168 EBV. GEO. PATTERSON" ON THE BEOTHIKS 



my frieud, Dr. Kiug of the Ethnological Society. This marked them a separule section of 

 the Algonkio, and such I believe them to have been." Again, in the ' Proceedings of the 

 Philological Society for 1850,' he has given a table of the affinities between the Beothik 

 and other Algonkin dialects, in which he endeavours to show^ that, though the former 

 differs very widely from the Micmac, it still belongs to that great family. Professor 

 Campbell cf Montreal, who his made the affiliation of the Algonkin languages the subject 

 of careful study, comes to the same conclusion. In a letter to the writer he says : " The 

 Beothik has its affinities with the old (mostly now) deiunct Algonkin dialects of New 

 England and with the Crée of to-day, branches of which are the so-called Scoffie or Shesh- 

 tapoosh and so called Montagnais. It is probably the most ancient Algonkin dialect, for 

 by its numerals and vocabulary generally, it connects with the Philippine Islands." 



On the other hand, Mr. Gatschet, after an elaborate investigation, comes to an oppo- 

 site conclusion, regarding the Beothiks as racially and linguistically separate from the 

 Algonkin. The grounds for this he sums up as follows : — 



" The facts, he says, which most strongly militate against an assumed kinship of 

 Beothik and Algonkin dialects are as follows : (1.) The phonetic system of both differs 

 largely. Beothik lacks/ and probably v, while / is scarce. In Micmac and the majority 

 of Algonkin dialects the r, ch and d are wanting, but occur in Beothik. (2.) The objective 

 case exists in Beothik, but none of the Algonkin dialects has another oblique case except 

 the locative. (3.) The numerals differ entirely in both, which would not be the case if 

 there w^as the least affinity between the two. (4.) The terms for the parts of the human 

 and animal body, for colours (except white), for animals and plants, for natural phenomena, 

 for the celestial bodies, and other objects of nature, as well as the radicals of adjectives 

 and verbs differ completely. 



" When we add to all this the great discrepancy in ethnological particulars, as canoes, 

 dress, implements, manners and customs, we come to the conclusion that the Eed Indians 

 of Newfoundland were a race distinct from the races on the mainland shores surrounding 

 them on the north and west. This language I do not hesitate, after a long study of its 

 precarious and unreliable elements to regard as belonging to a separate tinguistic family, 

 clearly distinct from Innuit, Tinne, Iroquois and Algonkin. Once a refugee from some 

 part of the mainland of North America, the Beothik tribe may have lived for centuries 

 isolated upon Newfoundland, sustaining itself by fishing and the chase. "When we look 

 around upon the surface of the globe for parallels of linguistic families relegated to insular 

 homes, we find the Elu upon the island of Ceylon in the Indian ocean, and the extinct 

 Tasmanian iipon Tasmania Island, widely distant from Australia. The Harufuru or 

 Alfuru languages of New Guinea are spoken upon islands only. Almost wholly confined 

 to islands are the nationalities speaking Malayan, Aino, Celtic, Haida and Aleut dialects. 

 Only a narrow strip of territory now shows from which portion of the mainland they may 

 have crossed over the main to their present abodes." 



When men so distinguished dift'er' I have not the presumption to attempt to decide 

 between them, and to discuss the various points I acknowledge myself ixnfit. But yet, 

 looking at the whole discussion, there are certain points clear from the statements on both 

 sides, and perhaps on the main question they are not so far apart as might at first sight 

 appear. They all admit that the language differed widely from the Micmac and those of 

 neighbouring Algonkin tribes. The dialects spoken by these are so nearly allied that the 



