3 
The informal council of all the hunters, presided over by the chief, 
was not only the chief legislative and executive body in the band, if we 
may apply these terms to so primitive a community, but also the chief 
court of judicature. There were, of course, no codified laws or statutes, 
merely a body of rights and practices handed down from one generation 
to another by word of mouth. Normally the head of each household was 
responsible for the conduct of its members, and might even take upon 
himself the infliction of the highest penalty, as the following story 
testifies; 
“ A certain man who had camped in the woods with his wife and baby met with 
ill success in his hunting, and did not return to his wigwam for three days. In the 
meantime his wife killed their baby by .placing it in a pot of hot water and went away 
to rejoin her people. To prevent her husband from discovering her route she pulled 
out a stake from the front of the wigwam and set it in its place again 1 . When the 
hunter returned he found his baby dead and his wife gone ; but, pulling out the same 
stake, he discerned her route and followed her to the wigwam of her people. He 
found her sitting on one side of the wigwam with the women, and her brothers sitting 
on the other. ‘Here is the murderer,’ he said as he entered; ‘she killed our baby.’ Her 
eldest brother exclaimed ‘Has she killed the baby?’, and when the man responded 
‘Yes’ he seized his war-club and struck his sister dead. Then he turned to a younger 
sister and commanded ‘ Go and live with this man in your sister’s place ” (John 
Manatuwaba). 
Although disputes between families might be settled by the heads of 
the households, with the assistance at times of mutual friends, there were 
many cases not capable of such a solution. A crime might be committed 
in secret, or Indians cognizant of wrongdoing might fear to inform or take 
action lest they be subject to sorcery later. Fear of sorcery was always 
present in the minds of the Indians. If a man discovered or suspected 
that another hunter was trespassing on his hunting-grounds, he would not 
visit the trespasser’s camp and demand redress, because the wrongdoer 
might take offence and through witchcraft cause him to break through the 
ice or meet with some other misfortune. Instead, he would himself employ 
witchcraft against his adversary, or engage a medicine-man for the same 
purpose. Murder by violence was probably rather rare, but these Ojibwa 
attributed many, if not most, deaths, to sorcery, which was murder in 
another form; and murder called for a compensating life unless the deed 
were compounded with goods or hunting territory. A convicted sorcerer 
might be killed at sight by the relatives of his victim, although the execu- 
tioner still ran the gauntlet of possible vengeance. The chief and council 
here assumed the responsibility. They investigated serious cases of theft 
and alleged murder, summoned the accused man before them, and sanc- 
tioned the death penalty or fixed the amount of indemnity. If the culprit 
belonged to another band they conducted the negotiations with the envoys 
who came to settle the case at issue. 
“If an Ottawa man killed an Ojibwa the band to which the Ottawa man belonged 
gathered goods of all kinds, appointed an eloquent speaker to lead a delegation, and 
offered compensation. The delegation was received by the chief and council of all 
the warriors. Its leader filled a bowl with tobacco, produced a long pipe, flint, steel, 
and punk, made an elaborate speech, lit the pipe from the punk, and offered it to 
the chief of the Ojibwa band. The chief would probably decline it by passing it on 
1 See p. 54. 
