<h2> <SPAN name="ch22" id="ch22"></SPAN><br/> <br/> CHAPTER XXII. </h2>
<p><small><i>Continued Description of Aboriginals—Manly Qualities—Dodging
Balls—Feats of Spring—Jumping—Where the Kangaroo Learned
its Art—Well Digging—Endurance—Surgery—Artistic
Abilities—Fennimore Cooper's Last Chance—Australian Slang<br/>
<br/> <br/></i></small></p>
<p><i>Nothing is so ignorant as a man's left hand, except a lady's watch.</i></p>
<p>—Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar.</p>
<p>You notice that Mrs. Praed knows her art. She can place a thing before you
so that you can see it. She is not alone in that. Australia is fertile in
writers whose books are faithful mirrors of the life of the country and of
its history. The materials were surprisingly rich, both in quality and in
mass, and Marcus Clarke, Raolph Boldrewood, Gordon, Kendall, and the
others, have built out of them a brilliant and vigorous literature, and
one which must endure. Materials—there is no end to them! Why, a
literature might be made out of the aboriginal all by himself, his
character and ways are so freckled with varieties—varieties not
staled by familiarity, but new to us. You do not need to invent any
picturesquenesses; whatever you want in that line he can furnish you; and
they will not be fancies and doubtful, but realities and authentic. In his
history, as preserved by the white man's official records, he is
everything—everything that a human creature can be. He covers the
entire ground. He is a coward—there are a thousand fact to prove it.
He is brave—there are a thousand facts to prove it. He is
treacherous—oh, beyond imagination! he is faithful, loyal, true—the
white man's records supply you with a harvest of instances of it that are
noble, worshipful, and pathetically beautiful. He kills the starving
stranger who comes begging for food and shelter there is proof of it. He
succors, and feeds, and guides to safety, to-day, the lost stranger who
fired on him only yesterday—there is proof of it. He takes his
reluctant bride by force, he courts her with a club, then loves her
faithfully through a long life—it is of record. He gathers to
himself another wife by the same processes, beats and bangs her as a daily
diversion, and by and by lays down his life in defending her from some
outside harm—it is of record. He will face a hundred hostiles to
rescue one of his children, and will kill another of his children because
the family is large enough without it. His delicate stomach turns, at
certain details of the white man's food; but he likes over-ripe fish, and
brazed dog, and cat, and rat, and will eat his own uncle with relish. He
is a sociable animal, yet he turns aside and hides behind his shield when
his mother-in-law goes by. He is childishly afraid of ghosts and other
trivialities that menace his soul, but dread of physical pain is a
weakness which he is not acquainted with. He knows all the great and many
of the little constellations, and has names for them; he has a
symbol-writing by means of which he can convey messages far and wide among
the tribes; he has a correct eye for form and expression, and draws a good
picture; he can track a fugitive by delicate traces which the white man's
eye cannot discern, and by methods which the finest white intelligence
cannot master; he makes a missile which science itself cannot duplicate
without the model—if with it; a missile whose secret baffled and
defeated the searchings and theorizings of the white mathematicians for
seventy years; and by an art all his own he performs miracles with it
which the white man cannot approach untaught, nor parallel after teaching.
Within certain limits this savage's intellect is the alertest and the
brightest known to history or tradition; and yet the poor creature was
never able to invent a counting system that would reach above five, nor a
vessel that he could boil water in. He is the prize-curiosity of all the
races. To all intents and purposes he is dead—in the body; but he
has features that will live in literature.</p>
<p>Mr. Philip Chauncy, an officer of the Victorian Government, contributed to
its archives a report of his personal observations of the aboriginals
which has in it some things which I wish to condense slightly and insert
here. He speaks of the quickness of their eyes and the accuracy of their
judgment of the direction of approaching missiles as being quite
extraordinary, and of the answering suppleness and accuracy of limb and
muscle in avoiding the missile as being extraordinary also. He has seen an
aboriginal stand as a target for cricket-balls thrown with great force ten
or fifteen yards, by professional bowlers, and successfully dodge them or
parry them with his shield during about half an hour. One of those balls,
properly placed, could have killed him; "Yet he depended, with the utmost
self-possession, on the quickness of his eye and his agility."</p>
<p>The shield was the customary war-shield of his race, and would not be a
protection to you or to me. It is no broader than a stovepipe, and is
about as long as a man's arm. The opposing surface is not flat, but slopes
away from the centerline like a boat's bow. The difficulty about a
cricket-ball that has been thrown with a scientific "twist" is, that it
suddenly changes its course when it is close to its target and comes
straight for the mark when apparently it was going overhead or to one
side. I should not be able to protect myself from such balls for
half-an-hour, or less.</p>
<p>Mr. Chauncy once saw "a little native man" throw a cricket-ball 119 yards.
This is said to beat the English professional record by thirteen yards.</p>
<p>We have all seen the circus-man bound into the air from a spring-board and
make a somersault over eight horses standing side by side. Mr. Chauncy saw
an aboriginal do it over eleven; and was assured that he had sometimes
done it over fourteen. But what is that to this:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"I saw the same man leap from the ground, and in going over he dipped
his head, unaided by his hands, into a hat placed in an inverted
position on the top of the head of another man sitting upright on
horseback—both man and horse being of the average size. The native
landed on the other side of the horse with the hat fairly on his head.
The prodigious height of the leap, and the precision with which it was
taken so as to enable him to dip his head into the hat, exceeded any
feat of the kind I have ever beheld."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I should think so! On board a ship lately I saw a young Oxford athlete run
four steps and spring into the air and squirm his hips by a side-twist
over a bar that was five and one-half feet high; but he could not have
stood still and cleared a bar that was four feet high. I know this,
because I tried it myself.</p>
<p>One can see now where the kangaroo learned its art.</p>
<p>Sir George Grey and Mr. Eyre testify that the natives dug wells fourteen
or fifteen feet deep and two feet in diameter at the bore—dug them
in the sand—wells that were "quite circular, carried straight down,
and the work beautifully executed."</p>
<p>Their tools were their hands and feet. How did they throw sand out from
such a depth? How could they stoop down and get it, with only two feet of
space to stoop in? How did they keep that sand-pipe from caving in on
them? I do not know. Still, they did manage those seeming impossibilities.
Swallowed the sand, may be.</p>
<p>Mr. Chauncy speaks highly of the patience and skill and alert intelligence
of the native huntsman when he is stalking the emu, the kangaroo, and
other game:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"As he walks through the bush his step is light, elastic, and noiseless;
every track on the earth catches his keen eye; a leaf, or fragment of a
stick turned, or a blade of grass recently bent by the tread of one of
the lower animals, instantly arrests his attention; in fact, nothing
escapes his quick and powerful sight on the ground, in the trees, or in
the distance, which may supply him with a meal or warn him of danger. A
little examination of the trunk of a tree which may be nearly covered
with the scratches of opossums ascending and descending is sufficient to
inform him whether one went up the night before without coming down
again or not."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></p>
<div class="fig"> <ANTIMG alt="p218.jpg (48K)" src="images/p218.jpg" width-obs="100%" /><br/></div>
<p><br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></p>
<p>Fennimore Cooper lost his chance. He would have known how to value these
people. He wouldn't have traded the dullest of them for the brightest
Mohawk he ever invented.</p>
<p>All savages draw outline pictures upon bark; but the resemblances are not
close, and expression is usually lacking. But the Australian aboriginal's
pictures of animals were nicely accurate in form, attitude, carriage; and
he put spirit into them, and expression. And his pictures of white people
and natives were pretty nearly as good as his pictures of the other
animals. He dressed his whites in the fashion of their day, both the
ladies and the gentlemen. As an untaught wielder of the pencil it is not
likely that he has his equal among savage people.</p>
<p>His place in art—as to drawing, not color-work—is well up, all
things considered. His art is not to be classified with savage art at all,
but on a plane two degrees above it and one degree above the lowest plane
of civilized art. To be exact, his place in art is between Botticelli and
De Maurier. That is to say, he could not draw as well as De Maurier but
better than Boticelli. In feeling, he resembles both; also in grouping and
in his preferences in the matter of subjects. His "corrobboree" of the
Australian wilds reappears in De Maurier's Belgravian ballrooms, with
clothes and the smirk of civilization added; Botticelli's "Spring" is the
"corrobboree" further idealized, but with fewer clothes and more smirk.
And well enough as to intention, but—my word!</p>
<p>The aboriginal can make a fire by friction. I have tried that.</p>
<p>All savages are able to stand a good deal of physical pain. The Australian
aboriginal has this quality in a well-developed degree. Do not read the
following instances if horrors are not pleasant to you. They were recorded
by the Rev. Henry N. Wolloston, of Melbourne, who had been a surgeon
before he became a clergyman:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>1. "In the summer of 1852 I started on horseback from Albany, King
George's Sound, to visit at Cape Riche, accompanied by a native on foot.
We traveled about forty miles the first day, then camped by a water-hole
for the night. After cooking and eating our supper, I observed the
native, who had said nothing to me on the subject, collect the hot
embers of the fire together, and deliberately place his right foot in
the glowing mass for a moment, then suddenly withdraw it, stamping on
the ground and uttering a long-drawn guttural sound of mingled pain and
satisfaction. This operation he repeated several times. On my inquiring
the meaning of his strange conduct, he only said, 'Me carpenter-make
'em' ('I am mending my foot'), and then showed me his charred great toe,
the nail of which had been torn off by a tea-tree stump, in which it had
been caught during the journey, and the pain of which he had borne with
stoical composure until the evening, when he had an opportunity of
cauterizing the wound in the primitive manner above described."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And he proceeded on the journey the next day, "as if nothing had happened"—and
walked thirty miles. It was a strange idea, to keep a surgeon and then do
his own surgery.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>2. "A native about twenty-five years of age once applied to me, as a
doctor, to extract the wooden barb of a spear, which, during a fight in
the bush some four months previously, had entered his chest, just
missing the heart, and penetrated the viscera to a considerable depth.
The spear had been cut off, leaving the barb behind, which continued to
force its way by muscular action gradually toward the back; and when I
examined him I could feel a hard substance between the ribs below the
left blade-bone. I made a deep incision, and with a pair of forceps
extracted the barb, which was made, as usual, of hard wood about four
inches long and from half an inch to an inch thick. It was very smooth,
and partly digested, so to speak, by the maceration to which it had been
exposed during its four months' journey through the body. The wound made
by the spear had long since healed, leaving only a small cicatrix; and
after the operation, which the native bore without flinching, he
appeared to suffer no pain. Indeed, judging from his good state of
health, the presence of the foreign matter did not materially annoy him.
He was perfectly well in a few days."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But No. 3 is my favorite. Whenever I read it I seem to enjoy all that the
patient enjoyed—whatever it was:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>3. "Once at King George's Sound a native presented himself to me with
one leg only, and requested me to supply him with a wooden leg. He had
traveled in this maimed state about ninety-six miles, for this purpose.
I examined the limb, which had been severed just below the knee, and
found that it had been charred by fire, while about two inches of the
partially calcined bone protruded through the flesh. I at once removed
this with the saw; and having made as presentable a stump of it as I
could, covered the amputated end of the bone with a surrounding of
muscle, and kept the patient a few days under my care to allow the wound
to heal. On inquiring, the native told me that in a fight with other
black-fellows a spear had struck his leg and penetrated the bone below
the knee. Finding it was serious, he had recourse to the following crude
and barbarous operation, which it appears is not uncommon among these
people in their native state. He made a fire, and dug a hole in the
earth only sufficiently large to admit his leg, and deep enough to allow
the wounded part to be on a level with the surface of the ground. He
then surrounded the limb with the live coals or charcoal, which was
replenished until the leg was literally burnt off. The cauterization
thus applied completely checked the hemorrhage, and he was able in a day
or two to hobble down to the Sound, with the aid of a long stout stick,
although he was more than a week on the road."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></p>
<div class="fig"> <ANTIMG alt="p220.jpg (64K)" src="images/p220.jpg" width-obs="100%" /><br/></div>
<p><br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></p>
<p>But he was a fastidious native. He soon discarded the wooden leg made for
him by the doctor, because "it had no feeling in it." It must have had as
much as the one he burnt off, I should think.</p>
<p>So much for the Aboriginals. It is difficult for me to let them alone.
They are marvelously interesting creatures. For a quarter of a century,
now, the several colonial governments have housed their remnants in
comfortable stations, and fed them well and taken good care of them in
every way. If I had found this out while I was in Australia I could have
seen some of those people—but I didn't. I would walk thirty miles to
see a stuffed one.</p>
<p>Australia has a slang of its own. This is a matter of course. The vast
cattle and sheep industries, the strange aspects of the country, and the
strange native animals, brute and human, are matters which would naturally
breed a local slang. I have notes of this slang somewhere, but at the
moment I can call to mind only a few of the words and phrases. They are
expressive ones. The wide, sterile, unpeopled deserts have created
eloquent phrases like "No Man's Land" and the "Never-never Country." Also
this felicitous form: "She lives in the Never-never Country"—that
is, she is an old maid. And this one is not without merit:
"heifer-paddock"—young ladies' seminary. "Bail up" and "stick up"
equivalent of our highwayman-term to "hold up" a stage-coach or a train.
"New-chum" is the equivalent of our "tenderfoot"—new arrival.</p>
<p>And then there is the immortal "My word!" We must import it. "M-y word!"
In cold print it is the equivalent of our "Ger-rreat Caesar!" but spoken
with the proper Australian unction and fervency, it is worth six of it for
grace and charm and expressiveness. Our form is rude and explosive; it is
not suited to the drawing-room or the heifer-paddock; but "M-y word!" is,
and is music to the ear, too, when the utterer knows how to say it. I saw
it in print several times on the Pacific Ocean, but it struck me coldly,
it aroused no sympathy. That was because it was the dead corpse of the
thing, the soul was not there—the tones were lacking—the
informing spirit—the deep feeling—the eloquence. But the first
time I heard an Australian say it, it was positively thrilling.<br/> <br/>
<br/> <br/></p>
<div class="fig"> <ANTIMG alt="p222.jpg (13K)" src="images/p222.jpg" width-obs="100%" /><br/></div>
<p><br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />