482 TRIBES OF THE UPPER MISSOURI [eth. ann.46 



The risk attending the extraction of large articles or the disgrace 

 incurred by pilfering is, they grant, all the punishment necessary, 

 and these seldom are attended with any serious consequences. All 

 must live some way and the right to property not being well defined — 

 besides eacli being accustomed to frequent reverses — stealing is looked 

 upon more as a means of subsistence necessitated by the state of 

 their peculiar wants, and does not present the idea of theft to them 

 as an immoral act or one tending to aggravate Wakonda. 

 Robberies to the extent of depriving another of his means of living 

 are seldom if ever attempted, though retaliation would of course be 

 severe in proportion, and in the progress of this retaliation the 

 property thus acquired, be it horses or women, would be destroyed, 

 besides the risk attending the robber personally. 



Fornication and adultery are not considered offenses to Wa- 

 konda. If the consent of the woman has been obtained, punishment 

 is seldom inflicted on the man unless caught in the act. The woman, 

 however, is punished in various ways, sometimes, though not usually, 

 by death. The property of the offender is taken or destroyed for 

 his trespass on the property of the offended. The chastity of any 

 woman not the property of another man may be violated without 

 any moral sense of wrong presenting itself, though the seducer would 

 be liable to be made to pay or in default of doing so his horses 

 would be killed by the relatives of the woman. Moreover, they 

 look upon women as intended for this purpose, and only take into 

 consideration the different claims upon them as an article of property. 



Rapes on virgins are nearly unknown. Were such a crime accom- 

 plished the law would be death to the perpetrator, not because it is 

 morally wrong, but because it depreciates the price of the woman 

 and lessens her chance of marriage. It is also considered as an insult 

 to her relatives, intimating a contempt of their feelings and power 

 of protection. 



The evils arising from falsehood or lying are with them of small 

 importance. Any lies an Indian could invent would not be produc- 

 tive of any great evil, and owing to their associations the falsehood 

 would soon appear. This being the case it is not regarded as a great 

 offense even to the individual, much less Wakonda. They all 

 lie occasionally, and the custom is so common as scarcely to attract 

 any further notice than their ridicule. Therefore there is no punish- 

 ment attending on it further than the person famed for lying would 

 be neglected and despised by the others. To call an Indian a liar 

 would be insult certainly, but not in the same degree as the same 

 epithet among whites. It would not be aggravation enough alone 

 to merit a blow or any revenge. There is no such thing as profane 

 swearing among any of these prairie tribes, nor is there a word in 



