Deer, Snipe, Héron, Hawk

(Élan) (Bécassine) (Héron) (Faucon)

a Bear, Bearer or Turtle, reckoning jhimself their brother, but he might marry into the second set Deer, etc., Avhom he considered bis cousins, and soon with the rest. But in later times, a man is allowed to marry into any tribe, but bis own.

A récent account from North west America describes the custom among the Indians of Nootka Sound ; « a whale (baleine) therefore, may not marry a whale, nor a frog a frog. A child, again, always takes the crest of the mother, so that if the mother be a wolf (loup), ail her children will be wolves (loups).

Ul — 19

As a rule^ also^ descent is traced from the mother^ not from the father.

Tbe analogy of the North American Indian custom is therefore with that of the Australians in making clanship of the female side a bar to marriage, but if we go down further south into Central America^ the reverse custom^ as in China^ makes its appearance. Diego de Landa says of the people of Yucatan, that no one took a wife of bis name, on the father*s side, for this was a very vile thing among them ; but they might marry cousins german on the mother's side. Further south^ below the Isthmus^ both the clanship and the prohibition reappear on the female side. Bernan says, that^ among the Arrawaks of British Guiana, « caste is derived from the mother and children are allowed to marry into their father's family, but not into that of their mother ». Lastly, Father Martin DobrixhofTer says that- the Guaranis avoided, as highly criminal, marriage with the most distant relatives^ and speaking of the Abipones^ he makes the foUowing statement : « Though the paternal indulgence of the Roman Pontiffs makes the first and second degrees of relationship alooe a bar to the marriage of the Indians^ yet the Abipones^ instructed by nature and the example of their ancestors, abhor the very thought of raarryîng any one related them by the most distant tie of relationship. Long expérience bas convinced me, thaï the respect to the consanguiniiy by which they are deterred from marrying into their

own familles is implanted by Dature in the minds of most of the people of Paraguay^ etc. » (Ttlor's eor/y history of mankind, p. 285, 286, 287.)

PARENTÉ UTÉHINE. — AUSTRALIE,

Among the natives of Australia, prohibitory marriage laws bave been found, but they are very Far from being uniform and may sometimes bave been misunderstood. Sir George Grey's account is, tbat tbe Australians, so far as he is acquainted with them, are divided into great clans and use tbe clan name as a sort of aurname beside tbe individual name. Ghildren take tbe family name of tbe moiher, and a man canoot raarry a woman of bis own name, so tbat bere, it would seem that only relationship by tbe female aide is taken into aceount. One effect of tbe division of clans in tbis way, is tbat tbe cbildren of tbe same &ther by différent wives having différent names, may be obliged to take opposite sides in quarrel.

M. Eyre's expérience in South Anstralia does not, however, correspond witb Sir George Grey's in the west and nortb west. Cotlins believed tlie custom to be for a native to steal a wife from a tribe at enmity with his own, and to drag ber, stunned witb blows tbrougb tbe wood, ber relations not avenging the affront, but taking un opportunity of relaliating in kind. It appeurs from Niad's account, that, in somc districts, tbe

population is divided into two clans, and a man of one clan only marry a woman of another.

in Ëast Auslralia, Lang describes a curions and complex System. Through a large extent of the interior^ araong tribes speaking différent dialecte^ there are four names for men an4 for women, Ippai and Ippata^ Kulbi and Kapota, Kumbo and Buta^ Murri and Mata, if we call thèse four sets A. B. C. D^ then the rule is that a man or woman of the tribe A must marry into B^ and a member of the tribe C into D, and vice versa^ but the child whose father is A^ takes the name of D^ and so on; A* D; B* C; C B; D' A; and the mother s name answfrs equaily well to give the name of the child; if the mother is of the tribe B^ her child will belong to the tribe D^ and so on.

This ingenious arrangement^ it will be seen^ has much the same effect as the Hindoo régulations in preventing intermarriage in the maie or female line, but allowing the maie and female to cross; the children of two brothers or two sisters cannot marry, but the brother's child may marry the sister*s. Lang, however, mentions a further régulation, probably made to meet some incidental circumstances, as, so far as it goes, it stultifies the whole system; A may also marry into bis or her own tribe and the children take the nanif^ of G.

(Tylor's early history of mankind, p. 284, 285.)