593 



not been often correctly treated. ('''*) And in the purchase of 

 land from the natives there have very often been great and 

 serious difficulties, leading to loss of time and money on the 

 one side and to irritation and a feeling of wrong on the other. 



The description of the mainland Mailu land tenure will 

 be given first, as it is the more important. Land ownership, 

 in our full sense of the word, involves among others the right 

 to exclude the land from trespass, and the exclusive right to 

 some of the produce of the soil — such as water, clay, and 

 minerals. Among the Mailu natives these rights belong to 

 the village community as a whole. Each village has around it 

 an area which forms what may be called its sphere of influence. 

 On this area strangers could not trespass, on pain of being 

 immediately seized and killed. Friendly neighbours could go 

 through to the village, but they might not loiter, for fear of 

 being suspected of evil magic and similar crimes. A stranger, 

 whether friend or foe, is not entitled to any of the produce of 

 the soil; he could not use a waterhole, or take clay for pot- 

 tery or red earth for painting, etc. In villages near, or on, 

 the sea shore, the adjacent beach and reef belong to this 

 sphere of influence. The village community is the group in 

 which these rights are vested, and, on the other hand, these 

 general rights are not further apportioned and subdivided 

 among the clans or individuals. This statement refers to the 

 Mailu natives living on the islands (Toulon, Lariioro, and 

 Louporti), as well as to the mainland villages. 



Between friendly villages their spheres of influence are 

 divided by recognized boundaries ; but between hostile villages 



(44) Even in Prof. Seligman's treatise, Avhere, as a rule, 

 everything is stated with admirable accuracy and lucidity, land 

 tenure is not dealt with in a quite satisfactory manner. Speak- 

 ing of the Koita he says. "Each man has his share in the Idiihu 

 garden land, which descends to his children," etc. Further 

 statements imply also the existence of individual land ownership 

 in a fairly European sense of the word. Now the Koita, as the 

 Sinaugholo and Magi — and I think all the Papuo-Melanesians — 

 make their gardens not individually, but jointly, the whole clan 

 making one enclosure, and the ground inside being subdivided 

 among the clansmen. There was no such thing consequently as 

 exclusive individual claims to any portion of land for gardening 

 purposes. There was no subdivision of land among individuals, 

 save in the exercise of certain purely nominal over-rights. As 

 the natives, however, attach a great importance to these over- 

 rights, they very often mention the name of an individual as the 

 real owner or "boss'' (Biaguna korikori — "real boss," in Motu). 

 Even the Motu, who possess very little land, have no individual 

 garden land apportioned to a man hereditarily. This latter state 

 of things (individual land tenure) I found only on Mailu Island. 

 Among the Northern Massim, on Woodlark Island, I found a 

 system of land tenure almost identical with that of the Koita and 

 mainland Mailu. 



