any young woman belonging to the class which my daughter would belong to if I had one. I give this example as the easiest way of conveying an idea of their system. Blacks in their native state—that is before they pick up our manners and customs—never call each other by name. They always use a term of relationship, but use names, in speaking of another, in the third person."
Mr. D. Stewart, of Mount Gambier, South Australia, describes, in a letter to the Rev. L. Fison, the system observed by him amongst the tribes in his district; and it seems to assimilate very closely to that of the natives of Mackay, in Queensland. Mankind and things in general are included in the larger divisions, just in the manner mentioned by Mr. Bridgman. There is undoubtedly a great deal yet to be ascertained respecting the nature of the classifications just described and the laws which govern the Australians in their relationships and marriages.
The prohibitions, as they existed amongst the tribes, had the effect of preventing, or, at any rate, greatly reducing the number of in-and-in marriages; but, as pointed out by Mr. Morgan, the institution of classes had an opposite effect—actually compelling in-and-in marriages, beyond the degrees of brothers and sisters. The restrictions, even as now stated in the systems I have referred to, leave such small scope for sexual selection as to give rise, no doubt, not seldom to practices like those described by Mr. Wilhelmi. Why some tribes are exogamous and others endogamous; how such classifications as those existing in Australia originated; why, when the prohibitions were openly disregarded, the offenders were punished, and yet secret violations of the rules were passed over without notice—are questions which cannot be answered. Further researches in countries peopled by savages will enlighten us. At present too little is known to admit of any theories being satisfactorily established. The field open to investigators is large. Such laws, or laws somewhat similar to those in force in Australia, are established amongst various races throughout the world.
They are thus referred to by Latham:—
"Imperfect as is our information for the early history and social condition of the Magar, we know that a trace of a tribual division (why not say an actual division into tribes?) is to be found. There are twelve Thums. All individuals belonging to the same Thum are supposed to be descended from the same male ancestor; descent from the same great mother being by no means necessary. So husband and wife must belong to different Thums. Within one and the same there is no marriage. Do you wish for a wife? If so, look to the Thum of your neighbour; at any rate look beyond your own. This is the first time I have found occasion to mention the practice. It will not be the last; on the contrary, the principle it suggests is so common as to be almost universal. We shall find it in Australia; we shall find it in North and South America; we shall find it in Africa; we shall find it in Europe; we shall suspect and infer it in many places where the actual evidence of its existence is incomplete."[1]
Of the many misstatements which have been made from time to time, and perhaps not seldom thoughtlessly, not the least important is that given in the work of Count P. E. de Strezelecki, entitled a "Physical Description of New
- ↑ Descriptive Ethnology, vol. i., p. 80.
