Among Congo cannibals

by John H. Weeks

Case V. Plaintiff said he owed the defendant 1000 brass rods, but as he did not pay up quickly the defendant lay in wait and caught his two wives who had gone together to fish among the islands; that by right of custom he should have taken only one and let the other go.

Defendant admitted the statement made as correct, but said that he had gone so often to the plaintiff’s town to collect his debt, and had been put off with such unreasonable excuses, that he was angry and took the two women instead of one.

I pointed out: (1) That the price of a woman was 2500 rods, but the debt was only 1000, and the expenses (fees to the men who helped him) only 500, making in all 1500, and the value of one woman more than covered this amount. (2) In tying up two women he had greatly exceeded the debt, and had thus put himself in the wrong.

Verdict for the plaintiff. One woman to be returned at once, and the other to be delivered up on payment by the plaintiff of 1800 rods; the defendant to lose thus 200 rods for tying up two women when one well covered the debt and expenses.

Case VI. Motuli, the plaintiff, said he owed the defendant a woman, and in payment of the debt he handed over a woman large with child, of which he, Motuli, was the father. The child was now two years old, and he wanted the child to be handed over to him.

The defendant allowed that all the above was true, but said that as the child was born after the woman came into his possession, the child was his.

I pointed out to Motuli: (1) That he was wrong to give his wife, by whom he was expecting a child, in payment of a debt. (2) He should have made an agreement at the time with his creditor respecting the ownership of the child. (3) That if the woman had died in child-birth he would have refused to pay another in her place, so as the creditor took her and the risks with her the child should remain with its mother. Motuli thus lost the case and was very angry.

Case VII. Bodia, the plaintiff, said he bought a wife of the defendant and had one child by her, which was now three years old; that when his wife had a second child she died in delivery, and now the mother and second child were dead. He wanted either the money returned, or that the defendant should pay him another woman.

Defendant admitted that all the statements were true, but said that Bodia had had the woman a long time and he could not see that he was responsible for her death.

I explained to Bodia: (1) That every woman who had a child had it at some risk to her life. (2) That he had owned the woman for four years, and she had farmed, cooked, and borne him one child; and as he had brought her into the position that caused her death, he himself must accept the loss. (3) His first child was properly born and grown up healthy, so there was no malformation of the womb. Verdict for the defendant.