Doug Cranmer Huxwhukw mask
Timeline of the Potlatch Conflict
The Museum Compromise
Stories of the Potlatch Collection
Timeline of the Potlatch Conflict
In the 1870s, the Canadian government began receiving correspondence from missionaries and government officials complaining about the potlatch, which escalated by the mid-1880s. They felt the potlatch conflicted with attempts to civilize the Indians, and should therefore be banned. Indian Agent Gilbert Sproat wrote to Superintendent of Indian Affairs, Sir John MacDonald, about "the giant evil which in this inveterate and most pernicious custom has to be met and overcome." The potlatch was "the parent of numerous vices which eat out the heart of the people" because it "promoted habits inconsistent with progress. It is not possible that the Indians can acquire property, or can become industrious with any good result, while under the influence of this mania." (Cole and Chaikin 15)
In
1881, George Blenkinsop's Annual Report on Indian Affairs showed concern
that the Indians were spending their wealth on the potlatch instead of
living necessities. "Surrounded with boxes of property all ready for the
'potlatch' on which their whole souls are fixed now more than ever, they
turn a deaf ear to any suggestion to purchase a little rice, tea, or sugar
for their suffering progeny…Out of this apathetic state, the Agent must
endeavor to lift them ere any hopes of bettering them can be expected."
(Codere 82) The Indians had a conflicting view. "The white man gives feasts
to his friends and goes to theatres; we have only our 'potlachs' and dances
for amusement; we work for our money and like to spend it as we please,
in gathering our friends together and giving them food to eat, and when
we give blankets or money, we dance and sing and all are good friends
together; now whenever we travel we find friends; the 'potlatch' does
that." (Cole and Chaikin 26)
In 1884, the government enacted Section 114 in Chapter 43 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, "An Act Respecting Indians…Every Indian or person who engages or assists in celebrating the Indian festival known as the 'potlatch' … is guilty of a misdemeanor, and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months and not less than two months. Every Indian or person who encourages, either directly or indirectly, an Indian to get up such a festival…or to celebrate the same, or who assists in the celebration of the same, is guilty of a like offense and shall be liable to the same punishment." (Bracken 83-84) Potlatching declined in many areas after the ban, but not among the Kwakwaka'wakw.
*Blenkinsop Portrait (BCPA)