offended party or parties. Thus, if both the offenders be married,
each must pay a fine to (a) his own offended spouse, and (b) to the
offended spouse of the partner in the crime. The pu-u of the fine goes
to the offended spouse--the rest to the kin of the offended spouse. In
addition to paying the fine, should the offender desire to continue
the marriage relation with his offended spouse, he must provide
animals and other perquisites for a honga (general welfare feast)
in which the kin of both parties take part, and which is supposed
to start the spouses anew in domestic harmony and felicity, and in
all that the Ifugao considers prosperity, namely, abundance of pigs,
chickens, rice, and children.
96. Sex in relation to punishment for adultery.--Although the
punishment for adultery is the same for either sex, the likelihood of
the adulterer's being punished is much greater if the offender be a
woman than if he be a man. This is for the reason that men are more
jealous than women and less attached to their spouses, usually. A
great deal of adultery on the part of men goes unpunished. Most women
would rather not hear about the peccadillos of their husbands. They do
not want to take action unless it be forced upon them. But once the
matter is brought to their "official attention," they have to take
action in order to "save face." Women sometimes tell their husbands
"It would be all right for you to have a mistress if you could only
do so without my hearing of it." And when they learn of some such
offense on the part of their husbands, they sometimes upbraid them,
saying: "Oh, why didn't you do this thing in such a way that I would
not hear of it?"
The husband, on the other hand, usually punishes, and often divorces
his offending wife.
Once an offense is known, it must be acted on. Otherwise, the offended
spouse is considered to be lacking in self respect. And indeed I
believe that the insult involved in adultery is more serious than
any other phase of the crime. The Malay's "face" is exceedingly dear
to him.
THE TAKING OF LIFE
97. General considerations.--It is extremely difficult to unravel
the law, if there be a law, with respect to murder, executions, and
war. The Ifugao has no tribunals to sentence, and no government to
execute. He makes no declarations of war. Doubtless no two nations or
tribes of the world ever engaged in a warfare in which each did not
consider the other the aggressor, or at least, the offender. The same
is true with respect to feuds between families, which were almost
as numerous as the families themselves. In spite of the years of
American occupation during which comparative peace has prevailed,
these feuds still exist. We must substitute, however, for patriotism,
fraternal and filial love; the sense of duty to the unavenged dead,
love of vengeance, and intense hatred engendered and justified by
a well learned catalogue of wrongs and assassinations inflicted on
the family by the enemy family. Once started, a blood feud was well
nigh eternal (unless ended by a fusion of the families by means of
marriage), for the reason that what was a righteous execution to one
family was a murder (usually treacherous) to the other.
Outside of manslaughter, to be treated of later, it may be stated as
a general tenet of Ifugao practice that the taking of a life must be
paid by a life. Considering, too, that a member of an Ifugao family
rarely if ever effected or accomplished any except the most ordinary
and elemental acts without previous consultation with his family,
and that nearly all killings were effected pursuant to a decision
of a family council, it was not without a fair show of reason that
Ifugao law held that a murder might be punished almost as well by the
execution of some member of the murderer's family as by the execution
of the murderer himself. For, if not principals in the commission of
the crime, other members of the family were at least accomplices or
accessories. Indeed Ifugao law held the whole family guilty, looking
upon the crime, quite correctly, as an offense for which the whole
family was responsible.
War, murder, and the death penalty exacted in execution of justice, in
the Ifugao's society are so near each other as to be almost synonymous
terms. We have already seen that a capital execution for crime is
nearly always looked upon by the kin of the executed as being a murder;
it is retaliated by them, by what to them is a justifiable execution;
but by what, to the killers, is considered as a murder to be punished
by another execution, and so on ad infinitum.
The Ifugao has one general law, which with a few notable exceptions he
applies to killings, be they killings in war, murders, or executions,
which public opinion would pronounce justifiable and legal. That law
is: A life must be paid by a life. Let us pass now to a consideration
of various classes of the takings of human life.
98. Executions justifiable by Ifugao law.--Public opinion or custom,
or both, justify the taking of a life in punishment for the following
crimes: sorcery; murder; persistent and wilful refusal to pay a debt
when there is the ability to pay; adultery discovered in flagrante;
theft by one of a foreign district; refusal to pay a fine assessed
for crime or for injury suffered. But even though custom and public
opinion justify the administration of the extreme penalty in these
cases, the kin of the murdered man do not, in most cases, consider the
killing justified. There are innumerable circumstances that complicate
a given case. Was the sorcery proven or only suspected? Was it a murder
that the man committed; or was he justified in the killing? Would
not the debtor have come to his right mind had his creditor waited
a little longer; and did the creditor approach him in the right way
with reference to the debt? Did not the woman make advances in the
adultery case that no self-respecting male could turn down? Was not
the indemnity assessed too large or otherwise improper; or did the
injured party wait long enough for the payment? These and a thousand
other questions may arise with respect to the various cases.
If the death penalty be inflicted by persons of a foreign district,
it is sure to be looked upon as a murder.
At feasts and gatherings about the "bowl that cheers" and especially in
drunken brawls, an unavenged killing, no matter what the circumstances,
is likely to be brought up as a reflection upon the bravery or manhood
of the living kin, and so urge them to the avenging of what was really
a justified execution.
Murder, sorcery, and a refusal to pay the fine for adultery justify
the infliction of the death penalty even on a kinsman if he is not
too close a relative. An execution of one kinsman by another is not
so likely to be avenged as is justifiable execution by one outside
the family. This is in accordance with the principle of Ifugao law:
The family must at all hazards be preserved.
99. Feuds.--A feud is a series of takings of human life as vengeance,
in which the heads may or may not be taken. There are some hundreds
of ways in which feuds may start. As a rule they begin with a taking
of life that is not justified in the eyes of the kin of him whose
life was taken. They may begin from a retaliation for a kidnapping
or even from an accidental killing. Feuds exist between neighboring
districts, or districts not far distant between which to a certain
extent ties of blood and marriage exist. It is exceedingly rare--if
it ever occurs--that entire villages or districts are involved. The
feud is an affair between families only. It consists of a series of
vengeances and "returning of vengeances." Feuds may even start within
the district: but as a rule, they are short lived, being stopped by
the counsel of the influential. Feuds between districts are well nigh
interminable usually, but may come to an end by means of intermarriage
or when one or two of the leaders of each family are afflicted by
certain diseases [17] thought to be inflicted by certain deities that
desire the peace ceremony. As has been hitherto stated, each killing
in a feud is considered by the killers to be an entirely justifiable
execution in punishment of crime. The deities of war and justice are
called to witness that the debt is not yet paid. Contemporaneously,
the kin of the slain are calling on the same deities to witness that
their family is sorely afflicted; that no debt was owed the others;
that no chickens or pigs, or rice had been borrowed; that no theft
or other crime had been committed, and so on; yet, that innocent,
they are being slaughtered.
100. War.--Before the American occupation, districts that were far
distant might be said to be continually at war with each other. The
war was carried on as a series of head-takings. There was no formal
declaration of war. As a rule there were no large expeditions to the
enemy country, and heads were taken from ambush, on the outskirts of an
enemy village or along much traveled paths. Women's heads were taken in
these exploits; but not as a rule, in feuds. To avenge lives taken in
war, while no doubt the life of the actual head-taker was preferable,
the life of any person of the enemy village might be taken; just as
in feuds, the life of any member of the enemy family might be taken.
101. Head-taking.--Heads were not taken in the case of executions for
injury. In feuds within a district, heads were not taken. In feuds
between families of different districts, heads might or might not be
taken. Usually they were taken if there were no ties of kinship between
the districts. It should be emphasized, however, that there was no
definite boundary between districts, and consequently, no well-defined
line beyond which heads might be taken. Families from the southern part
of a district would take heads in territory from which those in the
northern part of the district would not take them. Heads were always
taken in the case of those killed in war, if circumstances permitted.
102. Hibul or homicide.--The Ifugao law clearly recognizes several
grades of homicide.
(a) The taking of life when there is an entire absence of both
intent and carelessness. As for example, in the case already cited
(see sec. 54). when a party of hunters have a wild boar at bay. The
boar, as there stated, charges the most advanced of the hunters,
and in retreating backwards, the latter jabs one of his companions
with the shod point of his spear handle. There is no penalty for
such a taking of life.
(b) The taking of life when there is clearly an absence of
intent, but a degree of carelessness. For example, a number of
men are throwing spears at a mark. A child runs in the way, and
is killed. The penalty is a fine varying from one third to two
thirds the amount of the full fine for homicide according to the
decree of carelessness.
(c) Intentional taking of the life of another, under the impression
that he is an enemy when in reality he is a co-villager or a
companion. In case the killer can make the family of the slain
understand the circumstances, only a fine is assessed. This fine
is called labod. (See sec. 106.) If the killer be unrelated to
the slain, the full amount of the labod is demanded: if related,
the amount is usually lessened.
Example: Pumauwat of Raay was irrigating his fields at night. Some
of his companions told him that there were some head-hunters from
an enemy village near. In the darkness. Pumauwat encountered
another man. Likyayu, the betrothed of his daughter. He asked
him who was there. On account of the noise of water falling
from the rice fields, Likyayu did not hear the inquiry, and
said nothing. Pumauwat speared him. Likyayu cried out. Pumauwat
recognized his voice, and carried him home. He furnished animals
for sacrifice to secure Likyayu's recovery. Likyayu recovered. Had
he died, Pumauwat would have been called on for the full amount
of the fine: but had Likyayu been firmly engaged to Pumauwat's
daughter, that is, had the bango ceremony been performed the full
amount of the labod fine would not have been demanded, since the
relationship would have been an extenuating circumstance.
(d) The taking of life by persons in a brawl or by an intoxicated
or insane person. In case the slain died before his slayer
could agree to provide animals for sacrifice, the latter would
probably be killed by the kin of the slain if he were of a foreign
district. He might be killed if a non-related co-villager. He
would be fined the labod if a kinsman. He would probably go scot
free if a brother or uncle.
Example: A of Longa became insanely drunk at a feast at the house
of his brother Gimbungan. He attempted to embrace the comely
daughter of Gimbungan, his niece. Gimbungan tried to quiet him,
and in so doing aroused his ire. He drew back his spear menacingly,
and in so doing pierced the girl--who was at his back--with the
shod point at the end. She died. A was properly penitent when
he sobered, and furnished animals for sacrifice. The fine labod
was not, however, demanded of him. This was about thirty five
or forty years ago. Considerable feeling exists between the two
branches of the family to this day, owing to this occurrence.
The burden rests upon the slayer in the above cases to show that the
killing was accidental or that he was so drunk as to have utterly
lost his reason. The absence of a motive is a great help to him in
this. If he has ever had a serious altercation with the slain, in
the absence of controverting evidence, the presumption is likely to
be that the killing was intentional, and that he has been "feigning
friendship in order to kill by ugâ (treachery)."
103. Attempts to murder.--An attempt on the part of an enemy of
another district on the life of a person is punishable by death. An
attempt by one of the same district may or may not be punished by
death; in most cases peace would be arranged by mutual friends and
kinsmen. In such a case, he who made the attempt would be required
to furnish animals for a peace feast.
104. Wounding.--Wounds inflicted accidentally and without intent
or carelessness are not punished. In case the element of intent or
carelessness be present, he who inflicts the wounds must furnish
animals for sacrifice, pay the wounded man and his kin a fine,
and stand the expense of a feast to make peace. The following is a
typical list, for the kadangyang (wealthy)class, of the expenses of
animals for sacrifice and fine:
(a) First feast for the recovery of the wounded man, sacrifices
to the war deities: 3 pigs at 15 pesos; 10 chickens at 1 peso;
total 55 pesos.
(b) Second feast for recovery, the pinochla, or feast to cure
wounds and infections: 1 pig at 10 pesos; 2 chickens at 1 peso;
8 spear heads as fees of priests at 25c; total 14 pesos.
In case the wounded man lives, the following fine is paid him and
his kin:
(c) Fine of two bakid (two tens) amounting to 72 pesos; fee of
the monkalan, 10 pesos; total 82 pesos.
(d) Peace making ceremony: 1 pig at 15 pesos; other appurtenances
of feast, 2 pesos; total 17 pesos.
105. Special liability of the givers of certain feasts.--The givers
of uyauwe or hagabi feasts (glorified general welfare feasts to which
great numbers of people come) are responsible for wounds or deaths
that occur at these feasts. When a man decides to initiate himself
and his wife into the ranks of the kadangyang by giving one of these
feasts, he appoints one of the old priests of his family to perform
the tikman ceremonies. These ceremonies are sacrifices to the various
classes of deities whose special function is the "tying up" of men's
stomachs and passions. Prayers are addressed to these deities that a
little food satisfy the guest that attends the feast, to the end that
the giver be not eaten out of house and home; that a little rice wine
suffice to intoxicate the people; that the passions of men be tied up
to the end that no quarrels or frays occur; that no rice-wine jars or
gongs be broken; that no accidents occur--in short, that the whole
feast pass off smoothly. The duties of the manikam (the priest who
performs these ceremonies) are rather arduous. To say nothing of the
ceremonies he conducts, he must fast for a number of days and must
observe a number of taboos. He receives rather a large fee for these
services. And, indeed, their importance, in the eyes of the Ifugaos,
and the legal responsibility he incurs, certainly justify a large fee.
The manikam priests are jointly responsible with the giver of the
feast for accidents or violence that may occur. This liability of
the giver of the feast for wounds or loss of life is based on the
supposition that if he had not given the feast the wound would not
have occurred; and possibly that he gave the feast with the motive
of bringing about such an occurrence. The liability of the manikam
is based on the supposition that there must have been a remissness
on his part in his religious duties, else the accident or loss would
never have occurred. The following is an actual instance that would
indicate that this provision of the law is an incipient employer's
liability provision.
Malingan of Pindungan, many years ago, gathered together his
kin and friends, performed the preliminary feasts, and went to
Payauan to make a hagabi (lounging bench, the insignium of the
kadangyang class). They made a very large hagabi that weighed
nearly a ton. In helping to carry it across the river two men
were carried downstream by the current and drowned. Demand was
made on Malingan and the manikam of the feast for the labod fine
(see sec. 106). It was paid, and that is the reason Malingan's
descendants are not wealthier today, for formerly Malingan was
one of the wealthiest men of the district.
It should be stated that brawls and accidents are much more common
in feasts of this character given in parts of Ifugao other than the
Kiangan-Nagakaran-Maggok area. This is due to the fact that in the
area named above only relatives and persons invited by relatives
attend, while in other regions the event is not so exclusive. There
is the further consideration that in this area, on the night before
the general drink-fest begins, an old man makes a speech in which
he tries to put the crowd assembled in a good humor, and in which he
warns each and every one to seize and hold any person who begins to
disgrace hospitality by unseemly brawling.
106. The labod, fine assessed for homicide.--This fine is paid to
the family of the slain. For the kadangyang, or wealthy class, the
full fine consists of ten portions or divisions, totaling 975 pesos
in the case tabulated below. These divisions may be briefly described
as follows:
THE LABOD FINE
1. Outlay for a honga (general The honga is performed by the man's
welfare feast): kin as a means of preventing the
recurrence of such misfortunes in
(1) carabao P80.00 the family. The animals are
(2) 3 pigs 60.00 sacrificed to all the deities.
=======
Total P140.00
2. Dangale (sacrifices at funeral The animals of this part of the
feast): fine are killed at the funeral
feast of the slain.
(1) 2 carabaos P160.00
(2) 5 pigs 80.00
=======
Total P240.00
3. Gagaom (funeral shrouds): The clouts are to tie the dead man
in the death chair: one about the
(1) 8 death blankets P64.00 chest; one about the head; one
(2) 4 clouts 4.00 about the shoulders; and one to
(3) 1 ceremonial clout 1.00 tie on the head and beak of the
====== hornbill worn as a mark of rank.
Total P69.00 The ceremonial clout is worn on
the breech of the corpse.
The corpse is wrapped and entombed
in the eight death blankets.
4. Habalag (hangings at funeral The nine cheap blankets are
feast): distributed among the man's kin.
(1) 2 death blankets as
fee of the monkalun P16.00
(2) 9 maginlotan (cheap
death blankets) 36.00
======
Total P52.00
5. Mata-na (his eyes):
(1) 1 gold neck-ornament
for left eye P80.00
(2) 1 gold neck-ornament
for right eye 80.00
=======
Total P160.00
6. Putu-na (his belly): Articles listed under numbers 5 to
9 inclusive, go to the dead man's
(1) 1 pango (string of heirs and kin.
beads) P120.00
7. Puhu-na (his heart):
(1) 1 guling (rice-wine
jar, small) P80.00
8. Ubuna-na (his seat):
(1) 1 gong P80.00
9. Nunlidludagan (his place to
lie):
(1) 2 death blankets P16.00
10. Hidit (peace-making): For making peace with the family of
the slain.
(1) 1 pig and other
essentials of feast P18.00
=======
Total P314.00
The rank of the slain has something to do with the amount of the
labod. The amounts given above are those that would be collected in
the case of the killing of a Kiangan man of the kadangyang class. If
the slain were a middle class or poor man the amounts would not be
so great. [18] If the slayer were a middle class, or poor man, the
amounts above might be lessened somewhat, but not very much. If the
slayer be unable to pay, he is saddled with the rest as a debt. If
he cannot pay the debt during his lifetime, his children must pay it.
107. Accidental killing of animals.--The accidental killing of an
animal is not a crime. Sometimes even the value of the animal is not
demanded or accepted if tendered.
If a dog runs out threatening to bite a passer-by, and the latter
kills it, he is required to pay the value of the dog. If a dog bites
a passer-by, the latter may kill the dog and need not pay a fine. If
the dog bites him, and he does not kill it, he may demand a payment
from the owner. It was a provision of primitive Roman law that "If an
injury were done by a slave, the person injured had the right to exact
vengeance against the slave personally, thus injuring the master's
property; and the master or owner was consequently allowed to prevent
this vengeance by making compensation for the injury done." [19]
Should a pig, at that period of the year when rice is stacked below
the granary to dry out, enter through the fence and eat of the rice,
it may be killed by the owner of the granary; but he must give the
owner another pig in place of it. Such a killing is not considered
malicious, for the pig was spoiling the "miraculous increase" of the
year's harvest.
A pig that enters a rice field and eats of the unharvested rice is
usually returned to the owner with the request that he tie the pig
up. Should it again enter the field, the damage it does must be paid
for. Should the owner refuse to pay this indemnity, and should the
pig again enter the field, the owner of the field would be likely to
kill the animal. The owner of the pig might consider such a killing
malicious and improper. Public opinion would sustain the owner of
the field.
108. Malicious killing of animals.--This is a serious crime. Its
seriousness is due partly to the fact that domestic animals are
to a great extent considered members of the household and as such
loved and protected, and further to the fact that the intentional
and malicious killing of such a member of a household would have a
tendency to bring a like fate on the human members thereof, owing to
the mystic power and force of analogy.
A labod fine is demanded for the malicious killing of a pig. The fine,
in case a wealthy family is concerned, is as follows:
LABOD FINE FOR MALICIOUS KILLING OF A PIG
1. The corpse of the dead pig is surrounded by living pigs,
one on each side, i.e., four pigs are exacted in return.
2. Dangale (see sec. 106): 1 carabao. This animal is simply
handed over, not killed for a funeral as is the case when
a human being is concerned.
3. Gagaom (see sec. 106): 6 death blankets; 1 bayaó (fancy
blanket); 1 tin-unwe (ceremonial clout); 4 clouts.
4. Habalag (see sec. 106): precisely as in the case of a
homicide.
5. Liwa, fee of the monkalun, or go-between: 1 death blanket.
PUTTING ANOTHER IN THE POSITION OF AN ACCOMPLICE
109. The tokom, or fine for compromising another.--He who, voluntarily
or involuntarily, puts another in the position of an accomplice, or
in such a light that he might be regarded as being an accomplice in
the commission of a crime, and so be liable to punishment as such,
must pay the person so injured a fine, called tokom. It may almost
be said that he who causes another person's name to be prominently
mentioned or bandied in connection with a crime must pay this fine.
The following are instances in which a tokom would be demanded:
A of another district comes to the house of B, and is received
by B as a guest. While he is going home and while he is in the
outskirts of the district he is speared by C, a neighbor of B's
or a resident of the same district. B must force C to pay a tokom.