26 



Whether the cup was intended for use as a burial urn, or 

 simply for ordinary use it is difficult to say. 



Now, in endeavoring to sum up the results, a few points 

 need some discussion. 



1. Who were the people who erected the mounds? Judg- 

 ing from the following considerations, I should say they were 



NOT AN INDIAN RACE. 



Whoever built the mounds had a faculty not possessed by 

 modern Indians. Building instincts seem hereditary. The 

 beaver and the musk rat build a house. Other creatures to 

 whom a dwelling might be serviceable, such as the squirrel, 

 obtain shelter in another way. And races have their distinc- 

 tive tendencies likewise. It never occurs to an Indian to build 

 a mound. From what has been already said as to the fertile 

 localities in which the mounds are found we are justified in 

 believing that their builders were agriculturists. Dr. Dawson 

 in Montreal by the use of the microscope detected grains of 

 charred corn in the remains of Hochelaga. I have examined 

 a small quantity of the dust taken from one of the shells found 

 in the Grand Mound, with the microscope, and though I am 

 not perfectly certain, yet I believe there are traces of some 

 farinaceous substance to be seen. On skirting the shores of 

 the Lake of the Woods into which Rainy River runs, at the 

 present time, you are struck by the fact that there are no Can- 

 adian farmers there, and likewise that there are no mounds 

 to be seen, while along the banks of Rainy River both the agri- 

 culturist is found cultivating the soil and the mounds abound. 

 It would seem to justify us in concluding that the farmer and 

 the Mound Builder avoided the one locality because of its bar- 

 ren rocky character and took to the other because of its fertil- 

 ity. Moreover the continual occurrence of pottery in the 

 mounds shows that the Mound Builders were potters as well, 

 while none of the tribes inhabiting the district have any know- 

 ledge of the art of pottery. The making of pottery is the oc- 

 cupation peculiarly of a sedentary race, and hence of a race 

 likely to be agriculturists. At it requires the building faculty 

 to originate the mounds, so it requires the constructive faculty 

 to make pottery. In constructive ability our Indians are singu- 

 larly deficient, just as it is with greatest difficulty that they can 

 be induced even on a small scale to practice agriculture. It 

 has been objected to this conclusion that the Indians can make 

 a canoe, which is a marvel in its way. But there is a great 

 difference in the two cases. In the canoe all the materials 

 remain the same. The approximation to a chemical process 



