The French asserted that the policy of the English of Carolina in setting one Indian tribe against another was a part of their plan for driving the French from Louisiana and the Mississippi River country.[601] The process of obtaining Indian slaves through trade was, then, a part of a great political contest. The alliance of the leading tribes, such as the Chickasaw and the Choctaw, meant much to both English and French from the territorial and the commercial standpoints. In consequence, no effort was spared by either of the white races to obtain a dominating influence over these tribes in order to use them for their own benefit. This benefit consisted largely of the gain in trade both in furs and slaves. The French sought to dissolve this friendship by telling the Chickasaw that the English were only seeking to destroy them by having them wage war for slaves, and that when they were sufficiently weakened by war the English would fall upon them and sell them all as slaves.[602] In consequence of the unstable nature of the Indian and the influence brought to bear upon the tribes by both French and English, it was but natural that Indian relations in the section east of the lower Mississippi should be kaleidoscopic in character.[603] As each tribe gave, or refused to give, allegiance to the English it was in turn preyed upon by the English allies. If one is to accept the assertions of the French in the early eighteenth century, the Chickasaw during their eight or ten years intercourse with the English lost five hundred prisoners, and the Choctaw, eight hundred, sold as slaves by the English.[604]