Thedistinctionbetweenacquiredpropertyandpropertyinheritedorreceivedfromkinsmen，andtheenlargedpowerofpartingwiththefirst，arefoundinmanybodiesofancientlaw——inourownearlylawamongothers。Therulethatalienations，otherwiseunlawful，maybemadeunderpressureofnecessity，isfoundinmanypartsofHindoolaw。Therulerequiringtheconsentofthecollectivebrotherhoodtoalienations，withmanyminorrulesofthispartofBrehonlaw，constantlyformspartofthecustomsofIndianandRussianvillage-communities；andthedutyoffollowingcommonpracticesoftillage，whichisthebequestfromthesecommunitieswhichlastedlongestintheGermaniccountries，isclassedbytheCorusBescna，alongwithMarriage，asoneofthefundamentalinstitutionsoftheirishpeople。
’AncientLawsofIreland，’iii。17。ButmuchthemoststrikingandunexpectedanalogiesintheBrehonlawonthesubjectofTribesmenandtheTribearethosewhichithaswiththeHindoolawofJointUndividedFamilies。UndertheBrahminicalIndianlaw，wheneveramemberofajointfamilyhasacquiredpropertythroughspecialscientificknowledgeorthepracticeofaliberalart，hedoesnotbringitintothecommonfund，unlesshisaccomplishmentswereobtainedthroughatraininggiventohimbyhisfamilyorattheirexpense。ThewholelawonthesubjectwasmuchconsideredinastrangecasewhicharosebeforetheHighCourtofMadras’MadrasHighCourtReports，’ii。56，whereajointfamilyclaimedthegainsofadancing-girl。ThedecisionoftheCourtisthussummarisedbytheReporter：’Theordinarygainsofsciencearedivisiblei。e。，theyarebroughtintohotchpotuponpartitionofanundividedestate，whensuchsciencehasbeenimpartedatthefamilyexpenseandacquiredwhilereceivingafamilymaintenance。Itisotherwisewhenthesciencehasbeenimpartedattheexpenseofpersonsnotmembersofthelearner’sfamily。’TheverycounterpartsoftheIndianruleandoftheIndianexceptionarefoundintheancientIrishlaw。’Ifthetribesmanbeaprofessionalman-thatis，ifthepropertybeacquiredbyjudicatureorpoetry，oranyprofessionwhatsoever——
heiscapableofgivingtwo-thirdsofittotheChurch……but，ifitwasthelawfulprofessionofhistribe，heshallnotgiveoftheemolumentofhisprofessionbutjustashecouldgiveofthelandofhistribe。’CorusBescna，’AncientLawsofIreland，’
iii。5。ItwillbeseenfromtheinstanceswhichIhavegiventhattherulesoftheIrishBrehonlawregulatingthepowerofindividualtribesmentoalienatetheirseparatepropertyanswertotherulesofIndianBrahminicallawwhichregulatethepowerofindividualmembersofajointfamilytoenjoyseparateproperty。Thedifferenceismaterial。TheHindoolawassumesthatcollectiveenjoymentbythewholebrotherhoodistherule，andittreatstheenjoymentofseparatepropertybyindividualbrethrenasanexception——anexception，Imayadd，roundwhichanenormousmassoflawhasnowclustered。Ontheotherhand，theBrehonlaw，sofarasitcanbeunderstood，seemstomereconcileablewithnootherassumptionthanthatindividualproprietaryrightshavegrownupandattainedsomestabilitywithinthecircleofthetribe。Theexerciseoftheserightsisatthesametimelimitedbythecontrollingpowersofthecollectivebrotherhoodoftribesmen；andtotheselast，astotheAgnaticKindredatRome，someultimaterightofsuccessionappearstobereserved。HencetheIrishlegalunitisnotpreciselyaJointFamily；iftheBrehonlawistobetrusted，ithasconsiderablylessofthe’naturalcommunism’whichcharacterisestheIndianinstitution。The’Fine’ofthetractsisconstantlyspokenofinconnectionwithlandedproperty，and，wheneveritissoconnected，Iimagineittohaveundergonesomeofthechangeswhichareconstantlybroughtaboutbycontactwiththeland，andIfigureittomyselfinthatcaseasaMarkorVillage-Community，inwhichtheideaspropertotheoldergroupoutofwhichitgrew，theJointFamily，havesurvivedinexceptionalstrengthItinthisrespectapproachestheRussianratherthantheIndiantypeofvillage-community。
The’JudgmentsofCo-Tenancy’isaBrehonlaw-tract，stillunpublishedatthetimeatwhichIwrite，andpresenting，initspresentstate，considerabledifficultiesofinterpretation。Itputs，attheoutset，thequestion，——’WhencedoesCo-Tenancyarise？’Theanswergivenis，’Fromseveralheirsandfromtheirincreasingontheland。’Thetractthengoesontoexplainthatthelandis，inthefirstyear，tobetilledbythekinsmenjustaseachpleases；thatinthesecondyeartheyaretoexchangelots；thatinthethirdyeartheboundariesaretobefixed；andthatthewholeprocessofseveranceistobeconsummatedinthetenthyear。Itrustitisnotapresumptuousconjecturethattheorderofchangehereindicatedismoretrustworthythanthetimefixedforeachofitsstages。Theperiodoftenyearsfortheentiretransitionfromcollectivetoseparatepropertyseemstomegreatlytooshort，andhardtoreconcilewithotherIrishevidence；andIsuggestthattheBrehonlawyer，attachedtotheinstitutionofseparateproperty，liketherestofhisclass，isdepictingratheranidealthananactualsetofarrangements。Theprocess，however，whichisheredescribed，ifitbespreadoveramuchlongerspaceoftime，isreallyinharmonywithallourknowledgeoftheriseandprogressofcultivatingcommunities。