either with no hair or with too much, nor one immoderately talkative; nor one with inflamed eyes.” (Ch. III. v. 8). Although this law has been very frequently disregarded, yet no voidance of such a marriage, where the ceremony has been actually and regularly performed, has has ever taken place; it being understood that the above prohibition, not being supported by sound reason, only involves the bridegroom in the religious offence of disregard to a sacred precept. He again prohibits the acceptance of a gratuity, on giving a daughter in marriage naming every marriage of this description “Assooru,” as well as declaring an Assooru marriage to be illegal; but daughters given in marriage on receiving a gratuity have been always considered as legal wives, though their fathers are regarded with contempt, as guilty of a deadly sin. The passages above alluded to are as follow: (Munoo:) “But even a man of the servile class ought not to receive a gratuity when he gives his daughter in marriage; since a father, who takes a fee on that occasion, tacitly sells his daughter.” (Ch. IX. v. 98). “When the bridegroom, having given as much wealth as he can afford to the father and paternal kinsmen and to the damsel herself, takes her voluntarily as his bride; that marriage is named Assooru” (Ch. III. v. 31). “But in this code, three of the five last are held legal, and two illegal, the ceremonies of Pisaches and Assoorus must never be performed.” (Ch. III. v. 25).
28. The author finally quotes the following text: “Though immoveables or bipeds have been acquired by a man himself, a gift or sale or them (should)” not (be made) by him, unless convening all the sons; and he proceeds affirming, “So likewise other texts as this, must
