With regard to the Lone-Dog system, with which the present writer is more familiar, and upon which he has examined a large number of Indians during the last eight years, an attempt was made to ascertain whether the occurrences selected and represented were those peculiar to the clan or tribe of the recorder or were either of general concern or of notoriety throughout the Dakota tribes. This would tend to determine whether the undertaking was of a merely individual nature, limited by personal knowledge or special interests, or whether the scope was general. All inquiries led to the latter supposition. The persons examined were of different tribes, and far apart from each other, yet all knew what the document was, _i. e._, that “some one thing was put down for each year;” that it was the work of Lone-Dog, and that he was the only one who “could do it,” or perhaps was authority for it. The internal evidence is to the same effect. All the symbols indicate what was done, experienced, or observed by the nation at large or by its tribes without distinction--not by that of which Lone-Dog is a member, no special feat of the Yanktonais, indeed, being mentioned--and the chiefs whose deaths or deeds are noted appear to have belonged indifferently to the several tribes, whose villages were generally at great distance each from the other and from that of the recorder. It is, however, true that the Minneconjous were more familiar than other of the Dakotas with the interpretation of the characters on Lone-Dog’s chart, and that a considerable proportion of the events selected relate to that division of the confederacy. In considering the extent to which Lone-Dog’s chart is understood and used among his people, it may be mentioned that the writer has never shown it to an intelligent Dakota of full years who has not known what it was for, and many of them knew a large part of the years portrayed. When there was less knowledge, there was the amount that may be likened to that of an uneducated person or child who is examined about a map of the United States, which had been shown to him before, with some explanation only partially apprehended or remembered. He would tell that it was a map of the United States; would probably be able to point out with some accuracy the State or city where he lived; perhaps the capital of the country; probably the names of the States of peculiar position or shape, such as Maine, Delaware, or Florida. So the Indian examined would often point out in Lone-Dog’s chart the year in which he was born or that in which his father died, or in which there was some occurrence that had strongly impressed him, but which had no relation whatever to the character for the year in question. It had been pointed out to him before, and he had remembered it, though not the remainder of the chart.