254 THROUGH THE MACKENZIE BASIN 



poration. For more than a decade subsequent to 1831, each 

 heaver district in the chartered and licensed territories of 

 the Hudson's Bay Company was annually restricted to the 

 collection of a certain fixed number of beaver, which course 

 eventually proved of much benefit to all concerned. By this 

 means the perpetuation of the beaver was ensured in sections 

 where reckless slaughter had almost exterminated it, while 

 the resulting expansion in more forward localities naturally 

 followed. With the view, however, of reconciling them to 

 this enforced mode of preservation, the natives were strongly 

 urged and encouraged to devote their best energies to the 

 trapping of martens and other fur-bearing animals. After 

 the beaver were known to have largely increased in numbers, 

 and still sold well, the above rule was gradually relaxed ; and 

 as the wants of the Indians in those days were comparatively 

 few, they never experienced any particular hardship from 

 the limit thus imposed upon them in the general interest. 

 It may be here mentioned that the Company never encour- 

 aged the hunting of beaver or any other pelt out of season. 

 On the contrary, they strictly prohibited the killing of 

 beaver in summer;, and would only reluctantly accept the 

 skins of such animals as they were assured had been abso- 

 lutely necessary for food purposes. 



The introduction of nutria and silk in the manufacture 

 of hats in the early forties of the last century struck a deadly 

 blow at the value of beaver, the chief staple fur of Canada 

 and the North- West for two centuries, from which it has not 

 yet quite recovered. Eor nearly half a century thereafter, 

 the prices annually obtained for pelts were some 60 and 70 

 per cent, below the average which had previously ruled. 

 Since the Alaska fur seal, however, has come into " fashion," 

 very much better rates have been realized by the smaller 

 quantities of beaver sold in recent years. With the view 

 of obtaining better prices in England, as well as for its future 

 increase in numbers, the Company naturally favoured a con- 

 tinuation of its beneficial policy of restriction; but owing 



