates August
4, 1804, to May 18, 1805. These indicate that goods were sent to Ouiscon-
saint; Vieux Desert; la Puise; Lae Superieur; la loge du Genou; la loge des
Grandes Oreilles; la vien La Chouette, le Canard et l'Outarde; la loge de la
Moitie de chef; la loge du vieux Sorcier; Lae de la Truit; les Gens des
Laes; Portage de la Tortue; Lae de la Tolle. The outgoing items totaled
834 plus, and the incoming totaled 531 plus (Masson Papers, McGill Uni-
versity). The names are given with Malhiot’s spelling. The items give an
idea of the way in which a district was managed from a central post.
246 The North West Company

differed from an equipment, or equipement, which was a quan-
tity of clothing, tobacco, and other articles stipulated in an em-
ployee’s contract as part of his pay. A train, or traincau, was a
sledge made of a thin board, ten or twelve inches wide, and eight
or ten feet long. It was bent up at one end, by which it was
dragged on the snow or ice. The Hudson’s Bay Company’s peo-
ple were termed les Anglois or les Gens de la Bate d’Urson or les
Gens du Petit Nord. The North West Company’s people were
ealled les Gens du Nord-Ouest.'*

The North West Company was an association, not a body with
chartered or monopoly rights. It has been shown that this com-
pany was not averse to soliciting for such special privileges. But
the influences opposing the regular granting of these proved
themselves too powerful. The king’s posts appear to have been
the only region in which the company ever were granted legal
control of trade, and this was merely in the customary form of a
lease from the government.’

*° Amos, Trials, 9.

 

“° The lease in existence when the North West Company was formed had
been granted September 20, 1762 (Add. 21718, f£. 5; Q, 26-2, pp. 475 et
seq.). On May 26, 1785, Hamilton wrote to Sydney from Quebec, requesting
instructions. He had received positive orders to grant a lease of the King’s
Posts to Alexander and George Davison, but had already granted leases to
Thomas Dunn and William Grant (Q, 24-2, p. 335). A memorial of Thomas
Dunn, William Grant, and Peter Stuart for a renewal of their lease is in
Q, 26-2, pp. 338-352. The Posts were granted to Alexander and George
Davison and Francois Baby by a lease dated Quebec, June 21, 1786. The
rent was to be £400 currency annually due October 1, with 30 days’ time.
The lease was for ten years, i.e., until October 1, 1796, with a further
extension for six years, i.e., until October 1, 1802, if notice to leave were
not given before October 1, 1796, and an extension until October 1, 1797, if
notice were not given before June, 1796 (Q, 26-2, pp. 475 et seq.; Q, 74-2,
pp. 289-290). In 1800 Milnes wrote to Portland that the lease was about to
expire and that it was intended to dispose of it at public auction (Milnes
to Portland, no. 19, London, March 8, 1800, C. O. 42, vol. 114). It was then
leased by the agents of the North West Company for a rent of a thousand
louis, or a thousand pounds sterling a year (Masson, Esquisse, 79; Origin
and Progress, 29). The rent of the Posts for the year ending October 31,
1821, is stated to have been £922-10-0 (C.O. 47, vol. 122). The Posts were
held by the North West Company until its union with the Hudson’s Bay
Company.
Trade and Trading Methods 247

Elsewhere they depended upon established trade and ener-
getic, on occasion even unscrupulous, tactics to obtain fur re-
turns and discourage competitors. Except within the chartered
limits of the Hudson’s Bay Company and in the king’s posts,
the right to trade was legally open on equal terms to any British
subject. The North West Company also asserted that it was en-
titled to trade on lands claimed by the Hudson’s Bay Company
under their charter. The basis of the North West Company’s
contention is well stated as follows, in a pamphlet issued in their
favor:

The territorial rights of the Hudson’s Bay Company have never been de-
fined, and although they now claim as their exclusive property, all lands wa-
tered by rivers which in their course fall into the Bay, the greater part of
the country which would be included in that description, was previous to the
partial occupancy, or even to the discovery of it by their traders or servants,
in the actual possession of the French Colonists in Canada (some part as
early as the year 1727), and subsequently to the conquest of that country by
Great Britain, has continued in possession of Canadian traders who now oc-
cupy it, deriving their right uninterruptedly from their French predecessors
by the formal cession of Canada in 1761... .

Supposing, however, that the [Hudson’s Bay] Company acquired by their
Charter exclusive territorial and commercial rights in all countries which they
claim to belong to them and their definition of which is before stated; those
rights and privileges must have long since virtually ceased by the disuse of
that Charter, and by the non-fulfillment on the part of the Company of the
terms on which it was originally granted; . .™7

Against such claims various arguments might be. and were,
used. The question of the effect of the British conquest of Cana-
da was by no means the least difficult to determine. Would it,
as claimed, merely pass on rights to succeeding traders domiciled
in Canada. the leading individuals of whom were British new-
comers in the province? Or would it operate in favor of the Eng-
lish traders established since a much earlier date in a region at
least equally contiguous to the territory in dispute, hy eliminating

11 Narrative of Occurrences, 62-63.
248 The North West Company

the pretensions of the rival race which had been trading in their
hinterland? The Union of 1821 saved the British government
from the necessity of coming to a decision on this point or of
making a statement as to the validity of the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany’s charter.
LIST OF AUTHORITIES CITED
MANUSCRIPT MATERIAL

Additional MSS.
British Museum. The Haldimand Papers and a few other papers and some
maps of this series are cited.
Admiralty Papers
Publie Record Office, London, England.
American Fur Co. Journals, Canadian Archives, Ottawa.
B MSS.
Canadian Archives, Ottawa. These are copies of the Haldimand Papers,
the originals being among the Additional MSS. in the British Museum.

Bancroft MSS.
Bancroft Library, University of California.

Blackwood Papers
Redpath Library, MeGill University.
Board of Trade Papers
Public Record Office, London, England. The following series have been
cited: B.T.1, B.T. 5.
The former are In-Letters and the latter are Minutes.

Colonial Office Papers
Public Record Office, London, England. The following series have been
cited: C. 0. 6, C. 0. 42, C. O. 47, C.O. 135,

Custom House Papers
Public Record Office, London, England. The following series have been
cited: C.H. 4, C. H. 8, C. H. 10, C. H. 11, C. H. 17.
Edgar Letters
Toronto Publie Reference Library.
Foreign Office Papers
Publie Record Office, London, England. The following series have been
cited: F.0O. 5, F. 0. 353.
Masson Papers
Canadian Archives, Ottawa. Redpath Library, McGill University, Mon-
treal. Toronto Public Reference Library. The Toronto Library pos-
sesses only one manuscript of this series, the Journal of Simon Fraser.

Privy Council Register
Public Record Office, London, England.
Q Series.
Canadian Archives, Ottawa. These are copies of Colonial Office Papers
250 The North West Company

contained in C.O. 42. The Q Series has been calendared in the Cana-
dian Archives Reports.
Release of Claims by the Wintering Partners of the North West Company.
Toronto Publie Reference Library.
Selkirk Papers
Canadian Archives, Ottawa. These are copies of papers in Great Britain.
Stowe MSS.
British Museum
THOMPSON, DAVID
Journals and Map. Ontario Archives, Toronto.

Maps. In addition to maps contained in the preceding series, the following
have been used:
Pond, Peter. Map as copied by Ezra Stiles, 1790. Two copies are in
the Canadian Archives, Ottawa.
America, No. 54. Colonial Office Library, London, England.

PRINTED MATERIAL
Amicus [pseud. ]
Letters in the Edinburgh Herald and Chronicle. Reprinted, 1806.
Amos, A[NDREW ]
Trials in the Courts of Canada, relative to the Destruction of the Earl of
Selkirk’s Settlement on the Red River, with observations. London,
1820.
ANBUREY, THOMAS
Travels through the Interior Parts of America. 2 vols. London, 1789.
ANDERSON, ADAM
An Historical and Chronological Deduction of the Origin of Commerce...
continued by W. Combe. 4 vols. London, 1787-9.
Bancrort, HuBErt HOWE
History of the Northwest Coast. 2 vols. San Francisco, 1884.
Bouton, HERBERT E.
Athanase de Méziéres and the Louwisiana-Texas Frontier, 1768-1780. 2
vols. Cléveland, 1914.
Blue Book of 1819
See Papers relating to the Red River Settlement .. .
BRissoT DE WARVILLE, J[ean] P[ierre].
New Travels in the United States of America . . . 2d. ed. London, 1794.
BRYCE, GEORGE
Mackenzie, Selkirk, Simpson. London, 1905.
List of Authorities Cited 251

Remarkable History of the Hudson’s Bay Company. 3d. ed. New York
[1910].
BurPerE, LAWRENCE J.
The Search for the Western Sea. London, 1908.
CAMPBELL, ROBERT
History of the St. Gabriel Street Church. Montreal, 1887.
Canadian Archives
Reports, 1883, et seq. Ottawa, 1884, et seq.
Canadian Institute
Transactions.
CARTER CLARENCE EDWIN
Great Britain and the Illinois Country, 1763-1774. Washington, 1910.
CHRISTIE, ROBERT
A History of the Late Province of Lower Canada. 6 vols. Montreal,
Quebec, 1884-1885.
CoFFIN, VICTOR
The Province of Quebec and the Early American Revolution. Madison,
1896.
CovES, ELLIOTT, ed.
New Light on the Early History of the Greater Northwest: The Manu-

script Journals of Alerander Henry .  . and of David Thompson...
3 vols. New York, 1897.
Cox, Ross
Adventures on the Columbia River . . . New York, 1832.

Copy of the Deed Poll under the Seal of the Governor and Company of Ad-
venturers of England, trading into Hudson’s Bay, bearing date the Twen-
ty-Siath Day of March 1821 . . . London, 1821.

Dictionary of National Biography. London, 1885-1901.

DoucGiass, WILLIAM
A Summary, Historical and Political, of the First Planting, Progressive

Improvements and Present State of the British Settlements in North
America . . London, 1760.

DOWELL, STEPHEN

History of Taxation and Taxes in England from the Earliest Times to
the Present Day. London, 1888.

Edinburgh Review.

Euiott, T. C.
“Columbia Fur Trade prior to 1811,” in Washington Historical Quarter-

ly, VI, 3-10.
252 The North West Company

Encyclopaedia Americana.

FRANCHERE, GABRIEL
Narrative of a Voyage to the Northwest Coast of America in the years

1811, 1812, 1818, 1814. . . . tr. by J. V. Huntington. New York,
1854.
FRANKLIN, JOHN
Narrative of u Journey to the Shores of the Polar Sea . . . 1819-22.
London, 1823.

GOURLAY, ROBERT
Statistical Account of Upper Canada, compiled with a View to a Grand
System of Emigration. 2 vols. London, 1822.

HARMON, DANIEL WILLIAMS
A Journal of Voyages and Travels in the Interior of North America ...
New York, 1903.

HEAD, GEORGE
Forest Scenes and Incidents in the Wilds of North America . . . Lon-
don, 1829,

HENRY, ALEXANDER
Travels and Adventures in Canada and the Indian Territories between the
Years 1760 and 1776. New ed. by James Bain. Toronto, 1901.

Howson, JOHN
Sketches of Upper Canada . . . Edinburgh, 1821.

The Hudson’s Bay Company versus Magna Charta.

ImLay, GILBERT
4 Topographical Description of the Western Territory of North America
. . 3d. ed. London, 1797.

Invinc, WASHINGTON
Astoria; or, Anecdotes of an Enterprise beyond the Rocky Mountains.
Author’s revised edition. New York, 1861.

JEFFERYS, T[HoMAS]
The Natural and Civil History of the French Dominions in North and
South America . . . London, 1760.

KELTON, Dwicut H.
Annals of Fort Mackinae. Chicago, 1882.
KINGSFORD, WILLIAM
The History of Canada, 10 vols. Toronto, 1888-1898.

LANDMANN, GEORGE
Adventures and Recollections. 2 vols. London, 1852.
List of Authorities Cited 253

La RoCHEFOUCAULD LEANCOURT, FRANCOIS ALEXANDRE F'REDERIC, DUC DE

Voyages dans VAmérique ... Paris. An. 7.
Travels through the United States of North America, . . . 2 vols. Lon-
don, 1799.

A Letter from Simon McGillivray, Esq., to the Creditors of the Firms of
McTavish, McGillivrays and Co. and McGillivrays, Thain and Co. of
Montreal . . . London, 1827.

Letter to Simon McGillivray Esq. . . . by Henry Mackenzie. Montreal, 1827.

A Letter to the Earl of Liverpool from the Earl of Selkirk ;—accompanied

by a Correspondence with the Colonial Department (in the years 1817,
1818, and 1819), on the Subject of the Red River Settlement in North
America. n.p., n.d.

LINDSEY, CHARLES

An Investigation of the Unsettled Boundaries of Ontario. Toronto, 1873.
McCouttocn, J. R.
A Select Collection of Scarce and Valuable Tracts on Commerce. . .
London, 1859.

MACKENZIE, ALEXANDER
Voyages from Montreal, on the River St. Lawrence, through the Conti-

nent of North America, to the Frozen and Pacific Oceans . . . Lon-
don, 1801.
MacPuHERSON, DAVID
Annals of Commerce, Manufactures, Fisheries, and Navigation . . . 4

vols. London, 1805.
McTaGGaRT, JOHN
Three Years in Canada . . . London, 1829.
Mair and MACFARLANE
Through the Mackenzie Basin . . . London, 1908.
Masson, L[ovis Francois] R[opRIcvuE]
Les Bourgeois de la Compagnie du Nord-Ouest . . . avec une Esquisse
Historique et des Annotations. Quebec, 1889-1890.
MAUDE, JOHN
A Visit to the Falls of Niagara in 1800. London, 1826.
MONTGOMERY, JAMES, Bart.
Substance of a Speech in the House of Commons, 24 June 1819. London,
1819.
Montreal Herald.
Murray, Hucu
Historical Account of Discoveries and Travels in North America
London, 1829.
254 The North West Company

A Narrative of Occurrences in the Indian Countries of North America. Lon-
don, 1817.

Notice on the Claims of the Hudson’s Bay Company. Montreal, 1817.

Notice respecting the Boundary between His Majesty’s Possessions in North
America and the United States; with a Map of America . . . exhibiting
the Principal Trading Stations of the North-West Company; . . . Lon-
don, 1817.

On the Origin and Progress of the North-West Company of Canada, with a
History of the Fur Trade . . . London, 1811.

PALMER, JOHN
Journal of Travels in the United States of North America, and in Lower
Canada, performed in the year 1817 . . . London, 1818.

Papers relating to the Red River Settlement
Printed by order of the House of Commons, 1819.
Cited as the Blue Book of 1819.

Report of the Select Committee on the Boundaries between the Province of
Ontario and . . . Ottawa, 1880.

Review of Historical Publications relating to Canada, 1896—. Toronto,
1897 —.

Ross, ALEXANDER
Adventures of the First Settlers on the Oregon or Columbia River ...
London, 1849.
The Fur Hunters of the Far West . . . 2 vols. London, 1855.

Royal Society of Canada
Proceedings and Transactions.

SELKIRK, THOMAS Dovuc.as, 5th Earl of
A Sketch of the British Fur Trade in North America: with Observations
relative to the North-West Company of Montreal. London, 1816.
Observations upon the Present State of the Highlands of Scotland with a
View of the Causes and Probable Consequences of Emigration. Lon-
don, 1805.

SHEFFIELD, JOHN, Lord
Observations on the Commerce of the American States. New ed. Lon-
don, 1784.
Statement respecting the Earl of Selkirk’s Settlement of Kildonan upon the
Red River in North America . . . London, n.d.

STRACHAN, JAMES
A Visit to Upper Canada in 1819. Aberdeen, 1820.
aw

to
ol

List of Authorities Cited

THWAITES, REUBEN GOLD, ed.
Original Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, 1804-1806. N. Y.,
1905.
WILLSoN [HENRY] BECKLES
The Great Company (1667-1871): being a History of the Honourable
Company of Merchants-Adventurers trading into Hudson’s Bay.
2 vols. London, 1900.
Wisconsin Historical Sosiety
Collections.
APPENDIX A

REPORT TO GENERAL HALDIMAND ON THE NorTH WEST TRADE, 1780

Additional 21759, ff. 81-82.

Sir,—In conformity to Your Excellency’s request I made every inquiry inmy
power concerning the trade carried on between the Mercantile people of this
Province and the Savages of the Upper Countries, but the time since you spoke
to me on that head being short to collect all the intelligence I wanted, I am
not yet furnished with information sufficient to lay every branch of that trade
before Your Excellency so full and clear as I would wish. However, such
knowledge as I have acquired of that business is as follows, and submitted to
Your Excellency’s Consideration to grant passes for carrying on the currect
year’s trade as you may judge Consistent with the Welfare of Commerce and
the Safety of the Province.

At all times the Trade to the Upper Countries has been considered the
Staple Trade of this Province, but of late years it has been greatly aug-
mented, in so much that it may be reckoned one year with another to have
produced an annual return to Great Britain in Furrs to the amount of £200,
000 Ster., which is an object deserving of all the encouragement and protec-
tion which Government can with propriety give to that Trade.

The Indian Trade by every communication is carried on at great Ex-
pense, Labour & risk of both men and property; every Year furnishes in-
stances of the loss of men & goods by accident or otherwise, it is not there-
fore to be expected that the Traders in general are men of substance; indeed
few of them are able to purchase with ready money such Goods as they want
for their Trade. They are consequently indebted from Year to Year, untill a
return is made in Furrs, to the Merchants of Quebec & Montreal who are
Importers of Goods from England & furnish them on credit,—in this manner
the Upper Country Trade is chiefly carried on by men of low circumstances,
destitute of every means to pay their Debts when their Trade fails; and if it
should be under great restraints, or obstructed a few years, the Consequences
would prove Ruinous to the Commercial part of this Province and very hurt-
ful to the Merchants of London, shippers of Goods to this country, besides
the loss of so valuable branch of Trade in Great Britain.

In these troublesome times the least stop to the Indian Trade might be
productive of very bad Effects, even among the savages who are at present
our Friends or Neuter, who on seeing no supply of Goods would immediately
change sides and join the Enemies to Government under pretence that the
Rebels had got the better of us, and that we had it not in our power to sup-
ply them any more,—al]l the property in the Upper Countries in such a cas?
Appendic A 257

would become an easy prey to their resentment,—and the lives of His Ma-
jesty’s Subjects, doing business in these Countries at the time of a rupture
of this nature, might probably fall a sacrifice to the Fury and Rage of dis-
appointed uncivilized Barbarians.

I am informed that of late Years from ninety to one Hundred Canoes
have Annually been employed in the Indian Trade, from Montreal by the
Communication of the great River to Michilimackinac, Lakes Huron & Michi-
gan, LaBay & the North West; but this particular may be better ascertained
from the Registers Office, where I imagine not only the Number of Canoes
but the Names of the men employed in that Trade and the places of their
destination is recorded,—without access to that office it is impossible to be
exact in these points. From the different Posts above mentioned comes at
least one half the Furrs annually Exported from Canada, one fourth is sup-
posed to come from Niagara, Detroit and their Environs, and one Fourth is
said to be Produced at the lower Posts and Inhabited parts of the Province.

I do not know how many Canoes may be wanted this year for the Trade
of Michilimackinac and its dependencies, but I imagine a greater Number
than usual is absolutely necessary, because they will have to carry from Mon-
treal all the Provisions requisite for that Trade which was mostly furnished
in former years from Detroit, and carried from thence to Michilimackinac
in Vessels of burthen, by which means a great deal of Expence was saved in
Carriage.

As to the danger of Goods sent by the Grand River to the North West,
or La Bay falling into the hands of the Rebels or being carried to them by
disaffected persons, I am told it is hardly possible to be Effected, the Com-
munication being so difficult of Access and the distance so great, that the
Carriage of Goods conveyed by that Route would cost much more than they
ean by any means be worth. In this I shall insert the average value of a
Canoe load of Goods at the time of departure from Montreal, at Michili-
mackinae and at the Grand Portage, from that it may be Judged how far it
is practicable to carry on any Commerce with the Enemies to Great Britain
by La Bay, even by disaffected persons,—from Lake Michigan Goods may
he carried to the Rebels, but at very great expence, Labour & risk, the ac-
cess through that Channel being also difficult and a great way to go, though
not so far as the former. For my part I am not at present perfectly ac-
quainted with the Routes or distances so as to give a distinct account of
them, therefore I refer to the Maps of these countries, from which that par-
ticular will be better ascertained.

A Canoe load of Goods is reckoned at Montreal, worth in dry Goods to
the Amount of £300 first sterling cost in England, with 50 per Cent charges
thereon makes £450; besides that every canoe carries about 200 Gallons of
Rum & Wine, which I suppose worth £50 more, so that every Canoe on de-
parture from that place may be said worth £500 Currency of this Province.
258 The North West Company

The charges of all sorts included together from Montreal to Michilimackinac
£160 and from thence to the Grand Portage £90, so that it appears that each
canoe at Michilimackinac is worth £660, and at the Grand Portage the Cost is
£750 Currency. Every canoe is navigated by eight men for the purpose of
transporting the Goods only & when men go up to Winter they commonly
carry ten.

Considering the great Number of people in this Province immediately in-
terested in the Indian Trade, it is hardly possible to suppose bu there may be
amongst them some disaffected men, but the Major part of them I sincerely
believe are sure friends to Government and it would be hard the whole Com-
munity should suffer for the sake of a few bad men, since Regulations and
Laws are, or may be made sufficiently severe to prevent in a great measure or
altogether every Effort that may be made to Convey Goods to the Enemy,
and if any person whatever should attempt designedly to Violate such regu-
lations, as are made for the welfare and safety of the Whole the Law ought
to be put in execution against him with the utmost rigour, on conviction of
guilt and the offender never should be forgiven offences against the publick
in general. This I know to be the wish of every honest man within the cir-
cle of my own acquaintance, and I daresay it is the same with every well
meaning man throughout the Province, for it is evident that Severe Laws
never were made for the Government of good men, but for the purpose of
securing good Conduct and behaviour among such as require it, and how-
ever rigorous the Laws may be, in such times as the present they can neither
affect nor offend any person, but such as may have some View to transgress
them,

As to that part of the Trade carried on over Lakes Ontario & Erie, I am
not well versed in it, therefore shall say nothing more on that head than
what I have heard from the best authority, that is, that improper preferences
have been given in transporting Goods to Niagara and Detroit, by which
means it is represented that the Trade of these Countries have fallen into a few
hands, to the great detriment of many honest men equally good Subjects and
to the additional expense of Government being obliged to purchase what may
be wanted for publick Service from a few Individuals probably for enor-
mous prices; whereas if the Trade was more general every purchaser of
Goods would be less lyable to imposition.

Last year the Passes for the Indian Trade were given out so late, that it
was impossible to forward Goods to the places of destination, Especially in
the North-West, for that reason those concerned in that quarter joined their
stock together and made one Common Interest of the whole, as it Continues
at present in the hands of the different persons or Companies mentioned at
foot of this. The canoes for the North West are commonly the first sent off
and Indeed the earlier all the Canoes bound up the Grand River goes off the
Appendir B 259

better, because most of the men that Navigate them can be back in time to
Cut the Harvest and do other needfull Services.
I have the honour to be with great respect
Yours Excellency’s most obedt,
and most humble Servant,
Chas. Grant
Quebec, 24th April, 1780.

Todd & McGill 2 shares |
Ben & Jos. Frobisher 2 do
McGill & Paterson 2 do

McTavish & Co. 2 do The North West is divided into
Holmes & Grant 2 do Sixteen Shares all which form
Wadden & Co. 2 do but one Company at this time.
McBeath & Co. 2 do
Ross & Co. 1 do
Oakes & Co. 1 do

NOTE.—Brymner printed this report, with variations, from the B Series
copy in the Canadian archives. Canadian Archives Report, 1888. Note E.
pp. 59-61.

APPENDIX B

MEmorIR ACCOMPANYING PoND’s MAPS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM
Additional 15332 e

Amerique Septentrionale. Remarques sur la Carte presentée au Congrés
le ler Mars 1785

Découverte de Pond. 1785. Par Pierre Pond. Natif de Milefort dans
lEtat de Conecticut.

Cet homme extraordinaire a residé 17 ans dans les Contrées dont il parle,
et d’aprés ses propres découvertes, et les rapports des Indians, il assure étre
Certain d’avoir découvert un Passage a la mer du Nord Ouest. II est reparti
pour Constater quelques observations importantes.

No.1. La plus grande partie de la Region a )’Est des grandes Plaines,
sous la Latitude de 49 dégrés est trés remplie de Marais, Morasses, Terres
Noyées, Lacs, Rivieres et montagnes le Seul Bois qui y croit est le Peuplier,
le Bouleau et plusiers Especes de Spruce. Cette Region peut veritablement
etre appellée La Region des Castors.

No.2. Je suppose qu’il y ait 140 Dégrés Est de Distance entre Peters-
bourg et le Détroit de Bearing; de Petersbourg a Churchill 126° Ouest, dela
a Arabasca 23° Ouest; en tout 289° deja decouverts; par Conséquent; il ne
reste plus a decouvrir que les 74 dégrés entre Arabosca et le détroit de
260 The North West Company

Bearing, Ce qui n’est rien en Comparaison de la distance entre le grande
Portage et arabosea, Et je présume que la distance réelle ne peut pas étre
de plus de 60 Dégrés.

No. 3. Depuis la Latitude 54 vers le Nord I se trouve si peu d’ habitans
qu’on peut y voyager sans rencontrer une seule personne. pendant 1]’été les
Sauvages subsistent de la Viande de Rain-Deer, Poisson et Oiseaux Sauvages.
Ils attrapent les premiers dans des filets et convertissent leur peaux en vete-
mens. pendant Vhiver Is s’oceupent de la Chasse du Castor dont ils vendent
les peaux aux Marchands Anglais pour des fusils, de la poudre et quelques
autres articles indispensables. ceci est particulierement applicable 4 ceux qui
vivent au Nord du 58° de Latitude; Ceux au Sud de cette Ligne ont la res-
source des Buffles et de ]’Orignal—

No. 4. Quant a la maniere dont L’amérique a été peuplée je suppose une
ligne droite tirée depuis la Latitude 40° Long 95° Jusques 4 la Latitude
60° et Long. 130° Ouest presques toutes les tributs [?] a L’Est de cette
Ligne parlent une Langue qui a beaucoup d’affinité avec cette des Esquimaux
de la Cote de Labrador. Les tributs [?] au Contraire, qui demeurent a
Louest de cette Ligne parlent un Langage Extraordinaire, que Consiste dans
un bruit de Gosier qu’il est impossible d’aprendre. Les premiers son Con-
tinuellement en Guerre avec les derniers, les premiers sont trés adroits dans
la construction et la Navigation de leurs Canots; les seconds ignorent en-
tierement cet art. Les premiers sont tous amis et allies depuis Latlantique,
Jusquau 60 Dégré Nord.

Les seconds sont entreux également amis et dans une paix profonde.

Presque tontes les tributs [?] 4 Louest coupent un de leurs doigts 4 la
mort de leurs parents. Ceux 4 L’Est, au Contraire, ont un usage different,
ils pincent La peau de leurs bras et de leurs Jambes et les percent avec la
pointe d’un Couteau pour les faires Saigner.

fol.2. Les tributs de L’Est gagnent et Empietent [?] insensiblement
sur ceux de L’ouest. ces derniers, cherchent souvent 4 pénétrer vers L’Est;
mais La Superiorité que donnent 4 Leurs antagonistes les armes a feu, et si
grande qu’ils ne peuvent s’y opposer.

Toutes ces Circonstances et plusieurs autres me font Croire que l'une de
ces tributs vient de L’ouest, peut etre de quelque partie de La Siberie et que
L’autre vient peut etre par l'Est de L’Europe, et ont été ennemis irreconci-
liables. Comme venants de deux Souches differentes, telle est je croix la
Cause de leurs Guerres Eternelles tout ce que je puis assurer, est que les tributs
de L’Est ont foit reculer celles de L’ouest & une grande distance depuis 40
ans,

No. 5. J’ai tenu Conseil avec 40 des Naturels qui vivent a une petite dis-
tance dela mer du N.O. Les autres tributs Les appellent Les gens du
Couteaux rouge. Ce nom leur vient de ce que presque tous leurs articles son
faits de Cuivre rouge dont leur pays est rempli.
Appendic B 261

No.6. Ds Confirment Le flux et Reflux des eaux dons cette mer. Ils
assurent quwils ne Connoissent aucune terres nord; que Les Cotes courent
vers L’ouest; que la Navigation des Rivieres qui tombent dans cette Mer est
ouverte dans le Commencement de L’Eté; qu’ils ont vu plusieurs foix des
Isles de glace, flottant Sur ces [?] arages.

No.7. Ice herring pendant les annees 1773, 1774 et 1775 a Entrepris un
long et penible Voyage avee les naturels pout aller Examiner les grandes
mines de Cuivre dont ils lui avoient parlé et en a apporté des Echantillons;
mais ayant trouvé que ces mines etoient 4 une Grande Distance d’Eaux Navi-
gables, il erut qu’elles ne rapporteraient aucun profit & la Compagnie. une
autre raison Etait que ces Rivieres ne fournissant pas de bois, il n’aurait pas
été possible de construire un fort, n’y d’y passer un rigoureux hiver. aus-
sitot aprés son retour, il fut fait Gouveurneur du Fort Churchill et y resta
jusques a ce qu’il fut pris par Les Francois en 1782. On a Etouffé Les plus
petites circonstances de son Voyage et des ses decouvertes. Jai recu ces
details des Sauvages qui L’accompagnerent et aujourd’ hui il est defendu a
touts personnes d’aller vers L’ouest.

Suivt. les Détails que j’ai pu obtenir des Sauvages, sur ce qu’ils mont dit
dela Longuer des jours et des nuits et qu’il n’y a point pendant L’été
dobsceurité totale, mais toujours une Espece de Crepuscule, Je immagine que
cette nouvelle Mer est sur le Cercle artique.

No.8. Toutes les nations du Nord, Sont perpetuellement en Guerre avec
celles qui habitent dans le Voisinage de la mer de Californie; J’ai vu plu-
sieurs Chevelures negres qui en avaient été rapporttés les tributs du Nord
et de Louest sont gens fidele [?] et honestes Grés[?]les quels on n’a Jamais
entendre.

No.9. Je suis persuadé qu’il n'y a point de partie de ce Grande Continent
qui ne puisse étre Visitée; parce qu’ on peut se procurer des Chevaux ow la
Navigation est arretée

A Arabosea 15 Mars 1784

Pierre Pond.

fol. 3. De Milford dans L’Etat de Connecticut.

No. 10. Tl ne faut pas eroire que les Details que je mets sur Cette Carte
ont aucune analogie précise avec L’endroit méme Eloigné dans les bois, avec
peu de Papier, j’ecrirai mes reflexions et les placoir ou je Pourai.

No. 11. J’ai vu dans les montagnes des pierres a fusil, pleines de Veines
dun métal Blane je ne sais si c'est de L’argent ou ce que ce peut étre.

No. 12. Les Animaux de ces Cantons sont trés different de ceux de l’Est
et du Nord. ils semblent Correspondre avec ceux de L’Amérique du Sud, par-
ticulierement Le Lama & Cause de sa belle Laine.

No.13. Ici on Cultive d’Excellent tabae qui a une Saveur toute par-
ticuliere.
262 The North West Company

No. 14. Ici les montagnes et les plaines sont tres Chaudes pendt. L’Eté.

No.15. On trouve de long de ces grandes montages [sic] des Sources
(Eaux Bouillantes, d’autres d’une Chaleur plus Modérée et un Nombre
infini de froides.

No. 16. On trouve ici jusqu’ au 54° une tres bonne espece de Chevaux,
quelques mulets et des anes et de grandes troupeaux de Buffles, jusqw’ au
63 D.

No,17. Plaines immenses qui s’etendent le 30e D. Jusqu’au 60° de Lati-
tude nord et sont termines par cette Chaine Enorme de Montagnes qui dans
quelques endroits n’ont pas moins de 150 Lieues de Large.

No. 18. Tontes les rivieres de L’ouest de Cette Chaine Coulent dans La
mer Pacifique ou Océan occidentale Suiv' Ce que m’ont dit les Sauvages qui
quelque fois amenent des Prisonniers de ces Cantons. ils nous dirent aussi
que Semblables aux habitans de MidleBourg Suiv' le Capitaine Cook, ils se
coupent un doit a la mort de leurs parents.

No. 19. Les naturels disent qu’il y a un Chasme on Passage Souterrein &
travers ces Montagnes par ou coule la riviere; que les Rochers au dessus sont
perpendiculaires, et d’une auteur immense et qu’ ils avoient osé penetrer une
petite distance dans leurs Canots Sous ces Voutes [?] terribles.

No. 20. Le long des rivages de cette Riviere on trouve des Sources de
Bitume qui coule sur la terre.

No. 21. Jai avec moi plusieurs instruments faits du Cuivre des mines
dont Jai deja parlé que j’ai acheté des Sauvages nommés Archipoints.

No. 22. Toutes les Eaux de ces cantons coulent au N.O.

No. 23. Ces Regions sont remplies de Plaines immenses ot il n y a ni
bois ni herbes. on y trouve quelques Buissons dont la Grosseur N’Exede pass
celle de la Jambe. C’est d’ici, oh Jimagine, qu’on pourrait trouver un pas-
sage au N.O.

No. 24. La Latitude de ces Régions est bien connue.

No. 25. fol. 4. Les Rivieres sous la Longitude 125° O. sont navigables
et Sans Glaces depuis le Commencement de mai en 60 degrés de Latitude
nord; au lieu que les Rivieres qui Coulent dans la Baye d’Hudson, ne Sont
ouvertes que Vers La mi-juin, telle est la difference du Climat quoique plus
au nord qu’a York et & Churchill Sous les Latitudes ci dessus mentionnées on
y trouve tous les fruits naturels a L’amérique et au Climat tels que les
fraises, groseilles, &c et une infinité d’autres pour les quels Je n’ ai pas de
noms. ils Croissent sur les Bords des Rivieres et des Laces, qui abondent en
Poisson et sont Couverts d’une multitude infinie d’byes et de Canards Sauva-
ges, quand le vent est a Louest I’atmosphere est couvert de nuages de Brouil-
lards humides, méme pendant I'hiver; mais au contraire quand le vent est sud-
est tout est clair et serein.

No. 26. Je Ne prétends a aucune Exactitude dans Cette partie parce
quelle est deja bien Connue. Jene Me suis attache qu’aux découverts que
Appendix B 263

j'ai faites pendant un grand nombre d’années Vers Le N.O. Je N’ai pu
insérer dans cette carte tous les Lacs qui S’y trouvent.

NOTE.—The preceding is all written in a fairly neat and fairly legible
slanting hand. The following is written on smaller sized paper, in a fine
slanting hand. Many of the letters as “L’” are formed in a different man-
ner. It is enclosed with the preceding and is numbered consecutively as
folios 5-7, but this is in pencil not in the ink of the body of the MS. But
the pages are numbered 1-5 in the same ink and handwriting as the body of
the MS.

fol. 5. p. 1. Extrait d’ un Mémoire presenté au Congrés Americain, le
1** Mars 1785 par Peter Pond* (*the following is a footnote. Ce voyageur
a residé 17 ans dans les contrées dont il parle dans ce Mémoire et d’ apres
les propres recherches et les rapports des Indiens, il croit avoir découvert,
au moyen de quelques portages, un passage & la Mer du Nord ou glaciale,
par la riviere de cuivre. Il est reparti depuis pour constater quelques ob-
servations importantes. La Carte qui accompagne ce Mémoire a été dressée
par lui-meme sur les lieux. Il ne pretend cependant pas qu’ elle soit de la
derniere exactitude, mais elle suffit pour indiques les découvertes.) natif de
Milford dans l’Etat de Connecticut accompagné d’une Carte des pays situés
a Ouest du Lac Superieur jusqu’aux grandes montagnes qui les separe de
la Mer Pacifique.

La Contree qui est a l’Est du Missisipi a peu pres sous la latitude de 45°
est tellement remplie de marais, morasses, terres noyées, lacs et rivieres qu’
on peut veritablement l’appeler la Region des Castors. C’est 14 que sont le
Lac Superieur, le Lac Michigan, le lac Huron, le Lac Erié et bien d’ autres.
Le seul bois qui y croisse est le Peuplier, le Bouleau et plusieurs especes de
Spruce.

Au couchant de cette Contrée c’est & dire du Missisipi, sont des Plaines
immenses qui s’etendent depuis le 30° degre de latitude, jusqu’ au 60°™* et
qui ne sont bornées du cété de l’ouest que par une chaine enorme de mon-
tagnes qui les sépare de la Mer du Sud. Ces plains sont habitées par dif-
ferentes tribus de sauvages qui sont toutes alliées entr’elles et avec celles
qui sont 4 l’orient du Missisipi. Toutes ces Tribus paroissent avoir la méme
origine et elles parlent un langage qui a beaucoup dq’ affinité avec celui des
Esquimaux de la Céte de Labrador. Elles sont trés adroites dans la con-
struction et la navigation de leurs canots, et les individus 4 la mort de leurs
parens ont un usage tout particulier qui est de se pincer la peau des bras et
des jambes et de les percer avec Ja pointe d’un couteau pour les faire saigner.
Toutes ces nations se servent des armes & feu qu’elles achetent des Anglois
et elles sont perpetuellement en guerre avec celles qui sont 4 l’ouest de la
montagne. Ces Tribus, l’été vivent de leur chasse, et l’hiver elles ont la
ressource de Vorignal et des buffles qui habitent par grands troupeaux dans
264 The North West Company

ces plaines jusqu’ au 58°™e dégré de latitude. JI] y a aussi dans ces plains
une trés bonne espece de chevaux, quelques mulets et des Anes.

Cependant au Nord du 54°™¢ dégré de latitude on ne trouve presque plus
Vhabitans, et lon peut voyager long-temps dans ce pays sans recontrer une
seule personne. Le peu de sauvages qui vient [?] dans ces deserts subsistent
pendant l’été de la viande de Renne, de poisson et d’oiseaux sauvages. Ces
sauvages attrapent les Rennes dans des filets et convertissent leur peaux en
vetemens L’hiver ils s’occupier de la chasse du Castor dont ils vont vendre
les peaux aux Anglois pour des fusils, de la poudre et quelques autres articles
indispensables.

La chaine de montagnes qui separe as plaines de la Mer du Sud est
appelée par les habitans la Montagne pierreuse et en plusieurs endroits elle
est taillée & pic. Elle a autant de longueur que ces plaines et sa largeur est
quelquefois de 150 lieues. On trouve le long de ces mont agnes des sources
deau bouillante, d’autres d’une chaleur plus modérée et un nombre infini de
froides. J’ai aussi vu dans ces montagnes des pierres 4 fusil, pleines de
veines dl’ un metal blanc; Je ne sais si c’est de l’argent, ou ce que ce peut-
étre. Les naturels disent encore qu’il un Chasme ou passage souterrain a
travers cette montagne, par ot coule la riviere qui vient du Lae Arabosca,
que Jes rochers au dessus sont perpendiculaires et d’une hauteur immense et
qu’ ils ont osé pénetrer & une petite distance dans leurs canots, sous ces
voutes terribles. Ce qu’ il y a de certain e’est que le long des bords de cette
riviere et du Lac Arabosea on trouve des sources de bitume qui coulent sur
la terre.

De l’autre cété de cette montagne toutes les rivieres courent vers l’ouest et
vont se jetter dans la Mer du Sud, suivant ce que m’ont dit les sauvages.
De ce cété il y a encore plusieurs plaines, qui & partir du 45°™* degré de
latitude et allant vers le midi, sont fort chaudes dans 1’été. Ces plaines sont
occupées par des Tribus de sauvages qui n’ont rien du tout du commun avec
celles qui habitent 4 Est de la montagne, et avec lesquelles elles sont
toujours en guerre. Toutes ces tribus de l’Ouest sont tres unies entr’elles et
en général trés simples et de moeurs fort douces. Elles ne connoissent ni la
navigation, ni la construction des canots, au rapport de ceux de |’Est, et
ignorent entierement l’usage des armes 4 feu, ce que leur donne une grande
désadvantage sur leurs voisins. Elles ont un langage particulier qui consiste
dans un bruit de gosier quwil est impossible aux Nations de |’Est de contre-
faire (fol. 6, p. 3), et & la mort de leurs parens, les individus se coupent un
doit, comme cela se pratique chez les habitans de l’isle de Middelbourg selon
le Capitaine Cook. Ces Tribus de Ouest s’etendent jusqu’ a la mer de
Californie; ou les Nations de l’Est les poursuivent et emmenent souvent des
prisonniers. J’ai meme vu plusieurs chevelures de Negres qui avoient été
tués dans ces rencontres.

Les animaux que nourissent ces plaines de lOuest, sont aussi fort dif-
Appendic B 265

ferens de ceux de plaines de l’Est et du Nord; ils semblent plutot correspon-
dre avec ceux de l’Amerique meridionale; et particulierement le Lama &
cause de sa belle laine. Vers le 48°™* degré de latitude dans ces plaines on
cultive un excellent tabac, dont le saveur est toute particuliere.

De la difference qui existe entre ces Tribus de l'Ouest et celles de l’ Est,
jen conclude que |’Amerique a du étre peuplée par deux souches trés distine-
tes. En effet, si vous tirer une ligne depuis le 40°™* degré de latitude et le
95em* de longitude, jusqu’au 60°™* de latitude et 130°™* de longitude occi-
dentale, cette ligne separera les deux Nations dont l’une vient certainement
de l'Ouest, peut etre de quelque partie de la Siberie, et l’autre de l’Est
vraisemblablement de l'Europe (fol. 6, p. 4.). C’est cette origine differente
qui les rend ennemis irreconciliable et qui fait le cause de toutes leurs guerres.
Les Tribus de l'Ouest cherchent bien de temps en temps 4 penetrer dans
YEst, mais la superiorité, que usage des armes & feu, donne & leurs ennemis
les fait bientot rentrer dans leurs limites, et je puis méme assurer que les
Tribus de l’Est ont fait reculer celles de l'Ouest 4 une grande distance depuis
quaranteans.

Etant 4 Arabosea le 15 Mars 1784 et voulant avoir quelques détails sur
la Mer que l’on disait exister au Nord-Ouest, je tins conseil avec quarante
des Naturels qui habitent a une petite distance de cette mer. Les autres
Tribus, les appelent les Gens de Couteau Rouge, parceque presque tous leurs
outils sont faits d’un euivre Rouge dont leur pays est rempli. Ces sauvages
m’assurent en effet, que la Mer aupres de laquelle ils vivoient etoit une
grande Mer, qu’elle etoit sujette au flux et reflux que ses cétes couroient fort
loin vers l’ouest, et qu’ ils ne connoissent aucune terre au Nord; que toutes
les rivieres de leur pays couroient au Nord-Ouest et alloient se jetter dans
cette Mer; que toutes ces rivieres etoient navigables dés le commencement de
Vété, et quwils avoient vu plusieurs fois des isles de glace flotter sur leurs
cotes; mais ce qu’ils ajoutoient qu’il n y a point pendant 1’été d’obscurité
totale dans leurs pays, mais toujours une espece de Crepuscule, me fit eroire
que cette nouvelle Mer est sous le Cerele Polaire Arctique.

M. Hearne, Anglois, pendant les annees 1778, 74 et 75, a entreprit du fort
Churchill un long et penible voyage avec les naturels pour aller examiner les
grandes mines de cuivre dont ils lui avoient parle, et il en a apporte des
echantillons; mais ayant trouvé que ces mines etoient 4 une grande distance
d'eaux naviguable, il erut qu’elles ne rapporteroient aucun profit 4 la Com-
pagnie de la Baye @Hudson. Une autre raison etoient que ces rivieres ne
fournissant pas du bois, il n’auroit pas été possible de construire un fort, ni
d’y passer un rigoureux hiver. Aussitot apres son retour, il fut fait Gou-
verneur du fort Churchill et y resta jusqu’ a ce qu’ il fut pris par les francois
en 1782. On a étouffé les plus petites circonstances dle son voyage et de ses
découvertes et aujourd’hui il est deffendu 4 toutes personnes d’aller vers
VOuest. J’ai recu ces details des sauvages qui l’accompagnoient.
266 The North West Company

J’ai avec moi plusieurs instrumens faits de cuivre des Mines dont il
vient d’etre question, que j’ai acheté des sauvages nommés Orchipoints.

fol. 7, p. 5. C’est dans le pays de ces derniers que j’imagine qu’on
pourroient trouver un passage au Nord-Ouest. Ce pays est composé de
Plaines immenses dans lesquelles il n’y a ni bois, ni herbe; on y trouve
seulement quelques buissons dont le grosseur n’ excede pas celle de la jambe.
Tous les sauvages du Nord, sont gens fidels et honnétes.

Sous le 60°™* degre de latitude et vers le 125¢™* de longitude occidentale
toutes les rivieres sont navigables et sans glaces depuis le commencement de
Mai, au lieu que celles qui coulent dans la Baye d’Hudson ne sont ouvertes
que vers la Mi-juin. Telle est la difference du climat quoique cette latitude
soit plus élevée vers le nord que les positions d’York et de Churchill. Sous
cette latitude du 60°™* degré, on trouve tous les fruits naturels a l’Amerique
et au climat, tels que les fraises, Groseilles &c. et une infinite d’autres pour
lesquels je n’ai pas de noms. Ils croissent sur les bords des rivieres et des
lacs qui abondent en poisson, et sont couverts d’une multitude infinie d’oyes
et de Canards sauvages. Dans ce Canton quand le vent est a ]’Ouest, l’atmo-
sphere est couvert de nuages et de brouillards humides méme pendant Vhiver,
mais au contraire quand le vent est Sud-Est, tout est clair et serein.

De tour ceci je conclud qu il reste tres peu de pays 4 découvrir aux envi-
rons du Cercle polaire Arctique, car en supposant qu’il y ait 140 degrés de
longitude orientale, entre Petersbourg et le Detroit de Behering, 126 de longi-
tude occidentale de Petersbourg au fort Churchill, et 23 du fort Churchill 4
Arabosea; cela fait en tout 289 degrés decouverts; par consequent il ne reste
plus a decouvrir que les:-71 degres entre Arabosca et le Detroit de Behering,
ce qui n’est rien en comparaison de la distance entre le Grande Portage et
Arabosea. Je presume méme que la distance reelle n’est pas de plus de 60
dégrés; d’ailleurs je suis persuade qu'il n’y a point de partie de l’Amerique
septentrionale que l’on ne puisse visiter, parcequ’il est facile de se procurer
des chevaux ot la Navigation est arrétée.

Je ne pretends pas a une exactitude scrupuleuse dans la Carte qui accom-
pagne ce Memoire, parcequ’ etant écarté dans les bois avec peu de papier, je
faisois mes observations comme je pouvois. Je n’ai pu y-placer tous les lacs
que j’ai recontré a cause de la petitesse de 1’echelle.

APPENDIX C

EXTRACTS FROM THE EVIDENCE OF THOMAS AINSLIE GIVEN BEFORE THE
BoarRD OF TRADE

B. T. 5. Vol. 5 (Jan. 1788—Dec. 1789).
Couneil Chambers, Whitehall, 14 March 1789 (pp. 226-250).
“Thomas Ainslie, Esquire, Collector of the Customs in the Province of
Appendix C 267

Quebec, who has resided there in that capacity seven and twenty years, at-
tended and was examined as follows:—

Q. Can you inform the Committee what are the Numbers of People at
present inhabiting the Province of Quebec, distinguishing the Old In-
habitants from the New? (p. 226).

A. In the year 1760, when the Province was conquered, there were 76122
Souls—of whom between the age of sixteen and sixty, fit to bear arms, there
were 16212 (p. 227).

In 1784 there were about 113,012 Souls, exclusive of the People of Des-
troit, Chaleur Bay and Gaspee. I cannot distinguish between the old and
the new Inhabitants, but the new Inhabitants make but a very small propor-
tion of the whole.

Since the year 1784, the number of the Inhabitants has increased con-
siderably, and those entirely English, being Loyalists who came from the
Countries belonging to the United States.

Q. In what Articles does the Export Trade of the Province of Quebec
consist ?

A. The principal are Furrs of every kind (with an account of the par-
ticulars of which I will furnish the Committe,) Wheat, Flour and Biscuit,
Pease, Boards & Plank, Hoops and Staves, Oak Timber, Dried Cod Fish and
some Salmon, Oil, Pot and Pearl Ash.

Q. Are the Animals from whence these Furrs are taken, catched prin-
cipally by the Canadians or the Indians?

A. Principally by the the Indians, except a few Canadians who go with
them on their Hunting Parties.

Q. Have we the whole of this Trade, or does any part of it go to the
people of the United States?

A. We have the whole at present, and we take great pains to preserve it
(p. 228).

Q. Is it probable that the numbers of the Animals which furnish these
Furrs will diminish so as to affect the Trade?

A. I think it is hardly possible the space they have to range in is so very
considerable.

Q. To what part or parts of the Province do the Indians bring these
Furrs?

A. Principally to Michilimakinack—some few to Detroit. The Indians
resort to these places as they get the Furrs.

Q. In what Articles are they paid for them?

A. In Strouds, Blankets, and all kinds of Woolens, Fire Arms, Powder
and Shot, Traps for catching the Animals, Flour and Bread, Wampum, and
other Trinkets, and a small quantity of Spirits.

Q. Can you say on an average what the value of these Furrs may amount
to?
268 The North West Company

A. That depends on the price of them here, with an account of which I
will furnish the Committee.

Q. Is the Export of the various articles of Grain you have mentioned,
from the Province of Quebec, considerable?

A. I think it considerable, and it has increased of late very greatly; but
I will furnish the Committee with the Account of these Articles exported
from the Custom House Books.

. . . [Items on Grain, Flour, Lumber, Hoops and Staves, Fish, Oil, Pot
and Pearl Ash follow]...

Q. To what Countries are the several Articles above mentioned exported?
(p. 231).

A. The Furrs all go to Great Britain. I have mentioned before to what
countries the Wheat &c. is exported [Wheat to Spain and Portugal; Flour
and Bread to Newfoundland and the West Indies. p. 229]—The Boards,
Plank, Hoops and Staves go partly to Great Britain and partly to the West
Indies. The Oak Timber all to Great Britain. The Dried Cod and Salmon
go to the Streights. The Oil, pot and Pearl Ash wholly to Great Britain
. . . [West India Rum discussed] .. .

Q. Is ther any contraband Trade carried on against us with the Coun-
tries belonging to the United States, and what is the nature of such Trade?
(p. 232).

A. Such Trade is not very considerable, but still it is an object. It is
carried on principally in East India Articles, Tea and Piece Goods, which are
brought from New York up Hudson’s River and across Lake Champlain, and
they are able to sell them infinitely cheaper than the like Articles imported
into the Provinee from Great Britain. There is Water carriage from New
York to Quebec all the way excepting sixteen miles, and it is very cheap.
The People of the United States are further induced to smuggle these Ar-
ticles into the Province of Quebee as they are paid for them principally in
Money, of which they are in great want (p. 233).

Q. Can you suggest any method by which that contraband Trade can be
prevented or diminished?

A. I believe a very good method has been adopted by Lord Dorchester
by an ordinance passed in the Province and by placing Officers at proper
ports. The Ordinance has been sent to the Commissioners of the Customs—
and I know of no better method.

Q. What trace does the provinee of Quebee carry on either licit or illicit
into the State of Vermont or the Countries belonging to the United States?

A. We have a very great Trade with them in British Manufactures, and
in Rum, Sugar and Melasses and some Beaver is now and then smuggled
there contrary to our Laws.

. [discusses Hemp,] .. .
Q. What is the price of Labour in the province of Quebec?
Appendir C 269

A. In the Winter from 10d to 1s/4d Sterling—in the Summer from 2/
to 2/6 per day (p. 234).

. . . [discusses Shipbuilding increase, loyalty of French subjects, Eng-
lish settlers mostly desire Assembly which Ainslie thinks would lead to inde-
pendence ef. 236].

Accounts referred to in Mr. Ainslie’s evidence (p. 237).

{Items on Furs alone are copied]

Exports in 1783. To Great Britain only. Furs. Beavers 105467, Martins
44119, Otters 19699, Minks 7221, Fishers 3817, Foxes 5446, Bears 11596,
Deer in Hair 125123, Dressed Deer lbs. 30648, Musquash 68409, Racoons
93252, Cassed Catts 5536, Open Catts 4197, Elks 5626, Wolves 5858, Beaver
Eaters 203, Tygers 26, Seals 8, Squirrels 489, Ermine 29, Castoreum 1106 lb.
(pp. 238-9).

Exports in 1748. Recommencement of the English Board. To Great
Britain only. Furs. Beavers, 128620, Martins 45973, Otters 22435, Minks
9634, Fishers 4608, Foxes 7260, Bears 14903, Deer in Hair 227568, Dressed
Deer lb. 24232, Musquash 95773, Raccons 171066, Cassed Cats 3927, Open
Cats 6639, Wolves 6237, Beaver Eaters 306, Elks 11238, Tygers 54, Seals 201,
Squirrels 1495, Castoreum 907 Ib. (pp. 240-241).

Exports in 1785. To Great Britain only. Furs. Beavers 151249, Mar-
tins 34496, Minks 9332, Otters 19835, Foxes 6432, Fishers 4445, Bears
12839, Deer in Hair 174434, Dressed Deer lb. 4944, Musquash 141,118, Rac-
coons 99159, Cased Cats 2731, Open Cats 6336, Elks 11113, Wolves 8232,
Beaver Eaters 182, Seals 1525, Tygers 172, Squirrels 31, Castoreum lb. ....
. +. (pp. 242-243).

Exports in 1786. To Great Britain only. Furs. Beaver Skins 116623,
Martins 48436, Otters 23684, Minks 9595, Fishers 3958, Foxes 6213, Bears
19372, Deer in Hair 126794, Deer dressed lb. 5477, Musquash 202719, Rac-
coons 108521, Cased Cats 3072, Open Cats 2977, Elks 7555, Wolves 12923,
Beaver Eaters 506, Tygers 64, Seals 157, Squirrels 480, Kitts 296, Pichoux
882, Castoreum —— .. . (pp. 244-245).

Exports in 1787. To Great Britain only. Furs. Beaver Skins 139509,
Martins 68142, Otters 26330, Minks 16951, Fishers 5813, Foxes 8913, Bears
17108, Deer in Hair 102656, Dressed Deer lbs. 1787, Musquash 302016, Rac-
coons 140346, Cased Cats 5426, Open Cats 1825, Elks 9815, Wolves 9687,
Beaver Eaters 153, Tygers 27, Seals 125. Castoreum Ib. 1453, . . . (pp.
246-247).

Total of Furrs and Peltries Shipped from Quebec in the Year 1788, with
the average price in the London Market and the Value of the Whole (p.
250).
270 The North West Company

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

130,758 Beaver .......... @ 9/ 58,841 2 see
56,731 Martins ......... @ 6/1 17,255 13 7
20,177 Otters ........... @ 31/ 31,274 7 Ge
12,186 Minks ........... @ 3/8% 2,259 9 9

4,702 Fishers .......... @5/10% 1,381 4 3
7,510 Foxes ........... @ 27/ 10,138 10 Bi
Do Silver Grey ...... @ 66/6 ” ” ve
15,041 Bears ............ @ 48/6 36,474 8 6
151,535 Deer ir Hair..... @ 6/8% 50,827 7 3%
3,244 Do. half dressed. . .
per Ibs ama ve sds 3/ 486 12 als
106,753 Musk Rats ....... @ 5%! 2,557 12 5
115,556 Raccoons ........ @ 4/4% 25,277 17 6
7,060 Cased Cats ...... @ 13/4 4,706 13 4
2,161 Open Cats ....... @ 4/7% 499 14 7%
9,621 Wolves ......... @ 15/1% 7,275 17 TY%
13,680 Elks ............ @ 13/7% 9,319 10 igen
438 Beaver Eaters ...@18/ 394 4
£ | 258,970 3 10%
APPENDIX D

CANADIAN FuR TRADE, CIRCA 1789
From Report to Grenville dated London 4 November 1789. C. O. 42 vol. 66.
[It is the last item in the volume. ]

“Importation of Skins from Canada 1788 and Sold in January, February,
and March 1789.

sd.

124000 Beaver Skins sold for £62,922 average 10/2
14000 Bears ba 15,177 21/8
9200 Otters y 22,892 23/10
4600 Fishers aD 1,365 5/11
52000 Martins d 12,085 4/7
9400 Wolves i 6,323 13/5
450 Wolverins a 392 17/5
9000 Cats 2 4,131 9/2
11000 Minks 2 1,294 2/4
7000 Foxes a 2,836 8/1

113000 Raccoons m 15,533 2/9
Appendix D 271

sd.
80000 Musquash Skins sold for £2,223 average 614
14000 Elks » 8,170 11/8
142000 Deers a 34,416 4/10
2000 lb. Castorum 1,518 15/4 per lb.

 

 

[Total] £191,277

The average Amount of Skins from Canada for the last Five Years has
been about £200,000 pr Annum.

The numbers of Skins imported in 1788 were greater than usual, but some
Articles sold unusually low.

Beaver . . when the Russia Market was open
about 1/4*" was exported thither
about 1/8 as to France & Holland
& about 5/8'* consumed at home in
the Manufactory of Hats.

Bears about 1/4' exported to France Italy &e.

1/4 to Russia

1/2 to Germany
Otters about 1/6'exported to France Italy &e.

1/6 to Russia

4/6 to Germany
Fishers about 1/4** exported to France &e.

1/4 to Russia

1/2 to Germany
Martins about 1/4*" exported to France &e.

3/4% to Germany
Wolves about 3/4*" exported to France &e.

1/4 to Germany
Wolverins about 1/34 exported to France &e.

2/3 to Germany
Cats about 3/8 exported to France &c.

4/8 to Germany

1/8 consumedin England.
Minks about 1/2 exported to France &e.

1/2 to Germany
Foxes about 1/8 exported to France &c.
3/8 to Germany

1/2 consumedin England.
Raccoons aboutl/8t® exported to Russia
7/8 to Germany.
When the price of Beaver is high, this article is some-
times substituted for ordinary Beaver by our Hatters.
272 The North West Company

Musquash exported to Germany

Elks about 1/8'" exported to France

3/8 to Spain

4/8 to Germany
Castoreum mostly exported & to many different Markets.
Deers about 1/34 exported to Germany

2/34 consumedin England.

It is to be observed that the foregoing particulars respect the importation
from Canada only—but there are considerable Imports of Skins & Furs from
Hudson’s Bay, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland, and also from some of the
American States.

N.B. The Beaver and Otter Skins usually ship’d from hence to Russia,
when that Market was open were generally conveyed from thence to China,—
but that Channel having been shut some years the Officers of our India Com-
pany’s Ships going to China have adventured in those Articles from hence,
and so successfully as to have occasioned a considerable Increase annually.”

APPENDIX E

STATE OF THE FuR TRADE IN 1790

Enclosed in Mark Lane, 31 May 1790. John Inglis to Grenville. C.O. 42
vol. 72.

“The produce in England, of furrs & skins imported from the Province
of Quebec, taking the trade at the average of the last ten years amounts to
the sum of Two hundred thousand Pounds per Annum, which furrs &ca. are
traded for in different districts as nearly as can be ascertained, as under—
vizt.

The whole Country & posts below Montreal..... 30,000
The Grand River—the North Side of the 30,000
Lakes Ontario, Huron & Superior.......... al

____ 60,000
In the Country generally called the North West. 40,000
In the Countries to the Southward of the )

Lakes, the Trade of which are principally |

brought to the Posts of Detroit and Michli- r 100,000

mackinac, there being very little Indian
trade at Niagara... . 0... sees caw sca aees

Ses:

as above 200,000

 

Although there is no Indian Trade of consequence at Niagara, that post
is the key of the Communication to the principal trade of the Upper Coun-
Appendix E 273

tries of Canada. It is very uncertain whether the trade to the North-West,
can be carried on otherwise than by the post of Michlimackinac.

The American claim extends to the Lake of the Woods, if admitted, they
command the present Communication from Canada to all that Country & in
that case the Trade also as stated above at.......... 0.000. e cece ee £40.000

The Trade stated above at £100,000 is carried on by Traders who go out
into different districts as under—

In the district of the Garrison of Detroit vizt.

 

The Fort of Detroit, Segana, & the i
south-side of Lake Huron J 1000
Miamis & Wabach Country 2000
Sandusky 400
say 3400
Say 3400 packs of furrs estimated at
VD: TOG AS ie red pee cew oeb sore cat Matar aente taceleadgone 40800——.
In the District of Michlimacinac vizt.
gl The Grand River ............ 100
S BE, POSODNS oc ccccadames oaned 300
=e
S. Chequago ................4. 100
 Milwalt goscxexncineeecness 120

— La Bay or Green Bay including | =
the upper parts of the Mississippi ps

 

The Southside of Lake Superior........ 300
The Illinois Country ................. 600
Saye gees os 3020 packs of
Furrs estimated at £20 Each is............. 60,400
101,200

This Computation exceeds the Sum in the general Estimate £1200—

From this short state of Indian Trade, it appears that if the Country &
posts are ceded to America agreeable to Treaty 3/10 of the Furr Trade of
Canada will only remain for certain to Great Britain—1/5' is dependent
upon contingent circumstances—The remaining half will inevitably be lost.
It is true, that probably 3/5 of the Merchandise necessary for the Supply of
the Indians will in any event be furnished by Great Britain but the labour
of the great Number of persons employed in the Trade from Canada is of
importance as well as the Trade with the British Settlers at Detroit—where ;
the fixed property & Cultivation is of considerable Value.

It is presumed that America is not well prepared to Garrison the Forts,
to protect the Traders & carry on the Trade with Effect, & that dissatisfac-
274 The North West Company

tion or War with the Indian Nations will be the inevitable Consequence of
their being abandoned by the British Troops — All which is humbly sub-

itted —
mete London 31 May 1790.

Phyn Ellices & Inglis”

APPENDIX F

ALEXANDER MACKENZIE’S REPORT OF His VoyaGEs TO LORD DORCHESTER

Copy in Quebee, 20 November 1794. Dorchester to Portland.
No. 10. C. 0. 42. vol. 101.

“Duplicate
No. 10 Quebec 20th November 1794

My Lord

Mr. McKenzie who has been employed by the associated Mer-
chants of Montreal to make Discoveries in the Northwest parts of America,
has sent me a short Narative of two Expeditions performed by him across
this Continent. The great importance of the Trade carried on by those Gen-
tlemen may render it of consequence for His Majesty’s Ministers to be more
fully informed by Mr. McKenzie’s Discoveries, and as he is about to proceed
to England for the purpose of presenting a more particular account of them
to Your Grace, I take this opportunity of recommending him to your notice.

I am with great Respect and Esteem

My Lord
Your Grace’s
His Grace most obedient
The Duke of Portland humble Servant
&e. &e. &e. Dorchester

Endorsed
“Quebec, 20th Nov’ 1794 Lord Dorchester. Rx 7th March, Ans 4t" April,
No. 10. Duplicate. orig]. not reed. (One Inclosure)”
[Inclosure ]

“Copy

To His Excellency Guy Lord Dorchester Governor General & Com-

mander in Chief of British America &** &*#
My Lord

It was my intention to have done myself the honor of waiting on Your
Lordship, but the state of my health deprives me of that satisfaction: cir-
cumstances at present have made me determine to go to England by way of
the States, previous to which I think it my duty to give Your Lordship a
Appendix F 275

short Sketch of two Expeditions I have performed across this Continent;
Humbly hoping it may not be disagreeable to you.

The 3™¢ June 1789 I took my departure in a Bark Canoe, accompanied by
five Canadians, & three Indians, from one of our Settlements in the North
West, Latitude 58° 38 North, Longitude 110 4% West from Greenwich, I
followed the course of the Waters which had been reported by Mr. Pond to
fall into Cooks River, They led me to the Northern Ocean, in Latitude 6914
North, and about 135 of West Longitude, by the 16th July the Sea was then
covered with ice at some distance from Land, we saw a number of white
Porpoises, and observed there was a small Tide: Further, it was needless for
me to go, besides it would have been very dangerous to attempt to coast with
such a slight Vessel as I had. Therefore we returned by the way we went.

Tho’ this Expedition did not answer the intended purpose, It proved that
Mr. Ponds assertion was nothing but conjecture, and that a North West
Passage is impracticable. Not having been furnished with proper Instru-
ments to ascertain the Longitude in my first Expedition, I made myself but
little known during my residence in London the Winter of 1791/2, but to
prevent the like inconveniency I then purchased proper ones, in case I should
make a second attempt.

I left the Downs the 7t® April 1792, and passed the following Winter at
one of our Westernmost Settlements in the North West, on the Banks of a
large River which the Natives name Unjegah, in Latitude 56°:9 North, and
Longitude 117°: 40 West of Greenwich. The 9th of May 1793 I proceeded
in a Bark Canoe, ten of us viz. an assistant, Six Canadians & two young In-
dians, to the Source of this River: carried over the height of Land (which
is only 700 yards broad) that separates those Waters, the one empties into
the Northern Ocean, and the other into the Western, in following the latter,
they soon increased to the Size of a large River, which I continued going
down for a considerable distance. The rapidity of the current, the Natives
account of it &c. convinced me that I could not go to its Mouth & be back
that season: from its course and the information I received, I conclude it to
be a part, If not the whole of the River of the West; this determined me to
leave my Canoe in Latitude 53°: North, & Longitude 122°:43 West, and go
over Land by a route the Natives frequent in going to the Western Ocean, to
procure Iron & Trinkets for which they give Furs in Exchange to the Inhabi-
tants of the Coasts, where I arrived the 18th of July, there being many
Islands which prevented the view of the Main Ocean, I borrowed a Canoe
from the Natives in order to go and get a sight of the open Sea, I went about
Sixty Miles yet was not gratified, the Inhabitants becoming troublesome, made
it dangerous, to proceed any further: The Latitude here, I found to be 52°
:23 North, and Longitude 128° :15 West, which situation answers to Sir
Chas. Middleton’s Sound. The Inhabitants are well furnished with European
Articles, few of them of any material use, except the Iron, we could not un-
276 The North West Company

derstand those people therefore could not procure much intelligence from
them. We came back the way we went, and arrived at the place of our de-
parture the 24th. of Agust.

I am sorry I cannot give Your Lordship a more particular account of
this Expedition my Journal being as yet undigested.

I have the honor to be
My Lord
Your Lordship’s
m.o. &v.h.s.

Montreal 17th November 1794 (signed) Alex™ MacKenzie.
(Endorsed “In Lord Dorchester’s No. 10, to the Duke of Portland of the 20

Nov’ 1794.’’)

APPENDIX G

A PoRTION OF THE MANUSCRIPT JOURNAL OF ALEXANDER MACKENZIE IN THE
BRITISH MUSEUM
Stowe MS. 793 f. 80.

f. 80. A few remarks to elucidate my tracks from Athabasca latitude
58. . 38 North and longitude 110 1%4 West from Greenwich to the North
Sea and western ocean, as delineated on Mr. Arrowsmith’s Map.

Athabasca is 2750 Miles to the North and West of Montreal the distance
from this to the North Sea in latitude 69 %4 North and longitude about 135
West from Greenwich by the Slave lake and MacKensies River is 1540 Miles.
It was in the summer of 1789 that I went this expedition in hopes of getting
into Cook’s River; tho’ I was disappointed in this it proved without a doubt
that there is not a North West passage below this latitude and I believe it
will generally be allowed that no passage is practicable in a higher latitude
the Sea being eternally covered with Ice.

In prosecution of my journey to the western ocean in fall 1792 I took a
fresh supply of provisions at Athabasca, and passed on to the Unjigah, or
Peace River in which I went about 450 Miles against the currect to the last
of our Settlements in this direction in latitude 56 & 9 north and longitude
117.5% west where I passed the winter. on the 9th May 1793 I took my de-
parture from this the waters being then very high and strong, owing to the
melting of the Snow. It took me thirty days to get to the sources of the
River, distance about 400 Miles, the tenth day I came to the Rocky Moun-
tains latitude 56. longitude 120 and 14 west which is more than half the
above distance, the height of land only 750 paces broad is between two small
lakes we carried our canoe and lading over the portage, went with the ecur-
rant the river encreasing as we advanced till it lost itself in a larger branch,
which soon became a large River. After going down it about 420 miles I
learned from the Natives that as far as they had any knowledge of it, it
went a southern course. From this description and my own observations I
Appendic H 277

concluded it to be a part or the whole of the River of the West. The dis-
tance to the Mouth of it, would be too great for me to go and come back in
the course of the season, particularly as my canoe was so much damaged as to
be unfit for use therefore must lose time to make another, and that we had
lost all our Bullets on which depended our safety and subsistance. we had
some shot which we converted into balls but not enough. The natives gave
me to understand that it was not far over land to the Sea and by their di-
rections I returned some distance up the River left my canoe in latitude 53
north longitude 122.43 west.

f.81. From this in 17 days I [f.81] got to the sea coast: our course
about west and distance 250 miles, here I borrowed a wooden canoe from the
Indians & went out about 20 leagues amongst the Islands, which this part of
the coast is much interspersed with. My observations were 52 .. 23 lat:
and 128 and 14 west long: answering nearly to Mr. Charles Middleton’s
Sound. The 22d. July I turned back by the way I went and arrived the 24th.
Augst. at the place from which I had set out.

I have not the least doubt of the great River being navigable with canoes
and boats to its mouth. I have mentioned above the cause of my not put-
ting this to the proof. It abounds in Salmon and other fish, is well inhabited
they cloathe themselves in fur and skins and live by fishing and hunting.”

NOTE.— Folios 1-79 of this manuscript have the appearance of being a
transcription of the journal kept by Mackenzie on his descent of Mackenzie

River. On the first binding page, not on the manuscript itself, is a pencilled
note: “This is the original journal in the handwriting of Mackenzie.”

APPENDIX H

MEMOIR IN REGARD TO THE FuR TRADE, CIRCA 1794
Chatham MSS. Vol. 346.

We had the honor of delivering General Clark some time ago a Memoran-
dum wherein we mentioned such stipulations as will in our opinion, be neces-
sary to make with America, in order to enable His Majesty’s Subjects in
Canada to withdraw their property from the American side of the line in the
Indian Country—if the Posts are given up. And to secure to them the con-
tinuance of the Trade they now carry on with the Indians in upper Canada.

At the same time We suggested the propriety of the United States allow-
ing our Traders a free intercourse of Trade, in common with their own peo-
ple, into the Country belonging to the Indians on their side the line.

In consequence of the conversation we have since had with the General on
the same subject, when he asked in case the United States should demand
the same liberty for their Traders to traffic with the Indians within the Brit-
ish Lines, how it would affect the Interest of the Provinces of Canada? We
are of Opinion that such an Arrangement would not prove in the least injuri-
ous to them—As the expense of transport from the Untted States to the
278 The North West Company

Indian Country where the Trade is carried on, is nearly double what it is by
the River St. Lawrence, & the heavy impost Duties they have laid on all Ar-
ticles of European Manufacture required for the Trade, gives such a decided
Advantage as must prevent any considerable Competition. Nor are we Ap-
prehensive that a more frequent intercourse between the people of the United
States and the Canadians can have any evil tendency in a political point of
view, as the more the latter have the opportunity to compare situations with
their Neighbors, the more attached they must be to the British Government
under which they enjoy all the liberty they can wish for, without paying any
Taxes.

[Enclosure ]

Observations by Isaac Todd & Simon McTavish Representing the Princi-
pal Houses in Canada interested in, & Carrying on the Indian Trade to the
North West &c. 1794. [This was the endorsement. ]

The Merchants in Canada Trading to the Indian country send their
Goods from Montreal in the Spring of the Year to Detroit, Michilimackinae
& the Grand Portage; where they meet their Clerks & Traders, who have
Winter’d in the interior Country; receive their Furrs & deliver to them the
British Goods, with which they return to Winter again with the Indians.

Goods for this Trade which leave London in Spring 1794 are sent to the
Indian Country in 1795 & their produce in Furrs does not come to the above
Posts until 1796 so that it requires at least Two Years to obtain those re-
turns & get them down to Montreal.

Most of the Posts where the Traders winter are within the Limits
elaim’d by the Americans (part of the Trade from the Grand Portage ex-
cepted) and several of the Trading places on the Missisippe are on the
Spanish side of that River, and all the Lands in that Country (the Forts &
environs excepted) are the property of the Indians & ought in Justice to
them to be declared Neutral Ground, free alike for British & American Sub-
jects to Trade in, & to pass the Posts of each other without restriction or
hindrance, but before giving up the Posts, both Countries ought to unite to
obtain a just & proper Peace between the Americans & Indians, & each to
Guarantee it, & declare their intention to protect the Subjects of the other,
who may meet with injuries from the Indians; for, was the Posts to be de-
liver’d up, or an intention of doing so made known previous to such arrange-
ment, it’s probable the Indians thinking they were to be abandoned by the
British, would in resentment, destroy all the Traders in their Country, as
also the defenceless inhabitants in upper Canada.

On arranging matters with America, shou’d it be concluded to Cede to
them the Posts we now Occupy within the limits preserib’d by the Treaty of
Paris: it should be held perfectly secret from the Indians, untill compleatly
settle’d as before mentioned, And then to allow at least Three Years before
Appendir I 279

delivering them up, for the British subjects to regulate their Trade, & with-
draw such of their property & people as they may deem necessary from the
Indian Country.

On the delivering up the Posts, particularly that of Detroit, where there
is a valuable property in Lands & Houses, that property it is presumed will
be secured to the present possessors, and as the British & American Posts &
Settlements in several places will be separated only by a River, the Naviga-
tion of which is free to both, it would be necessary for the Credit & good
Government of each Country that some Arrangement should be made that the
Subjects of either committing Felonies or Crimes, or Debtors, should not be
sereen’d or protected by the other.

The Furs imported from Canada at the average price of the last 5 years
Amount to about £250,000, all of which are had from the Indians in Ex-
change for British Manufactured Goods—of the above Amount there is not
more than £100,000 in value comes from the Posts of Niagara, Detroit,
Michilimackinae & their dependencies, or rather the Country ceded to Ameri-
ca by the Treaty of Peace, but owing to some oversight, or want of a proper
Knowledge of the Country, Mr. Oswald settling the Line of Separation be-
tween the United States & us—in passing the Falls of St. Maries at the dis-
charge of Lake Superior, allowing them the South Side of the River pre-
cludes us from entering the Lake if they choose to prevent us, as the North
Side is not navigable for such Craft as are used in the Trade & there is no
landing place. Likewise at the Grand Portage on Lake Superior (where we
carry our Goods Nine Miles over a Mountain, till we fall into the Long Lake)
it is situated on the American side of the line about 6 Miles from the Water
Communication, which is inaccessible for a considerable distance, on account
of Falls, & Rapids; nor is it possible to make a carrying place on our Side of
the Line, the Mountains are so Steep. It will therefore be necessary in order
to preserve the N. W. Trade to this Country, which is near £100,000 of the
Exports in Furs from Canada, that some Stipulations shall be made to con-
tinue us in possession of our present Establishments at St. Maries and the
Grand Portage.

x x x
[Endorsed ]
Memoir of Isaac Todd & Simon McTavish who represent principal Houses
carrying on the N. West Trade, & are other ways generally concerned in
Canada.

APPENDIX I
DEPARTMENTS OF THE NoRTH WEST COMPANY CIRCA 1802

Copy of an enclosure in Quebec, 30 October 1802. Milnes to Hobart.
B.T. 1 vol. 20, no. 93. This return was apparently supplied by McTavish,
Frobisher & Co.
280 The North West Company

(Copy)

General Return of the Departments and Posts occupied by the North
West Company, in the Indian country, with the number of Partners, Clerks
& Men employed in that Trade, exclusive of the King’s Posts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

tee

Names of Departments Latitude Longitude = ae 8 |

% E182 | sei =

2 Beh se) =
Saint Maries ..... 46.30 N 84 w 1 2] 12; 14
Michipicoton ..... F, 46.5 to 47.55 | 84.15 to 84.45; 3 3! 10; 18
Kamanistiguia ... 48.25 89.20 1 2) 18! 20
Grand Portage ... 48. 90. 2 3} 8 11
Mille Lacs ....... 48.35 91.30 2 3; 6 9
PIC cénwaing ean 48.40 86.2 3 4; 10; 14
Nipigon Lake ..... 2 2! 7 9
Nipigon ......... } ssc enene { 7| 1! 10) 55| 66
Lac dela Pluie ...)/ 48.9to0 49.20 | 91.50 to 94.30 6 6| 28) 34
Riviere Rouge &

Assiniboine ....| 48.25 to 51.45 | 97.to 103.15 | 10) 2) 16! 90] 108
Lac Ouinipique ... 50 to 54 94.50 to 99 7| 2/ 13! 65) 80
Fort Dauphin .... 51.40 to 53) | 98.35to102.45; 7) 1) 14; 60; 75
Shuskatchivan

RIVER a ceag nage 53.10 to 54.30 | 99.47 to 115 9! 2} 16; 80{ 98
English River

(Mississippi) ..| 53.56 to 55.45 98 to 112 9; 2} 12) 75; 89
Athabasca ...... 55 to 66 110 to 120 18} 5; 16|186} 207
UpperAthabasca

RVers sc eaune se 54 to 55 112 to 116 3, 2} 4) 44] 50
South Side of Lae

Superior and the

Ford du Lac ... 46 to 48 84t0 95.30 | 12} 1; 15] 68}; 84

102|18| 141] 822) 981

Grand or Ottawa River.......... 0.0.00 4 6] 18) 24
Saint Maurice Posts .......... cece cece ec eee eee Bi zs 5; 9! 14
Moos River (Hudson’s Bay)...............0.0005 2) 1} 38{] 10] 14
Temis@amingue: sc 2y2e08 cacuids gescad ease ehaes 6; 1) 6] 18] 25
G. Total | 117} 20| 161| 877 | 1058

 

 

 

 

 

 
Appendic J 281

It may be proper to state that of this number, there are employed in the
Territory of the United States, comprehending the South side of Lac Su-
perior until the division of the Waters that fall into the Mississippi on one
side and Hudson’s Bay on the other as also the Grand Portage . . 95

On the Waters which fall into the River St. Laurence comprehending the
North side of Lae Superior, the Posts of St. Maries, Kamanistiquia, Temis-
caminque Lake and St. Maurice.......... 0.0.0... eee 76

On the Waters which fall into Hudson’s Bay comprehending the Riviere
Rouge, Nipigon, Fort Dauphin, Lae Ouinipique, the Shaskatchiwan and Eng-

lish ‘River’ (Missinipe) . 205: esvss ode ndes44mesu cae cao’ 630
And the waters which discharge themselves into the North Sea by Me-
Kenzié’s RIVEM yca.ce Nek alot te cae aw adae PEG RA owl ate 257

 

Exclusive 1058

Exclusive of the above number of Partners, regular Clerks and Servants
who Winter, there are 80 or 100 Canadians and Iroquois Hunters with whom
the North West Company have Contracts, but who are not considered Ser-
vants of the Company, ranging free over the Country wherever they find it
convenient to Hunt.

There are yearly employed by the Company in Canoes by the Ottowa
River 540 Men, 400 of which go to the place of rendezvous on Lae Superior,
where they pass from 6 to 8 Weeks, and then return to Montreal with the

Maes,
on R.S.M.

{Endorsed ]

In Lt. Governor Milnes of the No™

APPENDIX J
CANADIAN Fur TRADE, 1793-1801

Copies of enclosures in Quebec, 30 October 1802. Milnes to Hobart. B.T.
1. vol. 20, no. 93.

Average Number of Peltries cleared at the Custom House Quebec, for
England for Nine Years from 1793 to 1801 inclusive with a Calculation of
the Duties paid thereon on their landing in England amounting annually to
£16,071 ,, 15 ,, 4.
282 The North West Company

 

 

 

137,548 Beaver Skins ......... AP each: sets s yas agua’
38,638 Martins ............. 55/ per 40 or 1/41%4 each
18,349 Otters ...........000- Tf SD: ACD 5. csgisckoes galas
11,329 Minks .............-- 16/6 per 40.2 gs eseues

5,483 Fishers ...........--. 1/4% each ...........
10,141 Foxes ...........4.5. oe
19,286 Bears ...........005- D/6: GACH tos se tes ccs awe

169,811 Deer ...........--.-- 24 90h sexes ke ess ee

144,439 Raccoons ............ 13/9 per 100..........
12,200 Cased & open Cats ....11/ per 100...........

843° Elks. ones ceecceee sees AS Cachy ince aaaies 22 we
6,885 Wolves .........-.--- 6/4 each ............
778 Wolvereens .......... 8/6 @8@N 22.2 ees on
819 Careajoux ........... 3/6 each. 4s pastas case
219 Badgers ...........+. TE @BED: oy veo eee ee ai
DV SOUKSCES sc sar sews ducer danas LD. PeP LOO ses: ecers seiers a
A, OP 8ISEalS: 5 gay cary wus eer’ SO NeaChy sce4 cw Sk
2,835 Squirrels and Hares ... LI per 120). ve05 +24
57,151 Musk Rats ........... 13/9! “Per WOO. ae sie s
ABuUmalOes) 2 saiwalcn dls oad Med weed ate Gee oes
DSTI BED: saci aes econ seeacin <a este On darece glee pA ge

The foregoing calculation is made in conformity to an
Act passed in the 27th year of His Majesty under which
all former duties were consolidated, but it is understood
that since that time other and additional Duties have
been laid on Skins estimated on the above stated Articles
to. amount. toe. : 00 ec densasine ss tea tages oke te geese

Average amount of Duties paid per Annum....£

 

573
2656
1299
233
399
190
5303
1415
993
67
14
2180
136

143

50
16

392

16071

5950
22021

11

 

wonnwnp

10

10

ow Oo OG:

10

w

Val Oo:

 

R.S.M.
[Endorsed]

In Lt Gov. Milnes of the No. 33
Appendixc K 283

Statement of Furs Exported from Quebec in the Year 1801 with the av-
erage prices at which they sold in London amounting to £371,139-11-4.

 

 

 

Beaver Skins ......... 179,947 Lbs.... @ 15/6 per lb. | 139,458 8 | 6
Martins saasssse%00 94 24,454 ....@ 8/6 each 10,391 | 13 | 6
OUeTS: nccmangave temads 21,837 vet D28/6 ey ege 31,117 | 14 | 6
MinkS! ssc cxce2se ssa 10,689 269 DO" 46 oo scye 2,405 sy 6
FUshefs) viiuuicrse aces 5,422 algae Typ cars tae 1,897 | 14
Bears aeiucasds ce ne ane 25,299 ai HD BBP aa cae cae 69,572 5
Foxes :.::o000%a0+422 19,290 wera @IBY casuals 17,361 | ..
Ger aac cua simone thes 227,205 Se NOM IG eioncts 68,161 | 10
Cased & open Cats.... 18,704 save @10/6 vc cee 9,819 | 12 |..
Raccoon ¢de5 4 42e% des 92,345 visa @ B/Baweses 15,390 | 16 | 8
BIKS® sec bh ang 2s eae arate 1,140 sey sd C@DULB. -  < sinsae 1,026 | ss | ««
Wolves: saseiGcce doses 2,875 .-+»@I17/6...... 2,515 | 12 | 6
Wolvereens .........- 1,252 gees @A0/6 ceca 657 6
Badger saccar see ess 219 ene @ 10/6 sca. 114 | 19 |..
Kit Foxes <...06.0ee+ 9,130 wince @! DB scien 760 | 16 | 8
Seals 2 ouiqd ben Bees 1,505 sean @ 6/6 .22%5 489 2) 6
£| 371,139 | 11 | 4

 

 

 

 

[Endorsed] R.S.M.
In Lt Gov. Milnes of the No. 33.

APPENDIX K

PETITION OF THE NorRTH WEST COMPANY FOR A CHARTER

B. T. 1 vol. 61. no. 12.
(Seal) :

At the Court at Whitehall

the 22d of June 1811.
Present,

His Royal Highness The Prince Regent in Council. Upon reading this Day
at the Board the humble Petition of Messrs. McTavish, Fraser and Co. pray-
ing for the reasons therein contained, a Charter of Incorporation for Twenty
One Years, for “The North West Company of Canada” engaged in the Fur
Trade with the Indians, or Nations of the Interior Parts of North America,
belonging to His Majesty; It is Ordered by His Royal Highness The Prince
Regent, in the Name and on the behalf of His Majesty, and by and with the
Advice of His Majesty’s Privy Council, that the said Petition (Copy whereof
284 The North West Company

is hereunto annexed) Be, and it is hereby referred to the Right Honourable
The Lords of the Committee of Privy Council appointed for the Considera-
tion of all Matters relating to Trade and Foreign Plantations, to consider
the same and Report Their opinion thereupon to His Royal Highness at this
Board.

[Endorsed] . . . Rec. July 4th Read 16 Novr. 11.
[Enclosure] ss =,
(Copy)

To His Most Gracious Majesty in Council. The humble petition of
Messrs. MeTavish Fraser and Co. Messrs. Inglis, Ellice and Co.
and Sir Alexander McKenzie, on behalf of themselves and the
Agents and Other partners of the North West Company of
Canada—

Sheweth,

That your Petitioners have, either individually or collectively, been for
many Years engaged in Opening and Establishing a very extensive Fur
Trade with the Indians or Natives of the Interior parts of North America
belonging to Your Majesty; but Your Petitioners having by Experience
found that Competition between the different Traders led to consequences
highly prejudicial to the Indians and to themselves, and that a Coalition of
Interests was absolutely essential to the prosperity of the Trade, have lately
United to form an Extensive partnership, including all the parties who were
interested in the Trade, and Your Petitioners are now engaged in the prose-
cution thereof, under the name or Firm of “The North West Company of
Canada.”

That the Trading posts or Stations occupied by Your Petitioners already
extend from the Lakes of Canada to the great Chains of Mountains called
“The Rocky Mountains”, and that some few posts have been Established be-
yond these mountains, but that the Trade is capable of being much Extended
in this Direction, and of being made an Object of great National Importance
by opening Communications across the Continent with the Pacific Ocean, and
by forming Establishments on the North West Coast of America, and in the
Interior within the Limits of such parts thereof as belong to Your Majesty.

That Your Petitioners are desirous of prosecuting these Objects; but
from their Extent and Magnitude, and the Capital which must necessarily
be embarked, and the number of persons who must be employed therein in
very distant parts out of the reach of the efficient Controul and Super‘nten-
dance of the Civil and Military Establishments of Your Majesty’s Colonies
in North America, cannot carry their wishes into Compleat Effect, without
the Aid of a Charter of Incorporation from Your Majesty, for the protec-
Appendix L 285

tion of Your Petitioners in this undertaking, and the good Government of
those who may be employed therein.

Your Petitioners therefore submit to Your Majesty’s most gracious Con-
sideration this their humble Application for a Charter of Incorporation, for
Twenty one Years, for the granting and securing to Your Petitioners, and
their Successors, the Sole and exclusive Trade and Commerce of that part of
North America situate between the Summit of the Chain of Mountains called
the Rocky Mountains on the East and the Pacific Ocean on the West, and
extending from Cape Blanco in the Latitude of 42° North to 60° North, to-
gether with the Seas, Streights, Bays, Inlets, Lakes, Rivers, Creeks, and
Lands which lie within these Limits and the Countries, Territories, Lands,
Coasts, and Confines which border upon the different Branches and Sources
of the River Columbia or Oregan, or by whatever other name it may now or
hereafter be called or designated, being the great River which falls into the
Pacific Ocean in or about Latitude 46° North, and also the Countries, Lands,
Territories, Coasts and Confines bordering upon all those Lakes, Rivers, Wa-
ters and Streams which are discharged into the Northern or Frozen Ocean,
and have their Outlet to the Sea through the great Slave Lake and Macken-
zie’s River, in whatever Latitude or Longitude the Branches and Source of
the said Rivers, Waters, and Streams may be situated, and of the produce
of those Countries.

Your PETITIONERS therefore most humbly pray that Your Majesty will
be graciously pleased to grant to Your Petitioners a Charter of Incor-
poration, for the purposes aforesaid, with such powers and Authorities,
and under such restrictions as may to Your Majesty seem expedient and
fit. And Your Petitioners shall ever pray &ea.

APPENDIX L

PETITION OF THE NoRTH WEST COMPANY FOR A CHARTER

Enclosed in Council Office, Whitehall, 9 November 1812. Chetwynd to [the
Board of Trade] B. T. 1. vol. 70. no. 16.

To the Right Honorable Lord Viscount Castlereagh one of His Majesty’s
principal Secretaries of State &c. &e.

The Memorial of Messrs. McTavish Fraser & Co. Messrs. Inglis Ellice &

Co. and Sir Alexander McKenzie, on behalf of themselves, and the Agents

and others persons, Constituting the North West Company of Canada.
Humbly Sheweth

That in the Month of May 1811, Your Memorialists presented a Petition
on behalf of the said North West Company of Canada to His Majesty in
Council, praying for the reasons therein stated, that he would be graciously
286 The North West Company

pleased to grant to the said Company an exclusive Charter, to trade within
the limits therein mentioned [See No. 1 hereto annexed].

That the said Petition having been referred to the Lords committee of
Trade their Lordships reported thereon as your Petitioners believe that sub-
ject to certain Conditions they saw no objection to the Charter being granted.

That on the said Report being taken into consideration, by His Majesty
in Council, the same was referred generally and in the usual manner to the
Law Officers of the Crown, who, Your Petitioners are informed, reported
against the Grant of a sole and exclusive Trade within the Limits alluded to
but to these reports your Memorialists beg leave most respectfully to refer
Your Lordship.

That on this opinion of the Law Officers being intimated to Your Mem-
orialists and conceiving that from the Nature of the Reference to them, they
probably could not have given any other Answer, they presented in June
1812, to the Lords Committee of Trade, a Petition in aid of their former
Application stating, more in detail, the Grounds on which the North West
Company had ventured to apply for an exclusive Charter, and the political
Considerations which were in some degree, involved in their base. To this
petition they have not received any Answer, and they are apprehensive from
the political Considerations alluded to, the Lords of Trade do not consider it
is strictly within the reference to them, to determine finally on their applica-
tion for a Charter [See No. 2 hereto annexed].

Your Memorialists therefore beg leave to request the honor of Your Lord-
ship’s Attention not only to the papers annexed, but to the Reports of the
Lords Committee of Trade and of the Law Officers of the Crown before re-
ferred to, in the hope that Your Lordships will condescend to recommend to
the early and favorable Consideration of His Majesty’s Government, the Ap-
plication of the North West Company for an exclusive Charter on the Terms
mentioned in the said Report of the Lords of Trade.

And your Memorialists will ever pray &e. &e.

London 24th Sept. 1812. MeTavidh Rraser & Co:
Inglis, Ellice & Co.

_ NOTE.—(No. 1) is the same as the enclosure in B. T. 1, vol. 61. no. 12,
with minor differences in capitalization and spelling.

(No. 2)

To the Right Honorable the Lords of the Committee of His Majestys Most
Honorable Privy Council.
The Memorial of Messrs. McTavish Fraser & Co. Messrs. Inglis Ellice &
Co. and Sir Alexander MeKenzie on Behalf of themselves and the Agents
and other Partners of the North West Company of Canada.
Humbly Sheweth
7

Appendix L 28

That your Memorialists have received the Communication of your Lord-
ships’ Opinion upon the subject of their application for a Charter, and find
with great regret, that your Lordships are of Opinion, that the Charter ap-
plied for by them shonld not contain a Grant of the sole and exclusive Trade
to them, within the limits mentd. in their former application.

Your Memorialists being well aware that such exclusive Priviledge is abso-
lutely essential to the prosecution extension & existence of the Fur Trade, are
induced to hope, that your Lordships’ decision has arisen from your Memori-
alists not having in their first application, brought in detail, under your
Lordships’ view, the peculiar considerations Commercial and Political, upon
which they rest their claims to Public Protection.

Your Memorialists are satisfied that the importance of the Fur Trade, and
of the continuance of the Intercourse of your Memorialists with the Indians,
are justly appreciated by His Majesty’s Government, and as this Trade can
only be carried on by a Powerful and United Association of Merchants and
Traders,—such as that which now constitutes the North West Company, they
are convinced that your Lordships will feel every disposition to assist their
Efforts; and in this conviction submit the following Statement.

It is the peculiar nature of the Fur Trade to require a continual extension
of its limits, into new Countries; because the number of Animals diminishes
in those Countries where the Trade has been for any considerable time, estab-
lished, and if the Trade cannot be occasionally extended into new and unex-
hausted Districts, where Furs are more abundant, the returns of it will not
long be sufficient to support the expense of the requisite establishment.

As instances of the progressive extension of the Trade, and at the same
time of the diminution of the Animals it may be sufficient to state that at
the time of the Conquest of Canada from the French the Fur Trade did not
extend further into the Interior than the vicinity of Lake Winnipic, and now
the trading establishments of the North West Company, extend Northward to
the Frozen Ocean, and Westward beyond the Rocky Mountains, yet the quan-
tity of Furs yielded by the Trade is considerably less than at the former
period.

This statement sufficiently demonstrates the necessity of the Trade being
still further extended, and the Country beyond the Rocky Mountains, is the
only Outlet by which it can be so extended with advantage and success—that
being the only part of the Continent of North America, in which it is not
already established, and the annual returns of Furs consequently diminishing
as the Country becomes exhausted.

The expense of sending British Manufactures and other supplies for the
Indians, to so great a distance, is an insurmountable Obstacle to the Trade of
this Country, being carried on through Canada.

The distance which these Goods would have to be conveyed from Montreal
to the Rocky Mountains, exceeds four thousand Miles, following the course of
288 The North West Company

the Lakes and Rivers by which the Inland Voyage is performed, and the ex-
pense is considerably above £200 per Cent, on the original value, therefore
the traders going over Land from Canada, cannot possibly carry on the Trade
of that Country, upon an equal footing with those who get their Supplies of
Goods by Sea to the North West Coast, and from thence through the Colum-
bia and other Rivers, into the immediate scene of competition.

The North West Company therefore must abandon every hope of extend-
ing their Trade beyond the Mountains, and ultimately abandon the Trade it-
self, as such extension is essential to its existence, unless they can arrange
Plans and form establishments for carrying it on through that Channel, and
unless they obtain a Charter, or exclusive Grant, of the Trade of the Coun-
try, for a Certain term of years, they cannot with any prudence or justice to
themselves, or with any advantage to the Nation; venture to embark in so
extensive a concern.

Your Memorialists venture with great deference, to submit to your Lord-
ships, the reasons on which they form the above statement:—-The proposed
undertaking is, from its nature, uncertain in its result, and the amount of
Property to be laid out before that result can be ascertained, will be very
considerable; for it will be three years, from the commencement of the con-
cern before any returns from the Trade can be obtained, and during that
time, Shipments must be dispatched to the Pacific Ocean. There will be, at
all events, a great advance of Property in the beginning, and probably con-
siderable sacrifices must be made, before the proposed Trade can be fully
opened and established. If therefore after making these sacrifices, and over-
coming the difficulties incident to the Establishment of a Trade of this kind,
the North West Company are to be subject to the intrusion of any Specula-
tors, who may chuse to engage in the Trade, which may then have become ad-
vantageous, there can evidently be no inducement for the North West Com-
pany to embark in it; for it cannot be expected, that they should encounter
all the difficulties and dangers incident to the first commencement of an un-
dertaking of this kind, and by expensive efforts open new sources of Trade,
with the knowledge that other persons will be at liberty to participate in the
fruits resulting from their Public Spirit and exertions. For these and other
reasons Your Memorialists hope your Lordships will condeseend to recom-
mend that an exclusive Charter be granted to your Memorialists of the Trade
prayed for in their former Petition under the limitations to which it appears
your Lordships are of Opinion the same should be confined.

They trust that for the reasons assigned, and the Political and other con-
siderations connected with the subject, that your Lordships will think the
Charter thus applied for a just and necessary protection for the Commercial
Enterprize of your Memorialists, and when it is recollected that for the Ship-
ments made from England it will take three years to realize any returns and
in the meantime two other Annual Outfits will have been dispatched, so that
Appendix L 289

they will be always three years’ Outfits in advance, your Memorialists humbly
conceive, that under these circumstances the Term for which the Charter
should be granted, should not be less than twenty one years; and if it is to
be determinable before the end of that period, that in such Case not less than
five years’ notice of its expiration should be given to your Memorialists.

The Government of the United States fully impressed with the importance
of the Fur Trade have for many years endeavoured, by a uniform system of
exertion and perseverance to obtain possession of it, and by the active as-
sistance and direct protection they have afforded to their Traders, and by the
vexations, exactions, and restrictions, which they have imposed upon the
British Traders, they have succeeded in that object throughout the whole of
the Territories which they claim as belonging to Louisiana. It is but a few
years since the whole Fur Trade of the countries bordering upon the Rivers
Mississippi and Missouri, was carried on by an Association of British Mer-
chants and Traders, under the name of the Michilimackinac Company; But
the Government of the United States, having purchased Louisiana, and find-
ing that the Boundaries of that Province to the Northward and Westward
were not defined by any Treaty, availed themselves of that circumstance, to
claim a Territorial right to the whole Interior of the Continent of North
America, to the Latitude of 49° North, and without waiting to have the mat-
ter of Right ascertained or declared, they at once took possession, and have
assumed the Sovereignty of the Country.

The Government of the United States soon after, established a Chartered
Company to carry on the Fur Trade within the Territory thus acquired or
claimed by them, and to rival the Establishment of the British Subjects, who
till that period had retained the possession of the Trade, and preserved the
Attachment of the Natives to the British Nation, and especially to his Ma-
jesty, whom they were taught to consider as their Great Father, who sent the
Traders to supply them with Goods, and to purchase their Furs.

The advantages resulting from the Trade and this Attachment of the
Natives being equally calculated to excite the Jealousy of the Government of
the United States, they proceeded to subject the British Traders to every
possible restriction and imposition, with a view to drive them out of the
Country, and in Violation of a Treaty thus existing, they even went so far,
as to prohibit the admission into the Country, of any Trader who would not
take the Oath of Allegiance to the United States, and abjure his Allegiance
to his native Government.

Representations of these matters, have been made at different times to
His Majesty’s Government, but from the remoteness of the Objects pointed
out to them, their importance, perhaps, was not felt, or other matters may
have pressed more strongly upon the immediate attention of His Majesty’s
Ministers. The British Subjects engaged in the southern or Michilimackinac
Fur Trade, being thus left to themselves, in the Struggle with the American
290 The North West Company

Chartered Company, fostered and protected by, and indeed in some Measure
identified with their Government, after sustaining losses to a great amount,
were compelled to relinquish that branch of the Fur Trade, and to sell the
American Company, their Trading Posts or Establishments and Stock of
goods, while the Traders and inferior Agents employed in the Country, being
involved in Debt by the losses sustained in the contest, and unfit for any
other Employment than the Indian or Fur Trade, have become American
Citizens and engaged in the Service of the American Company, which having
thus obtained the whole Trade of the Country, which their claim, as part of
Louisiana, are now forming Establishments to supplant those of the North
West Company, and extending their Trade across the Rocky Mountains to the
Pacific Ocean. In this Enterprize, they have already made good Progress,
They have sent Expeditions of Traders across the Continent by the route of
the Missouri, and they have dispatched two Ships (one in 1810 and another
in 1811,) from New York to the Columbia River, with Supplies to carry on
the Trade, and permanently to fix Establishments in that Country—a third
Ship is now fitting out, to sail in the course of the present Summer; and thus
following up the system which was so successful in the Michilimackinac
Trade, the American Company, without stopping to enquire whether they
have any Title to the Country or not, have taken possession of it, and their
Government will doubtless found a claim upon that very possession, if they
are left to maintain it without interruption from His Majesty’s Government,
or from British Subjects.

The American Company are aware, that the only obstacle to their success
in this extensive Project, is the opposition they apprehend from yours Memo-
rialists, the North West Company, especially if they are protected and en-
couraged by His Majesty’s Government.

They have therefore expressed a wish to avail themselves of the Capital
and the experience of the Parties, who comprize that Company, as well as of
the extensive Establishments which have been formed to carry on the Indian
Trade, and accordingly they have made repeated Overtures to the North
West Company to take a share in their Trade to the Columbia River. A third
part of the Trade has been expressly offered to the North West Company, on
Condition of their joining the American Company, and it is thought if they
were to accede to the proposal, a moiety or half of the whole would readily
be given to them; in case such an arrangement should take place, the North
West Company would of course participate in the benefits of the American
charter, but they would also be under the necessity of recognizing the Gov-
ernment of the United States, as the Sovereigns of the Country, and even be
made the Instruments of extending that Sovereignty; but the well know [sic]
Loyalty and Attachment of the North West Company to their Mother Coun-
try, has hitherto formed an insuperable Obstacle to such a Union, between
the North West Company and the American Chartered Company, tho’ it
Appendix L 291

would in many respects, conduce to the advantage of the North West Com-
pany, especially as they could then share in the benefit of a direct and un-
restricted Trade to China. The Parties composing the North West Company
are determined, that even that Consideration shall not induce them to enter
into any such Arrangements, with the Americans, and if the proposed Charter
is granted to them, your Memorialists trust the Fur Trade, and the Posses-
sion of the Country in which it is carried on, may yet be preserved to Great
Britain.

At all events your Memorialists and the other Parties forming the North
West Company are ready to risk their property in the Attempt, and it is
evident from the foregoing Statement, that their Property will be deeply in-
volved before the Result can be known; But on the Contrary if they cannot
obtain from His Majesty’s Government, an exclusive Grant or Charter of the
Countries, as a Security for the advances they must make, and the expenses
they must incur in opening and establishing the Trade, they apprehend that
Trade will be totally lost to Great Britain; for it cannot be expected that
Individuals will risk the loss of their private Fortunes, in a competition with
a Foreign National Establishment, for the Fur Trade of a New Country,
when they have before them so recent an instance of the hopeless nature of
such a contest, in the fate of the Michilimakinac Company, who after an
arduous and expensive struggle, to maintain themselves in the possession of
a Trade in which they had been long established, were finally compelled to
relinquish it, and in fact annihilated as a Company, by the same Opponents,
who are become the Commercial Rivals of your Memorialists, in the Trade in
Question.

Your Memorialists also humbly conceive that the Territorial Possession
of the extensive Country bordering on the North West Coast of America, and
on the Columbia River will ultimately accompany the Trade now about to be
established, for if that object is now considered not worthy of the attention
and Encouragement to the views of your Memorialists, which they Trust will
be sufficient to preserve it, it is not probable that it should hereafter be con-
sidered worthy of the Exertions which may be required to recover it, after
the Government of the United States shall have founded a Title on the un-
disputed Possession which their Chartered Company is now about to take, but
which they may yet be perverted from obtaining.

From all these Circumstances your Memorialists presume, and humbly
trust, that they have shewn sufficient Grounds to induce your Lordships to
recommend that an exclusive Charter be granted to them for the Term before
mentioned.

: McTavish Fraser & Co.

London 30th June
ngued Inglish Ellice & Co. [sic]

1812
292 The North West Company

on behalf of themselves and the Agents and other Partners of the North

West Company namely

William MeGillivray
William Hallowell
Roderick Mackenzie
Angus Shaw

Archd. Norman McLeod
James Hallowell

Simon McGillivray
Thomas Thain
Alexander Mackenzie

Aeneas Cameron
Alexr. McDougall
Dunean Cameron
John Richardson
John Forsyth
John Inglis

John B. Inglis L
Edward Ellice

Jobn Ogilvy

John Mure

Sir Alexander Mackenzie
Thomas Forsyth

John McDonald

 

[Endorsed ]

sjuesy

S1IU}PIVY BUMLIUT MA

John MeDouall
Charles Chaboillez
John D. Campbell
John Thomson
Pierre de Rocheblave
John MeDonald
John Haldane
James Leith
James Hughes
Alexander Mackay
James Mackenzie
John McGillivray
Hugh McGillis
Simon Frazer
Alexander H [sic]
David Thompson
Daniel Mackenzie
William Mackay
Alexander Fraser
John Sayer
Donald McTavish
John Willis
Kenneth Mackenzie
Archd. MeLillann
Ranold Cameron

Sieujyeg Sur1jurA

 

Memorial of MeTavish Fraser & Co and others the North West Company
of Canada, praying for an exclusive Charter to trade within certain limits.

Read 16 Novr. 1812.

Atcheson & Morgan

Agents

In Mr. Goulburn’s—3d Octr 1812. No 1340.

{Another indorsement on next folio]

3d October 1812—Goulburn Esqr.

transmitting a Memorial from the North West Company, in Canada, praying
an exclusive Charter to trade within certain limits. No. 1340.
293

APPENDIX M

BILL oF SALE oF ASTORIA TO THE NorTH WEST CoMPANY

Copy in Hudson’s Bay House, London, 9 December 1825. Pelly to Canning.
F. 0.5 vol. 208.
Copy.
Bill of Sale
Pacific Fur Compy. to North West Company

THE ASSOCIATION heretofore carrying on the Fur
Trade to the Columbia River and its dependencies under the Firm and de-
nomination of the Pacific Fur Company being dissolved on the first of July
last by Duncan MacDougall Donald McKenzie, David Stuart and John
Clarke with the intention to abandon the Trade in that quarter, it is hereby
agreed concluded and settled upon of their own free will and Consent by
Duncan MacDougall acting for himself and in behalf of his associates name-
ly Donald McKenzie, David Stuart, and John Clarke on the one part and John
George MacTavish and John Stuart acting for themselves and in behalf of
the North West Company on the other Part That the following Agreement
and Settlement take place between them and be binding and obligatory in
the manner and subject to the terms and agreements herein after specified
and contained
Now therefore it is hereby mutually agreed and concluded by and be-
tween the said parties to these presents and they do hereby mutually cov-
enant and agree to and with each other in the manner following that is to say
Article Ist. The Party of the former part, hereby covenant and agree to
deliver or cause to be delivered the whole of their Establishments Furs and
present Stock on hands on the Columbia and Thompsons Rivers as soon as
the necessary Inventories can be taken unto the said party of the latter part,
or any other person or Persons appointed by them to represent the North
West Compy to receive the same at the prices and rates concluded and agreed
upon as hereinafter specified in Article 4th._—

Article 24, In consideration of Article first being duly and faithfully
performed by the party of the former part, they the said John George Mac-
Tavish and Jobn Stuart for themselves and in behalf of the North West
Company, do bind and oblige themselves and the said North West Company
or their Agents to pay or cause to be paid unto the said Duncan Mac-
Dougall acting for himself and in behalf of his associates as beforemen-
tioned his attorneys Assigns, or order, the amount of the Sum or Sums
arising from the Sale, according to article first, and the rates hereinafter
specified in Article fourth at Three several Instalments. The first One third
on or before the Twenty fifth of October One thousand eight hundred and
fourteen The Second One third on or before the Twenty fifth of November
and the remaining One third on or before the Twenty fifth of December fol-
294 The North West Company

lowing, and further it is hereby understood, that should the party of the
former part find it convenient to leave the amount of the several drafts after
becoming payable as already specified in the hands of the party of the latter
part or their Agents, that they the said party of the latter part or their
Agents will allow Interest at Six per Cent until paid on demand, and as
there are several monies the produce their wages due unto the people em-
ployed in the Service of the late Pacific Fur Company carrying on trade on
the Columbia and Thompsons Rivers, the said party of the latter part namely
John George MacTavish and John Stuart acting for themselves and the North
West Company or their Agents do hereby bind and oblige themselves to pay
or cause to be paid unto the several Individuals employed by the party of the
former part, the amount of the balances due them according to the State-
ment that shall be delivered by the said Duncan MacDougall acting for him-
self and his Associates as before mentioned within One month after their
arrival at Montreal in the Province of Lower Canada, the amount of which
several sums so paid are to be considered as part, and deducted from the
first Instalment to be paid unto the said Duncan MacDougall acting for him-
self and his associates as before mentioned his Attornies, Assigns or order
on or before the Twenty fifth of October One Thousand Eight hundred and
fourteen—

Article 3™. And further the said John George MacTavish and John
Stuart acting for themselves and the North West Company will be at liber-
ty to make a Selection and take unto their Service such of the People in the
employment of the party of the former part as they may think proper, In
consideration of which the said party of the latter part bind and oblige
themselves to pay or cause to be paid unto the said party of the former part
the several sums due them by such as may enter into the service of the party
of the latter part and the said party of the latter part further bind and
oblige themselves to provide and ensure a safe passage to the said party of
the former part and the remaining part that will not be taken into their
Service to their respective homes.

Article 4. And further it is hereby agreed and concluded upon by the
said parties that the following are the rates at which the Establishments
Furs and Stock on hand be valued at, as follows.

Dry Goods, Stationary, Gunpowder and Leaf Tobacco, fifty per Cent on
the prime cost

Ships Chandlery Sixty per Cent

Shot ball lead Iron and Steel One hundred per Cent

Deduction on made up Iron works at Columbia River, Thirty three and
One third per cent

Boats new each Ten Pounds Hx. Currency

ditto in use Five Pounds
Shallops with rigging complete One hundred pounds, Ten shillg
Appendix M 295

Two blksmiths forges complete Twenty five Pounds, Plug
Tobacco one shilling and six pence per Pound
do. manufactured at Columbia one shillg and three pence per Pound

Arms, Cannon &e [?] prime cost.

Provisions at fixed prices

Articles in use half inventory Prices

Horses thirty shillings each

Buildings Two hundred Pounds

John Reids adventure and Freemen in the vicinity of Snake Country and

Spanish River to deduct One hundred per cent Furs.

Beaver Ten shillings per pound

Beaver coating Eight and Four pence per pound

Muskrats Seven pence halfpenny each

Land Otters Two shillings and Sixpence each.

Sea Otters large Sixty Shillings each.

And for the faithful performance of all and singular the said Covenants
and agreements to be by them respectively kept and performed, all and every
of the parties to these presents bind themselves separately and jointly for
their several Associates firmly by these presents. In witness whereof the Par-
ties to these Presents, have hereunto set their hands and Seals this Sixteenth
day of October, One thousand eight hundred and thirteen at entrance of
Columbia River North West Coast of America.

John Halsey Witness Duncan MacDougall
Gabriel Franchere Witness

Alfred Seton Witness John George MacTavish
William Wallace Witness

Angus Bethune Witness John Stuart

Jas. McMillan Witness

Joseph McGillivray Witness

For explanation of what is meant and intended by Inventory prices for
articles in use and fixed prices for provisions it was mutually understood by
both parties at the time, that the Inventory prices of said articles in use
should be fixed at half prime cost, and that no charges at all were to be made
for Provisions or Stores of any description, and to prevent any difference
that might in future arise on the Subject. It is hereby mutually understood
and agreed upon by the parties present, that the Inventory Prices of the
said articles in use shall be fixed at half prime cost and no charges at all to
be made for Provisions, which explanation is to be considered equally valid
and binding as if inserted or so explained in the body of the Agreement

itself. Dunean MacDougall

John C, Halsey Witness John George MeTavish
Angus Bethune Witness John Stuart
296 The North West Company

It is hereby agreed by and between the parties of these presents, that in
consideration of the arrival of W. P. Hunt, the aforementioned Dunean
MacDougall wishes to assign and hereby does assign to W. P. Hunt the part
which he the said Duncan MacDougall held in acting for the party of the
first part and for the Completion of the afore mentioned agreements the said
W. P. Hunt holds himself equally bound with the said Duncan MacDougall.
And further to render the article regarding John Reids adventure to the
Snake Country more explicit, it is hereby further understood that Fifty per
Cent was meant instead of One hundred per Cent expressed in the said afore-
mentioned Article of Agreement to be deducted. Signed the Tenth day of
March, One Thousand eight hundred and fourteen.

Duncan MacDougall

John C, Halsey Witness Wilson P. Hunt
Angus Bethune Witness John Geo. MeTavish
John Stuart

[Endorsed]
Copy Bill of Sale Pacific Fur Company to North West Company. In Mr.
Pelly’s 9 Deer/25.
304

APPENDIX N

MEMORIAL OF THE FUR TRADERS IN REGARD TO THE AMERICAN BounDary, 1814
F. 0. 5. vol. 103.

Dear Hamilton—As I know your wish to have every information respect-
ing the United States, I send you a memorial, which has been drawn up by
the first house in the Canada trade in London by desire of Lord Bathurst—it
is worth your attention—and perhaps the original has not yet reached you.

Yrs. sincerely
12 May 1814. W. Burn.
[Enclosure]

To the Right Honorable Earl Bathurst His Majestys Principal Secretary
of State for War and Colonies.

The Memorial of the undersigned Merchants on behalf of themselves and
their correspondents in Canada carrying on the Fur Trade with the Indian
Nations throughout the Continent of North America Humbly Sheweth

That your Memorialists have ever since the Conquest of Canada from
France opened and maintained a constant intercourse and connection with
the Indian Nations of North America which has closely cemented the In-
terests of those Nations with the Provinces of Canada and has upon all occa-
sions secured to the Government of Great Britain the exclusive advantages of
a valuable trade during Peace and the zealous assistance of brave and useful
auxiliaries in time of War.
Appendic N 297

That Commissioners having been appointed by the American Government
to sue for Peace with Great Britain, your Memorialists cannot refrain from
laying the Claims of the Indians before your Lordship: and expressing their
anxious Hope that reparation may be obtained by His Majesty’s Ministers
for errors committed in the Treaties of 1783 and 1796 then solely occasioned
by ignorance of the rights and Interests of the Indians and your Memori-
alists, and that these rights and interests may be duly considered and pro-
tected in any Treaty which may now be entered into with the United States.

Your Memorialists have had frequent occasion to represent to His Ma-
jesty’s Ministers, to the different Governors in Canada and to the Envoys
and Ministers of this Country to the United States the incessant violation of
the Independance of the Indian Trade as established by those Treaties. The
American Government jealous of the influence acquired by the British Gov-
ernment over the Indians partly by His Majesty’s Bounty but principally by
means of the Fur Traders and jealous of the advantages derived by this
Country from the Trade have under every pretext harrassed and oppressed
the Indians and the Traders by vexatious regulations and revenue Laws
framed for the express purpose of dissolving their connection and latterly
sinee the purchase of Louisiana from France by requiring all persons trad-
ing to the westward of the Mississippi within the supposed Boundaries of
that Country to abjure their Allegiance to His Majesty or submit to the seiz-
ure or confiscation of their Property. Unfortunately these measures have
been too successful and the Trade has in consequence gradually declined since
the year 1803 ’till in the year preceding the present War, the enormous losses
inflicted on the Michillimackinac Company caused the dissolution of that
Concern and with it the compleat abandonment of the Indian Trade to the
south of Lake Superior.

That the ruin of the Trade of your Memorialists has borne doubly hard
upon the Indians who have in consequence been deprived of those supplies
from which their means of subsistence are principally derived, their wants
and customs having changed with their intercourse of Trade and being now
entirely dependant on the continuance of it.

The Indian Nations seeing daily proofs of the reduction to a system by
the American Government of all these attempys to destroy their Indepen-
dance and existence embraced the opportunity which the War afforded them
either of avenging their wrongs or of suffering in open Hostilities that ex-
termination of their race which they are strongly impressed is the ultimate
object of the neighboring States and by a simultaneous movement the dif-
ferent Nations appeared at once in Arms and came down to Upper Canada to
make common Cause with His Majesty’s Subjects in their defence against
American aggression.

That the defence of Upper Canada in the early period of the War is
greatly to be ascribed to the gallant Conduct of these Indians who required
298 The North West Company

no other Stipulation from the Officer commanding in Upper Canada than that
in any future Treaty their Lands and Hunting Grounds should not again be
placed at the mercy of the American Government; that such protection being
promised them by General Brook [sic] they did not mistake to take an ac-
tive part in the defence of our Colonies confiding their own Territories in the
event of a successful War solely to the Guardianship of His Majesty’s Gov-
ernment at a Peace.

That the different Tribes of Indians who aided in the defence of Upper
Canada came partly from the Mississippe and Mississourie but principally
from the Countries between the latter River and the Ohio.

Your Memorialists beg leave to impress on the attention of His Majesty’s
Ministers that a scrupulous performance of the promises made to the Indians
will be hereafter the most effectual protection to the Interest and safety of
both the Canadas and they earnestly hope that as in a revision and alteration
of the boundaries between Upper Canada and the United States this can
only be effected so that this object will meet with the most serious consider-
ation in the approaching Negotiations with the American Commissioners.

That your Memorialists beg leave to suggest for this purpose four lines
of boundary the former of which is the old boundary between the then
French Province of Quebec and the British provinces in America and which
should have been the boundary between Canada and the United States in the
Treaties of 1783 and 1796 the second line is drawn so as to exclude all
American Settlements on the Ohio and to include the Indian Tribes of the
Wyandds [sic] Delawares Shawnese Kickapores Potowatamers and Otawas:
the third will nearly divide the Territories and Hunting Grounds of these
Nations. The fourth your Memorialists have been induced to point out in
the event of such insuperable difficulties intervening as to render either of the
others unatainable [sic] the two latter lines exclude all American Settlement
of every description and the Territory included in them is solely inhabited by
Indians. If either of these can only be obtained provision should be made in
the Treaty for free intercourse with the Indians to the Eastward and South-
ward of them and expecially by Sandusky and all the Communications be-
tween Lake Erie and the Ohio and that British Traders may carry on their
Trade on all Waters flowing into the said Lake and River and be allowed
ingress and egress without paying any Duty either upon their supplies to the
Indians or on the return of Peltries.. . .

Your Memorialists beg leave to transmit herewith for the better infor-
mation of your Lordship a Map with each of these Boundaries marked upon
it viz.

First. The old Boundary between the Province of Quebec and the British
American Provinces viz from Presqu’ Isle on Lake Erie the line to take the
Land in 80 West Longitude and 41.20 North Latitude from thence along
the River Du Bauf French Creek and Alleghany River to Pittsburg thence
Appendix N 299

down the Ohio to its entrance into the Mississippe—thence up the Mississippe
to the Mississourie thence up the Mississourie to its Southernmost course in
the rocky Mountains [Marked in the Map with a Red Ink Line].

Second. From Maimi Bay on Lake Erie 83.25 West 42 North thence up
the little Miami River to Fort Defiance branching off South on the Glaise
River to its source, thence to the most northern branch of the Great Miami
down that River past Fort Hamilton to the Ohio in 84.30 west and 38.40
North thence by the Mississipi and Missourie as in the preceding line to the
Rocky Mountains [Marked in the Map black Ink].

Third. From Lake Erie up the Miami River to Fort Wayne from thence
to the nearest Water communicating with the River Wabash down the Wa-
bash to its confluence with the Ohio—thence down the Ohio to the Mississipi:
thence by the Mississourie as in the preceding Lines to the Rocky Mountains
[Marked on the Map].

Fourth. A line running due West in the parallel of 43 North Latitude
from the River St. Clair to Lake Michigan thence along the eastern shore of
Lake Michigan to the Mouth of the River Saint Joseph, up the River Saint
Joseph to its source in the nearest direction to Fort Wayne: from thence to
Fort Wayne and thence to the nearest Waters communicating with the Wa-
bash down the Wabash to the Ohio and from thence as in the preceding line
to the rocky Mountains [Marked in the Map].

Your Memorialists beg leave further to suggest that whenever an oppor-
tunity shall arise by Treaty with any other Power to which it shall be set-
tled, Louisiana is to belong to the boundary of that Territory should be fixed
by the River Mississourie and the rocky Mountains, with liberty to Traders
of all Nations to trade freely with the Indians along the courses of the
Mississipi and Mississourie and their tributary Streams without being subject
to taxes or duties imposed by any party as the only Settlements on the Wa-
ter communication between Detroit and the Countries bordering upon the
Lakes to the Northward and Westward of it are those of His Majestys Sub-
jeets with the exception of the Military Post at Michillimackinac now in our
possession and some American Custom Houses are the Communications in-
tended solely to harrass the Trade your Memorialists trust that no ter-
ritorial jurisdiction beyond Detroit will be ceded to the Americans which
would render the proposed Boundaries for the independance of the Indians
precarious and insecure.

Your Memorialists have hitherto principally endeavoured to draw your
Lordships attention to the peculiar Interest of the Indian Tribes and they
have now as far as commercial Advantages connected with the subject can
give weight to a Case which seems so little to require it; to add the following
details of the Trade carried on heretofore with the Indians in the proposed
new Boundaries.

Your Memorialists have imported into Canada from the year 1770 to 1803
300 The North West Company

by the communications of the Lake Michegan principally from the Countries
on the Mississipi and Missourie various Furs and Peltries to the value an-
nually of about £150,000 from the Countries between the Ilionois River the
Wabash and the Ohio by the communication of Lake Erie 80 to £100,000
subsequently to 1803 these returns have been diminished by the establish-
ment of American Custom Houses on the different Communications in that
year under Pretence of levying Duties similar to those raised on the importa-
tion of Merchandise into the Atlantic Ports of the United States. To these
Duties levied for some years on the property of your Memorialists at
Michillimackinae and other Posts to the amount annually of 15 to £20000
were added other vexatious regulations under which seizures were made and
other extortions required. It is needless to recapitulate all these grievances
to your Lordship but full proof of them can be produced if required.

The whole Furs and Peltries obtained from the Indian Countries by this
Trade were in return for British Manufactures imported from London into
Canada and the Duties imposed on the Peltries in England yielded an anual
revenue of from 40 to £50,000. This beneficial Trade which ceased entirely
in 1812 can only be resumed and extended by the establishment of one of the
proposed Boundaries between the Indians and the United States.

Your Memorialists cannot now conceive any possible emergency under
which this Country can be compelled to sacrifice to America the blended In-
terests of His Majestys Canadian Subjects and His faithful Indian Allies
in the approaching Negotiations with the Government of the United States
provisions in Treaties relative to the Independance and Freedom of the In-
dians have been proverbially useless where Territory has been ceded and no
Conditions of that nature can induce your Memorialists again to risk their
Property in the prosecution of the Fur Trade from which it is now with-
drawn. If it is found impossible or inexpedient to insist upon the Cession
to His Majesty of the Sovereignty of the Countries within the proposed
Boundary the Sovereignty of it should be left to the Indians who were or-
iginally entitled to it and your Memorialists have no hesitation in trusting
that property with the Natives which they have so much reason to dread
again placing under the power of their Oppressors.

Your Memorialists think it also necessary to state for the information of
your Lordship the insecure grounds on which they can hope to retain the
Trade from Lake Superior the only one now left to them in the event of the
Americans being again permitted a footing on that Lake. The prosperity of
that Trade has also attracted the jealousy of the American Government and
the breaking out of the war alone prevented the establishment of Custom
Houses which would have been equally destructive as in the former instances
and for which the appointment had actually taken place.

Your Memorialists have only further to express their conviction that His
Majesty’s Ministers with a full knowledge of the rights of the Indians of the
Appendix O 301

wrongs and Injustice they have suffered from the Government of America
and the fair Claims of the British Fur Traders will in return for that fidel-
ity and attachment to His Majesty which has marked the conduct of both
on the recent occasion of the War in Canada shield and protect them in the
Conditions of a Peace against the Power of their Enemies. The Indepen-
dance of the different Tribes and the future Security of the Canadas can
solely be effected by the means which your Memorialists have herein ven-
tured to suggest and they can only add their entire confidence in the known
justice of your Lordship that your Lordship will be pleased to represent to
the favorable Consideration of the other Members of His Majesty’s Cabinet
a case in which their valuable Interests are so intimately blended in the far
more important ones of Humanity and Justice and good Faith to the Indians
who have bled so freely in the Cause of Great Britain and committed their
future existence as Free men upon the Faith of her Protection.
And Your Memorialists as in Duty bound will ever pray &e &e.
London 7th May 1814. signed “Inglis Ellice Co.”

APPENDIX O

EVENTS IN THE INTERIOR DURING THE WINTER OF 1820-1821

Copy in C. O. 42 vol. 367.
Copy. To the Agents and Proprietors of the North West Comp’.

Fort William 22¢ April 1821.
Dear Sirs,

Our winter Express from the North reached this yesterday afternoon:
from the backwardness of the Season hereabouts, apprehensive that the let-
ters being detained longer than usual at this place, as I intend sending them
by the Recovery to St. Maries, I give this hasty Sketch of the most inter-
esting parts of their contents a chance of reaching you probably sooner by
forwarding it upon the ice to the Pic, whence I desire Mr. Chisholm to dis-
pateh it en Canot to Michipicotton. There are in all fourteen letters ad-
dressed to the Agents and Proprietors, and as I have classed them according
to their dates, I shall begin with No. 1 from Mr. Keith, dated Fort Chip:
24 Oct 1820, the subject of which is of a most distressing nature, the Cap-
ture and forcible detention of our friend Mr. Sim. McGillivray by the H. B.
people at Fort Wedderburn; this took place the day before the date of the
letter. Mr. Simpson, who is at the head of the H. B. affairs in Athab: being
present, Mr. Keith upon remoastrating with him on the Subject, was an-
swered that Mr. McG. was arrested by a regular Constable from Lower Can-
ada, who held a legal warrant for the purpose, and that the H. B. Servants
were called upon the this Constable to assist him in the execution of his
duty, when they necessarily complied, and refers Mr. Keith for any further
802 The North West Company

information to this constable; and from the tenor of the whole correspondence,
it would appear that the H. B. are determined to endeavor to carry out Mr,
McG. a prisoner. Mr. K’s Letter is addressed to the Eng. R. Gent™, & he
calls upon them for aid. Mr. K. recommends in the strongest manner to the
agents the absolute necessity of forwarding 7 or 8 Canoes of pork eaters
Winterers as early as possible with full ladings.

No. 2. dated Green Lake 26 Ne 1820, is from Mr. Alex. McDonnell ana
contains much matter of Interest, but I cannot trust more than the following
to this precarious route. The Eng. R. Brigade, owing to a 14 days passage
thro’ Lake Ouiniper were late in getting in. Mr. MeD. got to Isle 4 la
Crosse the 24t & Mr. Thompson with the Brigade the 30th. Clarke was be-
fore them some considerable time, and of course gained advantages which
otherwise he could not. Mr. Thompson with young M’Leod, Livingston and
Douglass winters at Isle 4 la Crosse in opposition to Clarke. Halero & 8.
Fraser at Lac La Cloche, La Rogne at Lae La Ronge, Heron at Lae Cari-
boux, and Mr. M’Donnell at Green Lake. There has been a great deal of
squabbling. Clarke and party are seemingly anxious to shed blood, there
have been three duels fought within a month’s time, one by Halero at Lac La
Cloche with the famous John M’Leod (no blood) one at Isle 4 la Crosse be-
tween young Douglas and a Pat Cunningham (no blood) and the third ean
hardly be called a duel, it was rather an attempt at assassination. Mr.
Heron and a Mr. Leslie had an altercation about an Indian, in which the
latter was in the wrong evidently, but came upon the ground with a pistol in
each hand, with the avowed determination of taking the Indian forcibly:
after some words, Leslie seeing that Heron procured a pair of pocket pistols
from some of his friends, turned off to return to his hut, but wheeling sud-
denly round, asked Heron to shake hands; poor Heron hesitated but after-
wards thinking the fellow meant to terminate the quarrel amicably, he held
out his hand, and the base villain fired instantly one his pistols at Heron’s
head, providentially without taking effect: Mr. H. seeing him have still an-
other pistol in his hand, lost no time in firing one of his pocket-pops, and
altho’ from having been a length of time loaded, it hung fire, he succeeded in
wounding the infamous Scoundrel in the groin; he dropped and was carried
home by his people, and confined for twenty days, when he began to move
about upon crutches. With regard to prospects Mr. M’Donnell sums up his
long and interesting letter by saying “Less than last years returns I do not
expect, more I have very faint hopes of.”

No. 3. is from Mr. Hallit [?] of Lower Fort des prairies of 3 Jany. 1821.
he complains of a scarcity of provisions owing to the mildness of the Season,
and does not expect to have more than 150 Bags pemican. Furs as usual.

No. 4. is from Mr. Leith, dated Dunvegan 4 Jany. 1821. He mentions
the arrival there of Mr. Black on the 15 Nov: from New Caled:—Mr. Far-
ries had got back from the Columbia, with his Supplies a few hours before
Appendir O 303

Black came away, and had not time to write. Mr. Black supposes they might
consist of about 80 pieces of trading goods, exclusive of douceurs [2], a list
from memory accompanies Mr. L's letter of the pieces. Mr. Black left Dun-
vegan for Fort Chipewyan the 234 Nov: and Mr, Leith seems sanguine in
his hopes from the measures adopting that Mr. S. McGillivray would soon be
liberated. Mr. Leith wishes that at least the same number of Canoes should
be forwarded next Spring (with full Loadings) as last year: returns of
McKenzie’s River are diminished, owing to want of ammunition during Jan-
uary 1819. The H. B. are settled near St. Johns and M’Intosh alongside of
them. Rod* M’Leod went to MeKenzie’s River with an additional Canoe;
New Caledonia is threatened with an opposition next year, they want 12 men
and a good Clerk to reinforee that depart™t. No more Iroquois wanted in
Athabasca. Summer returns at Dunvegan better than last years, expects
usual winter returns. a Sickness general amongst the Natives of McKenzie’s
River & New Cal: which must affect the returns.

No. 5. dated Lesser Slave Lake 12 Jan'¥ 1821 from Mr. Alex. Stewart,
mentions that his expectations are that the returns will be better than last
year.

No. 6. Cumberl. Ho: 18 Jan" 1821. Mr. Connolly writes that to that
date every thing looked well in respect to returns: he draws off his Indians
from the Rat River on a/e of the H. B. and they have made better hunts in
the vicinity of Cumberl: Ho: than they would have done at Lac des Roseaux:
the HB. were of course obliged to draw off their people—mentions, that it is
rumoured that the H.B. Gov. Williams (who winters at York) is to be at the
Grand Rapid again next year, but expects our people will be amply prepared
to meet him.

No. 7 Ft. Augustus 26 Jan’? 21. Mr. McBean seems to think that pro-
visions will be scarcer but does not mention the quantity he has, but as he
must send a large proportion for the use of the Athabasca, Lesser Slave Lake
and Columbia Canoes out coming, the quantity rendered at Cumb: Ho: may
be short. From many of the freemen having left that part of the Country,
and being otherwise scattered, does not expect the same returns in Beaver.
Mr. Rowand winters at the Rocky Mount: Ho: the natives are disturbed as
usual with war among themselves. Buffalo scarce owing to a mild winter.

No. 8. dated Swans River 30 Jan'’ 1821: from Mr. Allan McDonnell
complains sadly of his prospects: a Company in Red River Pritchard & Co.
Woolstaplers and Tanners, have started, who give such encouragement to the
Indians for raw Hides, that there will be neither Buffalo Robes or dressed
Skins from that dept. this year. Mentions also a report of Gov. Williams’
intentions of proceeding to the Grand Rapid next Summer.

No. 9. Beaver Creek R.R. 9 febr. 1821. from Mr. Jno. M’Donald: FD
Complains very much of the Summer arrangements in Upper Red R. owing
to mismanagement, accidents &c. &¢: Summer trade last expects to have 450
304 The North West Company

Bags Pemican, and the usual supply of Buff: Robes, but mentions also the
annoyance from Pritchard & Co; no grease to take out; mentions a report
of a large boat or scow being built at Jack River for the Grand Rapid coy-
ered over, Ball proof &c* &c* meant to blockade Gr. Rapid.

No. 10. Cumb: Ho: 1st March 21 is another letter from Mr. Connolly,
merely passing a 27 express from the N° of which he complains: reiterates
his hopes of good returns.

No. 11. March 11. Alexandria from Mr. Allan McDonnell: this is nearly
a repetition of his first letter: states Pemican at 100 Bags & 100 Kegs
Grease, expects few Robes & Skins.

No. 12. Beaver Creek March 19.21. another letter from Mr. McDonald
F D, who reduces now his expectation of provisions to 400 Bags—a little bet-
ter than the half of what was expected last year, and recommends this par-
ticular to the Agents, as there are appearances of a failure of provisions all
over.

No. 13. Pembina River 29 March 1821, a long letter from Mr. J. D.
Cameron :—prospects poor—no provisions:—no appearance of a stir amongst
the Meurons; does not think they would engage to go to the Gr. Rapid: men-
tions the Scow or boat, is 52 feet long, 16 Beam, 6 or 7 deep, square at both
ends &e* &c*—old Laurent at B. de la Riv: was killed last Nov. by an In-
dian, whom he had brought up, and who was engaged as a servant of the
Comp” for refusing to give him his Grand daughter to wife.

No. 14. Lae La pluie 9 April 1821. is from Mr. Harmon: expects a fair
proportion of returns, procured enough of rice for the winter and part of
next Summer. Indian Corn remains untouched which Mr. McLeod left there.
Has been under the necessity of making free with the Athabasca Goods.

From the Ath: Riv: & Ro: mo: portage there are 5 letters. No. 1 of
which dated Spokan Ho: 10 Sept. 1820 is from Mr. Haldane, and treats
merely of arrangements of no Consequence.

No. 2. dated the same as last. He got to Ft. Geo: 9th May last with the
returns in good order: on the 25th Same mo: the Levant sail’d with 13414
Beavers, 860 Otters, 266 B™. Coatg, 6770 M. Rats, 259 Minks, 104 Foxes, 116
Fishers, & 37 Sea Otters.—On the boats getting back again to Nez-percé
Forks with the New Caledonia Goods &ce* (8th June) they were joined by
Mr. D* McKenzie & party from the Snake Country bringing between 2 &
3/m. Skins, having for the present abandoned that Country. Mr. Farries lost
2 men coming down Fraser’s River in a Rapid, and was much annoyed by the
natives, and was blockaded some days in Mr. La Rayne’s old Fort at Kam-
loops, where they had nine dead the only summe [summer?] man (Chevrette).
Mr. Haldane had much trouble in equipping his Iroqouis, a Band of 50 more
got off towards the flat head lands, where [sic] I presume they will be dis-
posed of to some advantage. Mr. H. does not like the idea of Jaques Finlay
and the Fort des prairie freemen getting to the Columbia.
Appendir P 305

No. 3 is a letter from Mr. MeMillan, dated Ro: Mo. Portage 30 Sept.
where he had come to get Craft prepared for the inward bound, and to econ-
duet a parcel of Casts offs who are sent to Lesser Slave Lake.

No. 4 & 5 both from Mr. John Stuart, dated 5 Oct. from West end of
Ro. Mo. portage mentions having written a letter from Moose Lake, which
has not come forward, expected the 12 to descend the Columbia.

It is reported that Mr. Jno. Stuart had 2 of his men killed in Beaver
River by a party of the Lesser Slave Lake Indians, and I presume his letter
from Moose Lake would have given some particulars: the murderers are said
to be harboured by the H. B:—two of his followers also deserted him in the
dunelée [7], but they are with Mr. Leith, who intends forwarding them to
New Caled: indeed I have little doubt of their getting thru before Mr.
Stuart.

I have now given you a hurried sketch of the whole Budget, and it re-
mains to say a little about this place. I believe everything is as far as I can
learn going on as usual. The winter has been severe, and we are likely to
have a very late Spring, which may throw us back in farming. We have only
been able to make 5 Canoes as yet, owing to the extreme Cold: as to the re-
turns we have got hitherto the Hunts of all the few Indians remaining at
this place, and the foot of Mille Lacs will do the same as last year.

Begging your indulgence for the hurried manner in which this is thrown
together, with the utmost regard I am

Dear Sirs,
Your obed't Servant
(signed) J.G. MeTavish—

APPENDIX P

DEED OF COVENANT EXECUTED BY THE HUDSON’s BAY COMPANY AND THE
MCGILLIVRAYS AND ELLICE, 1821
C. O. 42. vol. 192.

Whereas His Majesty hath by an Instrument under the Hand and Seal of
His Secretary of State The Right Honorable Earl Bathurst bearing even date
herewith granted and given His Royal Licence to us the Governor and Com-
pany of Adventurers of England trading into Hudson’s Bay and William
MacGillivray Simon MacGillivray and Edward Ellice for the exclusive priv-
ilege of Trading with the Indians in all such parts of North America to the
Northward and to the Westward of the Lands and Territories belonging to
the United States of America as shall not form part of any of His Majesty’s
Provinces in North America or of any Lands or territories belonging to the
said United States of America or to any European Government State or Pow-
er and secured to us the said Governor and Company and William MacGilli-
vray Simon MacGillivray and Edward Ellice the sole and exclusive privilege
306 The North West Company

for the full period of Twenty one years from the date of the said Grant of
Trading with the Indians in all such parts of North America as aforesaid
(except as thereinafter excepted) And thereby declared that no Rent shall
be required or demanded for or in respect of the said Grant and Licence or any
privileges given thereby for the said period of Twenty one years We there.
fore the said Governor and Company of Adventurers of England trading into
Hudson’s Bay and the the said William MacGillivray Simon MacGillivray and
Edward Ellice Do hereby Covenant and Bind ourselves successors heirs ex-
ecutors administrators and assigns that We and they shall during the period
of the said Grant and Licence keep accurate Registers of all persons em-
ployed by us or our successors heirs executors administrators or assigns in
any part of North America and shall once in each year return to the Secre-
tary of State accurate Duplicates of such Registers and We the said Gov-
ernor and Company and William MacGillivray Simon MacGillivray and Ed-
ward Ellice Do hereby Bind ourselves our successors heirs executors adminis-
trators and assigns in the penal sum of Five thousand pounds that We will
as far as in us may lay ensure the due execution of all Criminal Processes
and of any Civil Process in any Suit when the matter in dispute shall exceed
Two hundred pounds by the Officers and Persons legally empowered to exe-
eute such process within all the Territories included in the said Grant and
for the producing or delivering into safe custody for purpose of Trial of any
persons in our employ or acting under our authority within the said Terri-
tories who may be charged with any Criminal offence And We do also hereby
Covenant that we will as soon as the same can be conveniently done make and
submit to the consideration and approval of His Majesty such rules and reg-
ulations for the management and carrying on the said Fur Trade with the
Indians and the conduct of the persons employed by us therein as may ap-
pear to us to be most effectual for gradually diminishing and ultimately pre-
venting the sale or distribution of Spirituous Liquors to the Indians and for
promoting their moral and religious improvement PROVIDED nevertheless
and it is hereby understood and declared and the covenant or covenants or
other obligations hereinbefore made and entered into upon the express con-
dition that the said Governor and Company and the said William MacGilli-
vray Simon MacGillivray and Edward Ellice and their successors heirs ex-
ecutors administrators and assigns or any or either of them shall not be
bound to plead or answer save and except as hereinafter mentioned in that
behalf or be otherwise subject or liable to any Action or Actions Suit or
Suits or other Proceedings which shall or may be brought sued instituted or
prosecuted against them any or either of them for or by reason or in conse-
quence of any breach or breaches of the said Covenant or Covenants on their
or either of their part other than and except such Action or Actions Suit or
Suits or other proceedings as shall be brought or prosecuted on that account
against them any or either of them by His Majesty’s Attorney General in
Appendix P 307

England or in his name and under his authority to be for that purpose given
prior to the commencement of each and every such Action Suit or other Pro-
ceeding AND THAT it shall or may be lawful to and for the said Governor
and Company and their successors and the said William MacGillivray Simon
MacGillivray and Edward Ellice their heirs executors administrators and as-
signs and each and every of them to plead and set forth this present pro-
vision and the same shall be held as operating in bar to all and every other
the Action or Actions Suit or Suits or Suits or other procedings which shall
or may be brought or instituted against them any or either of them for or by
reason or on account of any such breach or breaches of Covenant as afore-
said by any person or persons whomsoever other than and except His Majes-
ty’s said Attorney General and under his Name and Authority to be given as
aforesaid. IN WITNESS whereof the said Governor and Company have
caused their Common Seal to be hereunto affixed And the said William Mac-
Gillivray Simon MacGillivray and Edward Ellice have hereunto set their
Hands and Seals the Fifth day of December in the second year of the Reign
of our Sovereign Lord George the Fourth by the Grace of God of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland King Defender of the Faith And in
the year of our Lord One thousand eight hundred and twenty one

Sealed under the Common Seal)

of the abovementioned Governor By order of the

and Company and delivered by Governor, Deputy
William Smith their Secretary +>Governor & Committee
pursuant to their order and Wm Smith ( Seal of
appointment (being first duly ; Seey. HBCo.
stamped) in the presence of
Thos. Crosse Threadneedle
Street London
sol to the Hudson’s
Bay Co:— W. McGillivray (Seal)

Signed Sealed and Delivered by the
above named William MacGillivray, Simon
MacGillivray and Edward Ellice

in the presence of—

Simon McGillivray (Seal)

Thos Crosse Edward Ellice (Seal)

The Covenant is stamped in upper left hand corner of front page with
One Pound Fifteen Shillings on a shield. Below is 18-15. It is endorsed on
the back:—Covenant by the Hudsons Bay Company and Messrs MacGilli-
vrays and Ellice for performance of the Conditions contained in the Grant
to them of the exclusive Trade with the Indians in certain part of North
America to the Northward and Westward of the Territories of the United
States.
308 The North West Company

APPENDIX Q

Fur TRADE OF GREAT BRITAIN IN 1800

Extracted from C. H. 17. vol. 22 (Trade of Gt. Britain 5 Jan. 1800—5 Jan.

1801)
Customs and Drawbacks. 1801.
Great Britain
Skins Gross Receipts Drawbacks Net Produce
Bear blaek 2 scscesee' ot tae £19208-12-11%  £4318-15-0 £14889-17-111%4
Beaver: — e-wi-o cualls-o 4 Gaal ome 1497-12- 8%
Call. Taw ce. s ce ange Paseo 2 3816-13- 0
 PONHED scwnceaseausss 15896- 7-111%
DEEP fie HAI, vein tessa Hale 6926- 8- 734
OX: gig peeaGa a tad baw es 1041- 4- 834 329-13-4 711-11- 4%
Kid drest. acessaesss vetoes % 3395- 2-1
* MNMTESt sess dos eisai dee aac 4560- 1- % 4- 5-10% 4555-15- 244
Lamb in Wool............. 1520-19- 9%
Martin 6324 e40 $24 sew ewsdan's 10759-12- 9% 4035-17-9 6723-15- %
Mink’? goed Sa wacked ae 1300- 9-11 828-15-2 471-14- 9
Otter: c.o45ic7 dec dtoeeeeaes 3963-16-11%4 1718- 8-7 2245- 8- 4%
HeCCOOR  ioocesieavadeas das 1880- 1- 1% 981- 6-5 898-14- 814
Seal! snacs<g shares sever sees 1695-10- 2% 61- 3-10 1634- 6- 41%4
WGI (2 86) bacon 8 Bis § aNal Baek 8865-18- 334 5289-19-9 3575-18- 634
Of these the Receipts paid into Scotland were
Béar: black) :scass2% ea nese -12- 1
CENT, DAW alo ecere daa ddyedceree nao 45- 1- 2
* Pammned) - a.cacy ax acess aed 16- 8- 2144
Deer any Hairs «visi occ eevee ee 8- 7%
Mastin “pct tate cseaks de ae Ganeh 2- 2- 4
SEAL ge aah tees A clave ood 51-10-11

No Drawbacks on Skins for Scotland

Imports into Great Britain 1800

 

Amt Value Duty on Importation
Castoreum America ....... 553534 Ibs. £ 1937-10- 3 Duty £ 608-18- 3
Skins
Bear black Europe ........ 601 198- 1- 6
America ....... 61886 20114-12- 0
62487 20312-13- 6 Duty 19201-17-10

Beaver America .........325415 56947-12- 6 Duty 1497-12- 8
Appendix Q 309

Calf raw Europe ........ 33829-5 44194-11-11
APTICR.  escicvigeeg tens 305-10 382- 5-10
America ........ 127-6 186- 2- 8
34262-9 44763. 0-5 Duty 3805- 6- 0
Ibs.
Calf tanned Europe ...... 763305 19093-15-10
America ..... 312 7-16- 0
763617 19101-11-10 Duty 15770-13- 0
Deer inhair Europe ...... 6561 802- 2- 6
America ..... 724197 90525- 4- 3
730758  —-«91345- 6-9 Duty 6918. 5- 5
Fox Europe ............. 993 62- 1- 3
MATTAC Rossen associa basse 1 1-3
AMeTICA goceriaw avis 45952 2872- 0- 0
46946 ee - 2934- 2- 6 Duty 1041- 4- 8
Goat raw Europe ........ 45960-8 45929- 2- 8
SS re 4645-0 4645- 0- 0
America ....... 465-8 465-13- 4
51071-4 -51099-16- 0 ~~ Duty 311- 3-0
e. no.
Hare Europe ............ 1095-1-27 1616- 2- 5
AMeCPiCay cs:ieisa cess 30-2-22 46- 0- 6

1126-0-19 1662- 2-11 Duty 56- 2- 4

Kid in hair Europe ....... 560341 8695- 8- 4 Duty 4537-16- 2
no.
Kid drest Europe ........ 250837 4515- 1- 0 Duty 3395- 2- 1
Lamb undrest Europe .... 10158-3-14 5079-10- 2 Duty 1521- 1- 0
Martin Europe .......... 10 2-10- 0
America: 2.50% dae 141937 35482-10- 0
141947. 35485- 0- 0 ~—~dDuty 10379-12-10
Mink Europe ............ 7 -10- 6
AMETICA, 35. 5..<eieu eco aus 54418 4081- 7- 0

54425 ~ 4081-17- 6 Duty 1300- 9-11
 

 

310 The North West Company
Musquash America ...... - 51777 1294- 8- 6 Duty 394-18- 7
Otter Europe ..........- - 403 70-10- 6
America ......... .. 50062 8760-17- 0
50465 8831- 7- 6 Duty 3963-17- 0
Raccoon America ........ 248571 6214- 5- 6 Duty 1880- 1-1
Seal Europe ..........+.+ - 67005 2783-11- 2
America .........45 173532 7179-11- 5
240537 9963- 2- 7 Duty 1695-10- 2
Wolf Europe ............ 1 5- 0
America ........... 25442 6360-10- 0
25443 6360-15- 0 Duty 8865-18- 3
Other Skins Europe ..........0-000 eeu 1747-18- 4
Asia: ianimmieraknnmeeaaelen 105- 2- 5
Africa, s duseeceyecg ae eae 225- 0- 1
AIMOTICEY “sisc ds sexes arab hue wear bu 4146-12- 2
6224-13- 0 Duty 3226-19- 0

Of Imports from Europe Foreign note following items.

Skins
Bear black ..
Calf raw 7011-3
” tanned . 36195 lbs i
Deerinhair ......
BOR. Gane liews 554
Goat raw ....28540-9
Hare seev0% 429-3-6 "
Kidinhair . 99048
no.
Kid drest ...182137 "
Lamb undrest 999-1-11 ”

455 from Germany 3 from Denmark 4 from Prussia (all)

3317-4 from Holland 14201-5 from
Prussia &e.

136387 from Holland 383079 from
Flanders 200141 from France &¢

16 from Denmark

284 from Denmark 129 from Spain (all)

4139-9 from Prussia, 5999-7 from Port-
ugal 3324-4 from Italy 1635-1 from
Turkey, &e

498-0-0 from Russia, 160-0-0 from
Prussia, &

34039 from France 52549 Spain 373554
from Italy, &e.

55982 from France, 3168 from Holland
1152 from Flanders (all)

7902-2-11 Italy, 742-0-13 Spain, &c.
Appendic Q 311

Martin: cui sees aise 10 from Spain (all)

Mink: .aswsaccewasis 73 "(ally

MER waacaiee 16 - oe 4 from Denmark (all)

Seal a escces 49155 5170 from Russia 3291 from Denmark
128 from Flanders (all)

Woolf! jac-cmiianceg 7 from Denmark (all)

Other Skins ...£650-12-0 ” 298-9-2 from Holland 299-19-10 from
Port., &e

Ireland sent 125 black Bear, 8642-3 raw Calf, 6351 Deer in hair, 26 Fox,
632-1 raw Goat, 11 Kid in hair, 2398 drest Kid, 0-0-9 undrest Lamb, 376
Otter, £45-5-10 Other Skins.

Man sent 336-0 raw Calf £10-11-6 other Skins.

Channel Islands sent 194 Deer in hair, 6000 drest Kid £9-1-6 Other Skins.

Greenland sent 14 black bear 9261 Seal.

Prize Goods into Great Britain 1800

Amt Value Duty
Calf Yaw «sues save eserna duis ee 75-0 £ 93-15- 0 £ 11- 6-10
BP PANNEM) Geis dceddassteatoastha kersctins 6097 lbs. 305-16-11 125-14-11
Deer in halPsisecice cw nws vec ewes 17 2- 2- 6 3- 2
Goat: TaW «202 weaver dine pean ee 41-1 41- 1- 8 6-19- 2
PVA TES ie wtannicicn Spite seig ca Sctin SasqenSande eee 77-3-10 116-15- 0 3-18- 4
Kid, An behing coed Shae Ge naes 2100 33-12- 0 22- 4- 8
Other Sking. oy cass ec ve ywesouaane sodas 26-11- 8 24- 9-1
Value Duty
Total of all Prize Goods.......... deaaes 683098- 6- 5 60493- 8- 9
Foreign Goods exported from Great Britain 1800
Amt Value
lbs
GOSLOTEUM TSOEOPE® ois. se dc6sa.seses nieces fins aenmaailes scaytise tees 1055 2215-10-0
ASIA. canted siceeensarnee aera aE 9% 19-19-0
AME@PICA: «ke careses bee dees eed ae 28 58-16-0
109214 2294- 5-0
Excess of Imports 444314 value (Import less than Export) 356-14-9
Skins
Bear black Europe........02- ees eens eereeeee 18705 7949-12-6
Excess of Imports 43782 value 12363-1-0
Beaver WUTC secsmae sd net asia tree ges aaereg 18072 4292- 2-0
BABI AL <codagupss a aescudia aueniio votes ee Me ee 1247 296- 3-3

19319 4588- 5-3
312 The North West Company

Subsidy collected on Exportation 708-7

Excess of Imports 306096 value 52359-7-3. lbs

Calf tanned Burope....... 0... cece cece eee ceee 5651 211-18-3
Excess of Imports 757966 value 18889-13-7.

Deer in hair Europe. ... 00... cece eee eee 215248 32287- 4-0

Excess of Imports 515510 value 59058-2-9.
Foreign Goods exported from Great Britain 1800 (Contd).

Amt Value
FOX BULOPE: yi sis casas oe tele Gee es Cow Dee ae 16571 £1311-17-5
PA SID iiss 2 6 Ae 6, Wee NaN EH @ weal d AND NL Gees 3663 289-19-9
20234 1601-17-2

Exeess of Imports 26712 value 1332-5-4
Goat Taw EUTOpe icc swe ascidian eses esa ais noes 11-8 9-18-4
Excess of Imports 51059-8 value 51089-17-8.

c. no.
ARG: TEWROPE™ oi 5:5: posal end oleuadtis gate pie elele, & Gosanave. 6 28-3-0 35-18-9
Excess of Imports 1097-1-19 value 1626-4-2.
Hird drest Huropess ss vaavvsuaviavevsssevegsaon 1453 90-16-3
Excess of Imports 249384 value 4424-4-9
Lamb undrest Europe ............. 000.0 e eee 15-0-19 12- 2-5
Excess of Imports 10143-2-25 value 5067-7-9.
Martin Europe. . ses cssee ssi see ee aces ewe ead as 72312 6628-12-0
Excess of Imports 69635 value 28856-8-0
MUIR TENE O DE a acascenits oe rrp Homa tpaie Ga Mela clues aubishs 47274 4333- 9-0
Excess of Imports 7151 value (Import less than Export) 251-11-6
Musquash Europe ...........00 ccc cence 18010 187-12-1
Excess of Imports 33767 value 1106-16-5.
Otter EuTope: svicscreei ae iweae ivan soos Meee ae 30555 9166-10-0
ASIA gubecubyaeveeers seeeetehesa acs 1518 455- 8-0
32073 9621-18-0
Excess of Imports 18392 valued (Import less than Export) 790-10-6.
BE COO BUnO pe: visio. d54 sues ae cues og. tene da Wide O64 148951 £4965- 0-8
ASIA” cit dena ¢tsper eminem eal gessuny 10 6-8

148961 4965- 7-4

Excess of Imports 99610 value 1248-18-2.
S€al BULOPer vn cas ses os saw esa eee eaweeesaaeas Me 6233 583- 3-5
ASIA; 2 coe vos Sei pte Ret ose dk gek aiie un yd des 7200 510- 0-0

15433 1093- 3-5
Appendix Q 313

Excess of Imports 225104 value 8869-19-2

Wolf Huropecsc. sa bs cee ca wg nese ss we ye ewes 18671 5601- 6-0
Excess of Imports 6772 value 759-9-0

Other Skins Wurope:: ss cc sre sca cries Se whagie Sheek sears SES GRE Se Be 1944-16- 8

AGIG : deaedersss Ges Ae Ts cee eee eee eee aeee ee ees 54-10-10

1999- 7- 6

Excess of Imports value 4225-5-6

Of these Exports the following went to U.S. A.

Castoreum 7 lbs value 14-14-0 to S. Car. No Skins.

B.N. A. Colonies took nothing of these.

Castoreum 10 Ibs. value 21-0-0 to Barbadoes 11 lbs. to Jamaica.
Of Exports to Europe Foreign note following

Ibs
Castoreum 888 to Germany 30 lbs. to Denmark 101 Russia 10 Sweden 12
Skins Port. (all)
Bear black 17216 n 100 to Denmark, 380 to Sweden 58 to Prussia
(all)
Beaver 24 1794 to Russia 50 to Sweden 24 to Portugal (all)
Deer in hair 200859” 1086 to Prussia (all)
Fox 16299 a 163 ” ” 20 to Italy (all)
Goat raw 11-8 to Germany (all)
© no.
Kid undrest 25-0-0 m3 (all)
no
” drest 1453 a (all)
Lamb undrest 15-0-19 “ (all)
Martin 72312 i (all)
Mink 47274 “ (all)
Musquash 18010 (all)
Otter 24492 e 6063 to Russia (all)
Raecoon 143023 4928 to Denmark 1000 to Sweden (all)
Seal 8183 “ (all)
Wolf 18417 x 230 to Sweden 18 to Prussia (all)
Other Skins £1911-9-1 * 10-6-7 to Prussia, -5-8 to Port, -18-1 to Italy (all)
* *

Treland took 14 lbs. Castoreum, 951 black Bear, 13303 Deer in hair 89 Fox,
3-3-0 undrest Hare, 50 Seal, 6 Wolf, £21-17-3. Other Skins (& 1893 lbs
tanned Calf Prize Goods).

Channel Islands took 5651 lbs. tanned Calf.

* *
314 The North West Company

Imports United States to Great Britain 1800

No Castoreum

Skins
Bear Black ani Value
New England: 0:60 csc iscsi esses eset ae ai » 647 210- 5- 6
New! Mork: «apiyny eisai s sag ao 4 sien oa elavti a.a eau 2035 661- 7- 6
Pennsylvania 2 scsi cee tenon eae ee ee 8354 2715- 1- 0
Maryland oie sana e anne dak one as sore ace 130 42- 5- 0
North, Carolina: 3 gcc 'scsad sossie ee Shed ee Pace 15 4-17- 6
South Carolina, .22.:.26820sge00% yee os oe 659 214- 3- 6
11840 3848- 0- 0
Beaver
INGw VOPK. afated atin leieia quash educa oie Wd heeds 5 -17- 6
Pennsylvania cassie hgade saw ose aes jay 6 1-1-0
Maryland. svsciisou yess tes meee sens sa oe 663 116- 0- 6
South Carolina ......... cee cece eee eee 42 7- 7-0
Georgia seis cg eee egal ae RN ET Re oe 5 eee 64 11- 4- 0
780 136-10- 0
Calf raw
Pennsylvania, 2c.ceee< chasse eee ee emeeae te 20-10 26- 0-10
Calf tanned lbs
Pennsylvania: ¢.0calsniscanasen eases sane 312 7-16- 0
Deer in hair
New England ©: 5.42ssseee esas dss ee eee 5565 695-12- 6
INTE WE MGT Nach i-n sydsncdce be adowal-ace-a lepecdunca tana oie sauces 83679 10460- 9- 3
Pennsylvania; occas ccada so i ias ewan mes 58916 7364-10- 0
Maryland: 2o.ccsideescas yes eee vegkere eee 13672 1709- 0- 0
North; Carolina: + 2:3 seackiawsa aaiedae oe emeee 6282 785- 5- 0
South Carolina. .ecacscsie.s ouln bs cee wake 95365 11920-12- 6
GOORRIA Ginscs.a Seria sie pas name ami ogngned age pqe 21643 2705- 7- 6
285122 35640-16- 9
For
New England. 2 :csjeureue sent ga tex nek oes 2671 166-18- 9
New YOrk: gy scvie sei sane $4 Gade ace Bae dae he 14 -17- 6
Pennsylvania, . cacoin acewe annie cacao thomas 254 15-17- 6
Sonth Carolina: is seg sce aieiga ee ve dieses Gees 26 1-12- 6
Georgia < saey ei ys bettas wets eee hess 43 2-13- 9

wo
>
>
le)
eae
co:
co
.
2
2
Martin
New England
New York

Mink
New England
New York
Pennsylvania
North Carolina
South Carolina

Musquash
New York
Pennsylvania
Georgia

Otter
New England
New York
Pennsylvania
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia

Raccoon
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia

Seal
New York

Wolf
New England
New York ...
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Georgia

Appendix Q

 

 

 

 

315

2202- 9-
59-17-
130-13-

2393- 5-

123-13-
2.
2.

201- 8-
128- 2-
383- 8-
6- 9-
66- 6-
6-13-

792- 8-

0- 0-
4-13-
7- 3-

11-17-
15-18-
2- 5-
-10-
21-15-

2.
1-10-

28- 0-

123-17-

TDAAROH a |

19 AAR o

ooooso
316 The North West Company

Other Skins
New Bnglanl) 22 saseceuis Ristesee ee Siee desde saeue as 186-11- 5
New York: siav2< sages wee vs wae sds sie Sue She x oewe ses ueias 104-12-10
Pennsylvania, seit sisiss, one soside Son sacle Sin Sastel oia. Wale Wacaetee Pra eo 358-15- 9
South Carolina: 2ccccu-sdcacte weet neeee s4ane- ss ee ee eee 4-14. 7
Georgid.2¢-sins.s. 02 pees wealie dee sen tone eatin kak Bee ea nlew oe 6- 2-0

660-16- 7
Total Imports United States to Great Britain £2357923-10-9
Exports Great Britain to United States

Foreign Goods £179385- 5-0
Prize Goods 16654-18-0
British Goods 6689467-19-9

Imports British North American Colonies to Great Britain 1800

Castoreum Amt Value
Hudson: Bay isi her Sd ae Pa Saad bees oe 1895 663- 5- 0
Newfoundland .............. cece eee eee 4% 1-13- 3
Canada. ....6vansusinwme ty igs an eeasedoe ee se 3636 1272-12- 0

5535% 1937-10- 3

Skins

Bear black
MASON Baye 2 scp nakthony qiee-2 «Aa A tale a oe ones 1160 377- 0- 0
Newfoundland ............. 0c ccc e eee 31 10- 1- 6
Canada x5 suntews eevee vend wel eo ge deces 48290 15695- 7- 0
New Brunswick ...............000ceeeeee 205 67- 3- 6
INGva SCOtial > 2)3.2. cua eae ect rt ewer ioe ee 103 33- 9- 6
BAHAI: 33 2.4 siscx-aalpuaee Wien eigen sa Meet yes Maw os Se 42 13-13- 0

49831 16196-14, 6

Beaver
HUds0n Bay, - ecaoceu diy gucaea jee oe ele a4 ee 77150 13501- 5- 0
Newfoundland ..............0. ccc c eee 1562 273- 7-0
Canada” 554 sees tod sch Sack aewales pela aes awe anael a 245321 42931- 3- 6
New Brunswick .............. 00.0. ceeeee 138 24- 3- 0
NOva Seotia: sceou aie sic argu vse dese ek ey ces 124 21-14- 0
Bahama. ~ a-sisise se amas 74 ks base Gated ama wap 259 45- 6- 6

324554 56796-16- 0

Calf raw

Newfoundland .................0- cc eeue 33-9 68-18-11
Appendix Q

Nova S@0tiay Geseresdak evden eked oe de ols

Skins

Deer in hair
Hudson Bay 62th a cei sabe acaliws 6
Newfoundland .. 1.2... . eee eee cece eee

Fox

FNASON Bay 2G: digi intake esas Gens BEE RA
Newfoundland ............ ae Gusaties wae <

Hare

Newfoundland saiiceses vases Ga cea oa nen
Canada’ gene meus se wiealicnclateled kta isteldls ny ma

Martin

Hudson Bay wasvekiie Se yeeeosesweaagite ss
Newfoundland «.0c.0%6 cacevid ea ga ee hae oe
CANAME: oxccdanaiad aad oa aka co een alaald. + Gua
New. Brunswick. os aniya ears da ous a eas 2 Hee ee
NOVaSCGE18: suc sie gatvsct aiaeee he 8S Ge RARE

Mink
Hudson Bay™ 4 sips sens <4 gieieaipars Sarasa aoanens
Newfoundland asicnicecsass owas vevenweys
Canada, ccs dt dae eG on eee oe eeae ayes
New Brunswick: 4 ssani:eageds oe cacau'ed aie
Nova Scotia. 4s oicck.. sc eaiswicne Uda Steele E4089

 

 

317

15-14-

7

 

84-13-

1120-15-
-10-
46165-17-

6

0
0
6

 

47916- 7-

1075-17-
113-11-
1315-15-
68- 2-
76- 3-

a

OCORAOWMH

 

2649-10-

0

 

46- 0-

13627- 5-
414- 0-
18726- 5-
894-15-
914- 0-

6

0
0
0
0
0

 

34576- 5-

193-19-
1-14-
1252- 1-
74- 0-
166- 7-

0

onOonne

 

1688- 2-

0
318

The North West Company

 

 

 

Musquash
Hudson Bay. ite 5 sch paces deny eoam ogee 25849 646- 4- 6
Newtouwdlamd «2. #465 5i¢e@ovees@agens 36 -18- 0
WANA ait carbo eotuh dt Astana trchar ete wane am 20341 508-10- 6
New Brunswick 2:66 .0s0eisun eeuuwsn aan oe 300 7-10- 0
Nova Scotia: we vianaeucdwa ses wee sad wees s 296 T- 8- 0
Otter 46822 1170-11- 0
Hudson Bay ss cciwesvasaa yes ee areas soude 7691 1345-18- 6
Newfoundland ........-...... eee eee ee 1491 260-18- 6
Canada. cnccinon inom Cramer tases ea seen 34952 6116-12- 0
New Brunswick: .. 4002249084 sa0 ea eeunee« 288 50- 8- 0
NOVASC0tE, ceca da da uw iaeeae Pew meses 304 53- 4- 0
Bahama. 3 oead decane eaieed cae Gael saa 50 8-15- 0
R 44776 7835-16- 0
accoon
Hudson Bay’ ag resiie ia sassetere eee tase 4187 104-13- 6
CaNIIa 4 ives c ee bd ee ea Hee ex de oer e 243310 6082-15- 0
Nowa S¢otla: s6s2anksa gees adeneaeew ta 9 4-6
s 247506 6187-13- 0
eal
NewifOun@land case ec iaace a ands oa dea oe 62819 £2586-19- 9
I aniAiClal dz gc Same cuca eamtke aaah aude baal 8652 345-17- 2
Nova Scotia oes .e waves Hepes eva wordy eee 1332 50-10- 6
Wolf 72803 2983- 7- 5
Hirdson Bay? so .0wiyyins gem agaesd aes and wats 17091 4272-15- 0
Newfoundland ss vesscsees ce eee oes mera ats 2 -10- 0
OTSA. 26 Kekdasewdwe tee ae A EW ewe a Cd 8232 2058- 0- 0
New Brunswick .......... 0.000 c sen ee eee 4 1- 0-0
No¥a Scotia). sags waa we aateiepaigrs Gaus uee dents 1 5- 0
Other Skins 25330 Goaa le: 0
Hiudsou Bay o)sng neg ndsietand ate Ga eed aed awa hoe 685- 3- 5
Newfoundland! - ose s.e see iaae ves Mee as Hewes ted ekaweees 1- 3- 2
ANGUS » -.4:dcduactrais aay ndleaann oe GR bat iud edie) uae anda pod Guar see 1827- 4- 7
Ney Bruns with? icici dusts te anim ddcnamn sa Ste eee cabo ed we 09 41-11- 7
Nova: ScOtla. o424me saa nabs BER EE sabes de were cae men ees 47- 7-5
Bahamian: scents Sartkdis ervinasaeth et a cle Sista Sane oa Gaeta Ba 717-15- 0

 
Appendix Q

319

Besides Castoreum & Skins there were imported from Hudson Bay

e. Ib.
ISINGIASS: socaciamawe ue. a cde hy ear ee wee at ies 0-0-7
Heathers for Beds, s-cseiess ses e tog eng dares nase eae hs 89-3-0
Fish (not Cod or Herrings) ..................... or
THG
OU PRA ya vies Me Sark Pyar warses Wee w kee Hewes a gwen 9-1-0
Quills:\GOOSE: sna atae n26 Sata ne eed mniema an ae 245700
e. Ib.
"Wihaleniisy. 2cs0-suoecuastisncntas Guach cari te a enhs ater 41-0-24
Wood, (nor FirorOak) as csi cuciia cede eyiea as
Mises Articles: | waded ee oie ea wees sien a aa ee ees abit
Total Imports from Hudson Bay were £38463- 8-1.
” 2 » Canada ” 231394-14-2.

Exports from Great Britain to Hudson Bay were
Foreign Goods
British Goods
Exports from Great Britain to Canada were

Foreign Goods
Prize Goods
British Goods

Exports Great Britain to Hudson Bay 1800

 

Foreign Goods Amt
Bugle Great cues cenkite gee odie's tu ise OSvacaidars 1790 lb.
© CANMAMON, aaah dacarice tom be nae ee ERTS 2 |b.
GIOVES. sie po deta bys Bal se vie ras Sal en eeA bs 2 lb.
Coffee, Mast India. o.....cccen wees essen tl 1-2-26
Curranisy «cicugna oa derase anes aaa eans 1-3-2
ti) Mae oxaicrr uc as kT tee Gees Me ese He Se 2% lb
Bes) ANGLE PS" 2 2 inea banat c qa Nain ma bod eons 2%
2 e lb
©.) Prunes secede tyucieh sans ta sokeees BES 40-1-27
Raisins:SOH . axe s-edoes-cs odaw ach tea does Bas 39-3-24
e |b
ERICOr Mer eho ei goatidia rans atte duane eeacaun maui a astace 5-2-16
Sugar Be Plantny 442: sada seen oe ears need 41-1-11
THG
OM Ordinary” vega dy gaaigie we alse seals vas Gutalens 0-1-44
* Balad: scscctgies grea bees Rese ae nae eee 10 Galls.

-15-0
287- 4-0
3- 9-9

120- 5-0
36-17-0

329-14-3
9- 0-0
62- 1-8

1837-11-6
36223- 9-3

67603-19-5
6557-14-6
385993-19-4

Value
£104- 8- 4
-10- 0
-16-10
25- 2-3
3- 5- 4
2-2-9
-17-10

35- 6- 9
44-18-11

5-13-10
103- 7- 4

9-11-10
2- 0- 0
403-16- 0
320 The North West Company

TODACCG MAHIC. ..cuass cave tannacsacees 14097 lbs. 264- 6- 4
THG
Wine Porttpal) <....icnaceesecads. aes 458Es 1-2-16 53- 3-0
Mis. ATticlés: . sian. ss4 evn 2 bees eau we ae nae © mae 778- 4-2
Total 1837-11- 6
British Goods Amt Value
e Jb
Apothecary Ware ............. 000.000 ee 55-0-0 110- 0- 0
THG
Beer assy cee cee tana ee wed ae eee See sa wes 150-0-0 750- 0- 0
no.
Bricks cnciuiyaatiae diac Senne Gin ata aren 14000 7T- 0- 0
e lb
Brass Wrot ..... as adhtns Sb aS Sek alin Sale aia 65-0-0 292-10- 0
doz Ib
Candles Tallow «:cisevies eevee wexsrcaws 300-0 67-10- 0
Cha. Bu
Coals, Winton Meas. .......... 200s eee 45-0 54- 0- 0
Copper Wro®. aseicaveas carers e doses ys eos 105-0-0 556-10- 0
Qr Bu
Barley i aici acs tantgals anaes man pe eee ea 7-0 4-11- 0
BAAS os chy xs SG bs a eh ee Ree bes ba oa COs 2-0 1- 6-0
MATEY cise chases Sock v one eeend e(e.cheuet iancus Sees ually 45-0 39- 7- 6
Oats 22 taeda Sag Soe ie Sele ee en te cakes 8-0 4-4-0
5 e¢ |b
1)» | OAGINGA LS We Zaks se-sdese dane ehesad Sb Stee be God Sud leas 432-0-0 64-16- 0
Qr Bu
PEASE. con ianiod-cadae o4 gate'es nied Ga ee 60-0 72- 0- 0
e lb
WEAR DIOUL . gcc xicead-gacad cade ena dee ne eee 1158-0-0 579- 0- 0
Pieces
Glass & Earthenware .............--0005 206000 515- 0- 0
Cha. Bu.
Grindlestones ........2-.- 0-2 e cece eee 11-0 16-10- 0
Ibs
Gunpowder ..............65- grapes 17500 528-12-11
Haberdashery ssc sacs ds de. seu nes tas 70-0-0 140- 3-7
doz no
Hats Beaver <sr.50:4 pense Wane 3.4 Buln edtia's 60-0 240- 0- 0

Ma SEI Gs sanziasts dav) Jeoriuanatensiirsuenes siahedoun Beara «. 60-0 67-10- 0
Appendir Q

321

 

 

e lb
TOW WhO’ cakyes Gyn senrwiaisinc seen eees 420-0-0 1155- 0- 0
T. e lb
TOG . va cvqeisecat eas towel ees Sania oe ees we 15-4-0-0 159-12- 0
Leather Wro! aseemcscneews asin aac deus 1300 lb 146- 5- 0
e lb
MOIASSES!.. 5 9-0,uya'a alae daa deed ee etna te Oe wes 280-0-0 315- 0- 0
PO WLEE: arene ereseoe-ne h muanla sukete Sua adem amieanen 135-0-0 472-10- 0
e |b
Bacon& Hams ......................4. 640-0-0 2016- 0- 0
ig | BeeiSPork. aca a aes edna wee amend ood 900 Bbls. 2475- 0- 0
5 e lbs
‘24 Bread& Biseuit 2. 0.0.0... Joe 3560-0 267- 0- 0
© SBUttet aged sew o cadtove pS ahade heen eelamne 258 Firkins 251-11- 0
es ¢ Ib
Cheese: nels n ruses ink cela pW poasak as meee 270-0-0 324- C- 0
Salt White, chesaccn dd nected dean seieods 232 bush. 7-14- 8
Ib oz
Bulk Precess Gyo Gages Ga Speak sea k Ae 17-14 31- 5- 7
e |b
Sugar Refined .csysuise eevee vax ecewe on 68-2-9 188-11-11
Bays DOOD: oad apes austen eared shomas dare 1400 Pieces 5250- 0- 0
! SINGIG: scnorcama cheesey Bea eae peed 1400” 2765- 0- 0
Blane), vise seqch oS ore oak bg dead 2700 Yas. 146- 5- 0
doz pr
Stockgs, Worsted. .2sawesemsssae de pease 55-0 93-10- 0
SEUMES xs useless fore hers weice tease ne etal 26000 Ibs. 3250- 0- 0
lb. 02
& with Silk & Inele- ve.¢--cve ven oa see 31-8 4-6-7
MOISCANMICIES:- \-e snsuits d-ansanid Gem cuiaebvod naueias ae. Guana 12794- 6- 6
36223- 9- 3
Imports West Indies, Honduras Bay, Florida, and Southern
Skins Fishery to Great Britain 1800.
Bear black Amt Value
HIOHIOA: 4 04.368 Beton ee eta ew edie Chae 215 69-17-6
Beaver
BIORIC AS ed dad Noe fas acsiul Sea Ree ea oS 81 14- 3-6
Calf raw doz no
Barbaloes: <4.5 sexe x waned hee SEA cee ees 15-4 19- 3-4
a AMMA ICAL che ee suicag sratirdicn cen G.S8S 9 Nine cad ashok 42-0 52-10-0
Total British W. Indies................. 57-4 71-13-4
322 The North West Company

POTN a: 225 2ee ean. GASe Geeta secs ee eee 3-0
Deer in hair

PIMNA TC a dies Sacwct oieecce rsd ppenh t oe a ea cer ete aed ae 374

PlGF). v6 iat y.ce wed ae hk oe Swe ee Oe Sw 55370
Fou

TMVORA A cox Biccice Sed ce tense 3p aut sats A hoidenl es 4 eine fshk tek 552
Goat raw

Barbadoes: ..62.63 deten sided tad an seal ane o 22-10

GRONACa sd wow nx weld he ite 2G Ronde acne Aa D 3-9

PAMAICH. vies Heh acus ee ape rrowswaes a aLE eas 439-0

TRO GABE WLIO S ei so.2 gauge ciioiee ode ge destin 465-7

Goat raw

Matiinieo” «aires oh erend vase wende meses s 0-1
Otter

JAMAICA a4 ae cot Bene wae Ba Fees Raw 84

Blorida.  ccaiueagesswuaer daieye eae cagarsegan 674
Raccoon

BUG NGUA. 3g ase 5 care abit cs daayee sed alge ihe extent Dap 18s 590
Seal

Southern Pishery: a¢cece¥ ves siesiges dele ns 100327
Other Skins

Barbados: adicncnaragch as aeoe ean twos

MAMAICA ened... 5 Ap Peay ahd Hadashys ap SYS Sale sees

Total British West Indies
DEMETATE.. sors sx neue sh ot yao an Aaa kee Sees
Ma etini@@: ) ata 'scrne yieu'stue on side S58 vies eer
LIPINANE wae y Sade ks tvs Rees ane Suiew bade coeee OOS
TERA o56n 02 Guan eRe Ne Ne GRE

Total Conqd. Islands
ROL” WESt THOS ii 5.50 saison aise vavelaue yi wp ensued
TROT ALA: canto aes sensi a te ake aloes aneeasat Sap REA
Southern Wishery’ .: 2+ a9<s esx 4948s ewe os

Exports, Great Britain to Nootka Sound 1800

e lb
Goffee’B: Plant! 3. .9ai<5 eddeeeisi edeses’s 1-1-22
Sugar B. Plant) scot cceme sce. teacares 6-0-16

ENCORE 45 eh teeta ane Ramesh Maat essen Bateau Gd 374 Ibs

3-15-0

46-15-0
6921-15-0

34-10-0

22-16-8
3-15-0
439- 0-0

465-11-8
0- 1-8

14-14-0
117-19-0

14-15-0
4180- 5-10

11-

6- 2
T- 5- 8
18-11-10
1- 0- 0
29- 0- 3
2- 7-11
12- 0- 0

44- 8- 2
75-10- 0
3-15- 5
23- 5- 0

20-19- 4
15- 7-1
54- 0- 8
Appendix Q

T
TrOnW Bar > 2 Gd salauiesd. Gina Soa ed cree eas 1-4-2-9 Ib
Linen Camibricks 242.2502 2e555e5%¥ 05% 74 pieces
Piece Goods Muslins ................00. 25 pieces
RUM) nasatialns wane Coens meee ae ee Rtas 1031 Galls.
T.HG
Wane Port xi sewers ge desiw tee waka 0-1-57
PO SPANISH: waiews eo. k ethos an oe anim 0-0-7
Total

No Prize Goods
British Goods

Cottons 64 to 18¢ before Printed 2400 Yds. 250-0-0

British Goods Amt
Cottons Manufactures .................. Acres
Pieces
Glass & Eathernware ................... 200000
doz
WS SBOLtleS: “dusna) ele ei sane batons ee 6-0
e lb
SUPATTEANED. own nrnane Ge Shee ow neces 4-3-0
no
Watches:Silver ...c.6 suse cuonegaeee dead 120
Bays Single 2c scce csc wvesexae nee ne ae 100 pieces
Ci Long, 23 ees es ty gu eee edate wevass 200 pieces
EAMG)! | dane oe. eee nak hw se neat a he a 5000 yds.
2 Ibs
a IRETSCVINERE «esse SSS od Sc vd subs a seed aa ek oe oan
B | Perpets& Serges ...........00 0200 e eee 500
| doz no
Stockgs Worsted ............0 02.0000 100-0
| stutts Hi aris eee ese ae abies oy sy SIM 3 Met 4000
Mise.-Articles: 0 dacs da sscaanet Gia BoendGS
Total

Prize Goods exported from Great Britain

Amt
Calf tanned, Europe 6... cee eee eee eee ees 1893 lbs

Excess of Imports 4204 value 234-17-2
Abstract of Trade 1800

15-19- 5
90-13- 0
98-10- 0
309- 6- 0

16- 3- 8
-19- 5

644- 8-11

Value
12000- 0-0

500- 0-0
-12-0

13- 1-3
450- 0-0
197-10-0
1550- 0-0
270-16-8

200- 0-0
81- 5-0

170- 0-0
500- 0-0
20,000- 0-0
£36,853- 9-5

Value
70-19-9
324 The North West Company

Hudsons Bay
Imports to England value 38463-8-1
Exports from England value
British Manfs.  36223- 9-3
For" Merchandize 1837-11-6

Total 38061- 0-9

Balance in favor of Imports 402- 7-4
Gross Duties Collected
on Importation ........ 12896- 0-11
» Exportation ........ 72-18- 3

Total 12968-19- 2
Navigation
Ships entering Inward—3 ships 770 tons 87 men
” clearing Outwards4 ” 881 ” 142 men

Nootka Sound
Value of Exports
British Manufactures ............. 36853-9- 5
Foreign Goods ...........00ceenee 644-8-11

Total 37497-18-4 All from England
No duties collected
Navigation
Ships cleared outwards 1 ship 149 tons 25 men

APPENDIX R

LIST OF SHIPS CLEARING FROM QUEBEC WITH Furs, 1786-1813.
Compiled from C. 0.47 vol. 80-83 and B. T. 5 vol.8

1786. June-July. None.
July-September. Fame, Elizabeth (Queens Ferry, N.B.) Friend-
ship.
1787. 1 April-1 July. None.

1 July-1 October. Samuel & Jane.
October-November. Limniade, Everetta, William, Integrity, Su-
sanna, Liberty, Carleton.
1788. 5 July-5 October. Queen, Adventure, Scipio.
5 October-5 January 1789. Silver Eel, Integrity, Everetta, Mentor,
Carleton, Sally, Maxwell, Bellasarius.
1789.

1790.

1792.
1800.

1801.

1802.

1804.

1805.

1806.

1807.

1808.

1809.

10

on

10

n

10

aAno»1na»

13

nr

10

on

Appendix R 325

April-5 July. Maxwell, Mary Ann.

July-5 October. Carleton, London, Fame, Adventure, Adventure,
Montreal.

October-5 January, 1791. Caroline, Everetta, Integrity, General
Wolfe, Liberty, Ardeer, Nautilus, Mary Ann, Atlas.

April-5 July. Caroline, Nancy.

October-5 January 1801. Montreal, Adeona, Reliance, Everetta,
Adriatic, Firm, Brickwood.

April-5 July. Atlas, Atlas.

July-10 October. Montreal, Crescent.

October-5 January 1802. Adeona, Reliance, Quebec, Everetta,
Dasher.

April-5 July. Britannia.

July-10 October. Adeona, Ocean, Peggy, Mineral Spring, Adri-
atic, Aid.

October-5 January 1803. Eagle (Ayr), Everetta, Quebec, Fred-
erick, City of London, Caldicott Castle (Greenock), Arcade,
Teresa (Belfast).

April-5 July. None.

July-10 October. Montreal, City of Edinburg, Harmony (Cork).

October-5 January 1805. Quebec, Everetta, Adeona, Hope, British
King.

April-5 July. None.

July-10 October. Ann, Betsey.

April-5 July. Gosport (Newfoundland).

July-5 October. Eddystone.

July-10 October. Quebec, Desire, Duncan (Liverpool.).

October-5 January 1808. Magdalen, Mary, Everetta, Aurora
(Liverpool), Quebec, Two Sisters, Elizabeth (Liverpool), Ade-
laide, Winchester (Liverpool), General Craig.

January-5 April. None.

April-5 July. None.

July-10 October. Bee (Liverpool), Industry, Jane, Jane & Eliza
beth, Danzig, Oxenhope.

October-5 January 1809. Watt (Liverpool), Leipzig, Everetta,
Mary, Good Intent (St. Johns, Newfoundland), Reliance,
Esther (Liverpool).

January-5 April. None.

April-5 July. None.

July-10 October. Hope (Greenock), Mary, Brothers, Anna, Wil-
liam & Ann.
326

1810.

1811.

1812.

1813.

10

or or or

10

oon

10
5
5

10

The North West Company

October-5 January 1810. Surry, Alfred, Everetta, Brother’s Ad-
venture (Halifax), Brown, Valentine, Hero, Olive Branch,
Sampson, Magdalene, Hercules.

January-5 April. None.

April-5 July. None.

April-5 July. Caroline (Halifax), Sarah.

July-10 October. Sampson, Mary, Triton, Prevoyante (Halifax),

October-5 January 1811. Everetta, Sarah, Humber, Magdalen,
Andersons.

April-5 July. None.

July-10 October. Malvina (Aberdeen), Barbara (Aberdeen), Mar-
garet.

October-5 January 1812. Everetta, Isaac Todd, Coneord (Kirkal-
dy), Danube, Shaw, William Henry.

January-5 April. None.

April-5 July. Dolphin.

July-10 October. Kangaroo, Lord Wellington, Xenophon, Isaac
Todd, Success (St. George’s Bay, Newfoundland).

October-5 January 1813. Everetta, Magdalen.

April-5 July. Magdalen.

July-10 October. Cossack (?).

October-5 January 1814. Wolfe’s Cove, Everetta, Rising Hope.

[NOTE.—The above list is compiled from shipping returns. Unless
otherwise indicated in a bracket following its name, each ship cleared for

London].

APPENDIX 8

OFFICIAL VALUES OF THE TRADE OF THE HupSON’s Bay COMPANY WITH
GREAT BRITAIN 1772-1837.

Extracted from C. H. 4. vol. 5-32; C.H. 8. vol. 1-46; C. H. 10. vol. 1-28; C.
H. 17. vol. 1-30.

 

 

 

 

 

Exported from Great Britain to
Imported Hudson Bay
to Great Britain
from Hudson’s Bay Goods Manufactures
Foreign British

TVA D: esiscre Besasante-s £ 8005-17- 1 £1311- 6-10 £ 5069-15-11
VTS) wee Sees 8943- 4- 2 1328- 7-11 5139- 1-10
We ges wrwees 13440-12- 1 1284-12- 2 3676-12- 3
TOs sacahdiass bse Saeed 7412- 0- 0 929- 8- 0 424- 9- 6
ATT cei cemaenes 6634-12- 3 922-19-11 4855- 2- 6

 

 

 
Appendix 8

327

 

Exported from Great Britain to

 

 

to ae ee ee
from Hudson’s Bay Goods Manufactures
Foreign British

VAM | setae on ees £ 8243- 4.4 £ 839-18- 4 £ 5208- 5- 8
TTS: wk oi apace as 6589-10- 1 1246-10- 0 6950- 3-11
109 se wxitente es 5116-15- 7 1288- 0- 6 4194-14- 6
TESO: sece-eseicvosh S808 15017-10- 4 644-17-11 2977-12- 5
D781. canwkins yews 14763-17-10 427- 4- 0 5800-19- 5
1782 sew se dees 6801-18- 8 not totalled. not totalled.
VP 88) gece segetie eerce 7554-19- 1 3125-18-11 3972-19- 1
TSS Seed wine y acer 7683- 9- 5 2048- 8- 7 6888-19- 6
AGS) 2x38 seca gies: 11270- 5- 2 909- 0- 4 4216-10- 0
USO: fue wrcmnn wettvaens 12975-12- 3 1477- 6- 4 3329- 5- 5
DIST. a avirtaced as 16465-16- 6 740- 5- 5 7419- 9- 0
1788. seaswe ee cen 13702-11- 2 824-16- 7 8916-17-10
L189. sien cdsed v3 odes 15102- 7- 6 951-12- 0 8938-11- 8
1790” costes 14089- 1- 8 2698- 3- 5 7 26-19-10
91, caxcwacscnes 18368-11- 7 1072-16- 0 18790-18- 4
WG O2) ok sayedue wsiel’s 18492- 9- 0 4894- 4- 5 44940-18- 5
W098! oe vice ceeee 16291- 6- 3 3469-13- 2 22724-19- 0
DiS. (os iemcaciceatters 15452- 2- 9 1100- 6- 5 82138- 9- 4
WIGS ose wecnd nents 7936- 9- 3 1089- 9- 6 31500-17-11
DOO vane soa a's 29775- 1- 2 560- 2- 0 11017- 8- 3
bird: are ae era 20731-18- 4 2056- 8- 1 31275-10- 9
WO 8 aii ets eke 14-10- 0 816-17- 0 32383- 3- 6
1799) wis ions tans 18242- 0- 3 1347-17- 2 24367- 6- 0
T8005 as s4aeien 38463- 8- 1 1837-11- 6 36223- 9- 3
PSO casesera eateaakts 17022-15- 9 739-17-11 3391- 1- 0
1802: ss saeca sees 16018- 6- 8 983-12- 8 30684-18- 0
V803' 2 a stenatyd avseks 10951-18- 4 915- 9- 0 29647- 6- 1
W804 eo cijenecdee sheen 15671- 5- 3 698-13-11 4140- 7- 8
1805: sy2ivwesaees 15087-13- 9 706- 4- 1 19554- 2- 9
W806) ee acssever daa suave 18878-15- 8 903-11- 5 12205-12- 1
TSOP ca eng 4 ees 20911- 7-11 1431- 0- 7 19288-17-11
1808) sevice tages 8-10- 0 1613- 3- 2 23944- 8-1
TB0OF soacde tasicitnn 20876- 9- 6 983-1-2 | simaceseas
1810" azveseacas 8776- 8- 1 2035- 1-10 | cs eee eee
DST vince en ret eons 28768- 1- 7 4561- 9-6 | near ee
VST 2s iasstatsare a eats 29062-11- 0 2945-15- 0 9537- 5- 0
WBUB) ois gadgets no volume no volume no volume

 

 

 

 
328

The North West Company

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exported from Great Britain to
Imported — Hudson Bay
to Great Britain
from Hudson’s Bay Goods Manufactures
Foreign British
DS Lay os see teaten Gotan | £15826- 0- 5 £3105- 4- 9 £ 9006- 6-11
NU ce pcecnnce.: | 13010- 8- 4 3682- 8- 7 15654- 7-1
T8iG) s4 oes wiawe | 8124- 3- 7 4827- 4- 6 18292-13- 9
BUT sc eincrs Gen 28098-15- 7 38595- 3- 5 11117- 5-10
USTSE 2 ava aayeccainn ss | 27418- 0- 2 6519- 4- 3 30894- 1- 2
ABTS: vo cebaiiawans | 94910- 7- 4 5727-19- 4 23725- 9- 2
1820) scseevasaue 22468-16- 6 5888- 6- 5 24884- 8- 2
USO as igskas bx8 oxeany 27521-13-10 3823- 0- 2 29511- 1- 9
UBD es iriees pe Waite \ 39144- 6- 2 3924-18- 0 20775-19-11
W828) axed s2388 © 34856- 2- 7 3097- 8- 2 22171- 2- 2
T8248 oc os de a ee 35471-16- 3 2473- 9- 9 12480-11- 5
PB25. csc amine ! 382057- 5- 4 2213- 7-11 9557-17- 6
W826) cs ie eens eee 40742- 4- 5 1874-18- 7 14799-16- 8
WS2T sched eeacent 51171- 6- 6 4188- 2- 6 23149-11- 4
1828) says angie 54960-19- 1 4932-16- 8 35110-11- 2
T8209) ase sigieg ered eget 60522- 3-10 7815- 2-5 60036- 9- 3
1830) ss sesve dems 32857- 3- 3 8244- 8- 1 81899-10- 7
US OWy Cad aconaure gaat 66672- 3-11 6207-10- 4 49653- 0- 8
DBS! e ccrargl tt ns ee 39378-16-10 4144- 5- 0 36326- 9- 4
UBSB ccs te esiarai asd | 7173- 1-11 8206- 4- 4 31890- 5- 5
1834. oaceses cess | 64221- 4-10 6058-16- 5 48209- 9-10
E560 Gavaycbaees | 65082- 4- 5 7282-14- 5 53582-11- 5
I836- cs omivaddes 26312-12- 0 5761- 8-11 35619-18-11
VSS 65.64 web as | 88385- 7- 0 6246- 0- 2 43229-15-19
Trade of the Columbia River and North West Coast

SQ acc ata a apart jo treet eee 279- 2- 3 12247-10-10
1822) pos Be easate Pe BR RA fa Sg 49- 4- 0 442-19- 7
BES oaeiseceeee i pram mueeere, IN Saad s ieoan 7968-12- 7
US24 wescee paws!) caseatiacae | Ml) cdemeechiad 2080- 8- 9
1825 Saacsawadeu:| gtereedced |. xilaaktnee ies 1736-19- 7
1826 sacvstdeeus|)  acesaeeead | “enaevdiear 3621-15- 0
NOTES.

*The exports of Prize Goods to Hudson’s Bay in 1796 was £148-10-0, in
1798 was £26-5-0, in 1809 was £146-6-3, in 1810 was £30-0-0, in 1811 was
£29-7-6. These amounts are in addition to what has been listed.

Before 1791 all the trade was to or from England. From 1791 on this is
not specified, but was probably equally true. From 1827 on the heading be-
Appendic 8 329

comes “Settlements of the Hudson’s Bay Company” where previously it had

been “Hudson’s Bay.” From 1830 on the imports are listed to the United
Kingdom.

Complete figures for the Columbia River and North West Coast are not

in my possession. The same applies to exports of British Manufactures in
1809, 1810 and 1811.

Preceding 1809 the figures are compiled from C. H. 17, vol. 1-30. From
1809 on the imports from Hudson’s Bay are compiled from C. H. 4, vol. 5-32.
From 1809 on the exports of Foreign Goods are compiled from C. H. 10, vol.
1-28. From 1812 on the exports of British Manufactures are compiled from
C. H. 8, vol. 1-46.
GENERAL INDEX

Aet of 43 George III, ¢. 138, 80,
178.

Aet of 1803, not applicable within
territories of Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany, 144.

Aet of 1821, 177-178; covenant in
connection with, 178-179.

Act, Canada Jurisdiction, 151.

Agreement of 1795, 73.

Agreement of 1802, 73, 175, 197,
198, 203, 205, 226.

Agreement of 1804, 175, 198, 201,
202, 203, 205, 214-215, 232.

Agriculture, at fur-trading posts,
240.

Allen, 152.

America, discovery of, bearing on
fur trade, 1. See also Fur trade;
United States.

American Fur Company, charter
obtained, 133; merged into South
West Company, 133; business
dealings with North West Com-
pany, 174. See also Astor, J. J.;
Pacific Fur Company; South
West Company.

AMK Co. Men & Co., 88.

Askin, director of Miamis Com-
pany, 26; magistrate of Sault
Ste. Marie and Drummond Is-
land, 149.

Astor, J. J., 100, 133, 137; organ-
ization of Pacifie Fur Company,
100, 134; land and sea expedi-
tions, 134-135. See also American
Fur Company; Astoria (in In-
dex of Geographical Names) ;
Pacific Fur Company.

Atcheson, N., efforts of to obtain
chartered rights for North West
Company, 122, 124, 126, 129.

Auld, superintendent of North-
ern Department of Hudson’s Bay
Company, 170.

Baltic ports, centers of distribution
for fur trade, 1.

Barrieau, F., 53.

[ 331]

Barter, as practised in the fur
trade, 21, 241-242.

Bathurst, government official, 126,
129, 136, 141, 143, 161, 162, 178,
183.

Battoche, 148.

Beaubien, licensed fur trader, 26.

Beauchamp, J., 64.

Beaulieux, F., 64.

Beaver Club, 244.

Bell, J., 143.

Belleau, 93.

Bennerman, II., 154.

Bennett, Master of the “Otto,” 213.

Berens, 141.

Bethune, A., 138, 139, 175.

Bird, 121.

Bisson, B., 64.

Black, Captain, 137, 139.

Black, of North West Company,
158, 161.

Blue Book of 1819, 154.

Boiské, 94.

Boucher, F. F., 153.

Rouremont, 32.

Boyer, 46, 49, 53, 63.

British, see Great Britain.

British Museum, Thompson’s man-
uscript maps in, 103.

British North American Colonies,
167.

Brown, P., 153.

Bruce, 46.

Bulger, 140.

Cadot, J. B., 24, 26.

Cadotte, J. G.. 34, 37, 94.

Cameron, D., 69, 146, 147.

Campbell, J. D., 159, 160, 161.

Canada, see Index of Geographical
Names.

Canoemen (voyageurs, engagés),
grades of, wages, etc., 229-232;
method of payment to, 234-235.

Canoes, description, 216-218; used
in the fur trade, 218-220; sys-
tem of canoe expresses, 219-220.

Cardin, 47.

Castlereagh, 128.
General Index

Chaboillez, C., 24, 26, 81, 82, 94,
109, 227.

Chetwynd, 124.

China, see Index of Geographical
Names.

Clarke, J., 137, 138; expedition to
Athabasca, 156, 158.

Clause, 35, 69.

Coltman, W. B., 79, 150, 151, 152,
161.

Congress map, 41, 45.

Connolly, 163.

Constitutional Act, dividing Que-
bee into Upper and Lower Cana-
da, 7.

Convention of 1818, 178.

Cook, 43.

Cooke, 121, 122.

Cooper, J., 154.

Coureurs du bois, character and in-
fluence, 2.

Courtois, F., 64.

Courts, jurisdiction of, 79, 80, 179;
administration of justice, 5, 178.

Crooks, 134.

Crown lands, provision of, for use
of Indians, 4; regulation regar«-
ing, 4.

Cruise, 143.

Curry, T., 34-35.

Dalhousie, governor of Lower (an-
ada, 7, 162.

Day, 134.

Décharge, definition of, 210.

Decoigne, 158.

Dejarlais, J., 23.

De Meuron settlers, 149, 159.

De Rocheblave, 82, 227, 243.

Desriviéres, H., 24, 26.

Dorchester. governor of Lower and
Upper Canada, 7; report of A.
Mackenzie to, 59; revort on jur-
isdiction of courts, 79.

Dueette, C., 53, 64.

Dunbar, explorations of, 91.

Dunn, receiver - general of Upper
Canada, 186.

Dutch East India Company, 68, 75,
123, 164; establishment of fur
trade by, at New Amsterdam, 1;
trouble with the Northwest Com-
pany, 165.

[ 332]

East India Company, see Dutch
East India Company; French
East India Company.

Ellice, A., 83, 141, 198, 208.

eos E., 176-179, 180, 186, 188,

42.

“English Chief,” Chipewyan In-
dian, 50, 53, 57, 58.

Ermatinger, 149.

Erskine, 79.

Europe, furs peculiar to, 1.

Expeditions, early French and Eng-
lish, 32-33; To: Assiniboine dis-
trict, 46; Athabasca, 11, 61, 156-
161; Columbia River, 134; Tra-
ser River, 110, 113, 115, 116;
Mackenzie River, 44, 53-61; Mis-
sissippi River, 11; Missouri
River, 63-67; Pacifie Coast, 63-
67, 136-138; Snake country, 167.
By: Astor, J. J., 134; Finlay,
J., 113; Fraser, S., 110. 118,
115, 116; Harmon, D. W., 98,
108; Henry the younger, A., 92,
106-108; Hudson’s Bay Company
(Athabasea), 156-161, (Lake
Nipigon route), 48; Larocque,
81; Lewis and Clark, 81, 91. 109,
123; Livingston (to the Esqui-
maux), 78; MeDougall, J., 113;
Mackenzie, A., 51-68; McKenzie,
J., 78; MeMillan, 116; MeTav-
ish, J., 111; Northwest Company,
78, 81, 136-138; Stuart, J., 111,
112, 114; Sutherland, J., 50;
Thompson, D., 47, 70, 92-100;
Umfreville, E., 31, 48-49, 105.

Fawkener, 124.

Finlay, J., 25, 34, 35, 39, 63; ex-
plorations, 113.

Fletcher, Major, 150.

Florida, East, and West, establish-
ment of province, 4; character of
government, 4.

Forsyth, J., 208.

Forsyth, James, 26, 83, 198.

Forsyth, John, 26, 83, 84, 201.

Forsyth, T., 26, 83, 201.

Forsyth, Richardson and Company,
73-74, 83, 86, 198, 199. 200. 202,
244; competitor of North West
Company, 200-201; member of
General Index

New North West Company, 201-

202.

Franklin, description of his North
eanoe, 217.

Fraser, James, 208,

Fraser, John, 208.

Fraser, S., 65, explorer of Fraser
River, 103, 110, 113, 114, 115,
116, 122, 153.

French Canadians, social status in
the fur-trading companies, 245-
246.

French East India Company, mon-
opoly of export of beaver, 2.

Frobisher, 73, 198, 199, 201, 244;
estimate of cost of transporta-
tion of supplies to Indians, 212.

Frobisher, Benjamin, and Joseph,
11, 12, 17, 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 34,
35, 36, 37, 39, 48, 73, 159, 160,
198, 199.

Frobisher, B. J., 202.

Frobisher, T., 36, 39.

Fur trade, bearing of discovery of
America on, 1; sources of furs,
1; centers of distribution, Bal-
tic ports, 1, New Amsterdam, 1,
Montreal and Quebec, (which
see), 1, St. Lawrence Valley, 1;
effect on New France, 2; af-
fected by changes in govern-
ment, 3, 8; by Napoleonic wars,
171.

Competition, 14, 26, 47, 71, 73,
74. 76. 78-79, 89-91, 98, 121,
164, 197; influence on wages,
168; on union of Hudson’s
Bay Company and North
West Company, 168.

Pacific. 68; Mackenzie’s pro-
posed trans-continental and
trans-Pacifie combination, 68.
See also Astor, J. J.; Ameri-
ean Fur Company; North
West Company; Pacific Fur
Company.

Regulation: attempts at. 12;
tax on, 5; in Quebec, 6, 27;
made common property by
agreement, 9: between United
States and Canada, 7, 133;
trade passes, 23; right to trade

[ 333 ]

open to any British subject
save in chartered territory,
247-248,

Routes: 48, 49, 52, 53, 68, 104,
105, 112, 131, 132, 135, 140,
215, 216; through Canada, 21,
via Michilimackinac, 22, down
the . Mississippi, 22, via St.
Louis, 22; Hearne’s, 44; Fort
Williams, Grand Portage, 231;
Hudson’s Bay, 68; Ottawa,
22; Pond’s, 43, 44.

Value, 3, 17-20, 88, 119, 166, 170,
209.

See also Barter; Canoes; Canoe-
men; Indians; Mackenzie, A.;
Michilimackinae Company ;
Hudson’s Bay Comnany:
Northwest Company; United
States, ete.

Fur traders, regulations concern-
ing drawn up by Hillsborough,
5; deseription of their life, 232,
233-234.

“General Store” company, 21. See
also Michilimackinae Company.

Gerrard. 8., 186.

Gibbs, 79.

Grant, 62, 200.

Grant, Charles, 19, 23. 161.

Grant, Cuthbert. 49, 73, 93, 153.

Grant, Peter, 218.

Grant, R.. 46, 50, 148.

Grant and Blackwood, 197.

Great Rritain, fur trade in Canada
handled by Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany, 3; scheme of government
for North America, 4-5; Plan of
1764 for management of Indian
affairs, and of the fur trade, 5,
6, 7; export of furs from Que-
bee to foreign countries prohib-
ited, 27; policy regarding, and
regulations of, fur trade. 28;
government posts established,
28: ships maintained on lakes
Erie and Ontario. 28; dealings
of government with North West
Company, 29; formal claim made
to northwest country. 100. See
also Fur Trade: Hudson’s Bay
Company; North West Company;
General Index

Quebec; Treaties; Seven Years’
War; War of 1812, etc.

Gregory, John, 14, 17, 24, 25, 62,
73, 83, 200.

Gregory & McLeod, (Gregory, Me-
Leod and Company), 200; com-
petitors of North West Company,
25-26, 47.

Habitant, character and influence, 2.

Haldane, 166.

Haldimand, governor of Quebec, 7,
19, 23, 31, 34, 48, 197.

Halifax, Lord, 5.

Hallowell, W., 83, 202.

Halsey, 137, 139.

Hamilton, 30.

Harmon, D. W., 92, expeditions,
98, 108-112; enters North West
Company, 198; headquarters on
Stuart’s Lake, 111; study of In-
dian tribes, 111; trip to Babine
Indians, 111; final leaving of the
interior, 112.

Harrowby, Lord, 136.

Hay, A., 19.

Hay, Lt. Governor, 30.

Head, 215, 216.

Hearne, 8., 44, 69; early trader,
and governor, 36.

Heden, M., 154.

Henry, A., 33, 35, 39, 82, 88, 90,
214.

Henry the younger, A., expeditions,
92, 106-108; journals, 106; en-
ters North West Company, 106;
death, 108, 112.

Hillsborough, Lord, 5.

Hobart, colonial secretary, 76.

Holmes, 62, 200.

Holmes, Major, 140.

Holmes and Grant, 23.

Holroyd, 143.

Howard. J., 25.

Howse, 99.

Hudson’s Bay Company, formation
of, 3; early members, 3; charter,
3, 141, 143, 144, 178, 248; build-
ing of Cumberland House, 36;
some expeditions, 47, 69-71, 116,
156-157; Chipewyan Indians par-
tial to, 52-53; extension of trade,
69-72; good character of voya-

[ 334 ]

geurs, 72; territory, boundaries
of, encroachment on, ete., 79, 130-
132, 142; value of fur trade,
119-121, 169-174; relations with
North West Company, 141-142,
163, 169, Union of 1821 with,
168, 175, 176-177, 183, reasons
for, 180; provisions of Act of
1821, 177-179; petitions to Privy
Council in 1820, 181, 182; wages
paid clerks, 228. See also
Courts; North West Company,
ete.

Hunt, W. P., 134, 135, 138, 139.

Indian Tribes: Achinrow, 115;
Askettih, 114, 115; Assiniboine,
46,50; Atnah,114; Atsina (Rap-
id), 109, 110; Babine (NaAte-ote-

tain), 111; Beaver, 54, 58;
Blackfeet, 99; Carrier, 65; Chey-
enne, 82; Chilk-hodin, 114;

Chipewyan, 34, 39, 50, 52, 53, 56;
Cree (Knisteneaux), 238; Crow,
82; Deguthee Dinees (Quarrel-
ler), 55; Dog-rib, 55, 57; Es-
quimaux, 57, 78; Flathead, 99;
Gros Ventre, 70, 82; Hare, 55,
57; Iroquois, 87, 168; Kootenay,
96; Lillooet, 114; Mandan, 46,
47, 70, 82, 93, 109; Meti, 148;
Nipissing, 99; Ochipoins (Orchi-
points), 45; Piegan, 99; Quar-
reller (Deguthee Dinees Lou-
cheux), 55, 239; Rapid (Atsina),
109, 110; Red Knife, 45, 53, 54;
Sicanni, 64; Sioux, 47; Slave,
53, 55, 58; Snake. 167; Tahow-
tin, 114; Yellow Knife. 53.
Indians: organization of British
Indian Department, 5-6; crown
lands reserve for, 4; regulations
regarding trade with, 4; value of
trade, 19; goods used in, 220-
225; outbreak of, 46; population
in 1805, 88; hostility to fur trad-
ers, 110; used in fur trade com-
petition, 146, 147, 158, 160, 168;
high prices charged to, by fur
traders, 235; women taken as
wives by fur traders, 232-233.
See also Liquor; Fur trade.
Inglis, J., 83, 198, 208.
General Index

Inglis and Company, 208.

Inglis, Ellice and Company, 124,
127, 128, 162, 163, 182, 184, 186,
196, 198, 199.

Jay’s Treaty, 197.

Jurisdiction, questions of, 79, 88,
179.

Jussome, R., 47, 93.

Kaye, Freshfield & Kaye, 182-183.

Keith, G., 161; charge of coastal
department of North West Com-
pany, 167.

Keveny, O., 152.

King, death of, 89.

King’s Domains, 78.

King’s Posts, 87.

Lack, 122.

La France, 81.

La Gardeur de St. Pierre, 32.

La Harp. 32.

La Jonquiére. 32.

Lakes, navigation of the, 30.

La Mothe, k‘ller of King, 89.

Landmann, Colonel, 216, 217, 218,
219.

Landry, J., 53, 64.

Laroeque. F. A., expedition to the
Missouri. 81-82.

Larocque, J., 111, 112, 137.

La Vérendrye, 32, 104.

Law in the Northwest, 79, 80.

Leich, 26.

Leith, J., 161.

Leith. Jamison and Company, 83.

Lemoine, 94.

Leroux. L., exvloration work, 49,
50, 53, 54, 58.

Lesieur & Fraser, 62.

Leslie, 163.

Lewis and Clark expedition, 81, 91,
109, 123.

Liquor, prohibition of sale of to In-
dians, 2 footnote 3; in fur trade,
71, 76. 86, 91, 121, 168, 179, 203,
223-225, 234, 242; high price
charged, 235.

Little Company, The, see X Y Com-
pany.

Livingston, 162: expedition to the
Esquimaux, 78.

Lorme. P. de. 53.

McAuley, 158.

[ 335 ]

McBeath, 62, 200.

McBeath & Pond, 24.

M’Cargo, 214.

McCraken, H., 93.

Macdonald, A., 161.

McDonald, F., 98.

MeDonald, J., of Garth, 89, 137,
214.

Macdonell, A., 82, 146, 147.

Macdonell, M., 145, 146, 147.

McDonnell, J., 93.

McDougall, D., 138, 139.

McDougall, J., explorations, 113.

McGill, J., 24, 25, 26.

McGill and Company, 199.

McGillis, H., 92.

McGillivray, 62.

McGillivray, D., 83, 85, 89, 96, 191,
202; discoverer of Howse Pass,
96.

McGillivray, S., 130, 162, 176, 177,
178, 179, 180, 184, 185, 186, 188,
189, 199, 200; sketch of his ca-
reer, 191-193; social status, 242.

McGillivray, S., and Company, 208.

McGillivray, W., 73, 79, 83, 110,
162, 176, 177, 178, 179, 184, 185,
186, 189, 190, 191, 202, 216; so-
cial status, 243.

McGillivrays, Thain and Company,
184, 185. 186, 187, 189, 191, 192;
managers of Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany affairs, 191.

MelIntosh, A., 26, 86.

MeIntosh, W., 159, 160.

MacKay. A., 64.

McKay, D.. 25, 70.

McKay & Shaw, 26.

Mackenzie, A., 11, 14, 43, 44, 49,
74. 77. 83, 174, 181, 196, 197,
199, 200, 203, 205, 206; trips to
England, 62, 67; publication of
book on explorations, 67, 75, 118;
knighted. 67, 75; loyalty to
North West Company, 73; resig-
nation, 74; scheme for combin-
ing fur trade and fisheries of
America, 75-76, 197; efforts to
establish fur trade on Pacific
Coast. 121-127; accused of mur-
der of Semple, 153; cited on fur
trade data, 210-212, 220, 229;
General Index

social status, 242, 243; member

of Quebee legislature, 244.

Explorations, 51-68; the Mae-
kenzie River, 44, 53-58; map
and manuscript chart, 59-60;
discussion of Mackenzie’s find-
ings, 59-61; Athabasca and
Grand Portage, 61; to Pacific
Ocean, 63-67.

Mackenzie, Sir Alexander, and
Company, 187, 189, 202; see also
X Y Company.

Mackenzie, C., 81, 82, 89.

Mackenzie, H., 161, 175, 179, 187-
190, 199.

Mackenzie, Oldham and Company
of Terrebonne, 187.

McKenzie, J.. 78, 89, 225.

McKenzie, salary, 229.

McKenzie, D., 135, 137, 138, 166,
167, 214.

McKenzie. R., 44, 62, 63, 67, 73.74,
75, 83, 200, 202, 218; exnloration
work, 52, 61, 104, 105; social
status, 243.

McLaughlin, Dr., 175.

McLellan, 152.

MeLeod, 188, 200.

McLeod, A., 73.

McLeod, A. N., 84, 85, 157, 189.

McLeod, Major, 160.

McLeod, N., 14. 24, 25. 62, 148.

MeMillan, explorer of lower part
of Fraser River, 116.

McTavish, A., 232.

McTavish, D., 11, 108, 112, 135,
137.

McTavish. J. G., 110, 135, 137, 138,
139, 150; explorations, 111, 160,
161, 162.

McTavish, J., 189, 208.

MeTavish, Simon, 11, 12, 17, 23, 31,
73, 74, 77, 78. 79, 80, 85, 105,
198, 199, 208, 209, 214, 219, 244.

MeTavish. Fraser and Companv,
124, 127, 128, 182, 184, 186, 187,
191, 196, 198, 199.

MeTavish. Frobisher and Company,
62. 73, 86, 87, 187, 191, 198, 200,
201; connected with North West
Company, 77, 83, 184.

MeTavish, McGillivrays and Com-
pany, 130, 175, 176, 179, 184,
187, 188, 189, 199, 201, 202; or-
ganization, and members, 189;
expiration, and reunion, 191;

_ members of, in 1802, 202.

Malhiot, 90, 245.

Mallets, 32.

Maps: Pond’s, 40-45, 46; in Publie
Record Office, 41, Congress, 41,
45; in Colonial Office Library,
London, 43; manuscript maps in
British Museum, 103-104; Mac-
kenzie’s, A., 59; Thompson’s, D.,
of the West, 100-103; Turner,
the astronomer’s, 101.

Miamis Company, directors, 26.

Michilimackinac Company, 21, 127,
17; merged into Astor’s South
West Company, 133; London
firms interested in, 199.

Monin, D., 47.

Montgomery, J., 154.

Montour, 62, 200.

Montreal, see Index of Geographi-
cal Names.

Morgan, 47.

Mure, J., 84.

Murray, governor of Quebec, 6.

Napoleonic wars, effect on fur
trade, 171.

Nelson, 213.

New France, effect of fur trade
on. 1, 2: value of furs from, 3.
New North West Co., see X Y Com-

pany.

Northwest passage, bearing of
Mackenzie’s explorations on, 67.

North West Company:

Origin. in agreement of 1779,
9: formation under name of
North West Company, 11, 196:
principle of organization and
leading members, 11.

Organization, nature of, 12, 13,
246: trading organization,
228-248; costs of operation,
233-234; division of stock
(shares). 12. in the reorgani-
zation of 1789, 61-62; efforts
to secure charter. 124-130;
merged with Hudson’s Bay

[ 336 ]
General Index

Company, 168, 175, 183, rea-

sous for, 180, explanations of

S. McGillivray, 185, 186,

statement of H. Mackenzie,

187; terms of agreement of

sale, 176-177; act of Parlia-

ment secured, 177; formal

agreement (Deed Poll), 179;

arrangement between certain

partners, 179-180; petition to

Privy Council, 182, 183; con-

clusion of business affairs,

183-193; agreement of 1804

not superseded, 205; method

of operations, 15-17; system of

large trapping parties, 167,

free trappers, and free men,

232.

Agents, London, 31, 184, 196,
199, Montreal, 198, 199, 203-
206; business transacted at
Montreal annual meeting, 204-
205; annual report, 205; pow-
ers of, 205.

Employees, policy toward, wages,
duties, opportunity for ad-
vancement, ete., 16-17, 235,
(partners) 226-227, (clerks)
227-229, (guides) 229, (ca-
noe-men) 229-232, 235; social
status, 242-246.

Departments (Columbia River,
Mackenzie, ete.), creation of,
148, 167; various headquar-
ters, 70, 71, 97, 105, 112, 113;
posts as located on Thomp-
son’s map, 101-104.

Fur trade:

Volume, personnel and charac-
ter. 23-26, 242-246: geo-
graphical extent, 194-196;
value, 20, 166, 171-174, 193,
209.

Difficulties: government  re-
quirements, 29; lack of
ships, 29-30; getting men
of suitable character, 72;
dissension among members,
72; losses due to War of
1812, 142-143; the Red
River agricultural — settle-
ment, 143-155.

Competition: violent character

[ 337 ]

of, 14, 47, 121; efforts to
secure monopoly, 31, 48,
116-117, 121-155; aggressive
expansion under McTavish,
and the effect on jurisdic-
tion of Canadian courts, 78-
80; the X Y Company, 83-86,
113, 199-200; proposal to
establish fur trade bounda-
ries, 130-132; attack on
Hudson’s Bay Company's
monopoly, 141; struggle
over Athabasca trade, 156-
160, at Grand Rapid, 160-
163; dealings with Amert-
can Fur Company, 174; re-
fusal of interest in Pacific
Fur Company, 134, pur-
chase of, 112, 138, 163.

Goods used in: British, 220-
223, annual value of, 221-
222; other goods, 222-224,
225; liquor, 223-225, 234.

Mandan trade. 47; China
trade, 111, 112, 165, 196-
197; value of, 166; Colum-
bia River and west of the
Roeky Mountains trade, 163-
164; vessel asked for pro-
tection of, 136.

Trading rights, 246-247.

Property, permanent, 236 - 239;

deseription of: in Grand Por-
tage, 237; at Fort William,
238; forts of the interior, 238;
Cumberland House, 238, 241;
on the Saskatchewan, 238; at
Tle & la Crosse, 239; Fort
Chipewean, 239; Fort Provi-
dence, 239, Fort Good Hope,
239; purchase of Ossiniboia,
145; value, 23.

Transportation of goods: num-

ber of men employed, 22;
method followed, 22-23;
cost, 127; arrangement with
Boston firm, 165-166; routes,
22, 31, 210-212; ships em-
ployed, 164-165, 207-209, 212-
215; use of King’s ships, 29;
system of canoe expresses, 216-
220, canoe-men, 229-232, 234.
General Index

See also Barter; Canoe-men; Ca-
noes; Dutch East India Com-
pany; Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany; Michilimackinae Com-
pany; United States; War of
1812, ete.

Ogden, D., 43.

Ogden, I., 43, 44.

Ogilvie, J., 84, 86.

Old North West Company, 83;
agreement with X Y Company,
84-86; relative importance of the
two companies, 87-91.

Orders-in-Council, April 8, 1785-7.

Pacific Fur Company, 100; pur-
chased by North West Company,
112, 138, 163; founder of, 133;
formation of, 134; its competi-
tion felt by North West Com-
pany, 135.

Pacific Ocean, see Index of Geo-
graphical Names.

Pangman, Peter, 13, 14, 25, 62, 108,
200.

Parker, Gerrard, Ogilvy and Com-
pany, 199.

Passes, Trade, illustrative of vol-
ume, personnel and character of
fur trade, 23-26.

Pelham, secretary of Home De-
partment, England, 118.

“Peltry Trade,” 7. See Fur trade.

Perianger (perrianger), 31.

Perkins, J. & J. N., Canton, China,
166.

Perkins & Co., Boston, 166.

Perrv, Admiral, 141.

Phyn, J., 208.

Phyn, James, (Jas.) and Company,
2

Phyn, Ellice and Company, 208.

Phyn, Inglis and Company of Lon-
don, 83, 196, 198, 208.

Plan of 1764, 6, 7.

Plante, B., 23.

Pond, Peter, 13, 14, 24, 36, 37, 40,
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 51,
62; maps of, 40, 42, 43, 44, 45,
46; murder of Ross by, 41; theo-
ries on Athabasca drainage sys-
tem, 43.

Pontiae’s War, 34.

[ 338 ]

Population of the Northwest, 1805,
88.

Portage, definition of, 210.

Powell, Chief Justice, 152.

Prevost, 143.

Pritchard, J., 146.

Proclamation of 1817, Prince Re-
gent’s, 160, 161, 162.

Proclamation of October 7, 1863,
4,7.

Quebee, see Index of Geographical
Names.

Quesnel, J. M., 98, 114.

Red River Valley Agricultural Set-
tlement, 118, 119, 143-155; ex-
tent of, 145; name of colony,
145; governor, 145-146; struggle
with the North West Company,
144-155, 180; influence on fur
trade route, 215; commissioners
sent to investigate, 150-151; le-
gal struggle, 151-155; Blue Book
of 1819, 154. See also Selkirk,
Lord.

Reid, 104.

Reinhard, C., 152.

Richardson, J., 83, 88, 201, 244.

Richmond, 160.

Roberts, Captain, 140, 142.

Robertson, A., 26.

Robertson, C., 147, 152, 162; ex-
pedition to Athabasca, 156, 158,
159, 160, 161.

Robertson, Captain, 215.

Romilly, 143.

Ross, 25, 220; murder of, 14, 41,
49, 200.

Russian settlers and settlements on
the Pacifie Coast and their re-
lation to the fur trade, 136, 163.

St. Denis, 32.

St. Germain, L., 26.

St. Leger, B., 30.

Saxton, C., 160.

Sayer, J., 94.

Searlett, 143.

Selkirk, Thomas (Earl of), 159,
174, 214; colonization experien-
ces, 118-119; publication of book
on emigration, 118; his Red Riv-
er agricultural colony, 118, 119,
143-155, 180; representative of
General Index

Hudson’s Bay Company, 132;
treaties with the Indians, 150;
legal charges against, 150-155;
arrangement of Hudson’s Bay
Company with heirs of, 177;
death of, 181; petition of heirs
to Privy Couneil, 182; cited on
ships of North West Company,
209; cited on value of British
goods used by North West Com-
pany, 221; denunciation of pol-
icy of North West Company to-
ward employees, 235.

Semple, R., 147, 148; murder of,
153.

Seven Oaks (Frog Plains)  skir-
mish of June, 1816, 148.

Seven Years’ War, problem of
Great Britain at close of, 4;
situation of fur trade at out-
break of, 33.

Shaw, A., 26, 50, 69, 73, 107, 159,
160.

Sherbrooke, governor - general of
Canada, 149, 150.

Ships mentioned: Adeona, 208;
Adriatic, 208; Albatross, 135,
138; Athabasca (Arabasea),
213; Beaver, 79,134,135, 209, 213,
214; Caledonia, 142, 215; Carle-
ton, 208; Detroit, 142; Cherub,
137; Colonel Allan, 165; Eddy-
stone, 79; Euretta, 207; Everet-
ta, 208; Harvey (Hervey), 207;
Integrity, 207; Invincible, 107,
214; Isaac Todd, 108, 130, 135,
136,137,138, 164, 206, 208; Lark,
135; Levant, 166; Maria, 207;
Mary, 208; Mary Ann, 208;
Mink, 142, 143, 215; Montreal,
208; Nancy. 86, 142, 143, 207,
214, 215; Otter, 107, 213, 214;
Pedter, 135; Perseverance. 142,
143, 215; Phoebe, 137; Polly,
207; Raccoon, 137, 139: Recov-
ery, 214; Reliance, 208; Scor-
pion, armed American vessel,
140; Tigress. armed American
vessel. 140; Tonquin, 134.

Sibley, 91.

Simcoe, 68.

Simpson, G., 160.

[ 339 ]

Small, 62, 200.

Smith, 153.

Smuggling, 27.

South Sea Company, 75, 123.

South West Company, 133-134.

Sowle, Captain, 135.

Spaniards, fur trade controlled by,
22.

Spence, 161.

Steinbruck, J., 53.

Strettell, J., 31.

Stuart, D., 137, 138.

Stuart, J., 111, 112, 114, 115, 122,
134, 139.

Sullivan, 76.

Sutherland, 62, 70, 200.

Sutherland, D., 25.

Sutherland, J., expedition to Slave
Lake, 50, 62.

Sydney, 20, 48.

Thain, T., 84, 86, 187, 188, 189,
190, 191, 192, 202.

Thomas, T., 170.

Thompson, D., expeditions, 47, 70,
92-100, 107, 115; joined North
West Company, 92; survey of
the upper Mississippi, 94; mar-
riage, 95; journals, 93, 95, 96;
reaches Columbia River, 98, 99;
in Montana, 99; at Athabasea
Pass, 99; to the Snake River,
100; survey of the Columbia,
100, 122, 134, 135; settled at
Terrebonne, 100; his great map
of the West, 100; Henry-Thomp-
son Journals, 100; death, 100;
manuscript maps, 103-104.

Thorn, Captain, 134.

Thornburn, W., 73, 93.

Thwaytes, T., 145.

Todd, I., 34, 161.

Tomison, 69.

Toussant Le Sieur, 41.

Trade passes, illustrative of vol-
ume, personnel and character of
fur trade, 23-26.

Trappers, free, 232.

Treaty of Utrecht, 48.

Treaty of Ghent, 164.

Turcot, 69.

Turner, the astronomer and survey-
or, 62; map, 101.
General Index

Umfreville, E., exploration of Lake
Nipigon and Lae Seul route, 31,
48-49, 105.

Union of 1821. See Hudson’s Bay
Company.

United States, fur trade relations
with Canada, 132, 165, 178; pro-
hibited by Great Britain, 71;
duties and customs collected from
British fur traders, 105; per-

mitted in Agreement of 1802,

203; furs from, sent to Europe

through Canada, 21-22; smug-

gling from Canada, 27, 29;

changes in territory due to

treaties, expeditions, etc., 48-49,

123-124, 164; competition with

North West Company, 127-128;

furs of North West Company

handled by, in 1789, 197. See
also American Fur Company;

[ 340 ]

Michilimackinae Company; Pa-
cific Fur Company.

Vaudreuil, 53, 63.

Waden, J. E., 41.

Wallace, 137.

War of 1812, 133, 135, 137, 139,
140; American control of Lake
Erie, 141; losses caused by to
North West Company, 142.

Wentzel, 158, 228.

Williams, governor, 159, 160, 162,

Worsley, 140.

X Y Company, 69-91; founding of,
76; date, 77; agreement with Old
North West Company, 83-86,
199-200; relative importance and
competition of the two compa-
nies, 87-91; competition intensi-
fied, 118; Phyn, Inglis and Com-
pany, interested in, 198; For-
syth, Richardson and Forsyth,
members of, 201-202.
INDEX OF GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES

Abbittibi, 130.

Aberdeen, 207.

Achinrow village, 115.

Albany, 33, 150.

Albany River, 36.

Alexandria, 90.

Alleghany River, 298.

Anticosti, 4.

Arabasea, 259.

Arabosea, 259, 260, 261, 264, 265,
266.

Aretic Ocean, 43, 44, 59, 60, S7,
101.

Aretic Sea. See Arctic Ocean.

Arkansas River, 32.

Arrow Lakes, 100.

Ash House. 93.

Ashley Creek, 99.

Ashwapmuchuan River, 78.

Askettih village, 115.

Assiniboine district, first location
of English in, 46.

Assiniboine River, 45, 46, 47, 70,
71, 81, 82, 87, 89, 90, 91, 93, 95,
107, 109, 131, 240, 280.

Astoria, 104, 108, 134, 135, 137,
138, 139, 164, 252, 293; building
of, 134; passes from American
ownership, 138, 139; restoration
claimed by United States, 164;
Fort, 100.

Athabasea, 11, 40, 44, 49, 51, 53,
61, 62, 65, 88, 89, 110, 131, 132,
156, 158, 159, 160, 161, 169, 173,
174, 204, 225, 233, 276, 280, 303;
Pond’s theories on drainage sys-
tem, 43; struggle for fur trade
of, 156-163.

Athabasca House, 97.

Athabasea Lake, 39, 42, 43, 45, 52,

‘54, 63, 71-101, 157, 239.
Athabasca Pass, 99, 100.

Athabasca River, 40. 53. 61, 95,
146, 304; Upper, 88, 280.

Rad River, 65, 114.

Bahama, 316, 317, 318.

Baker’s Bay, 137.

Baldoon Settlement, 119.

[341]

Barbadoes, 321, 322.

Bas de la Riviére Fort, 151.

Bear Lake River, 239.

Beaver Creek, 303, 304.

Beaver Lake, 38, 39, 238.

Beaver River, 50, 95, 100, 131, 305.

Bedford House, 71.

Belhoullay Couin, 58.

Belhoullay Toe (White Man's
Lake), 56, 57.

Bella Coola River, 66.

Belle Riviére, 33.

Bentinck Arm, 66.

Big Lake, 69.

Birch Point, 78.

Black Lake, 131.

Black River, 78.

Black Rock, 142.

Blackwater River, 66.

Blaeberry River, 98, 108.

Boat Encampment, 100.

Boston, 165.

Bow River, 78, 96, 131.

Brandon House, 148.

Buffalo Lake, 40.

Cabinet Range, 99.

Cadodachos, 32.

California, 261.

Campion, E., 33.

Canada, 63, 66, 76, 88, 95, 105, 124,
125, 133, 146, 149, 158, 159, 160,
171, 184, 186, 187, 191, 194, 199,
206, 223, 225, 233, 234, 237, 247,
250, 252, 253, 254, 257, 270, 271,
272, 273, 277, 278, 279, 283, 284,
285, 286, 287, 288, 292, 296, 297,
298, 299, 300, 301, 316, 317, 318,
319; value of fur trade, 17-20,
156; Jurisdiction Act, 151.

Canada, Lower, 7, 80, 119, 132, 149,
150, 154, 244, 251, 254, 298, 301;
powers of law courts, 151-152.

Canada, Upper, 7, 80, 119, 132, 149,
150, 151, 152, 154, 186, 216, 252,
254, 277, 278, 297, 298, 301; pow-
ers of law courts, 151-152.

Canoe River, 100.
Index of Geographical Names

Canton, China, 75, 112, 135, 164,
165, 166, 206; value of fur trade
with, 166.

Cape Blanco, 125, 285.

Cape Menzies, 66.

Carleton Island, 19, 24.

Carlton House, 178, 238.

Carriers Lake, 113.

Cataraqui, 19, 26.

Cedar Lake, 131.

Chagonamigon, 33.

Chaleur Bay, 267.

Charlton Island, 79, 98.

Chequago, 273.

Chileotin River, 114.

China, early use of furs in, 1; ship-
ping of furs to across Pacific
Ocean, 111, 112, 123, 128, 130,
133, 164, through United States
territory, 196-197; value of fur
trade with, 166.

Chippewa, 216.

Churchill, 259, 262, 266.

Churchill River, 35, 39, 40, 45, 46,
71, 88, 95, 97, 110, 131, 159.

Clearwater River, 40, 61, 95.

Colonial office, 177, 182.

Columbia Department, 112.

Columbia Lake, Upper, 98.

Columbia (Tacontche Tesse) Riv-
er, 66, 75, 98, 99, 100, 103, 111,
112, 115, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126,
128, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139,
163, 165, 166, 167, 192, 220, 221,
222, 223, 229, 251, 254, 285, 288,
290, 291, 293, 294, 295, 302, 303,
304, 305, 328.

Columbia Valley, 117.

Connecticut, 259, 261, 263.

Cook’s River, 58, 61, 275, 276.

Coppermine River, 44, 45.

Cumberland, 36, 303, 304.

Cumberland House, 36, 37, 39, 97,
98, 109, 110, 131, 162, 238, 240,
241.

Dauphin River, 93, 109.

Deer’s Lake, 92.

Destroit, 267.

Detroit, 79, 203, 213, 214, 257, 258,
267, 272, 273, 278, 279, 299.

Detroit de Bearing, 259, 266.

Dog Lake, 104.

[342 ]

Dover, 160.

Drummond Island, 149, 160.

Du Quesne, 32.

Dunvegan, 110, 112, 302, 303.
Edinburgh, 252.

Edmonton, 50.

English River, 39, 49, 88, 146, 159,

226, 280, 281.

Esquimaux Lake, 56.

Fairford House, 71.

Finlay River branch, 64, 113.
Florida, 321, 322.

Fond du Lac, 22, 74, 88, 149, 150,

240, 280.

Tond du Lae Post, 151.
Footprint River, 36.
Forks, 45, 107, 109, 110; Fort of

the, 96.

Forts: Alexandria, 109, 240.

Assiniboine, 81.

Astoria, 100.

Augustus, 89, 95, 99, 107, 303.

aux Trembles, 46.

Bourbon, 35.

Charlotte, 108.

Chip, 301.

Chipewean, 52, 53, 58, 61, 63, 64,
67, 89, 110, 111, 158, 217, 219,
220, 239.

Chipewyan, 303.

Churchill, 261, 265, 266.

Cumberland, 69.

Daer, 146, 147.

Dauphin, 37, 40, 87, 88, 131, 280,
281.

Defiance, 299.

de Traite, 131.

des Prairies, 33, 37, 39, 44, 88,
98, 108, 157, 304; Lower, 302.

Detroit, 273.

Douglas, 147, 148, 149.

Epinett, 45.

Erie, 30, 132, 142.

Espérance, 46, 47, 50.

Eturgeon, 45.

Fraser, 110, 114.

Frontenac, 33.

George, 50, 95, 107, 108, 112, 114,
115, 116, 139, 164, 165, 166,
220, 304.

Gibraltar, 147. 148, 152.

Good Hope, 239.
Index of Geographical Names

Hamilton, 299.

Tle 4 la Croase, 39, 40, 95.

Kamloops, 304.

Lacorne, 35.

La Traite, 36.

Mackinae, 252.

Maurepas, 33.

McLeod, 113.

McLeod's Lake, 110, 111.

Montagne 4 la Basse, 109.

Montagne d’Aigle, 107.

Nelson, 36, 174.

Nez Percé, 167.

Okanagan, 134.

Old Establishment (Old Pond),
40, 52, 63.

Osnaburg, 69.

Pine, 47.

Poskoyae, 35.

Providence, 49, 53, 107, 239.

Reid’s, 194.

Resolution, 49.

Rocky Mountain, 113, 114, 303.

Rocky Mountain Portage, 110.

St. James, 110, 114.

St. John’s, 110, 207.

St. Joseph, 140.

Souris River, 47,

South Branch, 109, 110.

Stuart’s Lake, 112.

Swan River, 109.

Traite, 45.

Unalaska, 58.

Vermillion, 107, 110, 121, 158.

Wayne, 299.

Wedderburn, 157, 158, 161, 163,
301.

White Man’s, 56, 57.

William, 98, 100, 104, 106, 107, 108,
110, 112, 135, 140, 144, 146, 148,
149, 150, 151, 153, 156, 159, 160,
161, 175, 188, 204, 214, 216, 220,
228, 231, 238, 301.

Fraser’s Lake, 112, 114.

Fraser River, 65, 66, 101, 103,
110, 111, 113, 114, 115, 304.

Fraser River Valley, 113.

Fraser Valley, 122.

French Creek, 298.

French River, 140, 141, 211.

Frog Plains, 148.

Frog Portage, 97, 110, 131.

[ 343 ]

Frozen Ocean, 125, 253, 285, 287.

Gamanistigonia, 33.

Gap, 96.

Gaspee, 267.

Georgia, 314, 315, 316.

Georgian Bay, 132, 211, 212, 215,
216.

Glaise River, 299.

Giscome Portage, 64, 114.

Grand Portage, 13, 14, 15, 20, 22,
23, 24, 25, 28, 31, 35, 36, 39,
41, 44, 48, 49, 52, 53, 61, 67,
71, 73, 75, 77, 84, 87, 90, 92,
95, 97, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108,
203, 204, 205, 206, 212, 213,
216, 226, 228, 229, 230, 231,
232, 237, 257, 258, 260, 266,
278, 279, 280, 281; transferred
to United States territory by
treaty, 48.

Grand Rapid, 159, 160, 161, 162,
163, 303, 304.

Grand Rapids, 131, 161.

Grand River, 18, 44, 61, 257, 258,
272, 273, 280.

Great Bear Lake, 44, 220.

Great Bear River, 55, 58.

Great Lakes, the, 223.

Great Slave Lake, 42, 43, 44, 46,
49, 50, 538, 54, 58, 59, 61, 158,
239.

Green Bay, 273.

Green Lake, 44, 95, 157, 158, 302.

Green River, 95.

Greenock, 207.

Greenwich, 61, 275, 276.

Grenada, 322; establishment'‘of
province, 4.

Guillimsbury, 132.

Halifax, 207.

Height of Land, 69, 105, 132, 169.

Henley House, 36.

Holland River, 216.

Horn Mountain, 54.

Horse Shoe House, 97.

Howse Pass, 99; discovered by Me-
Gillivray, 96.

Hudson Bay, 33, 36, 48. 52, 53, 71,
79, 85, 87, 88, 102, 119, 120, 141,
142, 144, 156, 159, 160, 169. 170,
209, 223, 251, 255, 262, 266, 272,
280, 281, 305, 306, 316, 317, 318,
319, 320, 324, 326, 327, 328, 329.
Index of Geographical Names

Hudson House, 107.

Hudson's River, 268.

Hudson’s Streights, 181.

Hyperborean Sea, 56.

Tle & la Crosse Fort, 36, 95, 97, 157,
163, 239, 302.

Tle 4 la Crosse House, 40.

Ile 4 la Crosse Lake, 39, 40, 95.

Illinois, 33, 273.

Illinois River, 22, 26, 32.

Tllionois River, 300.

Indian territories, 80, 149, 152.

Isle 4 Outard, 157.

Isle de Middelbourg, 264.

Jack River, 159, 304.

Jamaica, 321, 322.

Kamanistiguia (Kamanistiquia),
280, 281.
Kaministikwia (Kaministiquia),

34, 35, 49, 87, 88, 90, 105, 214.
Kaministikwia River, 104, 107, 109.
Kamloops Fort, 304.

Kamoenim River, 104.

Kansas River, 32.

Kaskasia, 32.

Kempenfeldt Bay, 132, 215, 216.
Kettle Falls, 99.

King’s Domains, 78.

King’s Posts, 78, 87, 209.
Kingston, 86, 212.

Kirkaldy, 207.

Kootenay, 98.

Kootenay Falls, 98.

Kootenay Lake, 98.

Kootenay River, 98, 99.
Kullyspell House, 99.

Kullyspell Lake, 103.

LaBay, 257, 273.

La Baye, 18. 33.

Labrador, 260, 263.

La Chine (Lachine), 19. 156, 210,

216.

Lakes (Lacs) :

a la Martre, 44, 50, 53, 58.

Arabosea, 264.

Athabasca, 39, 43, 45, 52, 54, 63,

71, 157, 239.

Big, 69.

Black, 131.

Bourbon, 110.

Buffalo, 40.

[ 344 ]

Carriers, 113.

Cedar, 131.

Champlain, 268.

Clair, 53.

Clear, 40.

Columbia (Upper), 98.

de la Pluie, 280.

Original Fort, 50.

des Chiens (Dog), 88, 104.

des Roscaux, 303.

du Flambeau, 90, 245,

du Pichou, 69.

Erie, 18, 28, 86, 141, 212, 213,
258, 263, 298, 299, 300; Amer-
iean control of, 141.

Esquimaux, 56.

Fraser’s, 112, 114.

Great Slave, 42, 43, 44, 46, 49,
50, 53, 54, 58, 59, 61, 158, 239.

Green, 44, 95, 157, 158, 302.

Huron, 18, 19, 33, 86, 140, 142,
212, 213, 214, 215, 219, 257,
263, 272, 273.

Tle 4 la Crosse, 44, 53.

Kootenay, 98.

Kullyspell, 103.

La Biche, 95.

La Cloche, 163, 302.

La Croix, 97, 105.

La Loche, 40.

La Péche, 90.

La Pluie, 62, 88, 304.

La Rouge, 41, 302.

Lake of the Woods, 36, 70, 97,
131, 273.

Lesser Slave, 64, 95, 96, 112, 157,
303, 305.

Little Winnipeg, 45.

McGillivray’s, 103.

McLeod’s, 64, 113, 114.

Methye, 239.

Michegan, 300.

Michigan, 18, 257, 263, 278, 299.

Mille Laes, 97.

Mistassini, 78, 79.

Nipigon, 31, 48, 69, 87, 105, 131,
280.

Nipissing, 4, 211.

Okanagan, 111.

Ontario. 18, 28, 132, 213, 21
258, 272.

Ouiniper, 302.
Index of Geographical Names

Ouinipique, 280, 281.

Pepin, 32.

Red, 45, 90, 94, 131, 149.

Reindeer, 131.

St. John, 78, 79.

St. Joseph, 69.

Seul, on trade route, 31, 105.

Simcoe, 215, 216.

Slave, 39, 44, 50, 52, 61, 101,
125, 220, 276, 285.

Stuart’s, 11, 112, 114.

Sturgeon, 40, 110.

Superior, 22, 26, 28, 29, 30, 34,
35, 45, 73, 86, 87, 88, 90, 94,
95, 97, 102, 104, 105, 107, 110,
118, 140, 142, 150, 169, 212,
213, 214, 215, 238, 263, 272,
273, 279, 280, 281, 297, 300.

Temiscaminique, 281.

Temiskaming, 211.

Turtle, 94.

Upper Columbia, 98.

White Man’s, 56, 57.

Windemere, 98, 103.

Winnipeg, 34, 45, 87, 88, 92, 93,
106, 131, 149, 156.

Winnipic, 287.

Winnipegoosis, 93.

Wollaston, 131.

La Montée, 238, 239.

La Presentation, 33.

Le Boeuf, 32.

Leroux’s establishment, 54.

Lesser Slave Lake, 64, 95, 96,
112, 157, 303, 305.

Little Fish River, 53.

Little Winnipeg Lake, 45.

Liverpool, 207.

London, 17, 75, 85, 88, 120, 130,
133, 136, 141, 162, 163, 166,
175, 177, 180, 185, 186. 187,
188, 192, 194, 197, 198, 206,
207, 208, 209, 225, 236, 249,
250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255,
256, 275, 278, 283, 293, 296,
300.

Longeuil, 100,

Louisiana, 81. 289, 290, 297. 299.

Lower Fort des Prairies. 392.

Lower White Earth House, 108.

Lower Red River. 88.

Mackenzie Bay, 59.

[ 345 ]

Mackenzie River, 43, 44, 45, 52,
55, 56, 57, 87, 89, 101, 125,
163, 174, 192, 219, 220, 276,
277, 285; early exploration of,
with comments on findings, 53-
61. See also Mackenzie, A., in
General Index.

Mackenzie River basin, 117, 121,
124, 253.

Mackenzie River Department, 158.

MeDonnell’s House, 109.

McGillivray’s Lake, 103.

McKenzie’s River, 61, 281, 303.

McLeod’s Lake, 64, 113, 114.

McLeod’s Lake Fort, 110, 111.

Madison, 251.

Magdalen Islands, 4.

Maimi Bay, 299.

Maligne River, 37, 131.

Martin Lake, 239.

Maryland, 314.

Maskegan, 131.

Mattawa, 211.

Mer du Ouest, 33.

Mer du Sud, 264.

Methye Lake, 239.

Methye Portage, 40, 53, 95.

Miami River, 299.

Miamis, 33, 273.

Mieabinishi, 130.

Michilimackinac, 3, 15, 18, 19. 20,
24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32. 33. 34,
79, 140. 142, 171, 208, 212, 213,
214, 215, 257, 258, 278, 279, 289,
290. See also following entries.

Michilimakinack, 267.

Michillimackinac, 299, 300.

Michlimacinae, 273.

Michlimackinae, 272, 273.

Michipicoton (Michipicotton), 24,
26, 33, 87, 130, 159, 280, 301.

Middlesex County, 180.

Midlebourg, 262.

Mille Lacs, 87, 88, 280, 305.

Milwaki, 273.

Mingan (seignory). 79.

Missinipe River, 281. See also fol-
lowing entry.

Missinipi River, 11. 35, 131.

Mississipi River, 299. 300.

Mississippe River, 298, 299. See
also following entries.
Index of Geographical Names

Mississippi River, 32, 86, 94, 95,
263, 273, 278, 280, 281, 289, 297.

Mississourie River, 298, 299. See
also following entries.

Missouri Portage, 305.

Missouri River, 22, 47, 70, 78, 81,
82, 92, 93, 95, 102, 107, 289, 290.

Missourie River, 299, "300.

Mithy Ouinigam (Portage La
Loche), 11.

Monontague, 131.

Montagne 4 la Basse, 90.

Montreal, 15, 19, 20, 22, 23, 30, 33,
34, 39, 61, 73, 75, 80, 83, 100,
106, 119, 132, 133, 136, 139, 140,
144, 146, 147, 149, 150, 152, 159,
161, 162, 169, 175, 180, 188, 189,
190, 191, 196, 199, 201, 203, 205,
206, 209, 210, 212, 213, 219, 220,
225, 226, 229, 230, 231, 234, 235,
236, 237, 243, 244, 245, 251, 253,
254, 256, 257, 258, 272, 274, 276,
278, 281, 287, 294.

Moose (Moos) River, 79, 88, 98,
280.

Moose Lake Post, 160, 305.

Mount Royal Cemetery, 100.

Mouse Rivulet, 103.

Moyie River, 98.

Murray Bay, 78.

Natchitoches, 32.

Nechaco River, 65, 114.

Nelson River, 36.

New Amsterdam, 1.

New Brunswick, 316, 317, 318.

New Cilledionia, 110, 112, 113, 163,
302, 303, 304, 305.

New Fort, 97, 106, 110, 204, 214.

Newfoundland, 207, 268, 272, 316,
317, 318.

Newmarket, 216.

New Orleans, 32.

New Westminster, 116.

New York, 126, 128, 133, 191, 193,
251, 252, 255, 268, 290, 314, 315,
316.

Nez Percé Forks, 166, 304.

Niagara, 19, 24, 26, 33. Aa, cay 86,

212, 216, 253, 257, 258, 272, 279.

Nid du Corbeau, 69.
Nipawee, 35.
Nipawi House, 39.

,

Nipigon, 24, 33, 35, 69, 87, 88, 130
280, 281.

Nipigon Department, 69, 90, 110.

Nootka, 75, 324.

North Arm, 54,

North Carolina, 314, 315.

North Dakota, 106.

North Saskatchewan, 45, 89, 95, 96,
107.

North Sea, 281.

Northern Ocean, 59, 125.

Northwest Coast, 134, 223, 252,
291, 295.

N orthwest Sea, 45.

North West Territory, 101.

Norton Sound, 58.

Norway House, 147.

Nottawasaga Creek, 142.

Nottawasaga River, 215, 216.

Nova Scotia, 272, 316, 317, 318.

Ohio River, 32, 298, 299, 300.

Okanagan, "137,

Old Establishment, 40, 52, 63.

Old Pond Fort, 40.

Ontario, 253, 254,

Oregan River, 125, 285.

Oregon River, 254.

Oregon Territory, 101.

Osage River, 32.

Ossiniboia, 145.

Ottawa, 190, 249, 250, 251, 254.

Ottawa River, 19, 20, 22, 87, 88,
210, 211, 212, 280, 281.

Ouias, 33.

Pacific Coast, 122, 123, 128, 136,
206.

Pacifie Ocean, 44, 48, 61, 63, 75.
101, 111, 122, 124, 125, 253, 262,
263, 284, 285, 288, 290; Macken-
zie’s expedition to, 63-67.

Pacific Slope, 117, 121, 124.

Pack River, 64, 65.

Park River, 106.

Parsnip River branch, 64, 65, 66,
113, 114.

Pascoya, 32.

Pays d’En Haut, 244.

Peace (Unjigah) River, 39, 43, 49,
52, 58, 54, 63, 64, 67, 89, 96, 97,
98, 110, 113, 158, 239, 276.

Pembina, 146.

Pembina House, 147.

[ 346 ]
Index of Geographical Names

Pembina River, 71, 89, 90, 95, 106,

107, 304.
Pend d’Oreille Lake, 99.
Penetanginshene Bay, 132.
Pennsylvania, 314, 315, 316.
Petersbourg, 259, 266.
Pic, 87, 88, 90, 131, 280, 301.
Pierre aux Calumets, 157.
Pigeon River, 48.
Pin Portage, 162.
Pine Fort, 47.
Pine Island, 36.
Pittsburg, 298.
Point aux Pins, 213.
Point Douglas, 146.
Pointe 4 Ja Framboise, 237.
Pointe aux Chapeaux, 237.
Polar Sea, 252.
Portage de l’Isle, 70.
Portage du Bonnet, 211.
Portage La Loche, 11, 40, 53, 110.
Portage la Prairie, 106.
Portsmouth, 137.
Prairie du Chien, 32, 71.
Presq’ile, 32.
Presqu Isle, 298.
Prinee Albert, 107.
Prince Edward Island, 118, 119.
Prince of Wales Fort, 36.
Province of Canada, 101, 277, 296.
Province of Lower Canada, 294.
Province of Quebec, 268, 272, 298.
Put-in Bay, 141.
Qu’Appelle, 148.
Qu’ Appelle River, 45, 46, 50, 90,
146.

Quebec, 43, 48, 79, 80, 86, 88, 141,
152, 171, 206, 207, 209, 210, 244,
251, 253, 256, 259, 267, 269, 274,
279, 281, 283, 324; establishment
of province, 4; extent of terri-
tory, 4; boundaries, 6; divided
into Upper and Lower Canada,
7; relation of government to fur
trade and Indians, 7-8; jurisdic-
tion of courts, 79, 88; value of
fur trade, 18, 27, 88; fur trans-
portation center, 206.

Queenston, 216.
Quesnel River, 114.

[ 347 ]

Rainy Lake, 3, 34, 45, 51, 87, 97,
99, 108, 112, 131, 158, 164, 204,
219, 229, 230, 231.

Rainy Lake House, 98,

Rainy River, 93.

Rainy River Fort, 151.

Rat River, 88, 93, 131, 163, 303.

Red Cedar Lake post, 94.

Red Deer River, 96, 112.

Red Lake, 45, 90, 94, 131, 149.

Red River, 32, 45, 69, 70, 71, 87,
90, 91, 94, 106, 107, 118, 119,
144, 146, 147, 149, 150, 151, 156,
180, 206, 215, 232) 240, 250, 254,
303; upper, 88, 109, 303.

Red River Department, 131,

Red River Settlement, 253, 254. See
also Red River Valley’ Agricul-
tural Settlement in General In-
dex.

Red River Valley, 143.

Reid’s Fort, 104.

Reindeer Lake, 131.

Rio, 137.

River Cormorant, 78.

River Du Bauf, 298.

River La Biche, 131.

River La Loche, 40.

River of the Mountain, 54, 58.

River of the West, 66.

Riviére des Kikipoux, 33.

Riviére Rouge, 280, 281.

Riviére Terre Blanche, 106.

Rocky Mountains, 48, 45, 54, 96,
98, 114, 121, 125, 127, 128, 131,
132, 144, 163, 169, 178, 226, 252,
276, 284, 285, 287, 290, 299.

Rocky Mountain Fort, 113, 114,
303.

Rocky Mountain House, 95, 96, 98,
108.

Rocky Mountain Portage Fort, 110.

St. Clair River, 299.

St. John’s Fort, 110, 207.

St. Josephs, 33, 216, 219, 273.

St. Josephs River, 32, 299.

St. Lawrence River, 78, 87, 169,
171, 207, 209, 210, 253, 278, 281.

St. Lawrence Valley, fur trade in,
1,

St. Louis, 22, 150.

St. Louis River, 86, 94.
Index of Geographical.Names

St. Maries, 279, 280, 281, 301.

St. Marys, 15, 29, 30, 31, 87, 203,
213, 214.

St. Maurice, 26, 87, 88, 209, 280,
281.

St. Peter’s River, 37.

Saguenay River, 78.

Saleesh House, 99.

Saleesh River, 104.

Salt River, 90.

Sand Lake Post, 94.

Sand Lake River, 94.

Sandusky, 273.

Sandwich, 86, 152, 232.

Sandwich Islands, 134, 135, 165.

Saskatchewan River, 32, 34, 35, 36,
37, 39, 40, 46, 50, 69, 70, 82, 87,
93, 95, 97, 107, 109, 131, 159,
161, 206, 239, 240; fur trading
posts on, 3. See also North Sas-
katchewan River; Shuskatchivan
River; South Saskatchewan.

Sault Ste. Marie, 24, 26, 34, 36, 95,
133, 140, 142, 149, 151, 212, 214,
215, 219.

Scratching River, 90.

Sea Otter Harbor, 75.

Segana, 273.

Seven Islands, 78.

Seven Oaks, 148, 149.

Shahaptan River, 135.

Shaskatchiwan River, 281. See also
Saskatchewan.

Shuskatchivan River, 280. See also
Saskatchewan.

Skeena, 111.

Skeetsho River, 104.

Slave Lake, 39, 44, 50, 52, 61, 101,
125, 220, 276, 285.

Slave River, 39, 42, 49, 53, 54, 101,
239.

Smoky River, 63, 89, 97.

Snake country, 166, 295, 296, 304;
expeditions to, 167.

Snake River, 100, 104.

Souris River, 46, 70, 90, 93. 107,
146; five opposition parties at,
71.

Souris River Fort, 47.
South Branch Fort, 109, 110.
South Carolina, 314, 315, 316.

South Saskatchewan, 45, 78, 89, 96
109, 131.

Spanish River, 295.

Spithead, 141.

Split Lake House, 36.

Spokane House, 99, 100, 104.

Spokane post, 135.

Spokane River, 99, 100, 135, 137.

Stone Indian River, 93.

Stuart’s Lake, 111, 112, 114.

Stuart’s Lake Fort, 112.

Sturgeon Lake, 40, 110.

Sturgeon Weir, 131.

Swan River, 71, 93, 131.

Swan River Department, 109, 131.

Swan River Fort, 109.

Swan River House, 93.

Swans River, 303.

Tacoutche Tesse (Columbia) River,
66, 114.

Taovayas, 32.

Temiscaming (Temiskaming), 88,
130, 159, 205. See also follow-
ing entries.

Temiscamingue, 24, 26, 33, 280.

Temiscaminque Lake, 281.

Terrebonne, 100, 156, 187, 244.

Thompson River, 115, 138, 293, 294.

Three Rivers, 208.

Toronto, 33, 100, 179, 250, 252, 253,
254.

Turtle Lake, 94.

Umpqua River, 167.

Unalaska, 44.

Unalaska Fort, 58.

Unjigah (Peace) River. 65.

Upper Athabasca River. 88, 280.

Upper Columbia Lake, 98.

Upper Country, 51.

Upper Red River, 88, 109, 308.

Venango, 32.

Vermont, 268.

Wabach Country, 273.

Wabash River, 32, 299, 300.

Washington, 150, 251.

West Road River, 66.

Western Sea, 251.

Whale Island, 56, 58, 59.

White Earth River, 107.

White Man’s Fort, 58.

White Man’s Lake (Belhoually
Toe), 56, 57.

’

[ 348]
Index of Geographical Names

Wilarbut River, 104. Wisconsin River, 22, 32, 90, 245.
Wilarmut River, 104. Witney, 221.
Willamette River, 167. Wollaston Lake, 131.
Windemere Lake, 98, 103. York, 151, 153, 154, 215, 216, 262,
Winnipeg River, 36, 70, 93, 97, 102, 266, 303.

105, 109, 131, 150, 152, 240. York Factory, 69, 160.

Wisconsin, 32.

[ 349 ]