land in service Inam, the grantee is the proprietor so long as he lives, or has issue capable of carrying into effect the objects for which the gift is made, and the prince, on failure of issue, may make a second gift of the land, the gift of a daughter in marriage is a conditional one, and not an outand-out gift. The fivefold objects for which the gift of a girl is made are defeated by the husband's death, leaving the girl widowed behind him, desolate and hopeless, and the father has every right by the analogy to make a second gift of his daughter or Kanya. We have thus shown that the Vedas, the highest authority on matters of law, recognise re-marriage as a permitted thing even to the wife of an Agnihotrí, that the Vedas enjoin that the widow married should not be abandoned, but that she should be allowed to remain as wife, and that it was an ordinary thing in those days to speak of the felicity of widows and their second husbands."

II.

SMRITI AUTHORITIES FOR WIDOW MARRIAGE.

Vyása in his Smriti 1, 4 says:-"When a conflict is seen bet, ween the Vedas, the Smritis and the Puránas, then the Vedas are the authority. In case of conflict between the latter twothe Smritis are to be preferred." As among the Smriti texts themselves, there are two rules of construction. If one set of institutes contradicts the other, then there is option.' (Mitákshara, Commentary on Yajnavalkya v. 5.) And, again, each age has its presiding institute. "In the Kritayuga the institutes of Manu, in Tretá the institutes of Gautama, in Dvápára the institutes of S'ankha and Likhita, and in the Kali age, the institutes of Parásara, are held to be binding" in cases of conflict. With the help of these rules of interpretation, we shall now enumerate the Smriti texts in their order, continuing the enumeration of the authoritative texts which permit the remarriage of a woman whose marriage has once been completed.

Manu:

7. "In the case of five afflictions, viz., when the husband has gone abroad and no tidings of him have been obtained,

when the husband is dead, when the husband becomes a Sanyási (recluse), when the husband is a eunuch, and lastly when the husband being guilty of the five great sins, becomes a patita, i.e., one who accepts no atonement or for whom no atonement is prescribed; in these five afflictions. another husband is permitted by the institutes to women."

This is explicit enough. This text does not occur in the institutes as they are extant, but Madhaváchárya cites and copies it as from Manu, and it is found in the Nárada Smriti which professes to be an epitome of Manu Smriti and it is acknowledged by all that it is a text of Manu. The fact is, it is the law of the dissolution of the marriage tie which this text expounds. It will be at once obvious that outlawry, or civil death in modern law, constitutes the fifth justification here enumerated. As the modern law allows seven years' unheard-of absence as a justification for remarriage, these institute-writers did the same. Unheard-of absence, death, imbecility, renunciation of the world or becoming a monk, and lastly, outlawry, these are all valid justifications for the dissolution of the marriage tie by natural law, for in all these cases the great objects of marriage are defeated.

8. Nárada. This same text occurs in Nárada Smriti IX. 12, 97.

The verses which come immediately after the text in this Smriti explain the first word of the text, Nashte,explain the length of the period during which a wife should wait for her absent husband of whom no tidings are received. "A Brahmin wife should wait for eight years for her absent husband; if she has never borne children, she should wait for four, and then accept another husband." In a similar manner, periods of six and three years, and four and two years, are prescribed for women of the Kshatriya and Vaishya castes. No period is prescribed for a Shudra's wife. "In all cases when tidings of his being alive are received, the period of absence should be double. This is the view of Prajapati about absent husbands. If after the period prescribed, the woman associates with another husband, there is no sin in the act." About the other afflictions similar uncertainty does not exist, for the period is certain when the disability commences and the Smriti is silent.

9. Nárada." In the case of the husband belonging to four of the different sorts of eunuchs, their wives should abandon them though they have cohabited with them, IX. 12, 15. In the case of two others of the imbecile class, A'kshipta and Moghabija, another husband is permitted to their wives after six months' trial, though they have cohabited with them. 16. In the case of a seventh kind of imbecile, who feels passion only in the company of women other than his wife, the wife should marry another husband."18. These texts are important,for they afford a sure index of the meaning attached by the writers of the institutes to the main text quoted before. In both the texts the word used is Pati, and one of the arguments in the recent discussion at Poona, and in fact the chief argument on the other side was, that the second word Pati, occurring in the main texts (7 and 8) should be rendered into a protector, which meaning is plainly out of place here. The texts translated in this and the preceding para. remove all doubt on this head. The latter come immediately after the main text, and in them the same word Pati is used all through in a manner where it can be understood as husband and husband alone. The limitation of the period of absence is different in the case of a woman who has borne children from that in the case of her who has borne none from her first husband. Then in the texts about eunuchs, though the first husband has lived and cohabited as Pati (Kritepi Patikarmáni), yet as he is incapable of Patikarma, (the functions of a Pati), another Pati, or husband, is prescribed. This settles all doubts as to the sense in which the word is to be understood that it is a perfect Pati, and not a candidate proposed to be a husband that is spoken of in these and other texts.

Moreover, in the text from Manu and Nárada about the five afflictions, translated above, the first word Pati being understood in its proper sense as husband, it is not possible to give any other meaning to the second word Pati. The same woman, who has lost her first Pati, husband, is, according to the text, to take another Pati. If by this were meant that she was to seek a protector he cannot be another (anya) Pati. He can be anya, (another,) only with reference to the first. Besides, a mere protector can be of no help in remedying the affliction which the loss or incapacity of the first husband brings with it. A husband who is a eunuch does not become unfit to be a protector of his wife, for he can protect and maintain her most comfortably.

This same word Pati is, moreover, not an ordinary undefined word. Nearly all the institute writers have defined it. Manu, Nárada, Yama, Vasishtha, Brihaspati, and others have said :

"Not by the pouring of water on the bridegroom's hand, nor by the offer by word of mouth, is the bridegroom called Pati or husband of the kanya or daughter. It is after the ceremony of taking hold of the hand that, at the seventh step (which the bride and bridegroom take together), the bridegroom becomes Pati of a certainty."

This definition of the word ought to silence all doubts as to the interpretation to be put upon the word Pati in the texts from Manu and Nárada quoted before. Together they establish that a second marriage is lawful to a woman under the enumerated five afflictions, which, in the jurisprudence of all other nations, have been held to justify dissolution of the marriage tie with consequent liberty to marry again.

To proceed with the argument :

"She (who is abandoned by her husband or is a girl widow,) if she has never cohabited with a man, she is fit to be married to a second husband. If she leaves her first husband, and returns back without having cohabited with another man, the first husband may go through a second ceremony of marriage with her." IX. 176.

Besides the five cases of distress before mentioned Manu in this text adds two more, only with the qualification that she should be free from impure cohabitation.

11. Vasishtha

"On the death of the husband of a girl-wife, who has been merely married with the recital of the Mantras, but has never cohabited with her husband, she is fit to be given in marriage again." XVII.

12. Prajapati

“If she is a girl widow or has been abandoned by her husband by force or violence, then she is fit to be taken as a wife by any man upon a second ceremony of marriage."

13. Nárada

"Even if the marriage rites have all been completed, if the daughter has not cohabited with the husband, she is fit to be married again. She is like an unmarried daughter, or as though no marriage was celebrated."

14. Shátátapa

"A husband from a low family or of bad disposition is not fit to be united in marriage to a daughter. Though the Mantras, (marriage texts,) have been repeated, i.e., though the

marriage rites have been performed, they are not binding. If she has not cohabited with him, she should be wrested back from him by force, and given in marriage to another who is qualified."

This and another text to the same effect of this Institute are of importance. They show what importance is attached to the complete performance of marriage rites. They are not allowed to work injustice even when the first husband is living, and a fortiori, it cannot have been intended that they should stand in the way of the widow after his death.

15. Kátyáyana—

"If after having married the girl, the husband dies or disappears, the girl may marry again after an interval of six months."

16. Kátyáyana

"If the husband is of another caste or a patita, or a eunuch, or of bad disposition, or belongs to the same otra or clan, or is a slave, or is afflicted with chronic malady, in all such cases, the daughter, though the marriage rites have all been performed, is fit to be given in marriage to another person with clothing and ornaments."

This text is important as it shows that a husband who is afflicted with chronic sickness does not stand in the way of a second marriage. A fortiori, a husband dead cannot put in a claim to keep the girl a widow all her life.

17. Vasishtha—

"If he comes of a low family or is evil-disposed, or is a eunuch, or is patita, or is afflicted with epilepsy, or is diseased, or is an actor, or belongs to the same Gotra or clan, in all these cases, the daughter, though given in marriage, may be wrested back and given again."

Many other texts may be cited, but these will suffice. There are thus no less than eight different Institutes which permit the remarriage, under peculiar circumstances of distress, of a girl once married in due form. Of course, they do not all enumerate the same particular justifications, but five of them expressly allow remarriage in the case of the husband's death, and the others, by implication or by analogy. By way of summing up, it may be stated, that there are no less than seventeen afflictions upon the happening of which different Institutes permit a second marriage to a girl once married in due form.