The numerals of a few additional tribes will show clearly that all distinct perception of number is lost as soon as these races attempt to count above 3, or at most, 4. The Yuckaburra[33] natives can go no further than _wigsin_, 1, _bullaroo_, 2, _goolbora_, 3. Above here all is referred to as _moorgha_, many. The Marachowies[34] have but three distinct numerals,--_cooma_, 1, _cootera_, 2, _murra_, 3. For 4 they say _minna_, many. At Streaky Bay we find a similar list, with the same words, _kooma_ and _kootera_, for 1 and 2, but entirely different terms, _karboo_ and _yalkata_ for 3 and many. The same method obtains in the Minnal Yungar tribe, where the only numerals are _kain_, 1, _kujal_, 2, _moa_, 3, and _bulla_, plenty. In the Pinjarra dialect we find _doombart_, 1, _gugal_, 2, _murdine_, 3, _boola_, plenty; and in the dialect described as belonging to "Eyre's Sand Patch," three definite terms are given--_kean_, 1, _koojal_, 2, _yalgatta_, 3, while a fourth, _murna_, served to describe anything greater. In all these examples the fourth numeral is indefinite; and the same statement is true of many other Australian languages. But more commonly still we find 4, and perhaps 3 also, expressed by reduplication. In the Port Mackay dialect[35] the latter numeral is compound, the count being _warpur_, 1, _boolera_, 2, _boolera warpur_, 3. For 4 the term is not given. In the dialect which prevailed between the Albert and Tweed rivers[36] the scale appears as _yaburu_, 1, _boolaroo_, 2, _boolaroo yaburu_, 3, and _gurul_ for 4 or anything beyond. The Wiraduroi[37] have _numbai_, 1, _bula_, 2, _bula numbai_, 3, _bungu_, 4, or many, and _bungu galan_ or _bian galan_, 5, or very many. The Kamilaroi[38] scale is still more irregular, compounding above 4 with little apparent method. The numerals are _mal_, 1, _bular_, 2, _guliba_, 3, _bular bular_, 4, _bular guliba_, 5, _guliba guliba_, 6. The last two numerals show that 5 is to these natives simply 2-3, and 6 is 3-3. For additional examples of a similar nature the extended list of Australian scales given in Chapter V. may be consulted. Taken as a whole, the Australian and Tasmanian tribes seem to have been distinctly inferior to those of South America in their ability to use and to comprehend numerals. In all but two or three cases the Tasmanians[39] were found to be unable to proceed beyond 2; and as the foregoing examples have indicated, their Australian neighbours were but little better off. In one or two instances we do find Australian numeral scales which reach 10, and perhaps we may safely say 20. One of these is given in full in a subsequent chapter, and its structure gives rise to the suspicion that it was originally as limited as those of kindred tribes, and that it underwent a considerable development after the natives had come in contact with the Europeans. There is good reason to believe that no Australian in his wild state could ever count intelligently to 7.[40]