The Value of Dogs
I have yet to find mention of the monetary value of a dog at Red River, but there is plenty of evidence that people placed a high value on their dogs.
Despite the fact that their dogs were killing valuable livestock, I found no mention of owners being forced to kill the offending animals. The dogs were too valuable; without them it would be incredibly difficult to get meat back to the colony from the winter hunting grounds. The loss of a sheep was certainly felt by the community but, as long as they had dogs, they could still kill bison and get the meat (and hides) home!
On 11 June 1814, Archibald McDonald notes:
Some of the Company Serv’t Viz.- Donald McDermot, John MacMillan, Hugh Fraser & several others of my recruits complained of their treatment in the employ, & of being compelled to buy Dogs for the use of the Co-
showing us that dogs were not cheap. The complaints may have been made on principle, of course, but if the price of a dog was insignificant then the men might not have complained too loudly, especially since they would be getting good use of the dogs for their own purposes.
Miles Macdonell remarks on an incident in January of 1815 that gives us another insight into the value that was placed on dogs at the RRS:
Took down John O’Rourkes Complaint against Bautino & other freemen – who robbed him of a dog & assembled in a tumultuous manner with Guns & Knives to assault our people. A very serious affray must have taken place if O’Rourke had not prudently allowed Beautino to take the Dog until he could obtain legal redress.
The people of Red River obviously viewed the theft of a dog as a very serious offence!
And the complaint of Alexander Bannerman against Archibald McDonald, and his demand for pemmican against McDonald’s dog’s life, given the value of pemmican to the settlers at the time, shows us that the life of a dog was probably high enough that Bannerman thought McDonald would certainly make the exchange.
Another indicator comes from the contempt in a remark Archibald McDonald made in March 1815 about Miles Livingstone:
Two months ago with the greatest ado we got him to go out for meat for himself to the plains tho’ he had 3 good dogs at home starving for the want of meat & of course for the want of Labour.- After his arrival on or about the 23 of last month, I proposed to him to be off again, & look out for something for himself – rather than have his dogs idle but no the latter action was preferable. It is pretty clear from this man’s progress in attempting to live independent, that the sooner he is got quit of the better –
Rev. MacBeth also touches on how much people valued their dogs. A group in real danger of starvation takes great care to ensure that their dogs are fed. Here it is probably not the monetary value of the dogs that they are thinking about, but the necessity of their excellent health to haul whatever meat is obtained back home. Without their dogs, the hunters’ loved ones would die.
(reference: pages 16949-50, 18223, 18275-6 of the Selkirk Papers, M186; Rev. R.G. MacBeth. p. 91.)
Tags: Alexander Bannerman, Archibald McDonald, Archibald McDonald Journal, Bautino, dogs at the RRS, Donald McDermot, food supply, Hugh Fraser, John MacMillan, John O'Rourke, Miles Livingstone, Miles Macdonell, Miles Macdonell's Journal, The Rev. R. G. MacBeth
