6 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY 
languages about 500 words were chosen, but as the lexical 
material from several of the tribes is scanty, the comparison 
can never be complete. It was the intention to follow the 
compilation of this table with a closer comparison of Chiti- 
macha and Atakapa, which show many resemblances, but 
in the course of the work so many more similarities between 
Chitimacha and Tunica presented themselves that these 
were selected instead. In partial furtherance of this re- 
search Dr. Swanton proceeded to Louisiana in May, where 
he remained almost until the close of the fiscal year, visiting, 
studying, and photographing the mixed Indian population 
along the gulf coast in La Fourche and Terra Bonne Parishes, 
the Chitimacha at Charenton, and the Koasati northeast 
of Kinder. From the Koasati about 150 pages of native 
text with interlinear translation were recorded, and 134 
pages previously procured from an Alabama Indian in Texas 
were corrected. 
Mr. J. N. B. Hewitt, ethnologist, at the beginning of March 
went to Canada for the purpose of continuing his Iroquois 
studies. Establishing headquarters at Brantford, Ontario, 
he at once undertook the work of revising the extended 
texts relating to the Iroquois League, recorded during former 
field trips. Shortly thereafter this work was interrupted 
when Mr. Hewitt was selected as an official delegate from the 
Council of the Six Nations to attend a condolence and in- 
stallation ceremony at Muncietown, in which he took a 
leading part, requiring the intoning of an address of com- 
forting in the Onondaga language and also in acting the part 
of the Seneca chiefs in such a council. This official recog- 
nition gave Mr. Hewitt the rare opportunity of observing 
how such a ceremony is conducted from an esoteric point 
of view. 
On returning to Brantford, March 16, Mr. Hewitt resumed 
work on the texts pertaining to the league, which necessi- 
tated the reading of the words and the immediate context 
several times to determine their final form. Moreover, it 
was desirable to read the texts over with every informant 
separately in order to obtain a full expression of the inform- 
ant’s knowledge or criticism of the work of another. In this 
