[890] Latrobe, op. cit., II, 209.
[891] Porter, Earliest Religious History of Chicago, 70.
[892] Ibid., 71.
[893] Shirreff, op. cit., 228.
[894] Latrobe, op. cit., II, 206.
The few primitive hotels were, of course, utterly unable to accommodate comfortably the crowds of strangers who clamored for board and lodging. Latrobe characterizes his hotel, which was, apparently, the Sauganash, kept by Mark Beaubien, as "a vile, two-storied barrack," within which "all was in a state of most appalling confusion, filth and racket."[895] The public table was such a scene of confusion that the traveler felt compelled to avoid it. The French landlord was "a sporting character" and "everything was left to chance, who in the shape of a fat housekeeper, fumed and toiled around the premises from morning to night."
[895] Ibid., II, 209.
The character of the impression which the traveler forms is determined as much by his standard of judgment as by the conditions he actually encounters. Latrobe was a cultivated English gentleman, habituated to another manner of life than that which prevailed upon the American frontier. The picture drawn by Shirreff, himself a sturdy farmer, of Chicago's inns in September, 1833, is perhaps fairer than that of Latrobe; yet even when measured by his more lenient standards the conditions described seem crude enough.[896] His hotel was so disagreeably crowded that the landlord could not positively promise a bed, although he would do his best to accommodate his guests. His house was "dirty in the extreme, and confusion reigned throughout," but the traveler temperately observes that the extraordinary circumstances of the village went far to extenuate this. The table was amply supplied with substantial provisions, although they were indifferently cooked and served "still more so." At bedtime the guest was assigned to a dirty pallet in the corner of a room ten feet square which contained two small beds already occupied. But he was not to enjoy even this poor retreat without molestation. Toward morning he was aroused from a sound sleep by "an angry voice uttering horrid imprecations," accompanied by a demand to share the bed. The lighted candle in the hands of the speaker showed that the intruders were French traders. Shirreff checked their torrent of profanity with a dignified rebuke, which caused them to withdraw from the room, leaving him in undisturbed possession of the bed.
[896] Shirreff, op. cit., 228-29.
The thousands of savages congregated to barter away their birthright presented an extraordinary spectacle.[897] Although several different tribes were represented, their dress and appearance depended upon individual caprice and the means of gratifying it, rather than upon tribal customs and distinctions. Those who possessed the means generally attired themselves in fantastic fashion and gaudy colors. As a rule the warriors were attired more gaily and were more given to dandyism than were the squaws. All of the men, except a few of the very poorest, wore breechclouts and blankets. Most of them added to these articles leggings of various colors and degrees of ornamentation; while those who were able disported themselves in loosely flowing jackets, rich sashes, and gaudy shawl or handkerchief turbans. The squaws wore blue or printed cotton cloths and the richer ones had embroidered petticoats and shawls. The various articles of clothing of both men and women were covered with gewgaws of silver and brass, glass beads, and mirrors, such as had from time immemorial been supplied to the Indians by the traders. The women wore ornaments in their ears and occasionally in their noses, while the faces of both sexes were bedaubed with paint, blue, black, white, and vermilion, applied according to more or less fanciful designs.