Note 14 — Chapter I · THE SOCIAL ORGANISATION

The above statement is not quite in agreement with what has been written by Mr Man on the same subject, and what he says is therefore reproduced here. “Their domestic policy may be described as a communism modified by the authority, more or less nominal, of the chief. The head chief of a tribe is called maia igla, and the elders, or sub-chiefs, i.e. those in authority over each community, consisting of from 20 to 50 individuals, maiola. The head chief, who usually resides at a permanent encampment, has authority over all the sub-chiefs, but his power, like theirs, is very limited. It is exercised mainly in organising meetings between the various communities belonging to his tribe, and in exerting influence in all questions affecting the welfare of his followers. It is the chief alone, as may be supposed, who directs the movements of a party while on hunting and fishing expeditions, or when migrating. It is usually through his intervention that disputes are settled, but he possesses no power to punish or enforce obedience to his wishes, it being left to all alike to take the law into their own hands when aggrieved. The aryoto and eremtaga in each tribe have their own head chief, who are independent the one of the other. As might be assumed from the results of observations made of other savage races, whose sole or chief occupation consists in hunting or fishing, the power of the chiefs is very limited, and not necessarily hereditary, though, in the event of a grown-up son being left who was qualified for the post, he would, in most instances, be selected to succeed his father in preference to any other individual of equal efficiency. At the death of a chief there is no difficulty in appointing a successor, there being always at least one who is considered his deputy or right-hand man. As they are usually, on these occasions, unanimous in their choice, no formal election takes place; however, should any be found to dissent, the question is decided by the wishes of the majority, it being always open to malcontents to transfer their allegiance to another chief, since there is no such thing as forced submission to the authority of one who is not a general favourite. Social status being dependent not merely on the accident of relationship, but on skill in hunting, fishing, etc., and on a reputation for generosity and hospitality, the chiefs and elders are almost invariably superior in every respect to the rest. They and their wives are at liberty to enjoy immunity from the drudgery incidental to their mode of life, all such acts being voluntarily performed for them by the young unmarried persons living under their headship14.”