If Sir Herbert Maxwell could persuade Mr. Thomas Shaw, M.P., that the proverbially execrable weather on the Border is the direct result of fishing, especially with salmon-roe, out of season; if there was to be no fishing till Mr. Shaw, after tasting of the first trout, declared the season open; if the clergy of all denominations lent their presence to the imposing ceremony, then I believe that Tweed, Ettrick, Teviot, Yarrow, Ail, and Kale would be worth fishing in again. Taboo, as Mr. Frazer and Mr. Jevons agree, has had its uses in the evolution of morality; but remark that strictly moral offences are nowhere under taboo. You may steal (as long as the object stolen is not tabooed and does not belong to a chief or priest), you may kill, you may interfere with the domestic bliss of your neighbour, you may lie, but the automatic punishment of taboo-breaking nowhere follows. Baiame or Pundjel may punish you; but there is no instant mechanical penalty, as under taboo. After writing this paper, I found that Mr. Robert Louis Stevenson's experience of _tapu_, in the Pacific, led him to form the same opinions as are here expressed. 'The devil-fish, it seems, were growing scarce upon the reef; it was judged fit to interpose what we should call a close season ... a tapu had to be declared.' The tapus described 'are for thoroughly sensible ends.' There are tapus which, to us, appear absurd, 'but the tapu is more often the instrument of wise and needful restrictions.'[15] These taboos are imposed from above, by Government. In other cases, where the taboo expresses an inference from savage superstition (say that a baby or a corpse is dangerous), the taboo is not imposed except by public opinion. That opinion is sanctioned (as in the case of first-fruits) by the action of the Alatunja, or headman: in more advanced societies, by the king. In many cases, taboos are imposed on the king himself by the priestly colleges. But the greatest authority is tradition, resting on fancied experience. [1] _Introduction to the History of Religion_, p. 82. [2] Spencer and Gillen, pp. 10-16. [3] Jevons, p. 85. [4] Jevons, pp. 85-87. [5] Spencer and Gillen, pp. 15, 515. [6] _Ibid._ p. 517. [7] Spencer and Gillen, pp. 222, 246. [8] The Arunta eating of the totem, at the magic ceremony, is not religious. Mr. Jevons, however, adduces it as proof of 'the existence of the totem-sacrament,' surviving 'in an etiolated form.' But what proof have we that the totems were once 'totem gods,' or in any way divine, among the Arunta? Jevons, 'The Science of Religion,' _International Monthly_, p. 489, April 1901. [9] _Memories of the Months_, 1900, pp. 132, 133. [10] Spencer and Gillen, chapter vi. [11] _G. B_. ii. 318. [12] _Ibid._ [13] _G. B_. ii. 335. [14] Fitzroy, _Cruise of the Beagle_, ii. 180. [15] _In the South Seas_, pp. 47-50. XV _WALKING THROUGH FIRE_