We subjoin two more Chippewa specimens.

1. Why do you not behave better and sit still?

Auneeshween nuh?

neebwaukausewun

Why not, (includes pronoun,)

possess sense, (noun, verb, & pro.)

pisaun tshee

nemudubeyun

still

to

sit. (v. a. includes the pronoun, and in present tense.)

The sense of the English is rendered into Indian with force and sufficient precision. But the analytical mode adopted gives the retranslation a stiff and faulty aspect.

2. I do not think there is any such thing as virtue. Kauween Not

do I (negative mode of assertion, very common.)

nindenaindum

kago

iauseenoan* minno

izheewaubizeewin

Our personal knowledge of the southern languages is confined to the Cherokee, and we shall not, therefore, hazard any conjectures respecting them. We are inclined to believe, however, that they have a general family resemblance; but whether any connexion exists between them, and the other great families, we are ignorant. We found in the Cherokee the same general principles of formation, which distinguish

the others.

Whoever makes the experiment will discover, that much stronger analogies exist between dialects of our Indians, as they have been written, than as they are spoken. Languages, which appear almost identical upon paper, are yet in conversation understood with great difficulty. The causes of this difference have been already stated, but their operation must be felt before they can be fully appreciated.

It is easy to conceive, that roving bands of savages in the hunter state, may separate for very trivial causes, and that dialects may soon be formed, which will gradually recede from one another, until all etymological traces of their common origin can with difficulty be discerned. Languages, which are not fixed by letters, must be liable to perpetual fluctuations; and as the intercourse between different tribes is diminished by mutual hostilities, or by distance, their dialects will rapidly recede from one another. In this manner, many dialects, and possibly all, have been formed.

*This is one of those verbal Indian forms, which admit some latitude in the translation.

The Foxes have a traditionary legend upon this subject, which we are tempted to give, because it happily explains their opinion of the mode, in which these separations of natural and political connexion, and consequently of languages, have been brought about.

Many years since, say they, two bands of our people were living near each other. The Chief of one of these bands wanted some Indian tobacco,* and sent one of his young men to the Chief of the other band, to procure some. The latter,

being a little offended with his relation, told the young man, he would send no tobacco, and that he had long tusks, intimating he was disposed to quarrel. The young man replied, that the tobacco was wanted for a feast. The Chief then took up a pair of Apukwine, (large bone needles, made of the ribs of the elk, and used in the manufacture of rush mats,) and throwing his pipe upon the ground, put these like tusks upon each side of his mouth, and said, 'My teeth are long and strong, and will bite.' The young man returned and communicated the result to his Chief, who assembled his warriors and said, 'My warriors, let us prepare to pull out these long tusks, lest they should grow sharp and bite us.' He then directed them to accompany him in an attack upon the other party, and they proceeded to form an ambuscade. near their camp. As the day dawned, the Chief said, 'It is now light enough, we can see to pull out his teeth.' The attack commenced, and many were destroyed. This is the way, says the tradition, in which the great Indian family became divided. Till then they were one people.†

* Called by the Canadians Tabac du diable, or Feningue, and by the Chippewa, Inine Samau, or Man tobacco. It was formerly cultivated by the Indians, and used in all their feasts and religious ceremonies.

Much additional knowledge of the Indian languages may be expected to be gradually gained. Mr Duponceau and Mr Pickering, philologists of whom the country may be justly proud, have devoted much of their time to the subject, and are still pursuing it with ardor, to the extent of their opportunities. Mr Pickering has constructed with immense pains, a Grammar of the Cherokee, which is now in press. All attempts of this sort are of great importance in fixing grammatical forms, and establishing first principles.

In the fourth volume of the Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, is an essay by Mr Pickering, proposing a uniform alphabet for the Indian languages, an object of much importance in establishing such an orthography, as to ensure useful results from a comparison of different vocabularies. In the 9th vol. 2d Series of the Massachusetts Historical Collection, is published Eliot's Indian Grammar, accompanied with valuable notes and observations, by the above gentlemen. It is there stated, that this 'Grammar was presented

Mr John Dunn Hunter's book, has attracted some attention in this country and England. In the sixtyfirst number of the London Quarterly Review, is an article complimentary to the veracity and fidelity of Hunter. We were at first unable to conjecture why a work, purporting to be written by an American, was so kindly received. But it was not long before we discovered the strong claims, which it had to the favor of the Reviewers. Hunter elevates the Indian character far above its true standard, and he depresses that of the frontier settlers as far below it. He whines about the purchase of land, and the introduction of whiskey, as though these were not among the least of the evils, to which the calamities of the Indians are attributable. But these assertions may possibly account for the complacent humor of the Reviewers towards Hunter, in regard to the manner in which he has performed his task. We shall only remark farther,' say they, 'of Hunter's book, that in general his description of Indian manners and customs are minutely accurate.' "There is nothing suspicious in Hunter's narrative. The style is that of a man unaccustomed to write, simple and precise, but not altogether free from vulgarisms and barbarisms.'

This whole article is an admirable specimen of the critical sagacity of the Quarterly. The writers upon all subjects speak ex cathedra, but in this article they display more than usual dogmatism. Some of their facts have probably been furnished by a subaltern officer, who may have travelled from Detroit to the Miami, in the campaign of 1813, on the northwestern frontier; and these have been eked out by crude speculations and bitter invective. In examining the causes, which have heretofore impeded the acquisition of correct knowledge, on topics connected with the Indians, the Reviewers say, 'Until of late years, we could scarcely expect to possess any other instrument of communication with the Indian tribes than these, for educated Englishmen could be very rarely thrown into contact with them.' This is true Quarterly modesty. And so where an educated Englishman does not go, nothing can

to the public, as part of a series of tracts respecting the Indian languages, which it is the intention of the Historical Society to publish, from time to time, as circumstances shall permit.' Accordingly, in the next volume, (X) Dr Edwards's Observations on the Language of the Muhhekaneew Indians is published, together with a body of learned and copious notes by Mr Pickering. It is presumed the subject will be continued in other volumes of this work.

be known! We presume this article is the result of the observations of one of these educated Englishmen,' and the world will probably before long be favored with important discoveries, which it must be content to owe to the same prolific source. Feeling a deep interest in the reputation of the Quarterly, we cannot avoid suggesting to its contributors the expediency of confining themselves to their poor laws and savings' banks, and to other topics more immediately within the sphere of their own observation; and of being cautious how they discuss subjects separated from them by an extensive ocean, and interminable forests, even with the aid of an 'educated Englishman' to furnish facts which never existed.

Hunter has inserted what he calls a speech, delivered by Tecumthé to the Osages. And it is but a poor comment on the tact and judgment of the reading community, that this speech, and the reflections in which Hunter says he indulged on his arrival at the Pacific Ocean, have been already quoted into three respectable works, as valuable specimens of aboriginal taste and feeling.* The speech is lauded in the Quarterly, and the circumstances stated by Hunter, respecting its delivery, furnish, in the opinion of the Reviewers, a proof of his veracity. It is thought impossible for Hunter to have known, that Tecumthé made a visit to the Southwest in 1812, unless he had acquired a knowledge of this fact from the Indians. Now we happen to know,' say the Reviewers, 'that Tecumthé did certainly, after the capture of Detroit by our forces, in 1812, quit our head quarters there; that, proceeding down the Mississippi, he traversed an immense extent of Indian country, and employed himself with various success in animating his brethren by his eloquence to unite against the Americans, and that he did not return to the Michigan Territory, until the following January.' Now we happen to know, that Tecumthé did not leave Detroit for the Mississippi country in 1812. We happen to know, that on the 27th of September 1811, he arrived at Vincennes, and sought an interview with General Harrison. At the discussions, which took place during this interview, he displayed the most hostile spirit, and the result being unsatisfactory to him, he descended the Wabash with a small party in a canoe. He was himself a half Creek, his father being of that tribe,

* See the account of this speech in Hunter's Narrative, pp. 51-56.