[Footnote 25: Curr, _The Australian Race_, i. 100, 43 _sq._ For other instances, see Keating, _Expedition to the Source of St. Peter's River_, i. 127 (Potawatomis); Harmon, _Journal of Voyages in the Interior of North America_, p. 348 (Indians on the east side of the Rocky Mountains); Hall, _Arctic Researches_, p. 572 (Eskimo); Mariner, _Natives of the Tonga Islands_, ii. 162; Macdonald, _Oceania_, p. 208 (Efatese); Yate, _Account of New Zealand_, p. 145; Arbousset and Daumas, _Exploratory Tour to the North-East of the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope_, p. 322 (Bechuanas); Fritsch, _Die Eingeborenen Süd-Afrikra's_, p. 322 (Hottentots).] It is of particular importance in this connection to note that, in early civilisation, blood-revenge is regarded not as a private matter only, but as a duty, and that, where this custom does not prevail, the community punishes the murderer, frequently with death. We may without hesitation accept Professor Tylor's statement that "no known tribe, however low and ferocious, has ever admitted that men may kill one another indiscriminately."[26] In every society--even where human life is, generally speaking, held in low estimation--custom prohibits homicide within a certain circle of men. But the radius of the circle varies greatly. [Footnote 26: Tylor, 'Primitive Society,' in _Contemporary Review_, xxi. 714.] Savages carefully distinguish between an act of homicide committed within their own community and one where the victim is a stranger. Whilst the former is under ordinary circumstances disapproved of, the latter is in most cases allowed, and often regarded as praiseworthy. It is a very common notion in savage ethics that the chief virtue of a man is to be successful in war and to slay many enemies.