368 AFRICAN POLITICAL SYSTEMS
analogous ritual lineage heads, who are more closely identified with the lineage structure than chiefs.
How, then, were the rights and interests of individuals or groups protected against injury thirty years ago ? The general principles of what we should call legal procedure are the same now as they were then; for a case reaches a court only when other methods of effecting a settlement fail—when, formerly, the injured party tvould have resorted to armed self-help or drastic ritual stoctions.
The action taken to redress a wrong or assert a right depended on the structural relationship in which the parties stood to each other. The distribution of rights and responsibilities in accordance with the lineage structure makes every dispute an issue between groups—segments, lineages, clans, communities. Settlement by negotiation between the lineage heads, conducted through a privileged intermediary like a t&idaana, or a kinsman of both units, or the head of a lineage connected with both, would be attempted, to begin with, and often succeeded. A dispute between clansmen creates intestine hostilities, disrupts co-operation, and undermines the clan's corporate unity. A misfortune attributed to the displeasure of the ancestors may intervene and compel a reconciliation to be effected. But if it is acute or involves two major segments, now as formerly it may be brought before the chief or t&ndaanay who with the elders threshes it out. Chiefs nowadays treat these like ordinary cases, but are swayed in their judgements as much by concern for the solidarity of the group as by considerations of strict justice. In any case, the weight of moral pressure brought to bear on the disputants is usually sufficient to settle the matter; but instances are known where clansmen fought one another as a result of a dispute.
Disputes between members of clans linked by ties of clanship, neighbourhood, or ritual collaboration were dealt with similarly. The injured group might force a rapid settlement by threatening to cut off reciprocal good relationships and to take to arms.
But if, owing to the distance between their settlements, the injured party could not make direct representations or threaten their opponents, recourse might be had to arbitration. Chiefs, assisted by their elders, were the usual arbitrators. The injured party would appeal to the head of their opponents' maximal lineage, who would send the disputants to a neighbouring chief in order to ensure an impartial hearing. This chief's recompense