Matthew Cocking’s 1772–73 journal is a first-hand account of a Hudson’s Bay Company expedition from York Factory into the Canadian interior. Written as both a travel record and a strategic report, it documents the geography, hardships, and Indigenous relationships that defined the early fur trade—at a moment when inland competition was beginning to reshape the Company’s future.
This is Part 1 of a 3-part series dedicated to telling the story of one of the more significant explorers in the Hudson’s Bay Company’s early history: Matthew Cocking (1743 – 1799).
Beyond the Coast: Matthew Cocking’s 1772 Mission into the Interior
In June 1772, Matthew Cocking, Second Factor at York Fort, departed the Hudson’s Bay Company’s coastal stronghold and entered the interior of what would later become Western Canada. His journey, recorded in a detailed journal, reflects a pivotal moment in the transformation of the northern fur trade—from a coastal enterprise to an inland contest for influence and survival.
A Strategic Expedition
Cocking’s mission was not exploratory in the modern sense, but strategic. The Hudson’s Bay Company faced mounting pressure from inland traders operating out of Montreal—referred to in Company correspondence as “Canadians”—who were intercepting Indigenous trappers before they reached Hudson Bay.
As the journal’s introduction states, the expedition was undertaken
“to promote the Hudson’s Bay Company’s interest, whose trade is diminishing by the Canadians yearly intercepting natives on their way to the settlements.”¹
This shift in trade dynamics threatened the Company’s long-standing model, which relied on Indigenous trade networks bringing furs to fixed coastal posts.
Context: A Changed Continent
Cocking’s journey followed that of Anthony Hendry some two decades earlier, yet the geopolitical context had altered significantly. Following the British conquest of New France in 1763, competition did not diminish; rather, it intensified.
The inland traders—now largely British subjects—operated with greater reach and flexibility. As later commentary observes,
“the competition was much more bitter and strenuous than it had ever been before.”²
The Company could no longer assume its geographic advantage would secure its dominance.
Hardship and Uncertainty
The realities of the journey emerged immediately. Within days of departure, Cocking recorded the death of a member of his party:
“my Canoe mate died; we put up for the night.”³
Travel along the Hayes and Steel rivers required constant exertion—canoes were dragged, tracked, and carried across difficult terrain. Progress was slow, and illness spread among the party.
Food shortages became acute. At one point, Cocking noted:
“A quarter of an Eagle, Gull or Duck is one persons Allowance pr day.”⁴
Such entries underscore the precarious nature of inland travel, where survival depended as much on endurance as on planning.
Purpose and Perspective
Cocking’s journal reveals two central objectives:
- To document and understand the geography of the interior
- To persuade western Indigenous nations—particularly the Blackfeet—to redirect their trade toward Hudson Bay
In this sense, the journal is both a record of movement and a reflection of corporate intent. It captures a moment when the Hudson’s Bay Company began to recognize that its future lay not only at the coast, but deep within the continent.
Significance
For modern readers, Cocking’s journey provides a rare first-hand account of a transitional period in Canadian history. It illustrates the early stages of inland expansion and the pressures that would ultimately reshape the fur trade.
The expedition did not resolve the Company’s challenges. However, it clarified them—and, in doing so, set the stage for a fundamental shift in strategy.
References – Part I
- Matthew Cocking, Journal… from York Factory to the Blackfeet Country, 1772–73, Introduction, p. 91.
- Ibid., p. 92.
- Cocking, Journal entry, June 29, 1772, p. 96.
- Ibid., July 13, 1772, p. 97.
Smith Family Roots Ancestor
Matthew Cook (1743-1799)