Value in Beaver Pelts for a Pennsylvania longrifle?

[Mackinac Trader]

It is fairly well known that a Northwest Trade Gun, built in England for the Hudson Bay Fur Co. was worth approximately 9-12 Beaver Pelts in 1775 for the traders.

Recently, I was asked what the value in Beaver pelts was for a Pennsylvania Long Rifle, such as one built by Andrew Verner Gunsmith. This beautiful firearm has custom Inlays, carvings, etc. These were custom built rifles and were in a much different "class" than the trade Guns. I read somewhere that they maybe worth the amount of Beavers it would take to stack from the floor to the top of the barrel.

Does anyone have any knowledge of the value of these fine longrifles during the 1770-1790 time frame?

Thank you very much!
The Mackinac Trader

[timM]

It would be interesting to know what the value of an eastern trapped beaver skin would be worth in Pennsylvania in the late 18th century. Unqualified reading tells me a maximum value of a guinea?

I recently reread "Jedediah Smith and the Opening of the West” and mentioned within, that an average adult beaver “plew” weighs between 1.5 & 2 pounds and worth between 4 – 6 dollars in St Louis.    

I think this value coincides with other readings of that period regarding fur value. General Ashley's system of paying his hunters half the St Louis price for furs delivered in the mountains at almost a standard of $3.00 a pound.  Beaver value in the 1820's and a world away from Pennsylvania!

[Eric Smith]

I have always heard that a "buck" skin was the equivolent of a dollar. Maybe, maybe not.    But I would like to know the value of the hides the long hunters returned with. Interesting.

[T.C.Albert]

Ive seen and read such "fur house" clerking tables...but where?
They give relitive values for plews...1 bear equals so many made beaver...1 buff robe equals so many...etc etc...on up and down the fur bearing food chain. I cant say for certain, but I find it hard to believe that a trapper or anyone else could ever afford a rifle if he had to trade a pile of beavers as tall as the muzzle for it...although when I heard such tales around the rondezvous campfires it was told about the prices of trade guns in the interior, not fancy rifles...seems the story has maybe morphed some?
Maybe some of the recent works by Ryan Gale have some good hard prices and made beaver charts? Or the Northwest Journal web page? Buck skins and half tan deer hides were a whole nother trade I think, though there was overlap to be sure.
tca 

[Habu]

In the Carolina trade, while demand changed and cost of trade goods increased, through the 1700s a pound of dressed deerskin trade for about 6 shillings in South Carolina paper money.  (Wow, 5 pages in Deerskins and Duffels stripped down to a couple lines. . . . ) 

By the late 18th century, beaver were largely trapped out in Pennsylvania and the other "eastern" states of the day--I'm not sure you'll be able to find records of what they sold for due to the low numbers.  FWIW, in 1792 or 1794 (I don't recall which year), one of my great-greats got about 9 shillings per beaver in Maine.   

[flintriflesmith]

Here is a list of values for hides/skins exported from VA to London in 1775


Year   To   Type of Skin   Quantity   Unit    Value
               
1775   London   
                Beaver     12   No.   3 to 4 shillings each
                   Buck or Deer in hair   9,296   No.   2 to 3 shillings each
      Deer India 1/2 drest   6,850   Lbs.   12 to 18 pence per Lb.
      Deer Drest           70                No.    4 to 6 shillings piece
      Catt   283                  No.    2 to 3 pence each
      Fisher   35                   No.    6 to 8 pence
      Fox, ordinary   217   No.   14 to 16 pence
      Mink   108                   No.   20 to 24 pence
      Musquash   4                   No.   4 to 8 pence
      Otter   169                    No.   3 to 4 shillings
      Wolf   1                   No.   4 to 6 shillings each

These prices are in Pounds Sterling from customs reports. (About 1.6 pounds PA = 1 pound sterling but that varied year to year)

[Eric Smith]

Thanks for the information, Gary. Where did you find this?

[flintriflesmith]

The British government ran Customs Houses that were responsible for collecting export and import duties on trade prior to the Revolution. The surviving reports are in England but there are a few microfilm copies of the surviving years in libraries.

I did an extensive study of the deer hide trade several years ago for a talk at the Eastern Woodlands Indian conference and this is just a tiny bit of the documentation.

Gary

[Eric Smith]

I suppose there was some discrepancy between what they sold for in London and what the average hunter in the colonies recieved for his pelts.

[Luke MacGillie]

1756 cost of rifles and trade guns on the VA/PA/MD border area:

abt. 2 dozn. fusee Guns proved Barrells @ 14\--very good at the price but rather larger Bows than those commonly used in the Indian Trade ; they wou'd answer very well for a Bullet & Shot & believe wou'd suit the Southern Indians ; as I have been told they do not use a single Bullett so much as the Northern Indians
at Mr. Chapmans

abt. 1 dozn. 4. ft. square barrell'd Guns very small Bores best Iron mounted & stock'd like Rippells, a Bullet Mould to each.
@ 27\6

abt. 1 dozn. Rippells 4. ft. Barrells, best Iron Bullet Mould to each @ 41\6
Gun flints all sold --

My understanding of the money system is my biggest flaw so Gary or someone else would have to translate this, as I dont know if they are say the cost of the lot, or the cost of the individual weapons......

[flintriflesmith]

Luke,
I probably should look back at the entire documents in each of your postings but I fairly certian that in all three the prices are for individual guns (with bullet mould for the last two).
So the fusee guns are priced at 14 shillings each; those "stocked like" rifles are1 pound 7 shilling and 6 pence; the rifles are 2 pounds 1 shilling and 6 pence.

As I recall all of there are prices for imported guns so they do not address the original posting about Amerian longrifle prices.

The hard thing for most of us modern folks to get our head around is that each colonies money was valued differently in comparison to each other and to the English standard (Sterling). To make it even more complicated the relative values were re-evaluated and established EACH year. The values changed based on what we might think of as the colonies credit ratings and are called exchange rates. Virginia had a high rating and 5 pound VA currency often exchanged for 4 pounds Sterling. South Carolina had a very bad exchange rate in comparison.

[flintriflesmith]

I suppose there was some discrepancy between what they sold for in London and what the average hunter in the colonies received for his pelts.

The value of goods listed in the Customs Reports would be assigned at the time they were exported. It would include what was paid to the hunter/trapper by the trader, the transportation costs to the point of export, and the trader's profit. Some transaction passed through multiple folks who all added their costs.

The best place to look for what a hunter was paid would be closer to the start of the supply chain. If the hunter was an Indian the value would be in the assigned cost of the trade goods. Stores near the frontier also purchased hides and skins directly from hunters and trappers but those numbers are rarely cash and credit on an account is toward a bill for goods already sold is different ---the store got the profit on the first transaction..

By the time the product got to London the shipping, insurance, and markup would determine the asking price on that market. Customs export reports do not include those costs.

In most cases the export values show a price range (beaver 3-4 shillings each) which are based on multiple transactions. Since only 12 beaver pelts were exported from VA to London in 1775 it is a very small sample---compared to over 9000 deer skins (with the hair on) valued at 2-3 shillings each.

Gary

[Mackinac Trader]

I'm probably one of the most luckiest people in the world. Since the early days of watching Daniel Boone (Fess Parker) when I was a kid till now that I'm 56, I have loved my Flintlocks and everything to do with them. The reason I'm so lucky is that I get to dress up in my Colonial 1775 outfit, go back in time and work as a trader/Interpreter at Colonial Fort Michilimackinac here in Northern Michigan. I get to speak with many  people that are starving for information about the simple things us fellers love. Casting a ball, making fore with flint and steel, throwing a hawk... You know what I mean.

The good and bad thing about this position is that when I make a statement, it must be accurate or referenced by this is what I have heard or read. Or simply, we do not know for sure.... I will allways state this is what "maybe or may-have-been. It's our responsibility to educate the young people about what we study and love but to be accurate in every way.

Just about everyone that visits the fort finds their way into the Sejourne house. That is my hang out. This is one of the traders houses at the fort which was really a trade distribution fort. A visitor will see Northwest trade guns or another name is 'Mackinaw guns' here. These smooth bore, 62 ga. muskets were built for the Hudson's Bay Fur Company in London pretty much to trade the natives for "Made beaver Pelts". At this time in history, everyone in Europe wanted a Beaver hat! These trade guns were built just good enough for the natives to accept them and trade for them, usually around 10-12 beaver Pelts. During this time, Beaver pelts were the basic denomination of currency back then. (Most people in northern Michigan, Canada did not carry currency but traded furs for goods.

At the fort, we demonstrate live firings of the muskets and canons daily, all day long! Most of these firings are using the 'short pattern' Brown Bess and English trade muskets. The public is keenly interested in firearms! They want to see them up close, hear them and learn about them. That is my job. Most if not all the detail centers around trade guns as over the years, the only parts unearthed from the archaeologist from this site are parts from trade guns. We have to remember that the trade guns were not built that well and the natives and traders were rough on them. When they came to the fort they needed them fixed and the parts often got thrown out the window waiting for us to find.

John Askin was a prominent and successful trader at the fort in 1775. He was wealthy and well connected to Montreal and Albany trade centers. My question for all you Muzzle loader scholars is this; Would John Askin or any other prominent trader or for that matter, a 'retired Captain from the 60th regiment of foot from the F&I war owned a simple trade gun? Perhaps a Chiefs gun? Could he have owned and or carried a fancy Pennsylvania Longrifle? We will never know. Back in 1775, there was allot of 'unrest' in the colonies. We were indeed all 'British subjects' at that time. we were being taxed and re-taxed and people were fed up. There were rifles being built in Lancaster county Pennsylvania at that time that were very fancy. One of which was built by a very well know gunsmith by the name of Andrew Verner.

I will be showing one of my flintlocks this weekend, a beautiful remake of a Andrew Verner longrifle recreated Jerry Kirklin. This flintlock is of the same era as the trade guns. When I lay these firearms on the bench, the Andrew Verner stands apart.

Recently, the chief archaeologist of the fort asked me why I stated to a visitor that a longrifle, i.e. Andrew Verner may have been worth its height in Beaver pelts VS the traditional value assigned to a trade gun of 10-12 pelts.
 So, there it is fellers. I need your help, If I'm wrong, I will 'eat crow' with the Chief Archaeologist. I really just want to know so we are doing the best we can do at the fort.

Thanks for reading,
Ye Ol' Mackinac Trader

[flintriflesmith]

During this time, Beaver pelts were the basic denomination of currency back then. (Most people in northern Michigan, Canada did not carry currency but traded furs for goods.
...
Recently, the chief archaeologist of the fort asked me why I stated to a visitor that a longrifle, i.e. Andrew Verner may have been worth its height in Beaver pelts VS the traditional value assigned to a trade gun of 10-12 pelts.
 So, there it is fellers. I need your help, If I'm wrong, I will 'eat crow' with the Chief Archaeologist. I really just want to know so we are doing the best we can do at the fort.
Ye Ol' Mackinac Trader

There are a lot of statements in your post that raise questions but since your demonstration/lecture is coming up this weekend I will address two that stand out to me.

I also work in a historic site environment would suggest that you not say or imply that people in your area “carried” beaver pelts instead of currency. That could be really misleading. While pelts were a no doubt a way in which people settled debts at the end of trapping season, I think the correct interpretation would be of a credit economy where pelts exchanged for goods through a retail system involving stores and/or traders. Carrying actual beaver pelts instead of currency is just not practical! You would need a pack horse instead of a billfold or letter of credit on a merchant's account.

Your more pressing question about the number of pelts required to produce enough credit to buy a longrifle has been addressed in these exchange above but the answer isn’t just a simple number. At the great risk of oversimplification I will attempt to give you a nickel answer to a five dollar question.

If a trade gun was valued at 10-12 pelts and pelts were valued at 3-4 shillings then a trade gun was being “sold/traded” for from 1 pound 10 shillings to 2 pounds 8 shillings. That top price is high compared to what trade guns were actually worth here in the east (about 20 shillings for a common grade) but it may be that the supply and demand in your area allowed for such a huge markup on the guns or a much lower assigned value on the pelts. (You would need to have someone research the pelt values of other basic items to find an explanation for the relative prices.)

Here in the east where the longrifles were being made (and trade guns were selling for as little as 20-26 shillings or 1 pound to 1/6) they were selling for 4 to 6 pounds. Do the math and you will find that a low end longrifle was about 4 times more expensive than a low end trade gun.

Taking a huge leap of faith, and adding a lot of speculation, that MIGHT make a rifle worth 4 times as many pelts as a trade gun out in your area. I have no clue how tall a stack of 40 beaver pelts would be and I don’t think it matters because they were compressed and bundled for handling. Just tell your visitors that a fine rifle cost a lot more than a common trade gun (perhaps 4 to 6 times as much).

[Mackinac Trader]

All good advice! Thank you all for your comments and very useful information. I'm well prepared.

Mackinac Trader