In Florida, and adjacent parts of the Solomon Islands, not merely two, but _six_ ‘kema’ or exogamous divisions (‘phratries?’) exist. Two of the six have names derived from localities, two have animal names, Eagle and Crab: two _kema_ came in from abroad. All this points to contamination, and rearrangement, under new circumstances. Each _kema_ in Florida has one or more _buto_, the clam, pig, pigeon, and so on, not to be eaten by members of the kema. This looks like the ‘totemic subdivisions’ (that is, the totem groups within the ‘phratries’) of the Australians. Again, these butos within each _kema_, animals and plants not to be eaten, are exactly like the survivals of Totemism in the names of the Siouan totem kins with male descent, ‘Do not eat small Birds,’ ‘Do not eat Dogs,’ ‘Do not eat Buffalo,’ and so forth. The _buto_ of each kin within the Melanesian exogamous _kemas_, then, seems to me to be the old totem of the kin, now relegated to a position more obscure, in the changes of society, and, with one exception, not giving its name and tabu to the kema. Only in one case is the animal which is the buto, also the animal which gives its name to the _kema_. The Kakau _kema_ may not eat Kakau--the crab. The Manukuma (eagle) kema may eat the eagle: one fancies that they find it tough. In the same way the Narrinyeri and other tribes in Australia permit their totem kins to eat their totems. Members of each _kema_ are apt to speak of their _butos_ (which they may not eat) as their _ancestors_, as in Totemism, but this is a mere mythical explanation of why they may not eat the _buto_. With half a dozen other myths, it is used by totemists to explain why they may not eat their totems. Dr. Codrington, on the other hand, writes, ‘the _buto_ of each _kema_ is probably comparatively recent in Florida, it has been introduced at Bugotu within the memory of living men.’[6] Dr. Codrington, as we have already seen, inclines to the theory which derives totems originally from individuals. He cites Mr. Sleigh, of Lifu (mentioned by us before), who writes, ‘When a father was about to die, surrounded by members of his family, he might say what animal he will be, say a butterfly or some kind of bird. That creature would be sacred to his family, who would not injure or kill it; on seeing or falling in with such a creature the person would say, “That is _kaka_” (papa), and would, if possible, offer him a young cocoa-nut. But they did not thus adopt the name of a tribe.’[7]