82 



R. H. MATHEWS. 



Phratry. Wife. 



- Chungalee 

 Ohula 



Ohampina 

 Chemara 



B 



/Chimitcha 



I Ch una 



1 



j Taralee 



Tungaree 



Table VI. 

 Husband. 



Chimitcha 

 ChuDa 



Tungaree 

 Taralee 



Chungalee 

 Ohula 



Chemara 

 Ohampina 



Offspring. 



Taralee 

 Tungaree 



Chuna 

 Chimitcha 



Ohampina 

 Chemara 



Ohula 



Chungalee 



In the above table each of my cycles of women (see the 

 "'wife" column of Table III) is bisected, and the men of a 

 cycle are similarly divided. We will now deal with Phratry 

 A as it appears in Table VI. Taking the first man in the 

 kt Husband" column, Chimitcha, we see that his son is 

 Taralee, who belongs to the same phratry as his father. 

 Taralee marries Chemara, a woman of his mother's phratry. 

 This classification is diametrically opposite to my report. 

 But when we look for Chimitcha's No. Ill wife Ohuna and 

 his No. IV spouse Chimitcha, they are found in Phratry B. 

 Then Table VI does not exhibit an exogamous division any 

 more than Table III does. I cannot understand why Spencer 

 and Gillen bisect the cycle or series of women, Chungalee, 

 Ohula, Taralee and Tungaree, given as A in the "Wife" 

 column of Table III, and also the corresponding series shown 

 as B in that table, because nothing seems to be gained by 

 it. It neither establishes exogamy nor proves descent of 

 the sections through the fathers. 



Looking at Table VI it is seen that if Chimitcha marries 

 Chungalee his children will be Taralee ; if he takes a Ohula 

 wife they will be Tungaree; if he be allotted a Chuna they 

 will be Chemara; and if he weds a Chimitcha his family 

 will be Ohampina. The devolution of the sections must 

 consequently depend upon the mothers only. Moreover, 



