"1

as requiring great care to prevent them from dying on their own account.' The Kafirs believe that unless the father places a lump of earth in the mouth of one of the babies he will lose his strength.2

In the instances just referred to, the infant is killed either because, after the death of its mother, there is nobody to nurse it, or on account of the fault of its parents, especially the mother, or because it is held desirable that the sickly or defective should die at once, or out of superstitious fear. However, among many of the lower races, infanticide is not restricted to similar more or less exceptional cases, but is practised on a much larger scale. Custom often decides how many children are to be reared in each family, and not infrequently the majority of infants are destroyed.

Infanticide is common among various tribes in North and South America.3 Dobrizhoffer says that it was a rare exception among the Abipones to find a woman who had brought up two or three sons, whilst some mothers killed all the children they bore, no one either preventing or avenging these murders."4 According to Azara, the Guanas buried alive the majority of their female infants, and the Mbayas suffered only one boy or one girl in a family to live ; 5 but the correctness of his statements has been questioned. On the other hand there can be no doubt as to the extreme prevalence of infanticide in the islands of the South Seas. In some of the principal groups of Polynesia it was practised publicly and systematically, without compunction, to an extent almost incredible. During the whole period of his residence in the Society Islands, Ellis does

1 Kingsley, Travels in West Africa, P. 473. According to Nyendael, twinbirths are, on the contrary, esteemed good omens in most parts of the Benin territory (Ling Roth, Great Benin, p. 35).

Kidd, The Essential Kafir, p. 202. 3 Bessels, quoted by Murdoch, 'Point Barrow Expedition,' in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. ix. 417 (Eskimo of Smith Sound). Nelson, Eskimo about Bering Strait,' ibid. xviii. 289. Gibbs, 'Tribes of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon,' in Contributions

to North American Ethnology, i. 198. Powers, op. cit. pp. 177, 184 (Californian tribes). Yarrow, in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. i. 99 (Pimas of Arizona). Hawtrey, in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxxi. 295 (Lengua Indians of the Paraguayan Chaco).

Dobrizhoffer, op. cit. ii. 98. For another account of the infanticides of the Abipones, see infra, p. 400.

5 Azara, Voyages dans l'Amérique méridionale, ii. 93, 115.

6 Wied-Neuwied, Reise nach Brasilien, ii. 39.

not recollect having met with a single pagan woman who had not imbrued her hands in the blood of her offspring, and he thinks that there, as also in the Sandwich Islands, two-thirds of the children were destroyed by their parents. "No sense of irresolution or horror," he says, "appeared to exist in the bosoms of those parents who deliberately resolved on the deed before the child was born. They often visited the dwellings of the foreigners, and spoke with perfect complacency of their cruel purpose"; and when the missionaries tried to dissuade them from executing their intention, the only answer generally received was that it was the custom of the country. The Line Islanders allowed only four children of a family to get the chance of life; the mother had a right to rear one child, whereas it rested with the husband to decide whether any more should live. In Radack every mother was permitted to bring up three children, but the fourth and every succeeding one she was obliged to bury alive herself, unless she was the wife of a chief. In Vaitupu, of the Ellice Archipelago, also, “infanticide was ordered by law," and only two children were allowed to a family.5 In New Zealand and the Marquesas infanticide, though not so general, was yet of frequent occurrence and not regarded as a crime. In most of the Melanesian groups it was very common. In the Solomon Islands there still seem to be several places where it is the custom to kill nearly all children soon after they are born, and to buy other children from foreign tribes, good care being taken not to buy them too young." The practice of infanticide occurred at least occasionally in Tasmania, and, as it seems, almost universally in Australia. Mr. Curr supposes that the Australian woman, as a rule, reared only two boys and one girl, the rest of her children being destroyed.10 "In the laws known to her," says Mr. Brough Smyth, "infanticide is a necessary practice, and one which, if disregarded, would, under certain circumstances, be disapproved

of; and the disapproval would be marked by punishment."1 Mr. Taplin was assured that, among the Narrinyeri, more than one-half of the children born fell victims to this custom ; 2 and in the Dieyerie tribe hardly an old woman, if questioned, but will admit of having destroyed from two to four of her offspring.3

Among the Todas of India, up to the period of Mr. Sullivan's visit to their hills, about the year 1820, only one female child was allowed to live in each family. With reference to the Kandhs, or Khonds, Macpherson observes, "The practice of female infanticide is, I believe, not wholly unknown amongst any portion of the Khond people, while it exists in some of the tribes of the sect of Boora to such an extent, that no female infant is spared, except when a woman's first child is a female, and that villages containing a hundred houses may be seen without a female child." 5

8

It is said that among the Guanches of the Canary Islands, in ancient times, all children, except the first-born, were killed." The people of Madagascar frequently practised infanticide; but Ellis says that they were much less addicted to it than the South Sea Islanders, a numerous offspring being generally a source of much satisfaction. According to Kolben, infanticide was common among the Hottentots; whereas Sparrman only states that "the Hottentots are accustomed to inter, in case of the mother's death, children at the breast alive," and Le Vaillant altogether denies the existence of customary infanticide among them.10 Among the Swahili, according to Baumann, infanticides are very common and hardly disapproved of.11 But the peoples of the African continent are not generally addicted to infanticide, except in such special cases as have already come under our notice.

9

The custom of infanticide, in its extensive form, has been attributed to various motives. Among some peoples mothers are said to kill their new-born infants on account

996

3

of the trouble of rearing them,' or the consequent loss of beauty. Another cause is the long suckling time, generally lasting, among savages, for two, three, four years, or even more, owing to want of soft food and animal milk. When, as is very commonly the case, the husband must not cohabit with his wife during the whole of this period, he is naturally inclined to form other connections, and this seems in some instances to induce the mother to destroy her child. In another respect, also, the long suckling-time is an inducement to infanticide; among certain Australian tribes an infant is killed immediately on birth "when the mother is, or thinks she is, unable to rear it owing to there being a young child whom she is still feeding.' Among the Pimas of Arizona, again, infanticide is said to be connected with the custom of destroying all the property of the husband when he dies. "The women of the tribe, well aware that they will be poor should their husbands die, and that then they will have to provide for their children by their own exertions, do not care to have many children, and infanticide, both before and after birth, prevails to a great extent. This is not considered a crime."7 But there can be little doubt that the wholesale infanticide of many of the lower races is in the main due to the hardships of savage life. The helpless infant may be a great burden to the parents both in times of peace and in times of war. It may prevent the mother from following her husband about on his wanderings in search of food, or otherwise encumber her in her work. Mr. Curr states of the Bangerang tribe of Victoria, with whom he was intimate for ten years, that their habit of killing nearly half

1 Ellis, Polynesian Researches, i. 256 (Tahitians). Idem, Tour through Hawaii, p. 327. Polack, Manners and Customs of the New Zealanders, ii. 92. Gason, loc. cit. p. 258 (Dieyerie tribe).

2 Williams, Missionary Enterprises, p. 565 (Tahitians).

3 See Westermarck, History of Human Marriage, p. 484.

4 Ibid. p. 483.

307.

Schneider, Die Naturvölker, i. 297,

Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes of Central Australia, pp. 51, 264. Tidem, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, p. 608. Oberländer, loc. cit. p. 279.

7 Yarrow, loc. cit. p. 99.

8 Turner, Nineteen Years in Polynesia, p. 394 (people of Vaté, New Hebrides). Polack, op. cit. ii. 93 (Maoris).

"2

of the children born resulted "principally from the difficulty, if not the impossibility, of transporting several children of tender age from place to place on their frequent marches." 1 Concerning the Abipones, Charlevoix observes :-"They seldom rear but one child of each sex, murdering the rest as fast as they come into the world, till the eldest are strong enough to walk alone. They think to justify this cruelty by saying that, as they are almost constantly travelling from one place to another, it is impossible for them to take care of more infants than two at a time; one to be carried by the father, and the other by the mother." Among the Lenguas of the Paraguayan Chaco an interval of seven or eight years is always observable between children of the same family, infants born in this interval being immediately killed. The reasons for this practice, says Mr. Hawtrey, are obvious. "The woman has the hard work of carrying food from garden and field, and all the transport to do; the Lenguas are a nomadic race, and their frequent moves often entail journeys of from ten to twenty miles a day. . . . Travelling with natives under these circumstances, one is forced to the conclusion that it would be impossible for a mother to have more than one young child to carry and to care for." Moreover, a little forethought tells the parents that their child before long will become a consumer of provisions perhaps already too scanty for the family. Savages often suffer greatly from want of food, and may have to choose between destroying their offspring or famishing themselves. Hence they often have recourse to infanticide as a means of saving their lives; indeed, among several tribes, in case of famine, children are not only killed, but eaten. Urgent want is frequently represented by our authorities as the main cause of infanticide; and

4

1 Curr, Squatting in Victoria, p. 252. Oberländer, loc. cit. p. 279. Cf. Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai, p. 259; Fraser, Aborigines of New South Wales, p. 5.

2 Charlevoix, History of Paraguay, i. 405.

5

3 Hawtrey, in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxxi. 295.

* See Steinmetz, Endokannibalismus, pp. 8, 13, 14, 17.

5 Nansen, First Crossing of Greenland, ii. 330. Nelson, in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. xviii. 289 (Eskimo about