Oil Indian Dogs. .«i 



JVoIf Dogs. 



We know not whether the techkhi and the itzcuMtepoli/jh 

 were found in any of the countries confiderably to ihe north 

 of Mexico. We are well affured, however, that different 

 kinds of dogs were very common in many of the countries 

 of North America, when this continent was firft difcovered 

 by the Europeans, in the i6th and 17th centuries. I am 

 even inclined to think that North America was much better 

 fupphed with dogs (I mean thefe animals in thedomefticated 

 ftate) than South America and Mexico. There fcems to be 

 little doubt that in the northern countries there was a greater 

 variety than in the fouthern countries. Florida abounded in 

 thefe animals. When Fernando de Soto marched his army 

 through that country, in the year 1540, the Indians fupplied 

 him with great numbers of dogs. On one occafion, a;i 

 Indian cacique fent the Spanifli general no lefs than three 

 hundred dogs *. Thefe were eaten by the Spaniards, who 

 deemed them not inferior to the beft of (liecp f. But we are 

 informed that the Indians did not eat them %. It would 

 feem that the Spaniards did not always fland upon the cere- 

 mony of waiting to have the dogs prefcnted to them. The 

 Portnguefe author of Elvas, who accompanied Soto and his 

 fucceiTor in iheir mad ramble, informs us, that, during the 

 time the army laboured under a fcarcity of meat, " he who 

 could catch a dog in any villacre thought himfelf a very happy 

 man ; for fometimes (he obferves) we found thirty in a place ; 

 but the foldler that killed one, and fent not a quarter to bis 

 captain, fuffered for it, paving dear ior his incivilities when 

 he was to go fentinel, or upon any guard of fatigue §." 



We are not told what kind of dog it was that the Spaniards 



• This was the cacique of Quaxulc, whicli, if we can depend upon the 

 old maps of Florida, was in the countrv of the Chikkalah Indians. A 

 Relation of the Invafion and Conqueft of Florida, lCC. ixc. p. 71. 



t See A Relation, &c. p. 55. 



X A Rcl:;tion, &c. p. 71. I do not think it certain that the Inclians di',; 

 not cat tlicir dogs. Tlie prefent which Soto received at Ocute, in the 

 country of the Creek Indians, rather favours the opinion "hat they did. 

 The cacique fent the Sp.inifh general " tvvo tliouland Indians, with a prcr 

 lent of rabbets, partridges, maes-bread, two pullets, and a great nianv 

 dogs." A Relation, &c. j). 55. If the Indians did not eat their dogs, 

 why did they fuppofe the Spaniards were fond of thei\i ? It is true, tliere 

 was a great fcarcity of meat and fait at Ocute, and the Indians may have 

 fuppofcd that any kind of Food would be acceptable to ar. army of hungry 

 men. Belldcs, it is probal)le they had many opportunities of feeing the 

 Spaniards employed in fttaling their dogs. 



§ A Relation, &c. p. 56. 



B 3 foimd 



