This military function of slavery, as we shall see, also exists among several pastoral and agricultural peoples. The industrial part of society, in such cases, is not quite differentiated from the military part. As for the Tlinkits, Tsimshian and Ahts, the employing of slaves for protecting the master or his property is facilitated by the slave-trade: a purchased slave, brought from a great distance, may be made to fight, where it would not be safe to employ in warfare a slave captured from a neighbouring tribe; for the latter will probably be much inclined to go over to the enemies, who often are his own kindred. But the example of the Aleuts, whose slaves are prisoners of war and their descendants[119], shows that even captive slaves may be employed in warfare. We shall not very much wonder at this, if we take into consideration, that prisoners of war are sometimes soon forgotten, and even repelled, by their former countrymen. So “if a Mojave is taken prisoner he is forever discarded in his own nation, and should he return his mother even will not own him”[120]. The expectation of such treatment may induce captive slaves to fight on their masters’ side against their own tribesmen rather than join the latter.
2º. Slaves are sometimes employed in hunting, fishing and work connected with fishing, such as rowing, etc. From a statement of Dunn’s, quoted by Niblack, we learn that at Fort Simpson, British Columbia (in the country of the Tsimshian), “a full-grown athletic slave, who is a good hunter, will fetch nine blankets, a gun, a quantity of powder and ball, a couple [[216]]of dressed elk skins, tobacco, vermilion paint, a flat file, and other little articles”[121]. And Boas tells us, that Tsimshian slaves row the boats, bring the killed seals to land, and cook them[122]. Tlinkit slaves, as it appears from Kotzebue’s above-quoted statement, must fish for their masters. Among the Nootkas “the common business of fishing for ordinary sustenance is carried on by slaves, or the lower class of people; while the more noble occupation of killing the whale and hunting the sea-otter is followed by none but the chiefs and warriors”[123]. According to Jewitt’s narrative, Aht slaves had to supply their masters with fish. The author, on his wedding an Aht girl, got two young male slaves presented to him to assist him in fishing[124].
Dunn’s statement about hunting slaves is very valuable. It proves that hunting is here no longer the chief and noble occupation of freemen. Among such people as for instance the Ojibways a good hunter is held in high esteem, not bought at a high price as a valuable slave[125]. What we have said in the last paragraph about hunting not being fit to be performed by slaves, is not impaired by this statement; for hunting among these traders is not the most honoured occupation; moreover, the abundance of game along the Pacific Coast makes it very easy; it does not require nearly so much skill and application as among the Ojibways and similar tribes. This statement also contains a most striking refutation of Bos’ assertion, that slavery here exists only as a reminiscence of a hypothetical former agricultural state[126]. If this were true, there might be traces of an ancient slave system; slaves might even still be kept by rich men as a luxury; but the slave’s ability in hunting would not enter as a determining factor into his price. Slavery exists here in full vigour, and is not in any way, as Bos will have it, foreign to the economic state in which these tribes live[127]. [[217]]
What Meares tells us of the Nootkas is also instructive. The drudgery for daily sustenance, fishing, is left to the slaves; whereas the chiefs and warriors reserve to themselves the less productive and (partly therefore) more noble occupation of killing whales and sea-otters. It is remarkable that fishing is carried on by “the slaves or the lower class of people”. Those who cannot afford to buy slaves must themselves perform the drudgery that others leave to slaves. The formation of social classes among freemen is furthered by slavery.
3º. The slaves of the Ahts, in Jewitt’s time, were obliged to make the canoes and to assist in building and repairing the houses[128]. This proves, that slavery among them discharged an important economic function.
4º. We are often informed, that slaves do domestic work. Tsimshian slaves cook the killed seals and cut wood[129]. Among the Nootkas “women prepare the fish and game for winter use, cook, manufacture cloth and clothing, and increase the stock of food by gathering berries and shell-fish; and most of this work among the richer class is done by slaves”. Our informant speaks also of “the hard labour required” from the slaves[130]. Among the Ahts, slaves, as Sproat tells us, serve the family. When a man of rank is going to remove, the new house is prepared in advance by his slaves. According to Jewitt’s narrative, “all the menial offices are performed by them, such as bringing water, cutting wood, and a variety of others”. “The females are employed principally in manufacturing cloth, in cooking, collecting berries, etc.”[131]. Among the Fish Indians old women and slaves prepare the food[132]. Chinook slaves “are obliged to perform all the drudgery for their masters.… But the amount of the work connected with the Chinook household is never great”[133]. The last sentence here proves that “drudgery” means household work.
Some general expressions we find on record with our ethnographers seem to bear the same meaning. For instance, Tlinkit slaves, according to Kotzebue (quoted above), must “labour” for their masters; and Niblack, evidently referring to [[218]]the same statement, says that “slaves did all the drudgery”[134]. The Tacullies use their slaves “as beasts of burden”, which perhaps also means imposing household labour upon them[135]. Holmberg states that the Koniagas employed their slaves as labourers or servants[136]. And Niblack remarks about the Coast Indians of Southern Alaska and Northern British Columbia in general: “When slavery was in vogue, this class performed all the menial drudgery”[137].
It is remarkable, that slaves in so many cases are stated to perform household, i.e. female, labour. These statements are even more numerous than those about fishing and similar work; so it would seem (we may not speak more positively, as our information is rather incomplete), that household work is the chief occupation of slaves along the Pacific Coast. Now it is easy to understand, that fixed habitations and the preserving of food for winter use require a large amount of domestic labour. But this does not solve the question, why slaves are employed for this work; why the men purchase or capture slaves not for their own private use, but in order to relieve their wives of a part of their task. In Australia women are overworked, and beaten into the bargain; why are the men of the Pacific Coast so anxious to give the women assistance in their work?
It might be, that female labour is valued by the men, because articles of trade are prepared by the women. Unfortunately the ethnographers most often content themselves with remarking that a brisk trade is carried on, or that some tribe is commercial rather than warlike, without specifying the articles of commerce. Yet a few statements tend to verify our hypothesis. The articles of trade of the Chinooks before the arrival of the Europeans were: fish, oil, shells, and Wapato. “The Wapato, a bulbous root, compared by some to the potato and turnip, was the aboriginal staple, and was gathered by women”[138]. Lewis and Clark also state that this bulb, which “is the great article of food, and almost the staple article of commerce on the Columbia”, is collected chiefly by the women[139]. [[219]]The Tlinkits export to the interior basket-work, dancing clothes, train-oil prepared from the ssag (a kind of fish), a sort of cakes made of Alaria Esculenta (a sea-weed). The women manufacture basket-work, dancing clothes, mocassins and other clothes. In the fishing season they are from morning to night engaged in preparing the fish. In the autumn they gather berries, bark, leaves and other vegetable by-meat; in other seasons they gather shells and sea-urchins on the beach[140]. Here all articles of trade are products of female labour. Among the Ahts baskets and mats, manufactured by the women, are sold; the women may keep the proceeds, and also get a little portion of their husbands’ earnings. Our informant, speaking of the several divisions of the Ahts mutually exchanging the fish that each of them catches, probably also means fish prepared by the women[141]. In W. Washington and N. W. Oregon the kamas, a root which was “formerly a great article of trade with the interior”, is dug by the women[142]. What articles are exported by the other tribes we do not know.
There is another fact strengthening our hypothesis: women are often consulted in matters of trade. Among the Tlinkits “the men rarely conclude a bargain without consulting their wives”[143]. Nootka wives too “are consulted in matters of trade”[144]. About Puget Sound the females “are always consulted in matters of trade before a bargain is closed”[145]. Chinook women “are consulted on all important matters”[146], which matters, among these commercial people, necessarily include the trade. Among the Haidas, the trade, in Jewitt’s time, was even principally managed by the women, who were expert in making a bargain[147].