Indian Tribes of the Upper Missouri 20

Indian Tribes of the Upper Missouri 20

The place of outfit being in St. Louis, all returns of buffalo robes

and other furs are taken there also every spring and summer in

Mackinaw boats made at each fort for the purpose, and manned by the

voyageurs who came up on the steamboat the year previous. The risks are

numerous, both in bringing up the supplies in steamers and in taking

down the returns in Mackinaws. In the spring of 1819 this company lost

two steamboats in bringing up the supplies, one burned with the cargo

at St. Louis and the other snagged and sunk. Also the Mackinaws down

are often snagged and sunk, swamped, or the robes wetted by rain and

leakage. The loss of an ordinary boatload of robes would be $10,000,

and every year losses more or less are incurred in some way. From

experience we know that the chance of loss is equal to that of gain in

a given period of 10 years, yet should everything prove fortunate for a

length of time money would be made.

 

All men of family who turn their attention to hunting and collecting

skins and robes are shrewd and sensible enough in the trading of

them, sometimes too much so for some of the traders. Knowing the

value of merchandise and of what kind they stand in need, they make

their calculations of purchases before they leave their homes and any

additional article they can beg or otherwise get is so much additional

gain. They do not purchase useless articles. Goods of all kinds having

stated prices enables them to deal to a fraction, nevertheless they

will quibble and beat down the price if possible, even in the least

thing, and are generally successful in getting something out of the

trader in this way.

 

As for their debts, they will not pay. An Indian does not contract

a debt actually with the intention of deceiving; but before he has

the means to pay, new wants arise, his family wants clothing, he,

ammunition, etc.; in short, he is always in need, consequently never in

a situation to pay. Therefore they use every argument to get clear of

the debt, many of which are very ingenious, and if none will answer,

say they will not pay and that the trader has no business to trust

them. This being the case, but few credits are made. Whenever their

wants are too great, or means too small to enable them to hunt, the

articles are given them, though not credited. In the few instances

where credits are made the Indians keep no accounts whatever of them,

their object being to forget them as soon as possible; until they

have their memory refreshed of the disagreeable fact by a reference

of the clerk to his blotter. Our books are full of unpaid debts of

20 years’ standing, which would make a handsome fortune if the value

could be realized. There is no worse pay in the world, and a credit is

considered lost as soon as given, or if afterwards the trader receives

half pay he considers himself very fortunate. This being the case, no

runners are employed to collect, as in the Mississippi trade. As they

(the Indians) are not honest, neither are they sober, nor moral, but

have discretion for their own advantage.

 

The tariff of exchanges is made with the double view of securing the

profit of the trader and encouraging the Indians to hunt. Were a gun,

an ax, or a kettle, for instance, rated at too high a price, then

one of these articles would be made to serve the purposes of several

lodges by turns, or should ammunition be sold too dear only as many

animals would be killed as would be sufficient to feed their families,

and no more skins traded than sufficient to meet their most pressing

necessities. Such proceedings would lead to the abandonment of the

trade as not profitable. The expenses of this business are enormous,

the risk great, the capital invested half a million dollars, and more

than 300 people employed; and yet a good northwest gun is sold for

six robes or $18, the cost of which is $9.67. As a general rule, all

goods are sold at an average profit of 200 per cent on original cost.

The cost of buffalo robes in merchandise is about $1.35 in cash and we

estimate the expenses in men, forts, animals, and other disbursements

at $1.20 more each robe, which would bring them to $2.55. Now the best

sale made of a large quantity is $3 each. Therefore, a loss of one or

two boats loaded with robes must show a loss on the outfit.

 

Traders are very much subject to calls on their charity, both by

persons who really are in want and almost everyone else. All the

roving tribes are great beggars, even if they do not actually stand in

need. But viewing the question only in the light of an act of charity

they are numerous indeed. Unskillful in the treatment of diseases,

the different demands for medicines and attendance are great, which

at all times it is not safe nor expedient to comply with. The forts

are the depositions of all the old, lame, sick, poor, and feeble; in

fact, every one who can not follow the camp, or is of no use there,

is thrown on the hands of the traders, and his house has often more

the appearance of a hospital than a trading establishment. For all

this there is no pay, not even thanks nor kind words, but frequently

reproach and revenge if they are told to move off after recovery. It

would appear that the feeling of gratitude is unknown to the Indian. We

believe this to be the case among these.

 

It does not appear from our actual observation of 21 years, and

pretty correct information of as many more of still an earlier date,

that the principal animals have suffered diminution in the district

of which we treat, viz., from the Sioux country to the Blackfoot,

inclusive. How numerous they were in former years we do not know,

but understand from old Indians that more buffalo have been seen in

late years than were noticed 50 or 60 years since. It may be that the

range of these animals is becoming more limited from the pressure

of emigration westward. Yet this range is very extensive, reaching

from the Platte to the Saskatchewan and from Red River to the Rocky

Mountains, through all which immense district buffalo are found in

great numbers. Out of this question appears to us to arise another,

viz., Is not the decrease of the Indians from diseases communicated

to them through white immigration and commerce, thereby reducing the

number of hunters, equivalent to increasing the number of buffalo? And

does not the remnant of the Indians at this time require fewer animals

to feed, clothe, and provide all their necessaries, than the multitudes

before commerce was established with them? We think this view merits

consideration.

 

If the buffaloes diminish, so do the Indians, and the diminution is not

felt. The manner in which they hunted before firearms were introduced

(by driving the buffaloes into pens) was infinitely more destructive

than at present. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, were necessarily killed

when a camp of a few Indians was stationed and when a small number

would have sufficed. That commerce stimulates them to hunt is true,

and a great many buffaloes are annually destroyed expressly for the

hides. Yet even this destruction is limited. An Indian’s family can

only dress a certain number of hides during the hunting season. The

hides in their raw state are of no value, and not traded, and can not

be packed and carried when they move, which they are obliged to do in

the spring; therefore no more are killed than the Indians can handle.

Besides, there are but four or five months when the hair or fur of any

animal is seasonable or merchantable and the rest of the year only

enough are killed for meat, clothing, and lodges for their families.

As far as we can be allowed to express an opinion, would say that the

Indians by diseases brought about by commerce, and of late years by

white immigration, will diminish and perhaps be destroyed as formidable

bodies long before their game. The loss of Indians from smallpox,

cholera, measles, scarlet fever, venereal fluxes, etc., within our

own recollection can not be estimated at less than 15,000 to 20,000,

without taking into consideration the consequent loss of propagation.

 

Were the destruction less we think it would have the effect of

increasing these animals so that many must die for want of proper

grazing or be forced to seek other lands for food. This would reinstate

us in our first position, that it is more probable the small number

of Indians now in existence will disappear before their game, or at

least will be so reduced as not to retard their increase. Immigration

in settling the country would banish the buffalo from that part of it

where these movements were going on, and force them to the alternative

of scattering through the settlements and thus be destroyed; or, being

confined and limited in their grazing, they would die for want of

sufficient nourishment. They are a shy animal and will not remain where

they are much troubled. Indian hunting has not this effect. The Indians

do not occupy the proportionate space of a town of 100 houses to a

county, and in some places not more to a State of the United States.

Moreover, they herd with order, and in the winter, not being able to

remain on the plains where there is no fuel, and very deep snow, are

obliged to place their camps on the banks of streams and hunt merely

the outskirts of these immense herds.

 

The increases of buffaloes must be very great. Each cow has a calf

yearly and the fourth year these also have calves. Now, supposing a

band of 4,000 cows to increase for eight years without accident. The

computation would be as follows:

 

 

Say increase One-half

one-half cows bulls

4×4=16÷2=8 8

=== ===

One-half increase----------------------------------- 8

Old stock------------------------------------------- 4

---

12×4=48

Old stock------------------------------------------------ 12

One-half bulls------------------------------------------- 8

-------

Total in 8 years----------------------------------------- 68,000

 

 

Now supposing the whole number of buffalo cows in existence to be

3,000,000, which is certainly not an overestimate, then—

 

 

One-half One-half

cows bulls

3×4=12÷2=6 6

=== ===

One-half increase in 4 years-------------------- 6

Old stock--------------------------------------- 3

---

9×4=36

Stock------------------------------------------------ 9

Bulls------------------------------------------------ 6

-----------

Total in 8 years------------------------------------- 51,000,000

 

 

Making every calculation for their reduction in the many ways they are

killed, or die by accident, and the consequent loss by propagation, yet

being so numerous their ratio of increase is too great to diminish the

whole number much by any of these means.

 

The conclusion is that, in our opinion, both Indians and buffaloes,

with all other game, would disappear in consequence of white

immigration and occupation, though the Indians, being the smaller

number, would be the first to vanish. Also that commerce, by

stimulating the exertions of the hunters, can not increase their labor

beyond what they now perform, and that, being limited, is too small

to hasten the destruction or even diminution of any game as plentiful

as the buffalo. The same argument does not apply to beaver, foxes, or

even elk and deer. Should all the Indians be obliged to live on elk

and deer only, and have no resources but the furs of the beaver and

fox to get their supplies, a diminution of these animals would soon

be perceived and destruction follow, because their increase is not so

great, neither were they ever so numerous. They are smaller, and as

more would be required they would therefore soon disappear before the

united hunts of all the Indians. But as they are not as yet driven to

hunt them they do not diminish, except the beaver, which has been, in

this district, destroyed by large bodies of white trappers. Red foxes

are not, we think, so numerous as formerly, though it may be they are

not so much hunted. The trading posts or houses do not have the effect

of diminishing or frightening away the buffalo any more than the Indian camps.