166 NATURAL AND CIVIL 



exclusive of others. These were the pror^erfy 

 of the tribe, belonging equally to ail, end ta 

 which all had a right to repair in quest oi* sub- 

 sistence, and hadan equal and common privi'cgc ^ 

 When the Indian buildcd his house, or pLuuci 

 his corn, no one had a right to mole^.t him ; 

 the house and the corn becam_e his. When he 

 relinquished his possession, any other of the • 

 tribe had a right to take possession, and pursue 

 the same employment that he had done. The 

 fruits of their own labour and industry, was al- 

 ways the property of the individual : The riv- 

 er, the forest, the hunting ground, the land or 

 the territory, was the property of the tribe. 

 The former was of so simple a nature, so well 

 understood, and so universally agreed to, that 

 few controversies could ever arise about it ; 

 common custom and consent was sufficient tcr 

 adjust and regulate every thing of this nature. 

 The latter contained all the property, the means 

 of subsistence, and that on which the Avholc 

 tribe depended for their existence. This was 

 the great object and aim of their government ; 

 to protect and defend that, on which tlie whole 

 tribe subsisted. In such a state of society, the 

 injuries that would be done to individuals \\'ould 

 not be many in their number, or often of such 

 a kind, as to endanger the existence or sover- 

 eignty of the tribe. The right of redressing 

 them, was therefore left in private hands. This 

 has alwavs been the case, in the infancy of so- 

 ciety and government. If injuries were done, 

 if blood was shed, it belonged to the friends and 

 family of the injured person to seek redress. If 

 tl«i chiefs interposed, it was only by way of 



