120 BRITISH COLUMBIA.

THE DISTRIBUTION OF GIFTS.

The host could add to the shame of his rivals by still other methods associated
with the distribution of gifts, either by knowingly presenting them with more
property than they could return, or by destroying his own possessions, which
required of his rivals the sacrifice of an equal amount to save themselves from
dire humiliation. ‘This might call for the reckless waste of valuable oil, the
destruction of hundreds of blankets, or the burning-down of their houses. It is
not a matter for surprise that a potlatch usually closed with fierce quarrels and
not infrequent bloodshed.

PLATE XXXI. ,

Courtesy of National Museum of Canada, Ottawa.

Potlatch in progress at Victoria, B.C., 1887. Note the plank houses :
of the Coast Salish Tribe.

Potlatch gifts could not be declined, and the associated obligations of return
with interest were binding upon the recipient’s relatives if he were unable to meet
his liabilities. If unpaid during his lifetime they devolved upon his heirs; for
these return payments, though incurred by one individual, concerned the whole
kinship group; or, if the obligations were intertribal, the goods of the whole tribe
could be commandeered for the purpose.

In many cases an inventory was made out by the host and his friends, who
thus knew what each guest was to receive. When the time for the distribution
of gifts arrived the host in ceremonial dress, baton in hand, presided over the
assembly. Names were called out in order of rank and an attendant deposited
each gift in front of the recipient; the host signifying approval by thumping on
the ground with his baton. Guests were frequently dissatisfied with the selection
made or with the heavy obligation incurred, and did not hesitate to express their

discontent.
HOW THE COST OF A POTLATCH WAS MET.

Prolonged thrift and industry were demanded to prepare the amount of goods
and food prior to the festival; though the system of repayment with interest
relieved the host of some of the heavy cost. He was, actually, only temporarily
the loser, unless rivalry tempted him to wholesale destruction of his own property,
otherwise he was entitled to be repaid in kind within a stipulated time. By this
means he kept a hold on his possessions, while its dispersion in relatively small