The Evolution of Morality. 235 



and the paternity is supposed to be unknown. 

 But there can be no doubt that a is the mother of 

 her child, and that l&amp;gt; is the mother of hers. Pater 

 nity is doubtful, because it is inferred ; maternity, 

 being a fact of perception, does not admit of 

 doubt. Why, then, does &amp;lt;z s child call Z&amp;gt; mother, and 

 5 s child call a mother ? This cannot be explained 

 by the consanguine family. But it is a species 

 of relationship recognized in the Malayan system ; 

 therefore, that system is not based on the consan 

 guine family. If, on the other hand, that system 

 be supposed a mere classification of the genera 

 tions known to most individuals, then the term 

 &quot; mother &quot; must be applied by a child to the 

 women a, Z&amp;gt;, and c, because they all belong to the 

 same generation. 



With the disproof of the existence of the con 

 sanguine family, Morgan s theory of the devel 

 opment of marital relations falls to the ground. 

 The punaluan family, by which he accounts for 

 the Turanian system of relationship, is evolved 

 from the consanguine by excluding own brothers 

 and sisters from the marriage union. But if there 

 never was a consanguine, there could be no puna 

 luan family developed from it. And, accordingly, 

 some other account must be given of the Turanian 

 system of consanguinity. If we admitted the 



