THE ALKATCHO CARRIER OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 381

village, not only lived with his father-in-law but for some years
gave the latter almost the entire proceeds of his hunting and
trapping. At one time the young man gave some money to his
own father, and his father-in-law resented it.

Affinal ties are also utilized as an escape from parental tyranny.
In one case a young man married a woman unacceptable to his
father. For a time he and his wife lived with his parents. Finally,
unable to stand the nagging of his father, he left the house and
moved in with his father-in-law. He has not yet claimed his own
trap-line, but assists his father-in-law.

The new property regulations permitting a woman to inherit
property from a deceased husband, or to operate her own trap-
line, has freed women from dependence upon their own sadeku.
This, too, must be regarded as a factor in the disintegration of
the extended family. The effectual elimination of primogeni-
ture had the same effect.

CHANGES IN POLITICAL STRUCTURE

Whatever political organization the Carrier ever possessed de-
rived its authority from the sanctions inherent in the extended
family structure. The potlatch chief was never more than the
spear-head for the inter-village potlatches and had no real politi-
cal authority. Today the village of Alkatcho has a chief (non
resident), a captain, and a council composed of the church offi-
cials, bell-ringer, church watchman and song-leader. The court,
though, has no police arm and must rely for the enforcement
of its decisions either upon the good graces of the litigants or
upon the threat of a report to the Indian agent at Bella Coola.
The court, however, is reluctant to press charges against any
individual at Bella Coola. In effect then the court is such in
name only. When this political arrangement was first instituted
by the Church some fifty years ago all the important nobles be-
came officials and enjoyed the prerogatives. At that time the
court had a policeman who arrested drinkers, violators of the
sabbath and of church regulations. Today no one wishes to ac-
cept the onus of “making trouble for somebody.” Though lack-
ing in authority, the court still offers its officers a certain amount