S, 1885-7
��SCIENCE.
��in^i of the region as bring die Iteail nml reservoir of Rupert's Kiver. Its existence was firsl maile known in the Jaatit rflationii for Ihe year 1671-72. The ae- eount there given consists mainly of the journal of Father Charles Albanel, who was a<i90ciatei1 wltli If ooaieurDenysileSiiint Simon nnd 'another Frent'li- nan * in the exploraliun of the l[ne of cummunicn- tion (Jtppareatly well known to the Indiana, but which had never before been traversed by wbile men)
» Between Luke St. John and Hudson Day. The geograplilcal details given in this account Hte exceed- lligl; meagre; the chief items in regard to Lake MIs- tawini being ll>al it Is said to be so targe that the circuit of it couM, not l>e itiaile In les? than twenty days of line weather: that it is full of rock', fn>m which circa mstnuce lis name is derived; and that there was an abiiiidanee of lisb and game in the
ITlcinily. It does not appear that Father Albanel's 'fiuljrilld more than traverse a small arm of this lake, iH they were not on It more than one, or possibly two ■day^ So far as known to the writer, the first delineation let Lake HiitaBsinl Is on a map published by Jaillot ia I6S5, of which a niAnnscrlpt copy belonging to the JCohl collection is in the State department In Wash- IJligt«n, and lempumrtly, ul the present rime, in the ^OSMMion of Mr. Winior, librnrian of Harvard nni- iTsnltj. Ittloesnotnppenr, however, from Mr. Kohl's iwies attached to this map, whether the original WSB engraved or printed; but it Is said to have been almost entirely compiled from original Canadian authorities. On it the iHke in iiucslion bears the name of ' Ticm^aming.' That it is really the lake now D as MIstassini will be evident from what is said
This lake also appears under the name of ' Jli^itnsin ' O maps published by 11. MotI in 1715 and 1720. la shape, however, as iuiliu»ted on these two maps, h not at all like that given on the Jaillot map; neither bhthesame un Moll's two map^. It is cl<>iir from ) way in which it is represented by the latter, and iltpeelatly from Ihe manner in which the islands are ■cattcred over its surface, promiscuously and very UUferently in the two niaps, that nothing uioi'e was jDOWn about it by Moll than that there was a large Uke In that position in which were several islands. In Bellln'B map (17-14), which la found lu Cliarle- Wio\x, the same lake is given with a very dItTereril form ■'frODI that which hati been previously indicated. It ia l«pres«nted as forming three nearly parallel bodies of v^aler with ageneral north-ea^t south-irest trend, and mnected with eacii other by comparatively narrow (jehanuela. To the moat north-western of the^e bodies t water the name of ' Lac des Mlstassins ' is given; O the middle one, that of ' P^re Albanel; ' and to the asteriyooi'. that of ' Lac Dauphin.' In the map which forma the geographical basis of the Canada snrvcy (geological) map ( IS(f>|, iliis lake e called 'Misllashiui'l appears with a very dif- It shape from that given on the Bellln map, nnd I the appearance of being in part laid down from rveyt. The nortii-eastern and eastern portions, bow- er, are indieaied by a dotted line, from which Ihe
��inference may he drawn thai this pan of the lake wa> unknown. ' It is a remarkable fact, however, that the form of the lake, as given on the Geological surrey map, resembles quite closely that which it has on Ihe Jaillot map, showing pretty clearly that Ibe we«Uim side of the lake was laid down by the lail-mentloned compiler from actual exploration.
This same outline, given on the Geological survey map 'in IStitt, Is repeated without variation on the latest general map of (';knada, — that published by Slaiiford. and said to he Arrowsmlth's.wllh additions and corrections bringing it down to 1880. This woold indicate that no additions had been made la our knowledge of the geography of that re^ioit dnrlng ilie past twenty year^. It is a curious fact, how- ever, that on the Arrow smith-Stanford map. this lake, called ' Miitassinnie,' is moved just one degree farther to the east tliau it is on the Geological sur- vey map.
On most of the tnnps on which the take is given, it is represented as being some sixty or seventy miles In length, or about half thu size of Lake Ontario; alibough it Is clearly evident that its eastern side it unknown, bolli ai to fonn nnd position. All that Is known about its aize, l)Bynnil this, is the statement of P(-re Albanel, that It was reiiorled to be so large that it would require twenty days of pleas.inl weather 10 circumnavigate it; and the opinions of certain per- Bons, reported by the Itev. Abb£ LaBamme, giving it various dimensions, no clew being given to enable one to decide on the rel.ilive weigbt to be allowed to each person's opinion. The Kcv. Abb£ LaHarame givu his own statement, that there can be no doubt that Lake Mlstas-'liii is larger thau Lake Ontario; while the 'old trader.' as already mentioned, aays that there is no reason to doubt that i t Is ' but little inferior in sixe to Lake Superior.' Tbe positive statement of ' Mr. Burgess' is also added, that the take is a buEi- dred and litty miles in lenylh: this would lie al)OQt fifty miles less than Ontario.
AfI<T all, we have, in reference to Ihe dimension of L»ke Ml^lassiiii, no butler evidence to fill back on than lliat of Father Albanel. What number of miles can he allowed at the equivalent of a tour of twenty days of fine weather, the writer, with the experience of seven snromers spent in boating and canoejng on Lakes Superior, Michigan, and Huron, with crews of Indians, half-brpcds, and roifugeiirs. is unable to say. An ordinary journey of twenty days in a cauoe would, perhaps, carry a traveller aroiuid a lake half or two-tliirds the size of Ontario, which would coinelde with Mr. Bunsess's statement.
While it is possible that Lake Mistassini may be considerably lai^r than Lake Ontario, the probabili- ties are decidedly in favor of Its being aomewhai smaller. .Vt all events, geographical Liformatlon In regard to that r^ion, which does not seem difficult of access, ia greatly needed.
It is easy to see from the above that the name of the lake about which this note is written hna been spelled in as mauy diilerent ways as there are authors or cartographer? who have had to <Io wilh it. Thu spelling ' Mi'iiji5sini ' is here Bdii]>ieil becauje U ia ihc
�� �
