text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Fisheries

FISHERIES, a term which includes the taking of all kinds of water products as a business and thus applies to the pursuit of whales, seals, otters and other mammals; to the hunting of frogs, turtles and alligators; to the taking of oysters, clams, lobsters, crabs, shrimp and other shellfish; and to the gathering of corals, sponges and seaweeds, as well as to the capture of fish proper. Closely related to the fisheries is fish culture, by which the supply of water animals is maintained and increased; and the various shore industries having for their object the utilization or preservation of the products as brought in by the fishermen.

The countries whose fisheries are of greatest commercial importance, being worth upward of $5,000,000 yearly, are the United States, Great Britain, Japan, France, Canada, Russia, Norway, Germany and the Netherlands, in the order given. Countries which may be regarded as of second-rate importance in this respect, whose fisheries are worth between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000 annually, are Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Italy. No data are available for China and India, whose fisheries must be very extensive, and perhaps entitled to rank with those of the leading countries. An estimate based on official data and all other available information gives $350,000,000 as the approximate annual value of the commercial fisheries of the world. Water animals which are of great economic importance in both hemispheres are whales, seals, sea-herring, mackerel, tunny, cod, halibut, lobsters, shrimp, oysters and sponges. The most valuable of all fishery products are oysters; the most valuable of all fishes are sea-herring, salmon and cod.

United States.—The importance attained by the United States fisheries has been due to the abundance, variety, excellence and wide distribution of the products, augmented by cultivation and acclimatization. The abundance of food fishes had a marked influence on the original colonization of the country and was also an important factor in the subsequent development of various regions. At the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, some of the vessel fisheries had already become very extensive and sailor-fishermen, mostly from New England, manned our naval vessels and privateers and rendered valiant service.

For the years between the regular decennial fisheries census, returns are but fragmentary. For 1915 it is estimated that they exceed those of 1908 by about 2 per cent. According to the fisheries census, last compiled by the Census Bureau (for the calendar year 1908), the number of persons engaged in the fisheries of the United States in that year was 143,881, of whom 141,031 were sea fishermen and 2,850 shoresmen. The capital employed was $42,021,000, of which $13,806,000 was the value of the vessels; $7,269,000 of the open boats;

the value of apparatus and appliances; $5,342,000 the value of shore property; and $2,579,000 the amount of cash capital invested. The number of fishing vessels was 6,933 (aggregating 126,453 tons) and the number of open boats and vessels under 5 tons burden was 83,548. The equipment of the fisheries was 233,256 gill nets; 81,191 fyke and hoop nets; 16,104 pound nets, trap nets and weirs; 7,966 seines; and 17,787 other nets; lines valued at $476,000; dredges, tongs and rakes valued at $375,000. The total value of the catch was $54,031,000, representing an aggregate weight of 1,893,450,000 pounds — including the weight only of the edible parts of the oysters, clams, scallops, etc. Of the total catch 60 per cent was taken with nets and seines, 8 per cent with lines and baited hooks and 7 per cent with dredges and rakes. Of the whole, food fish amounted to 1,046,541,000 pounds, valued at $29,254,000; menhaden amounted to 394,776,000 pounds, valued at $893,000; oysters, clams, etc., amounted to 347,799,000 pounds, valued at $18,752,000; lobsters and crabs, 96,225,000 pounds, valued at $3,466,000; whale products, 4,028,000 pounds, valued at $497,000; and sponges, 622,000 pounds, valued at $545,000.

Seining for Salmon on the Columbia River

As to individual species, the oyster fishery yields the largest value—$15,713,000, or 29 per cent of the total value; salmon is second in value, yielding $3,347,000, or 6 per cent; cod is third, $2,914,000, or 5 per cent; then follow shad, $2,113,000 (4 per cent); lobster, $1,931,000 (4 per cent); clams, $1,896,000 (4 per cent); squeteague (weakfish), $1,776,000 (3 per cent); halibut, $1,562,000 (3 per cent); haddock, $1,308,000 (2 per cent); German carp, $1,135,000 (2 per cent).

In the order of weight the catches were: menhaden, 394,776,000 pounds; oysters allowing 7 pounds of meat to the bushel, 233,309,000 pounds; herring, 125,050,000 pounds; cod, 110,054,000 pounds; salmon, 90,417,000 pounds; alewives (river herring), 89,978,000 pounds; haddock, 59,987,000 pounds; crabs, 52,913,000 pounds; squeteague, 49,869,000 pounds; German carp, 42,763,000 pounds; lake herring, 41,118,000 pounds; halibut, 34,441,000 pounds; hake, 34,340,000 pounds; mullet, 33,703,000 pounds; pollock, 29,462,000 pounds; shad, 27,641,000; flounders, 23,346,000 pounds; shrimp and prawn, 19,080,000 pounds; catfish, 17,817,000 pounds; buffalo fish, 16,729,000 pounds; pike perch, 15,247,000 pounds; red snapper, 13,498,000 pounds; mackerel, 12,103,000 pounds; lake trout, 12,024,000 pounds; mussels, 8,543,000 pounds; scup, 8,414,000 pounds; suckers, 8,199,000 pounds; yellow perch, 7,898,000; whitefish, 7,708,000 pounds. The above named fishes constitute 97 per cent of the entire catch of the country.

Fish Wheel at Cascades, Columbia River

The distribution of the several species of food fish, regarded commercially, is as follows:

Alewives are caught chiefly in Virginia and Maryland; black bass in Florida and Illinois; bluefish in New York and New Jersey; carp in Illinois and Ohio; catfish in Louisiana; cod in Massachusetts and Maine; eels in New York and Massachusetts; flounders in Massachusetts, California and New York; haddock in Massachusetts and Maine; halibut in Washington; herring in Maine; mackerel in Massachusetts; mullet in Florida; pike perch in Ohio; pollock in Massachusetts; salmon in Washington,

and California; sardines in California; sea bass in New Jersey; shad in Virginia, North Carolina, Maryland, New Jersey and Florida; squeteague in New York and North Carolina; whitefish in Michigan; crabs in Virginia and Maryland; lobsters in Maine; oysters in Maryland, Virginia, Connecticut, Louisiana, New Jersey, New York and South Carolina, in the order named.

The Fisheries Bureau divides the country for supervisory and statistical purposes into five “Divisions”: these, with the several amounts of their catch, and percentages of the whole catch for the year 1908, are as follows: Atlantic Coast Division, 1,344,655,000 pounds; 71 per cent. Gulf of Mexico Division 117,723,000 pounds; 6 per cent. Pacific Coast Division, 176,150,000 pounds; 10 per cent. Mississippi River Division, 148,284,000 pounds; 8 per cent. Great Lakes Division, 106,632,000 pounds; 5 per cent.

AMERICAN FOOD FISHES

The relative importance of the fisheries in the several States may be gauged by the values of their individual catches (in 1908) as follows:

Massachusetts, $7,095,000; chiefly cod, haddock and mackerel, with herring, pollock and halibut of less importance.

Virginia, $4,716,000; chiefly oysters, with shad, menhaden, clams and crabs secondary.

New York, $4,594,000; chiefly oysters, with squeteague, bluefish, flounders and clams secondary.

Washington, $3,513,000; chiefly salmon and halibut, with oysters secondary.

Florida, $3,380,000; chiefly mullet and sponges, with red snapper, shad and oysters secondary.

Maryland, $3,306,000; chiefly oysters, with crabs, shad and alewives secondary.

Maine, $3,257,000; lobsters, with cod, herring, haddock and clams secondary.

New Jersey, $3,069,000; chiefly oysters, with squeteague, clams and shad secondary.

Connecticut, $2,982,000; chiefly oysters.

California, $1,970,000; chiefly salmon, with oysters secondary.

North Carolina, $1,776,000; chiefly shad and oysters.

Rhode Island, $1,752,000; chiefly oysters.

Louisiana, $1,569,000; chiefly oysters and shrimp.

Michigan, $1,473,000; chiefly lake trout and herring.

Illinois, $1,436,000; chiefly German carp.

Oregon, $1,356,000; chiefly salmon.

Wisconsin, $1,067,000; chiefly lake trout and herring.

Ohio, $840,000; chiefly lake herring and carp.

Georgia, $701,000; chiefly oysters.

Mississippi, $556,000; chiefly oysters.

Delaware, $541,000; chiefly oysters and menhaden.

Pennyslvania, $513,000; chiefly shad.

Texas, $446,000; chiefly oysters.

Alabama, $387,000; chiefly oysters.

South Carolina, $288,000; chiefly oysters.

Missouri, $271,000; chiefly German carp.

Indiana, $223,000; chiefly mussel products.

Iowa, $215,000; chiefly German carp.

Arkansas, $207,000: chiefly buffalo fish and catfish.

Minnesota, $192,000; chiefly lake herring.

Tennessee, $112,000; chiefly buffalo fish and catfish.

Kentucky, $110,000; chiefly catfish.

New Hampshire, $53,000; chiefly lobsters.

Kansas, $28,000; chiefly German carp.

Nebraska, $22,000; chiefly German carp.

South Dakota, $4,200; chiefly buffalo fish.

West Virginia, $2,000; chiefly carp and catfish.

Oklahoma, $300; chiefly drumfish.

With the object of restoring and maintaining the commercial fisheries of the country, and the stocking of its interior waters, the Bureau of Fisheries has 50 permanent hatcheries and 76 auxiliaries—subhatcheries and egg collecting stations. Nearly all the output of these establishments goes to the original sources from which the eggs were obtained. Besides the eggs, which are distributed mainly to State fishery commissions, young fish are widely distributed to all sections. These young fish are graded as “fry” up to the time the yolksac is absorbed and the fish begins to feed; “advanced fry” from the first classification up to the time they are one inch in length; “fingerlings,” from one inch in length up to one year old; “yearlings,” from one year old up to two years. In the fiscal year ended 30 June 1915, the number of eggs distributed was 536,260,143, of which 326,350,000 were pike perch; 98,940,000 whitefish; and 34,466,923 chinook salmon. The number of fry distributed was 3,694,281,699, of which 1,294,156,000 were flounders; 500,730,000 pollock; 405,400,000 whitefish; 282,820,000 pike perch; 260,133,000 cod; 195,267,000 yellow perch; 194,670,000 lobsters and 161,980,000 white perch. Of yearlings, fingerlings and adults, there were distributed 58,215,962. The total distribution of fish and eggs was 4,288,757,804, comprising 44 different species. The widest distribution was of brook trout: 5,700,263 fry and 6,965,167 fingerlings, yearlings and adults were sent to over 2,400 different localities.

A characteristic feature of the New England fisheries is the employment of a large fleet of fine, schooner-rigged vessels in the off-shore fisheries for cod, haddock, hake, halibut and mackerel. Cod is the principal fish so taken, part of the catch being made on the Grand Banks and other banks lying off Newfoundland and Nova Scotia; and part on the very extensive and prolific banks adjacent to the New England shore, the most noted of which is Georges Bank. The most important of the New England boat and shore fisheries are those for sea-herring (caught chiefly in brush weirs), lobsters (caught in pots made of laths), soft-shell clams and oysters. In the catch of herring, soft-shell clams and lobsters, Maine surpasses all other States.

The oyster industry of the Middle Atlantic States gives to that region the importance which its fisheries have attained. The principal oyster grounds are in Long Island Sound, Delaware Bay and Chesapeake Bay, a large part of the output now being taken from planted beds. An immense fleet of sailing vessels and boats is engaged in dredging and tonging oysters and running them to market. Other important salt-water products of this section are bluefish, menhaden, sea bass, squeteague, hard clams and crabs. The anadromous fishes, the shad, the alewives and

the striped bass, support valuable fisheries. The South Atlantic region has no noteworthy vessel fisheries, but its pound-net, gill-net and seine fisheries for alewives, shad, sea mullet and squeteague are important, shad being the leading product. The most prominent products of the Gulf States are mullet, red snappers, squeteague, oysters, shrimp and sponges.

The Pacific States have very important vessel fisheries addressed to cod, halibut and whales, and very extensive shore fisheries for salmon, herring and oysters. The salmon fishery is the most valuable in the world, immense quantities of quinnat, blue-back, silver and other salmon being caught in the Sacramento and Columbia rivers, in Puget Sound and in Alaska. Much of the yield is canned. Statistics for the Alaska fisheries for 1914 show the total investment for that year at $37,038,632, of which 80 per cent was in the salmon fishery. There were 21,200 persons engaged, of whom 11,178 were white. The product was valued at $21,242,975. The pack of salmon for the season was 4,056,653 cases of 48 pounds each—a total of 294,719,344 pounds. The number of salmon caught was 54,651,915. The other fishery of importance in Alaska is the whale fishery. In 1914, 482 whales were captured by the two shore stations, and about 50 by the 4 whaling vessels in the Arctic. The total value of products was $317,349. From the 5 private salmon hatcheries in Alaska there were liberated in the year ended 30 June 1915, 79,619,500 fry of red varieties of salmon; and from the 2 government hatcheries, 51,163,100 fry. Besides this restocking of the Alaskan waters there are several streams used by salmon in spawning, which are closed by law against fishing. Waste of fish at the canneries is very severely dealt with by the government under the law of 1906.

The fisheries of the Great Lakes are the most important lake fisheries in the world, those in the United States waters producing over 100,000,000 pounds of excellent food fish annually. Lake Michigan has the largest catch, amounting to 41 per cent of the total. Lake Erie yields 34 per cent: Lake Huron, 13 per cent; Lake Superior, 9 per cent; Lake Ontario, 2 per cent. The principal fishes are whitefish, lake herring or cisco, lake trout, pike perch and yellow perch. The numerous interior waters of the country are well supplied with economic animals and support valuable fisheries. The most productive waters are the Mississippi River and tributaries. The species figuring most conspicuously in the catch are black bass, buffalo fish, carp, crappies, suckers, frogs and mussels, the shells of the last named being extensively used in making pearl buttons.

Canning and Preserving.—The 1914 census of manufactures reported 538 establishments in the United States in that year engaged in canning and otherwise preserving fish and oysters, with products amounting to $58,283,404 —an increase of 44.1 per cent since 1909. Canned fish amounted in value to $41,321,593. The largest item was canned salmon, $27,633,284; sardines were second, with $6,238,933; followed by oysters, $2,676,951; shrimp, $1,725,621; tuna, $1,638,675; clams, $670,363; all other canned fish, $737,766. Of smoked and dried fish there were prepared 28,713,806 pounds, valued at $2,759,341. The largest item was

herring, 11,504,126 pounds, valued at $719,640. Salmon was second, 4,248,896 pounds, valued at $638,975. Finnan haddie was third, 4,095,693 pounds, valued at $327,877. Of salt and pickled fish, there were prepared 156,153,589 pounds, valued at $9,200,162. The largest item was cod, 83,502,295 pounds, valued at $5,661,770. Herring was second, 22,150,974 pounds, valued at $668,838.

United States Insular Possessions.—The fisheries of Hawaii give employment to about 3,600 persons, who employ 967 boats. The value of fishing property is $300,000. The catch comprises 7,250,000 pounds of fish besides other products, mostly eaten fresh and is valued at $700,000. The principal fishes taken are the akule, aku, and ulua. The Philippine Islands have valuable fishing resources which are but little developed. The leading fishery is that for pearls and pearl shells in the Sulu Archipelago; from time immemorial the pearls from this region have been famous. No statistics are available. The fisheries of Porto Rico are comparatively unimportant, although capable of development; at present the catch is only for local consumption and is eaten fresh.

Canada.—The fisheries of the Dominion of Canada are very extensive and closely resemble those of the United States. The aggregate yield according to official report, amounted in the year ended 31 March 1914, to $33,207,748, of which sea fisheries contributed $29,472,811. These figures include the value of canned products and hence exceed by several million dollars the actual value of the fisheries proper.

The number of men actually engaged in fishing was 71,776, and there were employed 1,992 vessels and 37,686 boats.

Among the provinces, British Columbia led with a catch valued at $13,891,398; Nova Scotia was second, with $8,297,626; then followed New Brunswick, $4,308,707; Ontario, $2,674,685; Quebec, $1,850,427, and Prince Edward Island, $1,280,447.

The catches of largest value were: salmon, $10,833,713; lobsters, $4,710,062; cod, $3,387,109; herring, $3,173,129; halibut, $2,036,400; mackerel, $1,280,319. In weight of catch, herring led with 248,421,900 pounds; salmon, 155,141,100 pounds; lobsters, 51,464,600 pounds; haddock, 40,563,300 pounds. See .

Newfoundland.—In proportion to population, the fisheries of this island are more valuable than those of any other country. The hair-seal fisheries employ (1914) 20 steamers, aggregating 12,067 tons, and employ 3,959 men. Their catch was 233,719 seals, weighing 1,200,000 pounds. The “Banks” fisheries employ 105 vessels, of 7,790 tons, and 1,892 men, and their catch was about 140,000,000 pounds. The value of fishery products exported is about $8,000,000, and the value of products consumed locally was estimated at $1,000,000. The leading fish are cod and herring, the cod fishery being more valuable than in any other country.

Great Britain and Ireland.—The fisheries of the British Isles surpass those of any other country of Europe, and are about equal to those of the United States. Besides extensive coast fisheries, there are very important offshore vessel fisheries for cod, haddock, herring and

gill-nets being set for herring and beam trawls used for the other species. About 106,500 persons find employment in fishing, of which 39,500 are in England and Wales, 37,400 in Scotland and 28,000 in Ireland. The registered fishing vessels and boats numbered 25,000, of which 3,375 are steamers. In 1910 the value of the catch of Great Britain and Ireland was $58,702,675. Herring constituted the largest item in value, reaching $16,064,040; followed by haddock, $8,798,725; cod, &8,011,855; plaice, $5,198,490; hake, $3,154,805; halibut, $2,266,015; and sole, $2,065,395. In 1911 the weight of fish landed on the shores of the British Isles was nearly 3,000,000,000 pounds, valued at about $57,000,000.

Russia.—This country has vast fishery resources and the annual catch exceeds in value that of any other country of Europe except Great Britain. The ocean fisheries are insignificant, but those of the Caspian Sea and the fresh waters, especially Ural and Volga rivers, are very highly developed. The herring fisheries of the Caspian Sea, Kamchatka and Saghalen are famous, and millions of pounds are caught annually. The sturgeon fisheries are the most valuable in the world, the caviare product alone for 1911 amounting to 5,300,000 pounds. The roach is so abundant and cheap that it may be considered the national fish; between 200,000,000 and 300,000,000 pounds are taken annually in the Caspian Sea. Other important products are carp, catfish, bream, whitefish, yellow perch and lampreys. The total catch in 1910 was 1,582,228,000 pounds, valued at $49,985,000.

France.—Fisheries of great magnitude are prosecuted in the coast waters of France and by French fishermen in Newfoundland, Iceland and the North Sea. The number of vessel and boat fishermen is about 97,000 and of shore fishermen 62,000; and the value of the products taken was $21,240,000. In the cod fisheries of Newfoundland, Iceland and the North Sea, 44,600,000 kilograms of fish, valued at $3,800,000, were caught; and in the high-sea fisheries 56,300,000 kilograms of herring, mackerel and other fish, valued at $5,600,000, were taken. The principal coast fishery is that for sardines, large quantities of which are canned and sent to all parts of the world; the quantity taken was about 40,200,000 kilograms, worth $2,400,000. Other valuable products are tunny, lobsters, spiny lobsters, crayfish, oysters, mussels and seaweeds. The cultivation of oysters has reached great perfection in artificial enclosures, are marketed annually.

Norway.—In 1910 more than 120,000 people were employed in the Norwegian fisheries, with a fleet of 183 steamers, 2,407 motor vessels, 3,779 sailing vessels and 7,571 open boats. The principal products are cod, valued at about $6,000,000; herring, valued at $3,250,000; mackerel, $800,000; pollock, $700,000; and sprat $460,000. The cod fishery is carried on chiefly at the Lofoten Islands, where 35,000 fishermen are engaged. Other important fisheries are the lobster, whale, seal and shark. The total value of the fisheries was $13,151,080. A large part of the catch is exported to other European countries and the United States.

Other European Countries.—Germany has cod and herring fisheries, in the Baltic and North seas, and minor fresh-water fisheries.

Upward of 32,000 persons are reported to be employed, and the catch in 1910 was valued at $8,905,140. The Netherlands have valuable herring fisheries, which yield about $1,478,000. Other valuable products are cod, anchovy and oysters. The total yearly production is valued at $8,500,000. The fisheries of Denmark are valued at about $4,000,000. The fishermen of Belgium catch chiefly herring and cod, the output being about $1,350,000 annually. Portugal has 4,000 vessels and boats, mostly engaged in the sardine and tunny fisheries; the products taken have a value of about $4,182,000. The fisheries of Spain are estimated to be worth $2,500,000, but no definite information regarding them is obtainable. Italy has nearly 100,000 fishermen engaged in the tunny, coral, sponge and general food-fish fisheries. The aggregate value of water products is estimated at $3,500,000 yearly. The Swedish fisheries are valued at about $3,850,000 annually. The principal species sought is the herring; the herring fishery of Bohuslän is famous, employing 7,500 men. Other important products are cod, mackerel, eels, salmon and lobsters. The sea fisheries of Austria-Hungary give employment to about 15,300 persons, and yield about $2,200,000 annually. Greece and Turkey have valuable sponge fisheries.

The total yield of the fisheries of Europe for the year 1910, as reported (May 1914) by the Permanent International Council for the Study of the Sea, was 5,670,221,200 pounds, of which herring constituted 26.48 per cent; cod, 18.5 per cent; haddock, 9 per cent; plaice, 6 per cent; mackerel, 3.09 per cent; sole, 2 per cent; halibut, 2 per cent; eels, 1 per cent.

The total value was about $126,000,000, of which England took $40,971,385; France, $23,525,005; Scotland, $15,853,140; Norway, $13,151,080; Germany, $8,905,140; Netherlands, $8,437,615; Denmark, $3,912745; Sweden, $3,849,255; Iceland (about), $2,000,000; Ireland, $1,878,150; Russia, $1,347,335; Belgium, $1,347,250.

Statistics kept for the North Sea fisheries, covering an area of 152,473 square miles, show that the average quantity of fish taken in 1910 per square mile was 16,115 pounds. The average total catch per day from North Sea waters was 3,360,000 pounds.

Japan.—The fisheries of Japan are in some respects the most important in the world, and in value rank next to those of the United States and Great Britain. In 1913, the fishing fleet of Japan comprised 133 steamers and 414,834 sailing craft and about 2,500,000 persons were employed in fishing and preparing fishery products. The total catch was valued at $47,532,924. All the coast waters abound in excellent food fishes, mollusks, crustaceans and other products, together with many objects used for ornamental, artistic and other purposes besides for food. The leading products are sardines (of which 500,000,000 pounds are annually caught), herring, bonito, cuttlefish and squid, tai, yellow tail, mackerel, tunny, salmon, cod, whales, coral and algae. The herring, salmon, cod and other fisheries of Hokkaido, the most northern of the main islands, are very extensive, yielding nearly 1,000,000,000 pounds. The aggregate output of the Japanese fisheries is probably not less than 6,000,000,000 pounds a year, with an estimated value of $30,000,000.

Bibliography.—Alflalo, P., ‘The Sea Fishing Industry in England and Wales’ (London 1904); ‘Great Fisheries of the World’ (London n.d.); Herbel, M. A., ‘Sea Fisheries; their Treasures and Toilers’ (London 1912); International Fisheries Congress IV, ‘Proceedings’ (Washington 1908); Krummel's ‘Handbuch der Oceanographie’ (1907); Somigli, C., ‘La Pesca Marittima Industrial’ (Rome 1912); Vallaux, C., ‘La Mer’ (Paris 1908); Wright, S., ‘The Romance of the World's Fisheries’ (London 1908).


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/220

204

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/221

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/222

206


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/223

Rh


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Fisheries, Bureau of

FISHERIES, Bureau of, a branch of the Department of Commerce, and originally of the Department of Commerce and Labor, before its division into separate bodies, 4 March 1915. Directed by a commissioner, its chief purpose is to foster the national fisheries principally by the propagation of food-fishes and the inspection of commercial fisheries. Situated in 32 States, 32 fish hatcheries and 92 auxiliaries and egg-collecting stations, cooperating with State fisheries commissions, carry on the propagation of food fishes, and also biological research and experiments for the promotion of scientific knowledge concerning fishes and marine animals. The total output of fishes and eggs in a recent year amounted to 3,687,535,911. Applications in the interests of more than 10,000 different bodies of water were received for fish for stocking purposes. The Alaska salmon and fur-seal fisheries have received considerable attention, especially for the development of the territorial fur resources, the annual value of which has reached $370,500. Consult ‘Department of Commerce — Annual Reports’ (Washington, D. C.).


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/224

208


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/225

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/226

210


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/227

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/228

212


text:
Page:The American Indian.djvu/98

66 through the Antilles and down the eastern side of the Andes. In Patagonia a skin shoe again appears, but the Fuegians tend to go barefoot. • 2;font-size:smaller;

title: Page:The American Indian.djvu/98


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/229

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/230

214


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/231

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/232

216


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/233

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/234

218


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/235

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/236

220


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/237

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/238

222


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/239

Rh


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Fisheries Question

FISHERIES QUESTION. The provinces of British North America in 1760-76 enjoyed mutual fishing rights on the entire North Atlantic coast, but when the Revolution severed Canada from the rest of the seaboard, Great Britain proposed to deny the United States the right to fish there, on the ground of Canadian opposition. As this meant ruin to a great New England industry, the Canadian waters being the cream of the fishing grounds, John Adams refused to sign the Treaty of Paris (7 Sept. 1783) until the right was granted, though his fellow commissioners would have sacrificed them; and his stubbornness secured their retention. Fishing could still go on; but we could not dry or cure fish on the coast of Newfoundland, or the settled coasts or river-banks of Nova Scotia, the Magdalen Islands or Labrador, except by agreement with the inhabitants. Under these provisions, the energetic American fishermen occupied many excellent fishing stations along the Canada shore, to the envy and dissatisfaction of the British; and when the War of 1812 broke out, the latter seized the opportunity to declare the Treaty of Paris abrogated, and order the Canadian officials to refuse American fishermen access to the grounds. The Americans declared the fishery provisions of the treaty unavoidable. The Treaty of Ghent, of 1814, ignored this question, as it did so much else of vital import, and the subject of the fisheries was left open as an unsettled subject of difference, or, as Henry Clay put it, “as a nest-egg for another war.” Collision and friction arose relative to the inshore fisheries; in 1816, 1817 and 1818 American fishing vessels

were seized in the Bay of Fundy. After prolonged negotiations, a treaty was entered into at London which revised the fishery provisions, and under which American rights were curtailed; the United States were to have the right of fishing only in deep sea waters at least three miles from shore, except in certain specified areas off the eastern, western and southern coast of Newfoundland and the Magdalens and Labrador, and the right to dry and cure fish was limited to a small part of the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador. They were, however, to be able to enter bays and harbors for wood or water or for refuge. The three-mile provision proved a bone of contention. Great Britain claiming that the three-mile limit must be measured from the headlands of the “bays,” and she pointed to the maps published at the time of the treaty, with the waters in dispute marked as “bays.” The United States, on the other hand, contended that the “bays” must be confined to small indentations, and that the three marine miles must be measured from a line following the sinuosities of the coast. In 1845 Lord Aberdeen, at that time British Foreign Secretary, offered as a “relaxation” from the full rights of Great Britain to open the Bay of Fundy to American fishermen, and this was done; but the American government declined to accept as a favor what they demanded as a treaty right, and pressed for an extension which the British government, urged thereto by Nova Scotia, refused, and both parties thereupon reverted to the strict letter of their rights. Another question also arose, as to the right of Great Britain to control the fisheries by local laws and regulations. Finally, the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 abolished all mutual restrictions on deep-sea fishing except for shellfish. The United States abrogated this treaty in 1866, and conditions reverted to those of 1818, but the Treaty of Washington in 1871, to take effect in 1873, revived it again in full down to lat. 39° N. The Canadians, however, asserted that their waters were much the more valuable, and on arbitration provided for in the treaty, they were awarded $5,500,000 in 1877, on a claim of $14,280,000. In 1885 the United States abrogated the reciprocity provision of the treaty of 1871, under pressure from fishing interests, and returned to the 1818 status with its disputed meanings. Our fishing vessels were seized as before and a period of acute tension ensued. In 1887 Congress authorized the President at his discretion to lay an embargo on all Canadian commerce to American ports, which, however, has not been done. In 1888 the Chamberlain-Bayard Treaty arranged these difficulties, but the Senate rejected it; a modus vivendi, however, was reached in the same year. A joint high commission to settle the question met in Washington in 1899, but adjourned without coming to a decision. By a treaty of January 1909 the questions in dispute were referred to The Hague Tribunal, which assembled on 1 June 1910, the award being issued on 7 September. The tribunal of arbitration was chosen from the general list of members of the permanent court at The Hague, Dr. H. Lammasch, professor of international law at the University of Vienna, presiding. George Grey, judge of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, was the American representative, and Sir Charles Fitzpatrick, chief justice of Canada,

represented Great Britain. On the important “headland theory,” the verdict was mainly in accord with the British contention, but no principle applicable to all bays was laid down. On the question of Great Britain's right to regulate the fisheries in dispute, the answer of the tribunal effected a compromise. The abstract right was conceded as in her favor, but she was forced to agree to the appointment of a commission of experts to pass her regulations in order that American fishermen may be protected from unfair and discriminatory legislation. Thus was brought to an end an irritating and vexatious controversy, which for upward of a century had from time to time threatened the peaceful relations existing between Great Britain and the United States. Consult ‘The United States and the North-Eastern Fisheries’ (Minneapolis 1887); and Wormwith, W. B., ‘The North Atlantic Coast Fishery Disputes’ (in ‘Canada and Its Provinces,’ Toronto 1914).


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/240

224


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/241

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/242

226


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/243

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/244

228


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Carve, Thomas


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Carvell, Nicholas


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/245

Rh


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Carver, John


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Carver, Jonathan


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Carver, Robert


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/246

230


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Carwardine, Penelope


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Carwell, Thomas


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/248

232


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Cary, Edward


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Cary, Francis Stephen


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/249

Rh


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Cary, Henry (d.1633)


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Cary, Henry Francis


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Cary, John (d.1395?)


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/250

234


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Cary, John (d.1720?)


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/251

Rh


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Cary, Lucius


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Fishermen, The

FISHERMEN, The. ‘The Fishermen’ (Rubaki), Dmitri Vasilyevitch Grigoróvitch, is a story of life among the peasants of northern Tula, where the broad river Oká flows through a level country to empty into the Volga at Nizhni Nóvgorod. These peasants get their living by fishing. Grigoróvitch, like most Russian writers, concerns himself with types of character. He was doubly an artist. His training as a painter and as the historian of art served him well in depicting the river landscape in every aspect. We see it in all the varying seasons of the year. Many of the pictures are veritable poems. Village life is also described with humor and realism. This is especially notable when some of the peasants visit the annual market, where episodes of traffic and of drunkenness occur. All the persons introduced are muzhiks; there is no introduction of “high life.” The plot is as simple as that of a Greek drama, but it touches the deepest springs of human life: honor and treachery, pure unselfish love and ignoble passion, joy and tragedy. The principal persons are found in the izba of the patriarchal old fisherman, Glyeb Savinitch, whose large family is increased at the beginning of the action by the adoption of a mischievous and surly little boy, Grishka, the illegitimate son of “Uncle Akim,” a distant relative of Glyeb's wife, Anna Savélyevna, a ne'er-do-well, boastful, idle, lazy and improvident, who comes to Glyeb's home to beg shelter and shortly afterward dies there, painfully and pathetically, leaving his “godson” for his relatives to bring up. On the other side of the river lives Uncle Kondráti with his granddaughter, the gentle and charming Dúnya. Glyeb and Kondráti are interestingly contrasted: the one proud, powerful, moody, violent-tempered (generally just and kindly), full of peasant wisdom often expressed in clever proverbs; the other calm, serene, religious and noble—the finest type of the muzhik. The story is a tragedy in humble life but a masterpiece of faithful delineation, touching the human heart. Grigoróvitch, as few other modern writers, succeeds in truthfully contrasting vice and depravity with the nobler virtues of unselfishness and pure love, the ugly traits of human nature with the finer qualities which often exist side by side in the same characters; but he is never pessimistic; in the end some

element of good triumphs. ‘The Fishermen’ was published toward the end of Grigoróvitch's most brilliant and fruitful period, which lasted from 1847 until 1855. An English translation, anonymous, was published in New York in 1917, with a brief foreword by Dr. Angelo S. Rappoport.


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/252

236


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Cary, Valentine


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Cary, William


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/253

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/254

238


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Caryl, Joseph


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Caryll, John (1625-1711)


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Caryll, John (1666?-1736)


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/255

Rh


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Casali, Andrea


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Casanova, Francis


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Casaubon, Isaac


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Case, Thomas


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Caslon, William (1692-1766)


text: Index to Short Stories/Index to Short Stories/H


text: Index to Short Stories/Index to Short Stories/He


text: Index to Short Stories/Index to Short Stories/Hi


text: Index to Short Stories/Index to Short Stories/Ho


text: Index to Short Stories/Index to Short Stories/Hu


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/256

240


text:
Page:The American Indian.djvu/61

Rh Ojibway and Iroquois, though it may have been used along the upper Missouri.

In the spring and summer dogs were made to bear packs and drag tent poles. This method was more widely distributed than the use of sledges and toboggans, covering the entire caribou and bison areas and extending somewhat into the inland portion of the salmon area. In the bison area, particularly in the northern part, we find an original contrivance known to us as a travois. Though of two or three varieties, the essential structure is the same throughout—a V-shaped frame with an intervening section of net or wood upon which the load is placed. The structure suggests that this travois is merely a development of the pack and trailing tent poles, the more widely distributed method.

It may be worth noting that dog packing in particular is a concomitant of those hunting tribes following a regular migratory circle. The excursions of the Eskimo to the caribou ranges, the corresponding shifts of the Canadian Indians, and the bison-hunting expeditions of the Plains were in pre-Columbian days facilitated by pack trains of dogs. The intrusion of this method into the inland salmon area is consistent with the journeys then made to gather food, as we have stated. On the contrary, topographical conditions in California made large movements unnecessary, which may be one reason why dog packing was not adopted. The maize areas were more independent and had little use for this trait. So far as we know, dog transportation was not in vogue in the area of intensive maize culture. Mexico and the Pueblo area had no way of land transport except by human carriers, and it is not until Peru is reached that the use of the llama comes to notice. This small, camel-like animal has little more carrying power than a large dog, but is particularly well adapted to mountain travel. For the remainder of South America our information is vague, but so far there is no reason to believe that the dog or any other animal was used for transport.

All this suggests that dog traction was intrusive to the New World. When we recall that in Europe and Asia the dog and reindeer are used to draw sledges and that the trait is

title: Page:The American Indian.djvu/61


text:
Page:The European Concert in the Eastern Question.djvu/315

, and Drainica Plan, then the Descani Kladanec, the watershed of the High Sukowa and of the Morava, goes straight to the Stol, and descends from it so as to cut the road from Sofia to Pirot, 1,000 metres north-west of the village of Segusa. It ascends in a straight line the Vidlic Planina, and thence Mount Radocina in the chain of the Kodza Balkan, leaving to Servia the village of Doikinci, and to Bulgaria that of Senakos.

From the summit of Mount Radocina the frontier follows towards the north-west, the crest of the Balkans by Ciprovec Balkan and Stara Planina up to the former eastern frontier of the Principality of Servia, near to the Kula Smiljova cuka, and thence that former frontier as far as the Danube, which it joins at Rakovitza.

XXXVII. Until the conclusion of fresh arrangements no change shall be made in Servia in the actual conditions of the commercial intercourse of the Principality with foreign countries.

No transit duties shall be levied on goods passing through Servia.

The immunities and privileges of foreign subjects, as well as the rights of Consular jurisdiction and protection, as at present existing, shall remain in full force so long as they shall not have been modified by mutual consent between the Principality and the Powers concerned.

XXXVIII. The Principality of Servia takes the place,


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/257

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/258

242


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/259

Rh


text:
Page:The American Indian.djvu/66

40

title: Page:The American Indian.djvu/66


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/260

244


text:
Page:Appeal to the Christian women of the South (Grimké, 1836).djvu/13

11 laws of Moses; Not one. You may observe that I have carefully avoided using the term slavery when speaking of Jewish servitude; and simply for this reason, that no such thing existed among that people; the word translated servant does not mean slave, it is the same that is applied to Abraham, to Moses, to Elisha and the prophets generally. Slavery then never existed under the Jewish Dispensation at all, and I cannot but regard it as an aspersion on the character of Him who is "glorious in Holiness" for any one to assert that "God sanctioned, yea commanded slavery under the old dispensation." I would fain lift my feeble voice to vindicate Jehovah's character from so foul a slander. If slaveholders are determined to hold slaves as long as they can, let them not dare to say that the God of mercy and of truth ever sanctioned such a system of cruelty and wrong. It is blasphemy against Him.

We have seen that the code of laws framed by Moses with regard to servants was designed to protect them as men and women, to secure to them their rights as human beings, to guard them from oppression and defend them from violence of every kind. Let us now turn to the Slave laws of the South and West and eaxmineexamine [sic] them too. I will give you the substance only, because I fear I shall tresspass too much on your time, were I to quote them at length.

1. Slavery is hereditary and perpetual, to the last moment of the slave's earthly existence, and to all his descendants to the latest posterity.

2. The labor of the slave is compulsory and uncompensated; while the kind of labor, the amount of toil, the time allowed for rest, are dictated solely by the master. No bargain is made, no wages given. A pure despotism governs the human brute; and even his covering and provender, both as to quantity and quality, depend entirely on the master's discretion.

3. The slave being considered a personal chattel may be sold or pledged, or leased at the will of his master. He may be exchanged for marketable commodities, or taken in execution for the debts or taxes either of a living or dead master. Sold at auction, either individually, or in lots to suit the purchaser, he may remain with his family, or be separated from them for ever.

4. Slaves can make no contracts and have no legal right to any property, real or personal. Their own honest earnings and the legacies of friends belong in point of law to their masters.

5. Neither a slave nor a free colored person can be a witness


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/261

Rh


text:
L'Amour fait Peur

 * Coates, Florence Earle (1908), "L'Amour fait Peur" in The Independent (22 October 1908). Written in Baltimore, MD.
 * Coates, Florence Earle (1909), "L'Amour fait Peur" in Lyrics of Life (1909).
 * Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "L'Amour fait Peur" in Poems II.

title: L'Amour fait Peur


text:
Page:The American Indian.djvu/68

42

title: Page:The American Indian.djvu/68


text:
Page:Appeal to the Christian women of the South (Grimké, 1836).djvu/14

12 against any white, or free person, in a court of justice, however atrocious may have been the crimes they have seen him commit, if such testimony would be for the benefit of a slave; but they may give testimony against a fellow slave, or free colored man, even in cases affecting life, if the master is to reap the advantage of it.

6. The slave may be punished at his master's discretion—without trial—without any means of legal redress; whether his offence be real or imaginary; and the master can transfer the same despotic power to any person or persons, he may choose to appoint.

7. The slave is not allowed to resist any free man under any circumstances, his only safety consists in the fact that his owner may bring suit and recover the price of his body, in case his life is taken, or his limbs rendered unfit for labor.

8. Slaves cannot redeem themselves, or obtain a change of masters, though cruel treatment may have rendered such a change necessary for their personal safety.

9. The slave is entirely unprotected in his domestic relations.

10. The laws greatly obstruct the manumission of slaves, even where the master is willing to enfranchise them.

11. The operation of the laws tends to deprive slaves of religious instruction and consolation.

12. The whole power of the laws is exerted to keep slaves in a state of the lowest ignorance.

13. There is in this country a monstrous inequality of law and right. What is a trifling fault in the white man, is considered highly criminal in the slave; the same offences which cost a white man a few dollars only, are punished in the negro with death.

14. The laws operate most oppressively upon free people of color.

Shall I ask you now my friends, to draw the parallel between Jewish servitude and American slavery? No! For there is no likeness in the two systems; I ask you rather to mark the contrast. The laws of Moses protected servants in their rights as men and women, guarded them from oppression and defended them from wrong. The Code Noir of the South robs the slave of all his rights as a man, reduces him to a chattel personal, and defends the master in the exercise of the most unnatural and uuwarantable power over his slave. They each bear the impress of the hand which formed them. The attributes of justice and mercy are shadowed out in the Hebrew code; those of injustice and cruelty, in the Code Noir of America. Truly it was wise in the slaveholders of the South to declare then slaves to be "chattels personal;" for before they could be robbed of wages, wives, children, and friends, it was absolutely necessary to deny they were human beings. It is wise in them, to keep them in abject ignorance, for the strong man armed must be bound before we can spoil his house—the powerful intellect of man must be bound down with the iron chains of nescience before we can rob him of his rights as a man; we must reduce him to a thing before we can claim


text:
Honor

 * Coates, Florence Earle (1908), "Honor" in The Smart Set (May 1908).
 * Coates, Florence Earle (1909), "Honor" in Lyrics of Life (1909).
 * Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "Honor" in Poems II.

title: Honor


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/268

252


text:
Page:The American Indian.djvu/74

48 the hand, usually upon the bare thigh or calf of the leg. (The peculiar slit skirt of the Algonkin and Iroquois is regarded as a hand spinner's costume by Parker. A twisting appliance has, however, been noted for the Eskimo.

But to return to our subject. The methods of preparing fibers for spinning differ with the materials, but after they are separated and cleaned, all must be carded, or extended

in the same direction. No aboriginal appliance for this has come to light, but with the introduction of the sheep, the European card was also introduced and has been in use ever since. The difference between hand and whorl-twisting is merely a matter of machinery. In either case, the native first arranges the roving by hand. The only twisting machine in use for true textile fibers was the whorled or rolled spindle, but there was nothing like the wheel of the Old World. Further, we are told that it is only bast fiber that can be twisted by rolling under the palm upon the thigh. Neither cotton nor wool can be economically handled that way because of

title: Page:The American Indian.djvu/74


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/269

Rh


text:
Eurydice

 * "Eurydice", a poem by Florence Earle Coates ("I hear thy voice!")
 * "Eurydice", a poem by James Russell Lowell ("Heaven's cup held down to me I drain")
 * "Eurydice", a drama by David Mallet
 * "Eurydice", a poem by Algernon Charles Swinburne ("Orpheus, the night is full of tears and cries")

title: Eurydice


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/270

254


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/271

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/272

256


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/273

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/274

258


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/275

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/276

260


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/277

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/278

262


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/279

Rh


text:
Eurydice (Coates)

 * Coates, Florence Earle (1909), "Eurydice" in Lyrics of Life (1909).
 * Coates, Florence Earle (1910), as "Che Faro Senza Eurydice!" in Lippincott's Monthly Magazine (March 1910).
 * Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "Eurydice" in Poems II.

title: Eurydice (Coates)


text: Index to Short Stories/Index to Short Stories/I


text:
Beauty's Path

 * Coates, Florence Earle (1908), "Beauty's Path" in The Outlook (22 August 1908).
 * Coates, Florence Earle (1909), "Beauty's Path" in Lyrics of Life (1909).
 * Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "Beauty's Path" in Poems II.

title: Beauty's Path


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/262

246


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/263

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/264

248


text:
Page:The American Indian.djvu/79

Rh with it, and in the New World it is difficult to find groups of tribes entirely innocent of the art. About the only localities without basketry are among the eastern Eskimo, and parts of

the bison and guanaco areas, all specialists in skin work.

The subject has received a great deal of attention and that great master of material culture, O. T. Mason, has left us an excellent treatise. Our museums have extensive collections,

title: Page:The American Indian.djvu/79


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/265

Rh


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/266

250


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/267

Rh


text:
Page:The American Indian.djvu/185

Rh position of long and short verses, with the right number of syllables in each."

Markham finds evidence of "four different kinds of plays called Anay Sauca, a joyous representation, Hayachuca, Llama-llama, a farce, and Hanamsi, a tragedy. There is clear proof that the memory of the old dramatic lore was preserved, and that the dramas were handed down by memory even after the Spanish conquest. It is to be found in the sentence pronounced on the rebels at Cuzco, by the Judge Areche, in 1781, which prohibited 'the representation of dramas, as well as all other festivals which the Indians celebrated in memory of their Incas'."

A few complete plays have been recorded in later times, the most famous of which is Ollantay. As to what effect the intervening years of Spanish control had upon the literary form of this production is now a matter of debate, but since Ollantay was preserved in the native tongue, the presumption is that it has suffered little. The reader is referred to Markham's translation and discussion for a statement of the case, and to our page 141 for a selection of Inca verse.

There is reason to believe that the early peoples of Mexico also had achieved something in the dramatic art, though good examples have not survived. Even among the Pueblo villages of the United States there are still native festivals in which there appear performances that deserve recognition as dramas. This is true, to a less degree, of certain ceremonies among the outlying tribes of both continents.

While the content we have given to the term literature is far wider than the modern concept of books, the Maya and Aztec did have some written literature. Brinton quotes the Spanish writer, Landa (1565), as follows:—

The sciences that they (Maya) taught were the reckoning of the years, months, and days, the feasts and ceremonies, the administration of their sacraments, the fatal days and seasons, their methods of divination and prophecies, events about to happen, remedies for diseases, their ancient history, together with the art of reading and writing their books with characters which were written, and pictures which represented the things written.

title: Page:The American Indian.djvu/185


text:
Reproach not Death

 * Coates, Florence Earle (1909), "Reproach not Death" in Lyrics of Life (1909).
 * Coates, Florence Earle (1911), "Reproach not Death" in Scribner's Magazine (November 1911).
 * Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "Reproach not Death" in Poems I.

title: Reproach not Death


text:
Page:The American Indian.djvu/81

Rh

title: Page:The American Indian.djvu/81


text:
1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Guild Socialism

GUILD SOCIALISM, the name given to a school of socialist thought which originated in England early in the 20th century, and has since spread to other parts of the world, particularly to the English-speaking countries—the United States, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa—and to Japan. As its name implies, it had, in the minds of those who originated it, a definite relation to the forms of industrial organization which existed throughout the mediaeval world, and it was an attempt to apply to the solution of modern industrial problems certain of the principles which were in active operation in the economic organization of mediaeval society. This does not mean that Guild Socialism is an attempt to restore the mediaeval guild system, or that it has any necessary relation to the restoration of a system of hand craft in place of the modern system of machine production. In harking back to the mediaeval organization of industry, Guild Socialists for the most part have in mind not the forms of production which prevailed in the Middle Ages, but the mediaeval principle of industrial self-government.

The origin of the Guild Socialist movement is to be found in The Restoration of the Gild System (1906), a book written by A. J. Penty, the well-known architect and craftsman, and in an article published at about the same time in the Contemporary Review by A. R. Orage, editor of the New Age, which was, during the following decade, very closely associated with the guild propaganda. In both these articles Guild Socialism appeared in an essentially preliminary form, and the emphasis was laid, far more than by the more recent guild writers, on an actual restoration of the mediaeval system. Mr. A. J. Penty, who has perhaps the best claim to be regarded as the originator of the modern guild movement in this form, took the craftsman's point of view and set himself in direct hostility to the modern systems of large-scale production and trading.

From 1906 to 1912 the guild idea developed gradually and almost unnoticed in the columns of the New Age; but during this period a gradual transformation of the theory was taking place, and the emphasis was coming to lie, not upon the return to craft organization or the restoration of a system closely similar to that of the Middle Ages, but upon the utilization of the modern trade-union and working-class movement as the basis for a system of industrial self-government, directly related to modern conditions and to large-scale production. During this stage the propaganda for the “restoration of the gild system” was developing into the propaganda of National Guilds, the emphasis on the word “National” indicating the necessity for a different kind of guild system corresponding to the “National Economy” of modern times.

This transition was made definite, and the first attempt to expound the new guild theory as a complete system of socialism began to be made in the New Age in 1912, when a series of articles, subsequently reprinted in the volume, National Guilds, which was written by S. G. Hobson, and edited by A. R. Orage, was published week by week. It was with the publication of these articles that the guild theory first became a definite force in the British socialist movement.

While this process of theoretical development was going on the situation in the British industrial world was rapidly changing. The earlier years of the 20th century were years of comparative industrial tranquillity, during which the main attention of the working-class movement was concentrated on political questions and on the building-up of the Labour party. From 1909 and 1910 onwards, however, a big wave of industrial unrest passed over the country. Big strikes broke out in a number of the most important industries, and a great stimulus was given to the movement for wider industrial combination. This industrial ferment also served to arouse a corresponding ferment in the realm of ideas. New socialist theories, based mainly on the working-class industrial organizations, sprang rapidly into prominence, and in particular the “Industrial Unionist” ideas, which had entered Great Britain from America a few years earlier, and the syndicalist ideas derived from contemporary developments in the French labour movement, gained for a time a large number of adherents and excited vigorous controversy. It was in the midst of this controversy and of this industrial ferment that the guild idea developed from a “Utopian” plan for the restoration of mediaeval conditions into the outline of a practical policy of industrial self-government, appealing particularly to the British organized working-class movement. The transition, however, was not fully completed with the publication of the “National Guilds” series of articles in the New Age; for the influence of the New Age, although it was during these years steadily growing, reached only a comparatively narrow circle of intellectuals in the middle and working classes. It was when a group of the younger men took up, from 1913 onwards, the wider dissemination of these ideas, particularly through the then newly founded Labour paper, the Daily Herald, that the movement began to exercise an influence over larger circles. This wide appeal, moreover, also resulted to some extent in a transformation of the Guild Socialist theory itself. The theory became steadily less Utopian and remote; and its advocates applied themselves more and more to a study of actual, pressing trade-union problems, and to the working-out of proposals for the “next steps” to be taken.

Up to this point the guild movement had remained entirely unorganized, save for the small degree of cohesion secured through the medium of the New Age. It was in 1914 that the idea of creating an organization for the propaganda and study of Guild Socialism in England first took shape at a private conference of the younger Guild Socialists. This led, at Easter 1915, to the formation of the National Guilds League, which immediately set on foot an active propaganda in the working-class and professional movement. There is no doubt that this propaganda was largely helped by the conditions of war-time industry. Workshop problems were constantly arising owing to the operation of dilution and to war-time changes in the

methods and forms of production. This situation served to awaken a critical spirit in the workers, and made them more ready to listen to plans for a change in the industrial system.

It is legitimate to say that by 1921 the guild propaganda, while it had not made any direct appeal to the larger masses of the workers in Great Britain or other countries, had come to exercise a powerful influence over a steadily growing number of the younger local and national leaders of the Labour movement and in the professions. This influence could be seen in the changing policies and programmes both of trade unions and professional associations and of socialist societies. For example, the Miners' Federation, which before the war advocated a measure of nationalization of the mines which would have placed them under direct State administration, laid before the Coal Industry Commission, in 1919, a scheme which was in substance an adoption of the Guild Socialist proposals for industrial self-government. Similar influences have been at work in other industries, notably in the post-office, on the railways and in the building industry. The influence of the Guild Socialist propaganda has also been considerable in the professions, and especially in the teaching world; while in the sphere of socialist organization the policy and programme of the Independent Labour party, the Labour party and other organizations have been largely changed so as to incorporate the idea of control of industry by the workers more or less on the lines advocated by the Guild Socialists.

The National Guilds League, which is the only organization directly representing the Guild Socialist movement in Great Britain, defines its objects in the following terms: “The abolition of the Wage System, and the establishment by the workers of Self-Government in Industry through a democratic system of National Guilds, working in conjunction with other democratic functional organizations in the community.” An examination of this definition will serve to indicate clearly the main ideas upon which Guild Socialism is based.

The central idea, undoubtedly, is that of self-government in industry. The guild propaganda is above all connected with the advocacy of a change in the system of industrial administration which would result in placing the power and responsibility of administration in the hands of the workers engaged in each particular industry or service. Guild Socialists have always stressed the point that by “workers” they mean not simply the manual workers engaged in industry, but the whole necessary personnel. Indeed, the oft-used phrase “workers by hand and brain” seems to have been coined by the Guild Socialists, and was used by them from the beginning of their propaganda. They have stressed, moreover, not only the need for common action by all the workers “by hand and brain,” but also the need for the recognition, in any form of democratic industrial organization, of vital functional differences between one grade of workers and another. The democracy which they have advocated has been not the government of industry by indiscriminate mass voting, but a system in which power and responsibility would be definitely related to the particular function which each individual or group of individuals is called upon to fulfil in the service of the community.

The central idea of Guild Socialism is thus the idea of functional democracy, or, in other words, the application of democratic principles to the organization of all forms of industry and public service. This advocacy is closely combined in Guild Socialist propaganda with a critique of the current conceptions of democracy. Guildsmen are fond of pointing out that the present forms of democratic organization, which may be called, for short, “parliamentary democracy based on universal suffrage,” are not in reality democracy at all, and do not in fact provide for the direction of the affairs of the community by the positive wills of its members. They urge that it is useless to look for effective democracy in the political sphere as long as the principle on which industry, which so largely dominates men's lives in modern communities, is organized is the principle of autocracy, or, at best, of fundamental class divisions. In this aspect their teaching may be regarded as a precise application

of the Marxian “materialist conception of history” to the criticism of modern parliamentary democracy. If industry is democratically organized, they hold that real democracy in the political sphere will follow almost as a matter of course; but, as long as men, in their daily work, are compelled to submit to external dictation and have no recognized voice in the ordering of their service, these class conditions, they hold, will inevitably reproduce themselves in the political sphere. Guildsmen say that “economic power precedes political power.”

The central object, then, of the Guild Socialists is to establish democracy in the sphere of industry, and thereby to secure that it shall be applied throughout the whole sphere of social organization. In advocating such a change they recognize that their hope of success rests on relating their ideal definitely to actual movements existing within the world of capitalism, but capable of being so transformed as to supplant capitalism and replace it in the organization of industries and services. They have therefore always based their propaganda directly upon the organizations which the manual and professional workers have created for the purpose of protecting their interests and improving their position under the wage system, and they have sought to persuade these organizations to accept the principle of industrial self-government, and to work for the realization of it by endeavouring, in proportion as their power increases, to extend their actual control over capitalist industrialism. Mention has been made above of the transformation which has taken place in the programmes of many trade unions and other working-class bodies, largely under the influence of Guild Socialist ideas. The members of these bodies, from regarding the purpose for which their organizations are built up as limited to the protection of their members' interests under the wage system in face of those by whom they are employed or the securing of useful legislation, are gradually broadening their conception of the function of these organizations so as to include the assumption of direct “control” and responsibility for the organization of industry. Nor is this influence manifest only in the changing programmes of the working-class organizations, but also in their positive policy and action. It was particularly plain in the “shop stewards' movement” in the British engineering and kindred industries, which, during the war, endeavoured to establish in the workshops a wider measure of direct trade-union “control of industry.” It is also manifest in the widening of the range of industrial disputes, and in the putting forward by the unions of claims which involve the recognition of their right to interfere and negotiate on behalf of their members in connexion with questions of “discipline” and “management.” It appears further in demands that foremen and supervisory workers should be members of the trade unions, and even that they should be appointed by, and responsible to, those who have to work under them.

The most remarkable outcome of the guild propaganda, and also the only important practical experiment which the Guild Socialists have so far been able to make, is to be found in England in the Building Guild movement. Towards the end of 1919 a movement arose, largely fostered by the local branch of the National Guilds League, among the building operatives in the Manchester area, for the formation of a guild which would be prepared directly to undertake work, especially on behalf of the public authorities, in the sphere of house-building. A local Building Guild organization, governed by representatives from the local management committees of the various building-trade unions, was set up in the Manchester area, and the movement spread very rapidly throughout the country, so that during the following year something like a hundred local Building Guild committees, linked up in a central organization, were brought into being. These guild organizations proceeded to make tenders to the local authorities for the carrying-out of the housing schemes which were then being brought forward in most parts of the country, and after some difficulty the Ministry of Health was induced to sanction a limited number of contracts on an experimental basis. In March 1921 work was already proceeding on about 20 such contracts.

Some of the difficulties which arose in the starting of the Building Guild movement serve to illustrate very clearly certain of the fundamental principles underlying the Guild Socialist movement. When the Building Guilds first tendered for contracts they were asked by the local authorities and by the Ministry of Health, as a private contractor would have been asked, what “financial guarantees” they were willing and able to give. They replied that they would give no financial guarantee, even if they were in a position to do so, since their intention was not to produce for profit, but to produce for the public absolutely at cost price. There is in the constitution of the Building Guilds not only no provision for capital or for interest or profits, but a definite clause which prohibits the distribution, under any circumstances, of any form of dividend or bonus or profit to the workers. This is one of the features which clearly differentiate the Building Guild movement from the movement for “Coöperative Production” with which it is sometimes confused. In their refusal to give financial guarantees the Building Guilds stressed the fact that they were in a position, as a private contractor was not, to give a “labour guarantee,” i.e. a guarantee that they could and would supply all the labour, including technical and supervising ability, necessary for the execution of the job. Stress has been laid, throughout the guild propaganda, on the idea that the power of the workers is based on their possession of a “monopoly of labour,” and the Building Guild movement itself is based on this monopoly, largely possessed by the trade unions which control the Building Guilds.

In the second place, difficulties arose because the Building Guilds firmly insisted that all workers employed by them must have security against unemployment, and must receive full-time wages irrespective of bad-weather conditions which so often cause an interruption of building work, of sickness, and of the other factors which serve to make the wages of the worker, especially in the building industry, vary so largely from week to week, and thus throw him into a position of permanent insecurity. This condition was accepted in the contracts actually signed by the Building Guilds and endorsed by the Ministry of Health; but considerable trouble subsequently arose over it in consequence of the opposition of the building-trade employers, who regarded it as “preferential treatment.”

This point is very important, and is fundamental to the whole guild theory. In the statement of objects of the National Guilds League quoted above, it will be noticed that the Guild Socialists set out first of all to secure the “Abolition of the Wage System.” A part of what they mean by this is that the conditions under which the workers at present receive wages involve permanent insecurity and are therefore degrading, and such as to place the worker at the mercy of the “governing class in industry.” Guildsmen, therefore, have always made the principle of “continuous pay,” or, as it is sometimes called, “industrial maintenance,” a fundamental part of their propaganda. They have insisted that all those who are willing to do service for the community have a right to continuous pay in return for that willingness to serve, and that the maintenance of the “reserve of labour” is a necessary and legitimate charge upon the various industries, and forms a real part of their costs of production. This principle of “industrial maintenance” has undoubtedly been one of the most favourably received and influential aspects of the Guild Socialist policy.

Guildsmen thus claim the recognition, not only of the principle that the responsibility for industrial administration should be placed in the workers' hands, but also of the principle of economic security for every worker in the widest sense. They recognize fully that this involves changes far more fundamental than any mere alteration of the machinery of industrial administration. They are not simply Guildsmen: they are also Socialists. They are in agreement with other schools of socialist thought in holding that it is necessary to transfer the means of production and distribution and exchange from private hands to some form of communal ownership. They are, however, strongly hostile to the older schools of collectivism or “State” Socialism, which contemplate the nationalization of industry in

a sense which would involve its direct administration, after transference to public ownership, by the governmental organization of the political State. Guildsmen have always laid great stress in their propaganda on the evils of bureaucracy and political control in industry; and their system of direct workers' control is put forward as an alternative to State administration.

This, however, does not mean that they hold that the entire control of the various industries and services ought to pass into the hands of the workers organized as producers. They have always contemplated the exercise of direct producers' control over administration in close conjunction with a control over policy in which the representatives of the organized citizen-consumers would have an effective voice. This is what they mean when they say that self-government in industry will be exercised through guilds “working in conjunction with other democratic functional organizations in the community.”

Guildsmen differ in their conception of the precise changes which are required in order to give effect to this principle. They are united in recognizing that the working-class coöperative movement is destined to play an important part as the representative of the organized domestic consumers in the society to which they look forward. But there is much difference of opinion amongst them concerning the character and role of the State. The majority in the National Guilds League has taken a view concerning the State which is closely similar to that of the Marxians. They regard the State as a form of capitalistic organization—“an Executive Committee for administering the affairs of the whole capitalist class”—and they look forward to its supersession “by forms of organization created by and directly expressing the will of the workers themselves. . . . It (the N.G.L.) holds, however, that the exact form of organization required in any country cannot be determined in advance of the situation which calls it into being.” There is a minority, however, in the Guild Socialist movement which holds that the State is capable of adaptation to the function of acting as the political representative of the community in a state of society in which economic organization is based on the Guild Socialist principle of industrial self-government.

The Guild Socialist theory concerning the precise forms of socialist organization which would replace the present machinery of industry and the capitalist State is still in the making, or rather, to some extent, in the unmaking. Different Guild Socialist writers have put forward different views on this question; and on the whole the recent tendency of the Guild Socialist movement has been towards the abandonment of any attempt to define at all precisely the structure of the future society, and towards a concentration rather upon the principles and policies which are to guide the transition to it, preserving only in general outline a common conception of the character of the future organization. The movement has undoubtedly been influenced, as it has been sharply divided, by events in Russia from 1917 onwards. The National Guilds League in England has affirmed its “solidarity with the Russian Soviet Republic,” but has refused to commit itself as an organization to Communist principles, or to declare for the adoption, in Great Britain, of methods similar to those which the Communists have applied in Russia. It is important to point out that the Guild Socialists and their organization, the National Guilds League, must not be regarded as a party or group at all parallel to other socialist organizations such as the Independent Labour party or the Communist party. Guild Socialists in many cases belong to, and work within, one or other of the socialist parties; and they are held together not so much by a common attitude on the question of socialist political policy, as by a common belief as to the principles which must guide the making of the new society— principles which are compatible with varying views as to the policy which it may be necessary to pursue in the political field. Differences on this question of method have not prevented the guildsmen from working together in their endeavour to promote in the trade-union world, and to a less extent in the coöperative movement, a policy designed to strengthen the demand for workers' control, and to bring about substantial encroachments by the

workers on the capitalist control of industry, even while the capitalist system as a whole remains in being. Mention has been made before of the development of the Building Guild organization. Side by side with this practical object-lesson, guildsmen have worked out policies for adoption in those industries in which it is not possible at present to establish guild organizations in rivalry with the existing capitalist system. They have supported, in the case of the railways, the mines and certain other industries, demands for nationalization, always, however, coupling their support with the demand that nationalization must be accompanied by a large measure of democratic control over administration. At the same time they have pressed, in industry generally, the policy known as “encroaching control.” “Encroaching control” means the attempt by the trade unions, while not at once overthrowing capitalism or dispossessing the present owners of the means of production, to transfer into the hands of the organized workers as many as possible of the functions of control which are at present exercised by employers or their representatives. The two outstanding forms of this propaganda of “encroaching control” are to be found: (a) in the demand put forward by the guildsmen for the election of foremen and supervisors by the rank-and-file workers; and (b) in the policy known as “collective contract.”

(a) Guildsmen are never weary of urging that in place of the present system, under which the foremen and industrial supervisors are appointed by the employers, usually from the ranks of the manual workers, the workers, through their trade unions, should take into their hands the right to appoint their own foremen and supervisors. This demand has not at present been conceded save in an insignificant number of instances; but the trade unions have taken certain steps towards it by securing, in numerous instances, the dismissal of foremen to whom their members have taken objection. The carrying-through of this policy of democratic election of foremen is closely bound up with the policy of “collective contract.”

(b) By “collective contract” is meant a scheme capable of assuming a number of different forms, under which the whole of the workers in a particular shop, factory or department would make with their employer a single agreement as to their terms of service, the amount and character of their output, and the payment for it. Instead of the present system, under which the employer engages and pays each worker individually, and appoints his own representatives to exercise discipline in the workshop, the trade unions themselves, under this system, would make a contract with the employer to supply the necessary labour, including workshop supervision, and to carry out the work required, and would thus control engagements and dismissals as well as workshop discipline. The employer, instead of paying each worker individually, would pay to the union, or to the works committee on its behalf, a lump sum, which the workers would then distribute amongst themselves in such a way as they might agree upon. By this arrangement, it is contended, the employer would be directly excluded from a certain sphere in which he now exercises control. The workers would thus not only get a valuable lesson and experience in the work of controlling industry, but would also greatly strengthen their position for a subsequent further assumption of power, which 'would involve the winning of industrial control over a wider area, including commercial as well as purely productive operations. This system, too, has not yet been adopted anywhere in full; but certain approximations to it have been made.

The guildsmen stress, in the whole of their propaganda, the need for an appeal to a new motive in industry if men are to be persuaded to put out their best efforts, and to do their best work in the service of the community. They claim that in the past, since the coming of large-scale industry, production has been secured mainly by the operation of two motives fear (of unemployment and starvation) and greed (for higher remuneration secured, e.g. by “payment by results”). They contend that these two motives are showing themselves more and more inadequate to secure the continuance of production, and that this is shown both by the increasing frequency and severity

of industrial disputes, and by the diminished willingness on the part of the workers to do their best. They maintain that a different spirit can be made to prevail in industry only if two conditions are satisfied. The first of these conditions is that the worker must have a sense that, in putting his best into his work, he is serving, not the private interest of any individual, but the whole community, and that his work is being directed to that end which will most conduce to the common benefit; the second condition is that the responsibility for doing his best must be placed upon the worker himself, and that he must be given freedom, in the form of self-government, in the organization of his work. These two ideas are often put together in the phrase “free communal service,” which is regarded by guildsmen as the condition of the creation of reasonable industrial order. It is recognized that such an order would make higher demands upon the will and good-will of the mass of the people than the capitalist system; but guildsmen contend that, if the right appeal is made and the above conditions satisfied, the workers will rise to the occasion and will be prepared to do their best in the service of the public, because they will feel that they “count,” and that the responsibility for the good conduct of industry rests directly upon them. Guild Socialists always insist that the power which goes with responsibility must be diffused to the widest possible extent among the whole mass of the people, and that this is the necessary condition of democratic efficiency and healthy social organization.

(G. D. H. C.)


text:
1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Guillaumat, Marie Louis Adolphe

GUILLAUMAT, MARIE LOUIS ADOLPHE (1863–), French general, was born at Bancqneuf (Charente Inférieure) on Jan. 4 1863. He entered the École de St. Cyr on Oct. 31 1882 and was appointed a sub-lieutenant of infantry on Oct. 1 1884. Four years later he was promoted lieutenant. In Nov. 1893 he became a captain and was transferred to the 147th infantry regiment. In 1903 he was appointed professor of military history at St. Cyr, and later became lecturer on infantry tactics at the École de Guerre. He was promoted lieutenant-colonel in 1907 and colonel in 1910. In Jan. 1913 he became director of infantry at the Ministry of War, and on Oct. 8 of the same year was made a general of brigade, continuing to hold his appointment. On June 14 1914 he became chef de cabinet when M. Messimy was War Minister, but on the outbreak of the World War he was placed at the disposal of General Joffre. On Sept. 2 1914 he was given command of the 33rd Division, becoming, in the following Dec., a temporary general of division. On Feb. 25 1915 he took part in the defence of Verdun, in the operations attending the German offensive of Feb. 1916, and in the French (Somme) offensive of the same year. He was confirmed in his rank as a general of division on Dec. 23 1915. In Dec. 1916 he took over command of the II. Army from General Nivelle when that officer was appointed commander-in-chief. Twelve months later (Dec. 14 1917) he succeeded General Sarrail as commander-in-chief in Salonika. In this capacity he had the difficult task of restoring the moral of a heterogeneous force that had become disorganized through inaction, and of reconciling the divergent military interests of the Allies in this theatre. He drew up the offensive plan which Franchet d’Espérey afterwards carried out so brilliantly, but in June 1918 was suddenly brought back to

Paris to act as military governor when the German summer offensives threatened to reproduce the conditions of the Marne. When the tide turned he actively supported the proposed Salonika advance by pressing its advantages on the War Council, and it was with his aid that Franchet d’Espérey obtained authority to advance. In Oct. 1918 he was given command of the V. Army. He was awarded the Grand Cross of the Legion of Honour on July 10 1918 and the médaille militaire on Oct. 3 1918. On Jan. 30 1920 he was appointed to the Superior War Council.


text:
Page:The American Indian.djvu/84

56 blanket being the most unique example, and covers the entire eastern maize area. The data for the Antilles are meager, but since the natives there made some use of cotton, it is safe

to assume a loom. In South America the entire manioc area seems to have been influenced by the Andean region in that looms of some kind were in use. Cotton was raised in many parts for making hammocks, which were woven on a kind of loom. In fact, the loom is a correlated part of the

title: Page:The American Indian.djvu/84


text:
User talk:99.190.72.234

Preemption
Didn't realize you were still working on this page when I proofread it; sorry for the preemption! Thought I'd Welcome-anon you here as I apologize, Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:34, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:99.190.72.234


text:
Page:The American Indian.djvu/178

 CHAPTER IX

THE FINE ARTS

doubt many readers will object to the title we have given this chapter on the ground that no aboriginal production can rise to the level of an actual "fine art," but we feel that the name is justified because the productions here considered occupy the same place in aboriginal life as do the fine arts in Europe. They may be comprehended under the familiar heads of sculpture, painting, literature, and music.

As we have indicated before, the center of New World sculpture was Yucatan, where stone carving is one of the most distinctive traits of Maya culture. True stone carving is rare in South America. The Peruvians did next to nothing of this sort; in fact, the only two places where stone carving rises to an observable level are in the extreme southern limits of Inca influence and again in Colombia, where we have the isolated statues of St. Augustine. In North America, no stone carving worthy of the name occurs north of the Rio Grande. Thus, the ancient Maya cities constitute the center of the sculptor's art, which fringes out in northern Mexico above and in Panama below. Although the carving of small objects in stone reached a very high level in the West Indies, it can scarcely be ranked as sculpture. Even the Aztec and other antecedent Mexican cultures which produced a fair amount of stone carving have not left behind evidences of sculptural skill strictly comparable to those of the Maya. Students of aboriginal art claim that the Maya development came before the Aztec and that the influence of the latter is plainly seen in the later Maya. For example, the well-known Chacmool statue found at Chichen Itza is said to represent a Nahua type, examples of which have been found in several parts of Mexico and also in Salvador, south of the Maya. These statues are, however, fairly representative of

title: Page:The American Indian.djvu/178