394 ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 



applied, as may be found described in my '• Place-nomenclature." Now, 

 H curious fact is this, that while the names on the river below St. Anne's 

 do not occur at all upon any other map or in any document known to 

 me, those above St. Anne's are almost identical' with those used by 

 Munro in his well-known Eeport of 1783. In describing the lower river, 

 however, Munro does not use any of these names. It seems to me plain 

 that all of the names on both the upper and the lower river are from the 

 same original, for they are of much the same character and corrupt the 

 Indian names in about the same way. This in itself would dispose of the 

 supposition that the original of this map was made by Munro to accom- 

 pany his report ; even had he made it for the uj)per river, it is impossible 

 that he could have made it for the lower, without using some of the 

 names in his report. I think, therefore, that Munro used on his voyage 

 an earlier map of the upper St. John made by some maker yet unknown 

 to me, and this map of Peachey's is drawn from the same original, but 

 with later additions. On the lower St. John, Munro probably had a map 

 of Morris. Noav, as to the original maker of this map, one at once recalls 

 the reference by Morris to Captain Peach, and it is quite possible that the 

 original of this entire map of the river is by him, or less probably, that it 

 was made by George Mitchell in 1735. It may yet be found among the 

 treasures of the British Museum, but for the present it remains one of those 

 puzzles which will give zest to the pursuit of our cartography for some 

 time to come. 



Probably this ma]i was published, for it was extensively copied. 

 There is a manuscript copy of the ])art from St. Ann's to Grand Falls in 

 the Crown Land office at Fredericton, with some ditferences from the 

 Peache}'- copy. The earliest appearance of this type in print that I have 

 seen is the map of 1794 in Kitchln's Atlas (Fig. 40), but it appears upon 

 many others, as Arrowsmith's United States, 1796 ; Solzmann's map of 

 Maine, 1798; a "Plan of the Eiver St. John" on Holland's new chart of 

 the coast of Nova Scotia, 1708, and even on Arrowsmith, 1794. and on 

 Henderson's map of the St. John, 1827. But its nomenclature and topo- 

 graphy later died out, and in the end the Morris type prevailed, and is 



' Map and report agree in some cnrions mistakes, such as the presence of both 

 B. Nequoynquiqua ana Madame Kissn-ay, wliich are in fact the same, and in placing 

 Medoctick Village at the south of the Madochencjuick (not named on the map), 

 when it certainly should have l)een put below Medoctick Creek. On the other hand, 

 the map has Gowac (Coac) wrongly placed and the report has it correctly. I some- 

 times have thought the map was made up to agree with the report. Perhaps, after 

 all, the upper river is from a map by Munro. Several of tlie names are of totally 

 unknown origin, such as /. Oamcells, (kith of Medoctick. On some of the maps 

 which adopt the Peacliey names, there are some seeming to belong to the same set 

 which are on neither Peachey nor Munro, such as Siqto hacto (Shikatehawk) and 

 Sheers Quarter (Grand River), seeming to show that all have drawn independently 

 from a common source. Mr. I. Allen Jack, of St. John, writes me he once possessed 

 a printed map, dated not later than 1770, whicli contained some of these names. 



