tery, and to surrender itself to its powerful influence. Its dominance as a passion marks the epoch of civilization commenced. We must recognize this remarkable passion as the only power able to master the hindrances and overcome the obstructions in the pathway of civilizaProperty and civilization are substantially convertible terms. A minute knowledge of the processes of evolution of this idea would constitute in some respects the most extraordinary chapter of the mental history of mankind.

The materials to be presented in this paper tend to illustrate, and are confined to, the state of marriage, of the family, and of the tribal organization among the Australian aborigines.

Systems of consanguinity and the tribal organization as they are now found to exist among savage and barbarous nations are chiefly important from the light they seem to throw upon the growth of the idea of the family through successive stages of development. Some of these systems of consanguinity are either primitive or quite near the primitive form, whilst others are in different stages of advancement. They indicate with substantial certainty that the Communal Family, founded upon the intermarriage of brothers and sisters, was the first and earliest form of the family in the primitive ages; or, at least, the earliest we are as yet able to recognize. Between this and the Barbarian Family (second stage of the family) there was a wide interval. The tribal organization intervened between these forms, and produced the gradual transition from one into the other. It seems to have been the primary object of this organization to break up the intermarriage of brothers and sisters, although the same result was reached among the Australian aborigines by a sexual organization anterior, in the order of time, to the totemic system. Brothers and sisters were necessarily of the same tribe, and marriage between them was permanently abolished by the prohibition of intermarriage in the tribe. The tribal organization tended to inaugurate marriage between single pairs, since it forced individuals to seek wives from other tribes, or to acquire them by negotiation, by purchase, and by capture. This tendency, however, was retarded by the subdivision of the same people into several tribes, which furnished each other with wives; but more especially by a system of regulated cohabitation, running by conjugal right (jura conjugialia)* through a large circle of related persons.

The Romans made a distinction between connubium, which related to wedlock, considered as a civil institution, and conjugium, which was a mere physical union.

Communal marriage and the communal family continued for ages after the introduction of the totemic system. The latter underwent changes within itself before it reached its ultimate form, some of which it will be the object of this paper to illustrate. There are nations of savages now existing which have been tribally organized in all probability for thousands of years, including their remote ancestry, amongst whom it is still in a transition stage.

The Patriarchal Family (third stage of the family) when considered in its highest type* came in with the dawn of civilization. As a form of the family it made but a slight impression upon human affairs, for want of universality. But as an example, as well as the creation of a family with a single male head, it was an advance upon any form before that time known, and heralded by the force of the innovation the advent of the Civilized Family, or the family in its fourth stage. It thus leaves but two forms through the immense periods anterior to civilization. When the facts are more fully ascertained, it is probable that several well-marked types both of the communal and of the barbarian family will be discovered and indicated, with perhaps one or more permanent forms between the two. For the present it will facilitate investigation if but the four successive forms above indicated are recognized.

Kinship and consanguinity, as used, are not convertible terms. The former relates to the connection through tribes and classes, while the latter relates to the connection by blood through common descents.

The preceding observations have been made to point out the bearing of the facts about to be presented.

The annexed papers on Australian kinship were furnished to the writer by the Rev. Lorimer Fison, an English missionary now resident in Australia, who received the principal facts from the Rev. W. Ridley, an English clergyman, and another English gentleman, T. E. Lance, Esq., both of whom have spent many years among the Australian aborigines, and enjoyed excellent opportunities for observation. They contain original information of an interesting character, show

Polygamy, restricted in the main to chiefs, yielded a low form of the patriarchal family; but the form intended to be indicated is identified with the pastoral state, and with a limited agricultural subsistence. It presupposes a growth of the idea of government beyond that of chief and followers, or even that of an oligarchy of chiefs, and also a considerable development of the idea of property, with an increased amount as well as stability of subsistence.

ing a phase of the tribal organization, together with a sexual organization, antecedent to the former in point of time, not hitherto known, except generally, as the writer believes.

We may further observe that the tribal institution was one of the oldest of the human family. Commencing in savagery and traversing the remainder of this period and the whole period of barbarism, it has probably been more influential than any other single institution upon human advancement. The nations of the Aryan and Semitic families were tribally organized in the remote past, lived and progressed under it, and only emerged from it, or laid it aside, when they had reached the commencement of their civilized careers. Property overthrew tribalism. In like manner the nations of the Turanian family were thus organized in the barbarous ages, some of them retaining it to the present day, whilst others have worked out from it into partial civilization. The American aborigines and the nations of Central Africa are still living in the tribal state; and this is true also of the Malayan and Australian families, where they have attained to a condition as far advanced as this organization presupposes. There are Polynesian nations still below the tribal state, amongst whom there is evidence of the intermarriage of brothers and sisters until a comparatively recent period.

Island nations progress much slower than continental. Some of them are still savage, and, if not absolutely stationary, are nearer the primitive condition than any other portion of mankind. At the same time their present state points to an anterior condition as far below it, as all the centuries of their experience, with some degree of continuous progress, necessarily implies. The Australians are savages. Belonging to the Alforan race, they rank below the Malayan, the Polynesian, and the Ganowanian. Their domestic institutions, therefore, must approach the primitive type as nearly as those of any other people. It is for the last-named reason that the facts of their social organization, about to be presented, possess a high degree of importance.

Three memoranda, furnished by Mr. Fison, are hereto annexed, and marked A, B, and C. They have been prepared with so much care and precision that but little can be added to render them more complete. Since, however, they were written at different times, it may prove an advantage to the reader to have them presented in a form * A brief notice of this system is given in McLennan's "Primitive Marriage," p. 118, and also in Tylor's "Early History of Mankind," p. 285.

uniting the three papers in one, thus giving him the option of the secondary or the original. An organization simple to savages may be embarrassing to ourselves until its principles are mastered; but with a reasonable share of attention it can be intelligently followed to the end.

The form of the tribal organization and of kinship under it to be presented, prevails among that portion of the Australian aborigines. who speak the Kamilaroi language. They inhabit the Darling River country north of Sidney. It is also found in other Australian nations. First. The Kamilaroi people are divided into six tribes, standing with reference to the right of marriage in two divisions, as follows:1. Iguana (Duli), 4. Emu (Dinoun), 5. Bandicoot (Bilba), 6. Blacksnake (Nurai).

2. Kangaroo (Murriira),*

3. Opossum (Mute),

Originally the first three tribes were not allowed to intermarry with each other, but were allowed to do so with the other three; and vice versa. This restriction is not anomalous, and would not of itself invade the fundamental structure of the tribe.t It is now modified in certain definite particulars, but not carried to the full extent of permitting marriage into any tribe but that of the individual. No person

can marry into his or her own tribe. Descent is in the female line, the children following the tribe of the mother. These are the essential characteristics of the tribal organization wheresoever this institution is found; and the Kamilaroi tribe, in its external features, is at once perfect and complete.

Secondly. But there is a further division of the people into eight classes, four of which are male and four female, with a regulation in respect to marriage which changes the nature of the tribe itself, or, rather, demonstrates that the tribal organization is in process of development into its true ultimate form. One only of the four classes of

* Paddymelon, a species of kangaroo.

The Seneca-Iroquois are divided into eight tribes, as follows:

1. Wolf.
5. Deer.

2. Bear. 6. Snipe.

3. Beaver.
7. Heron.

4. Turtle.

8. Hawk.

"Originally, with reference to marriage, the Wolf, Bear, Beaver, and Turtle, being brothers to each other, were not allowed to intermarry. The four opposite tribes, being also brothers to each other, were not allowed to intermarry. Either of the first four tribes, however, could intermarry with either of the last four, the relation between them being that of cousins. . . . . In process of time, however, the rigor of the system was relaxed, until the prohibition was confined to the tribe of the individual. . . . . They can now marry into any tribe but their own." League of the Iroquois, p. 83.

males can marry into one only of the four classes of females. More than this, if the male belongs to one of the first three tribes, the female must belong to one of the opposite three. The first restriction is in opposition to the true ideal of the tribe, because, as will hereafter be seen, a portion only of a tribe is allowed to marry with a portion only of another tribe, demonstrating the proposition before advanced, that the totemic system among the Kamilaroi was in the incipient stages of development.

The classes are the following:

Male.

1. Ippai.

2. Kumbo.

3. Murri.

4. Kubbi.

Female.

1. Ippata.
2. Buta.

3. Mata.

4. Kapota.

All the Ippais, of whatever tribe, are brothers to each other; all the Kumbos are the same, and so are the Murris and Kubbis respectively. In like manner, all the Ippatas, of whatever tribe, are sisters to each other; all the Butas are the same, and so are the Matas and Kapotas respectively. In the next place, all the Ippais and Ippatas are brothers. and sisters to each other, whether children of the same mother or collateral consanguinei, and in whichever tribe they are found, Kumbo and Buta are the same; and so are Murri and Mata, Kubbi and Kapota, respectively. Mr. Fison, quoting from the letter of Mr. Lance, remarks, "All Ippais are brothers, and all Ippatas are their sisters, and so also with Kubbis and Kapotas. If a Kubbi meets a Kapota whom he has never seen or heard of before, they address each other as brother and sister." The Kamilaroi, therefore, resolve into four great groups or circles of brothers and sisters. This is the first distinctive feature of the Australian system of kinship, disclosing an organization older than the tribes founded upon sex, and more archaic than any constitution of society hitherto discovered.

The term classes will perhaps answer for these subdivisions, although not entirely satisfactory. The classification is apparently sub-tribal, but in reality sexual. It has its primary relation to a law of marriage as remarkable as it is original.

Brothers and sisters are not allowed to marry. They are necessarily of the same tribe, except as they are tribal brothers and sisters through the class connection. Therefore the classes stand to each other in a different order with respect to the right of marriage, or the