MICHELSON. ] ETHNOLOGICAL NOTES. 341 
her father were dead, he would treat her exactly as one of his own 
daughters. If he has no children of his own, he may give his brother’s 
daughter, even if his brother is still living, almost anything, clothes, 
money, etc. She would ask him as freely as she would her own 
father, that is, if her father’s brother were well off. If a girl’s paternal 
uncle had children of his own (boys or girls), it is considered that he 
has enough to take care of; and in this case he would not make her 
the presents named above. But if the girl’s father were dead he 
would treat her exactly as his own daughter. Even if a girl is saucy 
to her father or immoral, and he knows it, he will not want to say 
much about it; he will not scold her severely. The girl’s mother 
will think it is the duty of the girl’s father to reprove her if she is 
impudent to him, and will say nothing. If a girl is saucy to her 
mother, her mother will reprove her, even slap her, or make her go 
without meals. She may slap the erring daughter until the latter 
is nearly 20 years old. If a mother knows her daughter is immoral 
she will make her fast for four days. If she still is immoral, the 
mother will make her fast for eight days. In the early days every 
one in the camp knew who was fasting, and none of the girl’s rela- 
tives would give her food or water. Under no circumstances will a 
girl be saucy to her maternal uncle. That is why a mother often 
tells her daughters to ask their maternal uncles for advice. In a 
way a girl is afraid of her maternal uncles; she is better acquainted 
with her parents. Nor would a girl be impudent to her paternal 
uncles; if she were, they would “get after her,” though her own 
father couldn’t. On the other hand, a girl would not go to her 
paternal uncles for advice. The only answer as to why they do not, 
I have been able to elicit is that “it’s not their way,’ which answer 
is in substance what most Kuropeans would give if pressed to explain 
why they did not commit infractions against definite social usage. 
[A girl or boy may be saucy to their grandparents; they will report 
the offender to her or his mother who will make the child fast.] I 
presume Hartland would interpret the peculiar relation of a man to 
his sister’s daughter as a survival of female descent; actually the 
Foxes are organized in exogamous groups with male descent, and 
were so as far back as 1827. See Forsyth apud Blair, 1. c., vol. ii, 
p- 210. Nor is there any reason to suppose that they had previously 
been organized in groups with female descent. From the data 
given above one could hold that the Foxes originally had father- 
right but were giving away to mother-right just as easily as vice 
versa. Personally I think either interpretation entirely out of place, 
and consider the whole matter simply a social phenomenon. 
Some of these injunctions occur in T. 
18 The basket work of the Foxes is not very esthetic. 
