16 NEW YORK STATE MUSEUM 
sent little of interest. The same may be said of New Jersey and 
eastern Pennsylvania. Mr Squier observed that above Wilkesbarre, 
“ still further to the northwest, near the borders of New York and 
forming an unbroken chain with the works of that state, are found 
other remains.” These extended still farther south and passed into 
Ohio near Lake Erie. The line reached Toledo, and many of the 
simple earthworks had double walls. West of Niagara river there 
was a line of earthworks commencing on the east of Elgin 
county, Canada, and nearly reaching Detroit. Early and recent 
ossuaries were frequent at the west end of Lake Ontario and 
northward into the Huron country. This was in Simcoe county, 
Canada, where Mr A. F. Hunter some years ago located 218 
villages and 122 ossuaries. Some have been added since, and 
in 1899 he published accounts of 49 villages and 24 ossuaries 
in the town of Tiny and vicinity. On both sides of the Bay 
of Quinté was a group of curious mounds, usually arranged 
in pairs and mostly built of stone. They reach from the 
east line of the early Huron territory to Deseronto. Mounds 
of a different character are found on the banks and islands 
of the St Lawrence, and another group of earthworks occurs near 
Prescott. These are of the Iroquois type. Scattered camps occur 
below these, and at Montreal the early seat of the Mohawks is 
confidently placed. Relics are not numerous there. Some distance 
below that city in 1636 the Canadian Indians pointed out spots 
where the Iroquois had recently lived. Prof. George H. Perkins 
said that on the Vermont side of Lake Champlain “remains of 
ancient settlements are very rare, and there is no sure evidence of 
long continued occupation of any locality near the lake.” At 
Swanton he found a cemetery with long stone tubes and native 
copper beads, similar to those of the Mohawk valley. 
One excellent work has not been quoted, and yet deserves atten- 
tion. This is the History of the Indian tribes of Hudson river, by 
KE. M. Ruttenber, 1872. This judiciously classifies these tribes, their | 
homes and changes, and may be consulted with great advantage, 
and in the main with full confidence. A single error of importance 
is one on page 69, where he identifies the Minquas with the Minsis, 
both names being Algonquin words, and thus easily confused. 
