tion paid to his descendants, or his feelings are simply disregarded when they collide with the interests of the living. Generally speaking, the question whether compensation is to be accepted or not, must be settled by a balancing of advantages and drawbacks.

2

3

Burck

We may expect, then, to find the customs regarding blood-revenge and compensation to vary exceedingly among different peoples. Among many the rule of revenge is strictly followed, and compensation never, or rarely, accepted, at least for intentional homicide. This group includes not only tribes who are in a state of savagery, but peoples but peoples like the Beni Amer, Marea, Kabyles of Jurjura, and Jbâla of Morocco. hardt says of the Bedouins :-"The stronger and the more independent a tribe is, the more remote from cultivated provinces, and the wealthier its individuals, the less frequently are the rights of the Thar commuted into a fine. Great sheiks, all over the Desert, regard it as a shameful transaction to compromise in any degree for the blood of their relations." Among the mountains of Daghestan and in parts of Albania it is likewise considered disgraceful to accept compensation for the murder of a relative.

6

5

In some instances the acceptance of compensation does not necessarily mean that the family of the slain altogether renounce their right of revenge. Among the Ahts, though it is usual to accept large presents as expiation for murder, yet, practically, this expiation is not complete, and blood alone effectually atones for blood. An accepted present never quite cancels the obligation to punish in the breast of the offended person or tribe." s Among the Somals, "after the equivalent is paid, the

murderer or one of his clan, contrary to the spirit of El Islam, is generally killed by the kindred or tribe of the slain." 1 Among the Berbers (Shluḥ) of the province of Sûs, in Southern Morocco, a person who commits homicide immediately flees to another tribe, and places himself under its protection. His relatives then pay ddit, or blood-money, to the family of the victim, but this only prevents the offended party from taking revenge on any of them, and does not entitle the murderer to return; if he appears outside the tribe to whom he has fled for refuge, he is at any time liable to be killed. Among the Ossetes, again, it was formerly a prevalent custom for a murderer to pay a fixed price for a certain time to the family of the murdered man, say for a year, during which time the blood-revenge remained dormant.'

3

In many instances, on the other hand, custom allows the acceptance of compensation as a perfectly justifiable alternative for blood-revenge, or even regards it as the proper method of settling the case. Among the Indians of Western Washington and North-Western Oregon the principle of life for life, though fully recognised, is sometimes abrogated in favour of material damages. Among the Thlinkets "the murder of a relative can be atoned for by a certain number of blankets." Among the Californian Karok the murder of a man's nearest relative may be compounded for by the payment of money. The Kutchin demand blood-money for a slain kinsman, but avenge his death should such be denied." Among the Kandhs the custom of blood-revenge was modified by the principle of money compensation, the acceptance of such compensation being in no case considered disgraceful. In the Malay Archipelago, whilst the more ferocious tribes

1 Burton, First Footsteps in East Africa, p. 87 n.t. Cf. Paulitschke, Ethnographie Nordost-Afrikas, p. 263. 2 von Haxthausen, Transcaucasia, p. 405.

Gibbs, Tribes of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon,' in Contributions to North American Ethnology, i. 189.

21.

4 Petroff, loc. cit. p. 165.

5

5 Powers, Tribes of California, p.

Richardson, Arctic Searching Expedition, i. 386.

7 Hunter, Annals of Rural Bengal, ii. 76. Macpherson, Memorials of Service in India, p. 82.

insist, in many situations, upon a literal compliance with the law of retaliation, other tribes constantly accept a pecuniary compensation. Among the majority of the Bedawee tribes of Egypt compensation is generally taken in commutation for vengeance; 2 and the same is the case among the Aenezes, though it would reflect shame on the friends of the slain person if they were to make the first overture. Among the Wadshagga, again, the acceptance of blood-money is obligatory. The Vendidâd forbids the followers of Zoroastrianism to refuse the compensation offered for a deed of bloodshed. Among the Irish the public opinion of the village held that the quarrels between its members should be compromised in a certain manner. However, if the guilty party did not pay the amount awarded, the community did not compel him to do so, and the injured party was then at liberty to avenge his own wrongs by reprisals or levying of private war. Among the Teutons the kindred of the slain might, in early times, choose between taking revenge or accepting compensation, just as they liked; but later on they were expected by public opinion,. and finally required by public authority, not to pursue the feud if the proper composition was forthcoming, except in a few extreme cases.7

Thus the exaction of life for life, from being a duty incumbent on the family of the dead, becomes a mere right of which they may or may not avail themselves, as they please, and is at last publicly disapproved of or actually prohibited. Among the circumstances by which this process has been brought about there is still one which calls for special attention, namely, the pressure of some intervening authority, the elders of the tribe, or 1 Crawfurd, History of the Indian 6 Ancient Laws of Ireland, iii. p. Archipelago, iii. III. lxxx.

Lane, Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, p. 120.

3 Burckhardt, Notes on the Bedouins and Wahábys, p. 87.

4 Merker, quoted by Kohler, in Zeitschr. f. vergl. Rechtswiss. xv. 56. 5 Geiger, op. cit. ii. 34.

8

7 Keyser, op. cit. ii. pt. ii. 95. Pollock and Maitland, op. cit. i. 46 sq. Gotlands-Lagen, 13.

8 Cf. Vámbéry, Das Türkenvolk, p. 305 sq. (Kirghiz); Munzinger, Ostafrikanische Studien, p. 500 (Barea and Kunáma).

2

the chief, inducing the avenger to lay down his weapon and to accept money for blood. I do not say that the practice of compensation has originated in such an intervention; we meet it among peoples who know nothing of courts, judges, or regular arbitrators. But when we hear of chiefs making efforts to check the blood-feud by persuading the injured party to accept remuneration in money or property, it is impossible to doubt that some connection exists between the system of compensation and the judicial power of the chief. Among the Indians of Brazil, when blood is shed, either designedly or accidentally, by one of the same tribe, the chief not seldom insists upon the acceptance of compensation by the family of the deceased. Of the people of Nias, amongst whom the offender may suffer death at the hands of the avenger, we read that even grave cases, when brought before the chief, are often punished by fines only. Among the Dooraunees, in Western Afghanistan, "if the offended party complains to the Sirdar, or if he hears of a murder committed, he first endeavours to bring about a compromise, by offering the Khoon Behau, or price of blood." The Teutonic nations, as Kemble observes, in the course of time made the State the arbitrator between the parties "by establishing a tariff at which injuries should be rated, and committing to the State the duty of compelling the injured person to receive, and the wrong-doer to pay, the settled amount. It thus engaged to act as a mediator between the conflicting interests, with a view to the maintenance of the general peace.

We have previously discussed the important measure of substituting punishment for revenge by transferring the judicial and executive power of the avenger to a special authority within the body politic, commissioned with

the administration of justice. The system of compensation was only one of the methods adopted by such an authority for the settling of disputes; and, on the whole, it was a sign of weakness. Speaking of the Rejangs of Sumatra, Marsden observes that the practice of expiating murder by the payment of a certain sum of money "had doubtless its source in the imbecility of government, which being unable to enforce the law of retaliation, the most obvious rule of punishment, had recourse to a milder scheme of retribution, as being preferable to absolute indemnity." When the central power of jurisdiction is firmly established, the rule of life for life regains its sway. Thus, in the mature legislation of semi-civilised and civilised peoples, up to quite recent times, murder has almost invariably been treated as a capital offence—unless, indeed, committed by some person belonging to a specially privileged class, such as the Peruvian Incas, the Brâhmanas of India, or, in England, all who had the Benefit of Clergy, that is, every man who knew how to read, with the exception of those who were married to widows." But among many of the lower races, also, manslayers are subject to capital punishment, in the proper sense of the term-to death inflicted, not by an individual avenger, but by the community at large or by some special authority."

4

3

It is not only by the slaying of a fellow-creature that a person may forfeit his right to live. Among various peoples custom allows, or sometimes even compels, the offended party to kill the offender in cases which involve

1 Marsden, History of Sumatra, p. 246.

2 Cf. Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, ii. 599 sq. (Teutonic peoples). Réville, Hibbert Lectures on the Native Religions of Mexico and Peru, p. 151.

Laws of Manu, viii. 380 sq.

5 Stephen, History of the Criminal Law of England, i. 458 sqq. According to the Cornelian law, a free Roman citizen could not be punished capitally for the commission of murder, but was

6

simply exiled from Italy, whereas a slave was executed for a similar crime (Mommsen, Römisches Strafrecht, p. 631 sq.). Supra, pp. 171, 172, 189. Veniaminof, quoted by Petroff, loc. cit. p. 152 (Aleuts). Adair, History of the American Indians, p. 150. Morgan, League of the Iroquois, p. 331. Harmon, Journals of Voyages and Travels, p. 348 (Indians on the east side of the Rocky Mountains). Turner, Samoa, pp. 178, 295, 334 (Samoans, natives of Arorae, Efatese). Thomson, in Jour.