To the authorities that have been already adduced, may be now added that
of Rutherford, whose evidence, both in the extract from his journal that
has been already given, and in other passages to which we shall
afterwards have occasion to refer, is in perfect accordance with the
statements of all preceding reporters entitled to speak upon the
subject. The facts that have been quoted would seem to show that the
eating of human flesh among this people is not merely an occasional
excess, prompted only by the phrenzy of revenge, but that it is actually
resorted to as a gratification of appetite, as well as of passion.

It is very probable, however, that the practice may have had its origin
in those vindictive feelings which mix, to so remarkable a degree, in
all the enmities and wars of these savages. This is a much more likely
supposition than that it originated in the difficulty of procuring other
food, in which case, as has been remarked, it could not well have, at
any time, sprung up either in New Zealand or in almost any other of the
countries in which it is known to prevail. Certain superstitious
notions, besides, which are connected with it among this people,
sufficiently indicate the motives which must have first led to it; for
they believe that, by eating their enemies, they not only dishonour
their bodies, but consign their souls to perpetual misery. This is
stated by Cook.

Other accounts, which we have from more recent authorities, concur in
showing that the person who eats any part of the body of another whom he
has slain in battle, fancies he secures to himself thereby a portion of
the valour or good fortune which had hitherto belonged to his dead
enemy. The most common occasion, too, on which slaves are slain and
eaten is by way of an offering to the "_mana_" of a chief or any of his