E. Palmer says that the game and other products of a certain country belonged to the tribe (= local group) there residing; the boundaries were respected and trespassers punished by death.[426] [426] E. Palmer, _J.A.I._, xiii. pp. 278, 279. In North-West Central Queensland the "tribe" (our local group) has its head-quarters.[427] This group has also an over-right over its territory, "over which the community as a whole has the right to hunt and roam."[428] There is still a further subdivision; each family possesses hunting-grounds of its own, and no other has the right to any product thereof without the family's permission. In the case of tribesmen, transgression is a trifle; in that of strangers, a very serious offence.[429] The statements of Roth do not, however, say anything about their mode of living. The mention of "head-quarters" points to a subdivision of land amongst families and to a scattered mode of living. In all probability we may assume here the following form: the local group as joint owner of its land; and single families having special rights to certain parts of it, and camping as a rule separately or in small groups, and aggregating in cases of emergency at the head-quarters. This is the only statement which attributes to families and individuals respectively a virtually exclusive right over a certain ground. We read in another place of the mode or rather the principle according to which individual proprietorship is determined in the North Queensland tribes: "The child's own country, its 'home' where it will in the future have the right to hunt and roam, is determined not by the place of actual birth, but by the locality where his _choi_ had been held apart." _Choi_ is the spirit part of the child's father, embodied in the father's afterbirth. The place of this _choi_ is carefully determined after the child's birth, according to a customary ceremonial.[430] The extent of a local group is determined in the following statement: "there were from twelve to twenty heads of families constituting the group, each with its particular division, who together made the tribe."[431] Here again the land seems to be allotted to the local group, though, according to the foregoing passages, there was a further subdivision according to families. [427] Roth, _Eth. Stud._, p. 133, § 226. [428] _Idem_, Bull. viii. p. 8. [429] _Ibid._ and _Proc. R.S.Q._, pp. 50, 51. [430] Bull. v. pp. 18, 23. [431] _Idem_, _Proc. R.S.Q._, p. 69.