"Old employee, formerly of the Hudson Bay Company" - to Jeff Kopp

[Leanne Riding]

I think I did have a chance to see it, now that you mention it -- and
took a shot at trying to figure out which one it was... I never got very
far, though I made some inroads. Seems to me that the approach I took
was to study the word "bit," gave a specific currency value. I then
distracted myself by learning a little about the valuation of American
dimes. Something about how many "bits" was equal to one Spanish Real??
or another Spanish coin?? Something about a half dime??

Looking for my notes...
Oh here are my notes...

My notes say:

"The book comes 30 years after 1817, according to the introduction…it
comes after 1847." Can't remember what the introduction said.

I looked at spelling of the word "mar-kook" (was that in there?)…but
decided that this "has been a consistent and popular spelling throughout
the years." ie. John Jewitt in the early 1800s, Stannard some 50 odd
years later, Owen Wister "JimmyJohn Boss," 1900. I'm not a linguist
though, what do I know?

Here is what I wrote about the half dimes:

"The book mentions that "bit" means dimes and half-dimes. This word
"bit" changes depending on what is in circulation at the time it is
recorded. Initially, a "bit" was a silver Spanish Reale. One dictionary
that I have read mentions that the word "bit" meant one dime, or 12 1/2
cents (the valuation of a Spanish Reale at the time). Apparently the
Reale circulated up until the late 1850s, when the gold rushes caused
gold to become more available than silver. The silver Reales were
hoarded and melted down because they had become more valuable as
bullion. After 1837, dimes and half dimes became popular. 1873 was the
last time the half-dime was issued. It became rarer due to hoarding
during the civil war, but still existed in circulation. So we have
established a time period of 1847-1873. But it could go on after 1873,
and anyway, the author might include it out of nostalgia."

Hmmmm... this next part is interesting -- I wonder if I was right about
the following (not really sure, as I tend to write my notes more
confidently than I actually feel):

"Here's an important clue: The author mentions that in the last census,
the number of tribes was numbered at about 50. Well, this is an
excellent clue. This did not begin until the census of 1880. According
to the Report of the Superintendent of the Census...1889 (p. 26) "An
attempt was made...to enumerate [Indians living on reservations] upon a
very elaborate plan, and many of the tribes, particularly those on the
west coast, a full enumeration was obtained; but the investigation was
stopped by the failure of the appropriation, and was not resumed." The
relevant schedule for this census is the 1880 Questionnaire-Schedule 1,
"Indian Division". (University of Virginia Geospatial and Statistical
Data Center. United States Historical Census Data Browser. ONLINE. 1998.
University of Virginia. Available:
http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/census/. [Tuesday, January 27, 2004].) In
1890 and onward they recorded similar but not quite so extensive
information, which also included tribal affiliation."

I added to myself: "Therefore, our date is now firmly fixed 1880 or later.
Mr. Eels also helped here. He lived in Union City at the time."

Wonder what I meant by "here" -- with the Census, or with the book???.
That part could be pure speculation, or wrong.

I add, "Perhaps our little booklet was created for the purpose of
interviewing a native person for the next census."

and "I'm wondering if this might not be written by John Kelly, an
interpreter who did work for the US department of education regarding
Alaska in 1889-1890."

So I think, what I was about to decide, before I quite writing my notes,
was that the booklet was put together as part of the "very elaborate
plan" of carrying out the 1880 census. I am unsure why I mentioned
Eells, or why I thought that John Kelly might have been involved with
the book.

- Leanne :)


Jeffrey Kopp wrote:

> Whoa, great detective work, guys!
>
> When did the "Our Roots" project appear, and how is it related to
> canadiana.org?
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeff
>
> P.S. Perhaps I should put up the "Houts mystery dictionary" again for
> possible identification; Francisc never got to see it. and am not sure
> Leanne has--although it is almost certainly from outside her
> neighborhood (looks like southern Puget Sound).

To respond to the CHINOOK list, click 'REPLY ALL'.  To respond privately to the sender of a message, click 'REPLY'.  Hayu masi!