Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 2, 1891.djvu/139

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
Correspondence.
131
delight. Many of their stories were certainly derived from Gaelic or French sources, from the Hudson Bay voyageurs, probably, most of whom were Scotch. The purely Indian stories, they said, they could not tell properly in English; and though I learned a lot of their language, I could not understand them."

A propos of Dr. Hyde's own book (Beside the Fire), the Rev. Euseby D. Cleaver writes to me:—

"Dr. Hyde's Leabhar Sgeulaighteachta caused a great stir last summer in Waterford, Cork, Kerry, Galway, etc., and the school-boys who had copies were sent for to read it to the men in the fields during the dinner-hour, and all over the country at night.

"Hyde is somewhat of a pessimist about the future of the Irish language. The language and the folk-lore will live on for another half century in any case."

These facts are of considerable importance in discussing the vexed question of the transmission of tales. Dr. Hyde's statement should be carefully considered by all students of modern collections of Indian legends. I confess it confirms suspicions I have long had with regard to Mr. Leland's Algonquin collection. It may be said that Dr. Hyde, an experienced and enthusiastic folk-lorist, is by no means in the position of an ordinary Hudson's Bay voyageur, but it is quite possible that a professional Gaelic story-teller, with a répertoire as large as, if not larger than Dr. Hyde's, may have got over to New Brunswick in the last century or the beginning of this. The distinction made by the Indians between the English tales and their own should be noted.