74 R. H. MATHEWS. 



cases the women whose favours were obtained by a given 

 man, belonged to the sections from which he could claim a 

 No. 1, 2, 3 or 4 wife. Exceptions were of course observed 

 as we should expect, judging by the variations in other 

 native rules. I notice that Spencer and Gillen 1 in report- 

 ing cases of sexual liberties of this kind, give examples 

 which would mostly fall respectively within the scope of 

 Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 marriages. The authors were not aware 

 of the Nos. 3 and 4 types of marriage, but certain women 

 whom they mention answer the description. 



Anyone advocating paternal descent among theOhingalee 

 might perhaps lay stress upon the fact that the child is 

 always assigned tlie section name of its father's father. 

 There is, however, no weight at all in that argument, 

 because the very same thing happens in the Kamilaroi, 

 Wiradjuri, Barkunjee, etc., where the descent is unmis- 

 takably through the mother only. Not only so, but in every 

 tribe I know possessing female descent all over Australia, 

 the child takes the section name of its father's father. 

 This law holds good no matter whether the tribe be divided 

 into two, or four, or eight intermarrying sections. 



In former articles I have described the social organisa- 

 tion of the Barkunjee 2 and Kamilaroi tribes. It will be 

 interesting to show the resemblance of the social structure 

 of these tribes to that of the Ohingalee and Arranda. In 

 the Barkunjee there are only two principal divisions — the 

 cycles — and the name of the offspring is determined through 

 the women. The men of one cycle marry the women of 

 the opposite one or else the women of their own cycle, 

 which is tantamount to the statement that the aggregate 

 of men in one cycle can marry all the women of the tribe. 



1 Northern Tribes, 134-136 and 138-139. 

 8 This Journal, xxxix., 118. 



