As to treatment of wives among the central tribes (Spencer and Gillen), there were undoubtedly cases of cruelty, but they were the exception rather than the rule. The savage husband has a hasty temper and in a passion might act harshly, while at other times he might be quite considerate of his wife. Among the aborigines of the Darling Eiver, New South Wales, quarrels between husband and wife were said to be quite rare (Bonney), and Smith says-that love is not rare in Australian families, while another observer (Palmer) says that the life of the women is hard and that they are much abused by their husbands. Dawson, who wrote expressly to show that the Australian blacks had been misrepresented, maintained that in Victoria, at least, there was no want of affection between members of a family (p. 37). Lumholtz (pp. 161ff.) holds that the Queensland husband felt little responsibility for his family, that he was really selfish and hunted only for sport, often consuming the game as caught, bringing nothing home. The same author refers to one case of a wife being terribly beaten because she refused, one cold night, to go out and get fuel for the husband. Over against this testimony, we have that of Spencer and Gillen, referred to above, that the husband was ordinarily by no means cruel. In hard seasons men and women suffered alike. A woman, however, suspected of breach of marital relations, was treated with revolting severity. They point out that many things which to us seem harsh were by no means so in their eyes, and that the savage woman recovers easily from wounds that to a civilized woman would entail the greatest suffering. Treatment which we should naturally think cruel was to them merely rough and in conformity with the rest of their life. Howitt (p. 738) says that among the Kurnai tribe family duties were shared by husband and wife, each performing an allotted part toward the support of the family. The man's duty was to fight and hunt, the woman's to build the home, catch the fish and cook them, gather vegetable foods, make baskets, bags and nets.
With reference to their children, much affection was usually shown, and this in spite of the fact that abortion and infanticide were practised in many localities (e. g., in northwestern central Queensland, (Both, p. 183); and among the southeastern tribes, Howitt, pp. 748ff.). In this connection Howitt says, ". . . they [the Mining tribe] are very fond of their offspring and very indulgent to those they keep, rarely striking them," a mother often giving all the food she had to her children, going hungry herself. Infanticide was by no means so unrestricted, or as indicative of cruelty of nature and lack of parental affection as is implied by Mackenzie, writing in the year 1852.[1] Among the north central tribes[2] infanticide was practised, but only
