After a month hiatus, the Clerk returns. Lest you should think your humble Clerk has been lacking in industry, this past month has been occupied with travel to Grand Portage to participate in the Annual Rendezvous and greet visitors to the post in the countinghouse.
Beyond that trip, the days have been taken up in my "other life" as a puppeteer in performance and in building characters for a company in northern Minnesota.
However, I have returned.
During this period my experiments with ink have continued. I have taken the greater part of the ink I have produced in the past and dehydrated it producing a powdered ink. I had earlier stated that I wasn't enthralled by the produced outcome, the product having much particulate residue and seemingly quite thin.
I was wrong!
After using this reconstituted ink, I found that it worked quite well. The liquid applied quite nicely to the paper. At first contact the ink was quite a faint gray, but within seconds as it dried, the ink took on a dark complexion. This is possibly due to the tannin etching in the paper's linen/cotton fibers, but perhaps the iron sulfate play some part.
I have yet to strain the reconstituted ink to remove the particulates as some instructors of the 18th century advise. They claimed that the particles interfere with the flow of the ink but I have not found that to be the case.
More as it develops.
On a related theme, I have also been exploring what form actual period powdered ink took. In my search, I found the following information which I posted in another forum:
Whilst searching out information on forms of powdered ink, having gone the dehydrated route, I found this series of abstracts from Smithsonian workshops. The particular one that caught my eye was Elissa O’Loughlin's on Powdered Inks.
"Powdered iron gall inks are not reconstituted inks. . . The packets, usually made of paper, allowed the user to carry large quantities of ink without the bulk of the liquid. The ink was mixed with water as needed, and presumably formed a dark writing ink within a short period of time."
Which caused my question about the time element since "a short period of time" was defined.
"Erasmus is said to have carried powdered inks with him on his travels. One could assume that they were in common use when writing materials went “on the road” with officials such as circuit court judges. Colonial American records contain many references to these inks. Benjamin Franklin sold them in his shop in Philadelphia, and the Congress of the United States purchased large quantities of the ink in paper packets."
This is an interesting note on the actual types of the ingredients, as opposed to the commonly used materials:
"One extant sample of powdered iron gall ink in the U.S. National Archives (c. 1830) exhibits some properties which suggest that the form of the iron was chosen carefully. The powder is light brown-gray in color, appears finely divided (not clumped) and the particles of gum are glassy and brittle."
Apparently, rather than the ferrous sulfate (iron sulfate) obtainable from chemical houses (school supply warehouses), the type used possibly used was pure heptahydrate, not hygroscopic and so does not readily oxidize in air.
Another thread to pursue.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Friday, July 31, 2009
Pointed question
I received a recent inquiry regarding the use of "points" on blankets and whether they related to weight or thickness of the blanket. I thought the reply might be of use to you:
Blankets, from the reading I've done on English manufacture, were indeed produced by weight (and sometimes, consequently, length of the complete piece, many many yards) as the completed blanket fabric was taken to the guild hall for weighing and approval. Various widths of fabric were produced which pertained to the ultimate size of the blankets to be manufactured.
However, the weight referred to does not refer to the individual blanket, rather the total piece which would be later cut up into pairs. The thickness of the knap and the quality of the fabric were more a function of the maker and were not indicated, as far as I have been able to determine, by the points (weight could vary from country to country, by manufacturer or weaver; the guild was the ultimate arbiter of whether the fabric was of good quality). The use of points, when they were used and not everyone used actual points apparently, were for indicating size. They would be especially useful as a handy tool for finding the right blanket at a glance.
The "point" is sort of a matter of contention. According to the HBC blanket historian, Harold Tichenor, the "point" may have evolved from French useage in the 16th century. However, there was never a consistent standard for a "point", per Tichenor, until the 19th century when HBC set a standard. In reading about blanket manufacture in Witney and Oxfordshire, there seems to have been an understood set of sizes, though they may have varied from guild hall and manufacturer (remember all work was piece work sent out to individuals and groups by the blanket company). From the use of the "point" in inventories, etc. there must have been a common understanding as to the sizes, or relative sizes each appellation indicated ( 2 point, 2 1/2 point, etc).
And yet, when the point sizes are compared by manufacturer they vary. This site (I may have already passed this on to you) has a messed up page, but toward the bottom there is a comparison of sizes to various companies late 18th into the 19th centuries: http://hrd7.tripod.com/hbc/hbc.html
Off to Grand Portage next week.
Blankets, from the reading I've done on English manufacture, were indeed produced by weight (and sometimes, consequently, length of the complete piece, many many yards) as the completed blanket fabric was taken to the guild hall for weighing and approval. Various widths of fabric were produced which pertained to the ultimate size of the blankets to be manufactured.
However, the weight referred to does not refer to the individual blanket, rather the total piece which would be later cut up into pairs. The thickness of the knap and the quality of the fabric were more a function of the maker and were not indicated, as far as I have been able to determine, by the points (weight could vary from country to country, by manufacturer or weaver; the guild was the ultimate arbiter of whether the fabric was of good quality). The use of points, when they were used and not everyone used actual points apparently, were for indicating size. They would be especially useful as a handy tool for finding the right blanket at a glance.
The "point" is sort of a matter of contention. According to the HBC blanket historian, Harold Tichenor, the "point" may have evolved from French useage in the 16th century. However, there was never a consistent standard for a "point", per Tichenor, until the 19th century when HBC set a standard. In reading about blanket manufacture in Witney and Oxfordshire, there seems to have been an understood set of sizes, though they may have varied from guild hall and manufacturer (remember all work was piece work sent out to individuals and groups by the blanket company). From the use of the "point" in inventories, etc. there must have been a common understanding as to the sizes, or relative sizes each appellation indicated ( 2 point, 2 1/2 point, etc).
And yet, when the point sizes are compared by manufacturer they vary. This site (I may have already passed this on to you) has a messed up page, but toward the bottom there is a comparison of sizes to various companies late 18th into the 19th centuries: http://hrd7.tripod.com/hbc/hbc.html
Off to Grand Portage next week.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Blankets, one more time
Since there was a question about sizes, this page about Point Blankets is a good, quick reference, especially if you can't get a hold of other books. Remember to double the length indicated to derive the "pair of blankets" size. Ex. the one point at 46 inches long is about 8 feet as a pair or double.
You can figure the half point as in between the point sizes.
Contact me for some bibliographic references on blankets and weaving in England (Witney, Oxfordshire, etc).
You can figure the half point as in between the point sizes.
Contact me for some bibliographic references on blankets and weaving in England (Witney, Oxfordshire, etc).
Blankets, pelts, and costs: a clarification
I recently received an email requesting more information and a clarification on my previous posts. I thought it might be helpful to post my reply here, also, in case I was unclear or others might desire an encapsulation:
First, a bit of a correction. The 2 1/2 point blanket is sized more along the size of a modern twin bed blanket. I'll check the actual dimensions and send, but I'm sure you have a number at the fort (can't remember if you have Rob Stone's among your blankets; his are well sized and used by many of us). So they aren't 12'x12'. They were woven, by individual weavers (some with multiple workers), on looms in varying overall sizes depending upon the type and size of blankets being called for. The Alfred Plummer books, "The Blanket Makers 1669-1969: A History of Charles Early & Marriot (Witney) Ltd" and "The London Weavers' Company, 1600-1970" are two good resources, among a number of others I have used.
The blankets were taken in large batches (I forget the term) to the Hall for guild approval before being cut for shipping, usually into double lengths of the blanket size ordered. The blankets were shipped in the double lengths, hence the term "pair of blankets". The whole sale price (which I am trying to track down from mill to sale) is based upon this double blanket (price paid to weavers was on overall length woven or weight).
On the price, 8s. is indeed an "average" wholesale price for an individual blanket (one half of the double blanket sent as a "pair"). This is based upon the Grand Portage inventory, the Grant Campion invoice, and other price documents. The 8s. is considered the "cost" (wholesale plus overhead--canoes, men, food, etc) to get that blanket to Grand Portage, and most likely by extension Fort William, though the price and cost was higher by the time period you portray there.
On the plus, I thought I had included some of the documentation sources. Mainly, the references used had to be secondary (Innis "The Fur Trade in Canada", and Parker's "Emporium of the North") because I don't have access to the records they have/had. Those that were at the MN Historical Society have disappeared.
However, the primary documentation they cite seem to agree both on the varying price structure for the time period I am viewing (1780s to around 1800) and weight of the pelt itself. Ross was one of the cited primary sources. The actual prices varied widely (and wildly) in this time period making comparisons that much more exciting.
Using the records compiled by Harold Innis “The Fur Trade in Canada” and James Parker “Emporium of the North”, beaver brought 8/6 to 10/2 (1784), 15/6 (1789), 1802-5 average 14/. A. Henry in 1806 mentions a beaver pelt being worth 10/ Halifax.
Two pounds for the weight of a pelt seems to be the consensus average, thus the 3 to 4 plus "price" for the 2 1/2 point blanket times the particular price for peltry at any given time.
1784
1 beaver pelt worth 17 to 20/4
Return on one 2 1/2 pt 46-55/ Montreal
1789
1 beaver pelt worth 31/
Return on one 2 1/2 pt 88/
1801
1 beaver pelt worth 28/
Return on one 2 1/2 pt 79/
One thing to keep in mind, most of the blankets were not sold at either Grand Portage or Fort William, so the overhead was much higher, almost prohibitively so by the time it reached the Athabasca Department. Parker's "Emporium" has some good information on this. No matter the overhead (and the Wallace documents gives a rudimentary idea with the advance percentages charged clerks in their minutes on partner agreement regarding prices to be charged) the Native trading partners wanted the blankets for the customary price of 3-4 pelts. So going west, profit became problematic.
Let me know if I am still lacking clarity. You can post here or reach me at furtradeclerk@q.com
First, a bit of a correction. The 2 1/2 point blanket is sized more along the size of a modern twin bed blanket. I'll check the actual dimensions and send, but I'm sure you have a number at the fort (can't remember if you have Rob Stone's among your blankets; his are well sized and used by many of us). So they aren't 12'x12'. They were woven, by individual weavers (some with multiple workers), on looms in varying overall sizes depending upon the type and size of blankets being called for. The Alfred Plummer books, "The Blanket Makers 1669-1969: A History of Charles Early & Marriot (Witney) Ltd" and "The London Weavers' Company, 1600-1970" are two good resources, among a number of others I have used.
The blankets were taken in large batches (I forget the term) to the Hall for guild approval before being cut for shipping, usually into double lengths of the blanket size ordered. The blankets were shipped in the double lengths, hence the term "pair of blankets". The whole sale price (which I am trying to track down from mill to sale) is based upon this double blanket (price paid to weavers was on overall length woven or weight).
On the price, 8s. is indeed an "average" wholesale price for an individual blanket (one half of the double blanket sent as a "pair"). This is based upon the Grand Portage inventory, the Grant Campion invoice, and other price documents. The 8s. is considered the "cost" (wholesale plus overhead--canoes, men, food, etc) to get that blanket to Grand Portage, and most likely by extension Fort William, though the price and cost was higher by the time period you portray there.
On the plus, I thought I had included some of the documentation sources. Mainly, the references used had to be secondary (Innis "The Fur Trade in Canada", and Parker's "Emporium of the North") because I don't have access to the records they have/had. Those that were at the MN Historical Society have disappeared.
However, the primary documentation they cite seem to agree both on the varying price structure for the time period I am viewing (1780s to around 1800) and weight of the pelt itself. Ross was one of the cited primary sources. The actual prices varied widely (and wildly) in this time period making comparisons that much more exciting.
Using the records compiled by Harold Innis “The Fur Trade in Canada” and James Parker “Emporium of the North”, beaver brought 8/6 to 10/2 (1784), 15/6 (1789), 1802-5 average 14/. A. Henry in 1806 mentions a beaver pelt being worth 10/ Halifax.
Two pounds for the weight of a pelt seems to be the consensus average, thus the 3 to 4 plus "price" for the 2 1/2 point blanket times the particular price for peltry at any given time.
1784
1 beaver pelt worth 17 to 20/4
Return on one 2 1/2 pt 46-55/ Montreal
1789
1 beaver pelt worth 31/
Return on one 2 1/2 pt 88/
1801
1 beaver pelt worth 28/
Return on one 2 1/2 pt 79/
One thing to keep in mind, most of the blankets were not sold at either Grand Portage or Fort William, so the overhead was much higher, almost prohibitively so by the time it reached the Athabasca Department. Parker's "Emporium" has some good information on this. No matter the overhead (and the Wallace documents gives a rudimentary idea with the advance percentages charged clerks in their minutes on partner agreement regarding prices to be charged) the Native trading partners wanted the blankets for the customary price of 3-4 pelts. So going west, profit became problematic.
Let me know if I am still lacking clarity. You can post here or reach me at furtradeclerk@q.com
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
What this blanket cost . . . the final stanza, more or less
More than a month has passed since my last post, and people were beginning to wonder whether starvation or some other calamity might have befallen this Post. Fear not, just life intruding.
Though no post has appeared, your Clerk has been nonetheless busy: besides work with the automatons, the past five weeks has been filled reading and research to trace the blanket's cost back toward it's source in England (much reading on blankets, weaving, and the process of producing blankets in Witney, Oxfordshire, and Yorkshire) among other pursuits. During this time, a pleasant weekend was spent on the Yellow River in the Fond du Lac District (the Folle Avoine posts of the NW Co. and XY Co.)
In previous posts, we have established, rather loosely I hope you will understand, the wholesale cost of the 2 1/2 point blanket in Montreal ( 5s., five shillings) and Grand Portage (7s.) and the "value" such an item brought when traded with the Native peoples with whom the various fur companies traded (3-4 beaver pelts or plus).
In some later post, I will endeavor to describe my search to find the source cost in England and the difficulties in terminology, differing qualities and sizes, and other conundrums which have presented themselves. For now, let me turn to what these plus represent in terms of financial return and how it compares to the wholesale cost. I will end with some information on period cost of goods and income.
The references for the worth of the plus or beaver pelt are: Harold Innis' The Fur Trade in Canada (itself a huge reference work citing other primary references) and James Parker's Emporium of the North.
To put a very short leash on the the price of beaver, lest it run amok in its wildly erratic fluctuations from the French period through the second decade of the 19th century, I take an average price of £1. for parchment beaver. My reasoning is thus:
Prices varied depending upon a number of factors from the supply (which itself was subject to the returns of any one year, the state of war which might or might not exist on the high seas, to cite just two conditions) to the quality of the fur (not just summer vs. winter, castor gras/caster sec, but spoilage, how much flesh was left on the hide, and so on) to the needs of the hatters and other end users of the furs.
Innis and Parker (citing Morton's) are somewhat at variance with regard to their understanding of the beaver prices. At the same, they do not specify the unit of pricing quoted (though Parker is somewhat more clear). Innis give a price range 1784 through 1801 of 8/6 to 14/ with a high at 15/6 in 1789 (the price in shillings, and it is assumed per pound of beaver fur given his comments elsewhere in his book). According to Parker, the price of parchment beaver, castor sec (caster gras with its thicker coat minus the guard hair being worth more), in 1784 was 19s. 9d., close to £1. After the turn of the century, prices soared to over 30s. Given Innis' price range and the context of Parker's comments, these latter prices appear to be per plus.
Beaver pelts themselves weighed in, on average, between 1 3/5 and 2 1/2 pounds each depending upon seasonal coat. Using 2 pounds as an average beaver pelt, the range of price for one beaver plus in the Innis' time frame above would be 17s to 31 shillings (£1 11s.).
Thus I take a conservative average of £1 as the return on one beaver pelt.
If each 2 1/2 point blanket cost 3-4 plus, then the average cost or return over the period is £3 to £4 for the 5s. wholesale cost. More precisely, using Innis' figures and subtracting the wholesale cost, the actual return on a blanket is between 45s. to 88s. in the period.
Of course, the "overhead" in terms of wages and supplies would come out of this amount. Not a bad sum. Philip Turnor of the HBC noted in 1792 that the total NW Co. expense on 20,000 "made" beaver taken from Athabasca region in all likelihood did not amount to more than £3000 to and from England. Perhaps a £17,000 return from that Department alone.
What do all of these financial numbers mean in the context of the period? Cost of living numbers for Canada are difficult to come by and I have not found any good overview resources of the cost of goods or comparative prices for Canada. However, some idea of what these monetary figures indicate can be seen from:
In 1797 England bread sold for 1d. (one pence) and beer for 4d. (12d.=1s. 20s.=£1). The Dobie/Badgley 1797 invoice from Montreal indicates a good Hudson Bay fusee for 21s. 6d. or 15s. for a doz. pen knives.
A typical voyageur might make £30 per year (a common laborer in England £26-40, the lowest being poverty wages), a clerk £50-150 (less than an English cabinetmaker, clerk, or weaver).
At some future point, I'll post some more cost/wage comparisons with a idea of how these compare as percentage of income with percentage of today's income.
Thanks for your patience,
I remain Yr Hmble
Clerk
Though no post has appeared, your Clerk has been nonetheless busy: besides work with the automatons, the past five weeks has been filled reading and research to trace the blanket's cost back toward it's source in England (much reading on blankets, weaving, and the process of producing blankets in Witney, Oxfordshire, and Yorkshire) among other pursuits. During this time, a pleasant weekend was spent on the Yellow River in the Fond du Lac District (the Folle Avoine posts of the NW Co. and XY Co.)
In previous posts, we have established, rather loosely I hope you will understand, the wholesale cost of the 2 1/2 point blanket in Montreal ( 5s., five shillings) and Grand Portage (7s.) and the "value" such an item brought when traded with the Native peoples with whom the various fur companies traded (3-4 beaver pelts or plus).
In some later post, I will endeavor to describe my search to find the source cost in England and the difficulties in terminology, differing qualities and sizes, and other conundrums which have presented themselves. For now, let me turn to what these plus represent in terms of financial return and how it compares to the wholesale cost. I will end with some information on period cost of goods and income.
The references for the worth of the plus or beaver pelt are: Harold Innis' The Fur Trade in Canada (itself a huge reference work citing other primary references) and James Parker's Emporium of the North.
To put a very short leash on the the price of beaver, lest it run amok in its wildly erratic fluctuations from the French period through the second decade of the 19th century, I take an average price of £1. for parchment beaver. My reasoning is thus:
Prices varied depending upon a number of factors from the supply (which itself was subject to the returns of any one year, the state of war which might or might not exist on the high seas, to cite just two conditions) to the quality of the fur (not just summer vs. winter, castor gras/caster sec, but spoilage, how much flesh was left on the hide, and so on) to the needs of the hatters and other end users of the furs.
Innis and Parker (citing Morton's) are somewhat at variance with regard to their understanding of the beaver prices. At the same, they do not specify the unit of pricing quoted (though Parker is somewhat more clear). Innis give a price range 1784 through 1801 of 8/6 to 14/ with a high at 15/6 in 1789 (the price in shillings, and it is assumed per pound of beaver fur given his comments elsewhere in his book). According to Parker, the price of parchment beaver, castor sec (caster gras with its thicker coat minus the guard hair being worth more), in 1784 was 19s. 9d., close to £1. After the turn of the century, prices soared to over 30s. Given Innis' price range and the context of Parker's comments, these latter prices appear to be per plus.
Beaver pelts themselves weighed in, on average, between 1 3/5 and 2 1/2 pounds each depending upon seasonal coat. Using 2 pounds as an average beaver pelt, the range of price for one beaver plus in the Innis' time frame above would be 17s to 31 shillings (£1 11s.).
Thus I take a conservative average of £1 as the return on one beaver pelt.
If each 2 1/2 point blanket cost 3-4 plus, then the average cost or return over the period is £3 to £4 for the 5s. wholesale cost. More precisely, using Innis' figures and subtracting the wholesale cost, the actual return on a blanket is between 45s. to 88s. in the period.
Of course, the "overhead" in terms of wages and supplies would come out of this amount. Not a bad sum. Philip Turnor of the HBC noted in 1792 that the total NW Co. expense on 20,000 "made" beaver taken from Athabasca region in all likelihood did not amount to more than £3000 to and from England. Perhaps a £17,000 return from that Department alone.
What do all of these financial numbers mean in the context of the period? Cost of living numbers for Canada are difficult to come by and I have not found any good overview resources of the cost of goods or comparative prices for Canada. However, some idea of what these monetary figures indicate can be seen from:
In 1797 England bread sold for 1d. (one pence) and beer for 4d. (12d.=1s. 20s.=£1). The Dobie/Badgley 1797 invoice from Montreal indicates a good Hudson Bay fusee for 21s. 6d. or 15s. for a doz. pen knives.
A typical voyageur might make £30 per year (a common laborer in England £26-40, the lowest being poverty wages), a clerk £50-150 (less than an English cabinetmaker, clerk, or weaver).
At some future point, I'll post some more cost/wage comparisons with a idea of how these compare as percentage of income with percentage of today's income.
Thanks for your patience,
I remain Yr Hmble
Clerk
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Fish nets, fish nets, roly poly fish nets . . .
As promised, a couple of photos of the completed fishnet.
It ended up much longer than expected.
The whole net ended up about 16' long. I would like to have made it wider, but to be honest, I was really getting restless and needed to complete other work. I ended around 2 1/2'.
I wanted to try making the fishnet in the manner of the pictures in Diderot and others. I have found some very much simpler instructions, but not documentation that anyone "did it that way".
So . . . after much mindless monotony, a fishnet made with period hemp material is born. The "diamonds" are about an 1 1/2 to 2" on a side.
The Clerk
It ended up much longer than expected.
The whole net ended up about 16' long. I would like to have made it wider, but to be honest, I was really getting restless and needed to complete other work. I ended around 2 1/2'.
I wanted to try making the fishnet in the manner of the pictures in Diderot and others. I have found some very much simpler instructions, but not documentation that anyone "did it that way".
So . . . after much mindless monotony, a fishnet made with period hemp material is born. The "diamonds" are about an 1 1/2 to 2" on a side.
The Clerk
Sunday, May 17, 2009
What this blanket cost . . . and the beat goes on
Having established the wholesale price of 5s (five shillings) for a single blanket, what would the actual cost be, say in Grand Portage, Fond du Lac, Athabasca, and so on.
As any business knows, the factor in determining price (besides desiring to provide room for profit) is "overhead". In the case of our blanket heading into Upper Canada and the Northwest ("Northwest" being anything "Midwest" nowadays from Ohio through what is now Minnesota, the Dakotas, and into Canada), overhead was figured on the cost of goods at Grand Portage (or Kaministiqua later, or Rainy Lake) plus equipment items for personnel and interest. Two different interest items are noted in at least on account in 1801 (H. Innis, The Fur Trade in Canada, p. 243; Coues New Light I, 4 and 200-1): interest on goods for the year plus last year's inventory, plus an interest percentage added which included the previous year. To all this is added the cost of freight to carry the furs back to Montreal and wages.
More specifically, overhead included: personnel wages (the proprietor, interpreter, and clerk), transportation which included the wages of the voyageurs to and from posts and Montreal (the men paddling canoes, lugging goods across portages), the cost of the canoes, any tariffs/duties/fees/licenses, interest on goods (both current and carried past year), the costs of upkeep of the Grand Portage depot and particular post, gifts, spoilage, the "outfit" given to each employee each year, and so on.
This latter cost, the clothing and equipment given to each man, was more than off-set by the fact that wages were for the most part paid in goods (Innis, pp. 240 ff, footnotes). And given daily necessities of the men (clothing worn out, tobacco and alcohol, and so on) and the inability to bring much in the way of possessions west, goods were often "advanced" to the extent that wages were never paid. In fact, many men owed years worth of service after a single "tour of duty" (Innis).
Figuring out what the actual overhead for individual items was is nearly impossible, though some educated guesses can be made. A few examples suffice:
1. The 1797 Grand Portage inventory indicates a pair of 2 1/2 point blankets as worth 14s. This would make the individual blanket worth 7s, a markup of 2s or 40%.
40% seems a bit high, though the rate was probably variable depending upon the year, the rate of return on furs, competition, and so on. This variability lead to the NW Co. establishing, in 1804, a rate of increase or "tariff" to be assigned to calculate the freight and "advance" on price westward.
At Kaministiquia (what became called Fort William), in 1804, the advance in price was deemed to be 23% on the Montreal "Cost of all Goods without reserve." (NW Co. minutes, in Can. Archives, Innis, and Wallace Documents)
This would put the price at Fort William of our 5s blanket (more like 5s 3d, five shillings 3 pence by 1804) at 6s 1+d.
2. Zebulon Pike noted (Expeditions of, ed/ Coues I, 283), in 1805, what he was lead to believe was the markup on goods between Montreal and places west: 250% at Fond du Lac (2.5 times the cost or 12s 6d).
Other sources (La Rochefoucault in La Rochefoucault-Liancourt's Travels in Canada 1795, p. 115) indicate a 3 times advance in Detroit, 4 times in Michilimackinac, 8 times at Grand Portage, 16 times at Winnipeg, all on the usual value at Montreal.
The two examples, Pike and La Rochefoucault, I believe, indicate more of a "retail" price markup (including profit for the merchant) rather than reflecting a simple overhead cost markup. But they still give some idea of what needed to be factored into the cost of this blanket as it headed west for trade in exchange for furs.
Therefore, let us take 7-9s at Grand Portage, as our base wholesale price (which includes overhead to GP) for a 2 1/2 point blanket. This blanket traded, usually for 3 (sometimes later 4) beaver pelts.
What was the cost to the Native trappers on this basis, and what return did the 5s, now 7-9s blanket bring?
Next time.
The Clerk
As any business knows, the factor in determining price (besides desiring to provide room for profit) is "overhead". In the case of our blanket heading into Upper Canada and the Northwest ("Northwest" being anything "Midwest" nowadays from Ohio through what is now Minnesota, the Dakotas, and into Canada), overhead was figured on the cost of goods at Grand Portage (or Kaministiqua later, or Rainy Lake) plus equipment items for personnel and interest. Two different interest items are noted in at least on account in 1801 (H. Innis, The Fur Trade in Canada, p. 243; Coues New Light I, 4 and 200-1): interest on goods for the year plus last year's inventory, plus an interest percentage added which included the previous year. To all this is added the cost of freight to carry the furs back to Montreal and wages.
More specifically, overhead included: personnel wages (the proprietor, interpreter, and clerk), transportation which included the wages of the voyageurs to and from posts and Montreal (the men paddling canoes, lugging goods across portages), the cost of the canoes, any tariffs/duties/fees/licenses, interest on goods (both current and carried past year), the costs of upkeep of the Grand Portage depot and particular post, gifts, spoilage, the "outfit" given to each employee each year, and so on.
This latter cost, the clothing and equipment given to each man, was more than off-set by the fact that wages were for the most part paid in goods (Innis, pp. 240 ff, footnotes). And given daily necessities of the men (clothing worn out, tobacco and alcohol, and so on) and the inability to bring much in the way of possessions west, goods were often "advanced" to the extent that wages were never paid. In fact, many men owed years worth of service after a single "tour of duty" (Innis).
Figuring out what the actual overhead for individual items was is nearly impossible, though some educated guesses can be made. A few examples suffice:
1. The 1797 Grand Portage inventory indicates a pair of 2 1/2 point blankets as worth 14s. This would make the individual blanket worth 7s, a markup of 2s or 40%.
40% seems a bit high, though the rate was probably variable depending upon the year, the rate of return on furs, competition, and so on. This variability lead to the NW Co. establishing, in 1804, a rate of increase or "tariff" to be assigned to calculate the freight and "advance" on price westward.
At Kaministiquia (what became called Fort William), in 1804, the advance in price was deemed to be 23% on the Montreal "Cost of all Goods without reserve." (NW Co. minutes, in Can. Archives, Innis, and Wallace Documents)
This would put the price at Fort William of our 5s blanket (more like 5s 3d, five shillings 3 pence by 1804) at 6s 1+d.
2. Zebulon Pike noted (Expeditions of, ed/ Coues I, 283), in 1805, what he was lead to believe was the markup on goods between Montreal and places west: 250% at Fond du Lac (2.5 times the cost or 12s 6d).
Other sources (La Rochefoucault in La Rochefoucault-Liancourt's Travels in Canada 1795, p. 115) indicate a 3 times advance in Detroit, 4 times in Michilimackinac, 8 times at Grand Portage, 16 times at Winnipeg, all on the usual value at Montreal.
The two examples, Pike and La Rochefoucault, I believe, indicate more of a "retail" price markup (including profit for the merchant) rather than reflecting a simple overhead cost markup. But they still give some idea of what needed to be factored into the cost of this blanket as it headed west for trade in exchange for furs.
Therefore, let us take 7-9s at Grand Portage, as our base wholesale price (which includes overhead to GP) for a 2 1/2 point blanket. This blanket traded, usually for 3 (sometimes later 4) beaver pelts.
What was the cost to the Native trappers on this basis, and what return did the 5s, now 7-9s blanket bring?
Next time.
The Clerk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)