2, pp. 123-130.

Information has been recently received to the effect that this
collection was not made by the distinguished English explorer from
his personal observation, but was obtained by him from one man in Salt
Lake City, a Mormon bishop, who, it is feared, gave his own ideas of
the formation and use of signs rather than their faithful description.

5. A list read by Dr. D.G. MACGOWAN, at a meeting of the American
Ethnological Society, January 23, 1866, and published in the
_Historical Magazine_, vol. x, 1866, pp. 86, 87, purporting to be the
signs of the Caddos, Wichitas, and Comanches.

6. Annotations by Lieut. HEBER M. CREEL, Seventh United States
Cavalry, received in January, 1881. This officer is supposed to
be specially familiar with the Cheyennes, among whom he lived for
eighteen months; but his recollection is that most of the signs
described by him were also observed among the Arapaho, Sioux, and
several other tribes.

7. A special contribution from Mr. F.F. GERARD, of Fort A. Lincoln,
D.T., of signs obtained chiefly from a deaf-mute Dakota, who has
traveled among most of the Indian tribes living between the Missouri
River and the Rocky Mountains. Mr. Gerard's own observations are based
upon the experience of thirty-two years' residence in that country,
during which long period he has had almost daily intercourse with
Indians. He states that the signs contributed by him are used by the
Blackfeet, (Satsika), Absaroka, Dakota, Hidatsa, Mandan, and Arikara
Indians, who may in general be considered to be the group of tribes
referred to by the Prince of Wied.

In the above noted collections the generality of the statements as
to locality of the observation and use of the signs rendered it
impossible to arrange them in the manner considered to be the best to
study the diversities and agreements of signs. For that purpose it is
more convenient that the names of the tribe or tribes among which the
described signs have been observed should catch the eye in immediate
connection with them than that those of the observers only should
follow. Some of the latter indeed have given both similar and
different signs for more than one tribe, so that the use of the
contributor's name alone would create confusion. To print in every
case the name of the contributor, together with the name of the tribe,
would seriously burden the paper and be unnecessary to the student,
the reference being readily made to each authority