The laws of this people are unfitted for the government of a single isolated family, some of them being only adapted for the regulation of an a.s.semblage of families; they could therefore not have been a series of rules given by the first father to his children: again, they could not have been rules given by an a.s.sembly of the first fathers to their children, for there are these remarkable features about them that some are of such a nature as to compel those subject to them to remain in a state of barbarism, whilst others are adapted to the wants and necessities of savage RACES, as well as to prevent too close intermarriages of a people who preserve no written or symbolical records of any kind; and in all these instances the desired ends are obtained by the simplest means, so that we are necessitated to admit that, when these rules were planned it was foreseen that the race submitted to them would be savages, and under this foresight the necessary provision was made for the event.

We cannot argue that this race was originally in a state of civilization, and that from the introduction of certain laws amongst them, the tendency of which was to reduce them to a state of barbarism, or from some other cause, they had gradually sunk to their present condition; for in that case how could those laws which provide solely for the necessities of a people in their present state have been introduced amongst them? Neither could they have been invented according to necessities and emergencies which a savage state has produced, for under such circ.u.mstances it is impossible that they could have been promulgated and enforced throughout so wide a range of country, and amongst a dispersed race of barbarians of such a variety of dispositions, who acknowledge no chief or lawgiver, and are so characteristically impatient of restraint.

Without in this place attempting to form and to support any theories founded upon the views I have just put forward, I may state my impression that it would seem, from the laws and customs of the natives of Australia, to have been willed that this people should until a certain period remain in their present condition, which is consequently not the result of mere accident, or of the natural const.i.tution of man. From the peculiar nature of their inst.i.tutions it was impossible that they could emerge from a state of barbarism whilst these remained in force, and from the tenacity and undeviating strictness with which they are retained, and the strong power they hold over the savage mind, it seems equally impossible that they could have been abrogated, or even altered, until the race subjected to them came into contact with a civilized community whose presence might exercise a new influence, under which the ancient system would expire or be swept away.

We may, I think, fairly produce this as a proof that the progress of civilization over the earth has been directed, set bounds to, and regulated by certain laws framed by Infinite wisdom; and, although such views may by some be deemed visionary, I feel some confidence that these laws are as certain and definite as those which control the movements of the heavenly bodies. I believe moreover, that they are capable in some degree of being studied and reduced to order, although no attempt to do so has. .h.i.therto been made; and the inst.i.tutions of barbarous races, their probable origin, the effects they have upon the people submitted to them, the evidences of design which they contain, and other similar questions, are those points to which in this enquiry attention should be particularly directed.

CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS.

The progress of events and the rapid march of science in our country are very wonderful, but the progress of events in the eastern hemisphere at the present moment is still more amazing: Christianity and civilization are marching over the world with a rapidity not fully known or estimated by any one nation; the English are scarcely aware what has been effected by their own missionaries and commerce, and they are utterly ignorant of what has been already done, and is now doing, by the Americans, Dutch, and Portuguese.

CHAPTER 11. LAWS OF RELATIONSHIP, MARRIAGE, AND INHERITANCE.

RELATIONSHIP AND MARRIAGE. DIVISION OF FAMILIES.

Traditional Laws of Relationship and Marriage.

One of the most remarkable facts connected with the natives is that they are divided into certain great families, all the members of which bear the same names, as a family, or second name: the princ.i.p.al branches of these families, so far as I have been able to ascertain, are the:

Ballaroke Tdondarup Ngotak Nagarnook Nogonyuk Mongalung Narrangur.

But in different districts the members of these families give a local name to the one to which they belong, which is understood in that district to indicate some particular branch of the princ.i.p.al family. The most common local names are:

Didaroke Gwerrinjoke Maleoke Waddaroke Djekoke Kotejumeno Namyungo Yungaree.

These family names are common over a great portion of the continent; for instance, on the Western coast, in a tract of country extending between four and five hundred miles in lat.i.tude, members of all these families are found. In South Australia I met a man who said that he belonged to one of them, and Captain Flinders mentions Yungaree as the name of a native in the gulf of Carpentaria.

LAW OF MARRIAGE.

These family names are perpetuated and spread through the country by the operation of two remarkable laws:

1. That children of either s.e.x always take the family name of their mother.

2. That a man cannot marry a woman of his own family name.

COINCIDENT INSt.i.tUTIONS AMONGST THE NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS.

But not the least singular circ.u.mstance connected with these inst.i.tutions is their coincidence with those of the North American Indians, which are thus stated in the Archaeologia Americana:*

Independent of political or geographical divisions, that into families or clans has been established from time immemorial. At what time and in what manner the division was first made is not known. At present, or till very lately, every nation was divided into a number of clans, varying in the several nations from three to eight or ten, the members of which respectively were dispersed indiscriminately throughout the whole nation.

It has been fully ascertained that the inviolable regulations by which those clans were perpetuated amongst the southern nations were, first, that no man could marry in his own clan; secondly, that every child belongs to his or her mother's clan. Among the Choctaws there are two great divisions, each of which is subdivided into four clans, and no man can marry in any of the four clans belonging to his division. The restriction among the Cherokees, the Creeks, and the Natches, does not extend beyond the clan to which the man belongs.

There are sufficient proofs, that the same division into clans, commonly called tribes, exists among almost all the other Indian nations. But it is not so clear that they are subject to the same regulations which prevail amongst the southern Indians.

(*Footnote. Volume 2 page 109.)

A similar law of consanguinity seems to be inferred in Abraham's reply to Abimelech (Genesis 20:12) And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife.

FAMILY NAMES AND SIGNS. ORIGIN OF FAMILY NAMES.

The origin of these family names is attributed by the natives to different causes, but I think that enough is not yet known on the subject to enable us to form an accurate opinion on this point. One origin frequently a.s.signed by the natives is that they were derived from some vegetable or animal being very common in the district which the family inhabited, and that hence the name of this animal or vegetable became applied to the family. I have in my published vocabulary of the native language, under each family name, given its derivations as far as I could collect them from the statements of the natives.

But as each family adopts some animal or vegetable as their crest or sign, or Kobong, as they call it, I imagine it more likely that these have been named after the families than that the families have been named after them.

SECOND COINCIDENCE.

A certain mysterious connection exists between a family and its kobong, so that a member of the family will never kill an animal of the species to which his kobong belongs, should he find it asleep; indeed he always kills it reluctantly, and never without affording it a chance to escape.

This arises from the family belief that some one individual of the species is their nearest friend, to kill whom would be a great crime, and to be carefully avoided. Similarly a native who has a vegetable for his kobong may not gather it under certain circ.u.mstances and at a particular period of the year. The North American Indians have this same custom of taking some animal as their sign. Thus it is stated in the Archaeologia Americana:* "Each tribe has the name of some animal. Among the Hurons the first tribe is that of the bear; the two others of the wolf and turtle.

The Iroquois nation has the same divisions, only the turtle family is divided into two, the great and the little." And again, in speaking of the Sioux tribes:** "Each of these derives its name from some animal, part of an animal, or other substance which is considered as the peculiar sacred object or medicine, as the Canadians call it, of each band respectively." To this we may add the testimony of John Long, who says,*** "one part of the religious superst.i.tion of the savages consists in each of them having his totem, or favourite spirit, which he believes watches over him. This totem they conceive a.s.sumes the shape of some beast or other, and therefore they never kill, hunt, or eat the animal whose form they think the totem bears."

(*Footnote. Volume 2 page 109 quoting from Charlevoix volume 3 page 266.)

(**Footnote. Ibid page 110 quoting from Major Long's Exp. volume 1 chapter 15.)

(***Footnote. Voyages and Travels page 86.)

Civilized nations, in their heraldic bearings, preserve traces of the same custom.

BETROTHMENTS AND MARRIAGES.

Female children are always betrothed within a few days after their birth; and from the moment they are betrothed the parents cease to have any control over the future settlement of their child. Should the first husband die before the girl has attained the years of p.u.b.erty she then belongs to his heir.

A girl lives with her husband at any age she pleases, no control whatever is in this way placed upon her inclinations.

WIDOWS.

When a native dies his brother inherits his wives and children, but his brother must be of the same family name as himself. The widow goes to her second husband's hut three days after the death of her first.

The old men manage to keep the females a good deal amongst themselves, giving their daughters to one another, and the more female children they have the greater chance have they of getting another wife by this sort of exchange; but the women have generally some favourite amongst the young men, always looking forward to be his wife at the death of her husband.

OBLIGATIONS OF RELATIONSHIP. DIVISION OF FAMILY BRANCHES.

But a most remarkable law is that which obliges families connected by blood upon the female side to join for the purpose of defence and avenging crimes; and as the father marries several wives, and very often all of different families, his children are repeatedly all divided amongst themselves; no common bond of union exists between them, and this custom alone would be sufficient to prevent this people ever emerging from the savage state.

As their laws are princ.i.p.ally made up of sets of obligations due from members of the same great family towards one another--which obligations of family names are much stronger than those of blood--it is evident that a vast influence upon the manners and state of this people must be brought about by this arrangement into cla.s.ses. I therefore devoted a great portion of my attention to this point, but the ma.s.s of materials I have collected is so large that it would occupy much more time to arrange it than I have been able to spare so as to do full justice to the subject; but in order to give an accurate idea of the nature of the enquiries I pursued I have given in the Appendix A a short genealogical list which will show the manner in which a native gives birth to a progeny of a totally different family name to himself; so that a district of country never remains for two successive generations in the same family. These observations, as well as others made with regard to the natives, can be only considered to apply, as yet, to that portion of Western Australia lying between the 30th and 35th parallels of south lat.i.tude unless the contrary is expressly stated; though I think there is strong reason to suppose that they will, in general, be found to obtain throughout the continent.

DIFFICULTY OF PURSUING THE ENQUIRY.

It is impossible for any person not well acquainted with the language of the natives and who does not possess great personal influence over them to pursue an inquiry of this nature; for one of the customs most rigidly observed and enforced amongst them is never to mention the name of a deceased person, male or female. In an inquiry therefore which princ.i.p.ally turns upon the names of their ancestors this prejudice must be every moment violated, and a very great difficulty has thus to be encountered in the outset. The only circ.u.mstance which at all enabled me to overcome this was that the longer a person has been dead the less repugnance do they evince in uttering his name. I therefore in the first instance endeavoured to ascertain only the oldest names on record; and on subsequent occasions, when I found a native alone and in a loquacious humour, I succeeded in filling up some of the blanks. Occasionally round their fires at night I managed to involve them in disputes regarding their ancestors, and on these occasions gleaned much of the information of which I was in want.

LAWS OF LANDED PROPERTY. RIGHTS AND BOUNDARIES. PROPERTY VESTED IN INDIVIDUALS.

Traditional Laws relative to Landed Property.

Landed property does not belong to a tribe, or to several families, but to a single male; and the limits of his property are so accurately defined that every native knows those of his own land, and can point out the various objects which mark his boundary. I cannot establish the fact and the universality of this inst.i.tution better than by the following letter addressed by Dr. Lang, the Princ.i.p.al of Sydney College, New South Wales, to Dr. Hodgkin, the zealous advocate of the Aboriginal Races:*