WYAWASTHA-DARPANA. 838 result: for, in the passage (“a substitute for a son must be adopted,”) unity, ascribed to the object to be adopted, is of definite import; and the singular number, used in the following passage, to express severally, both the male issue, and the father of the same, would be contradicted, “If one, among brothers of the whole blood, be possessed of male issue, Manu pronounces that they all are fathers of the same, by means of that son.-D. Mín, Sect ll. § 64, 65. IV. Neither must it be alleged that, because the plurality of brother's sons is mentioned * * in this passage (“those who are fathers of male issue, by means of their own sons, and those of brothers, are completely saved,") many brother's sons, even though unadopted, may be sons of one person: for, from occurring in respectful modes of expression, in which, hy popular acceptation, the plural number is used, it has an indefinite import ; also, the injunctive precept proposed, being accomplished in our opinion, by means of one only, the propounding many would be contrary to sense and law. --1/id. Sect. II. § 66. 887. The substitute for a son is also necessary for a woman, to present to her \\ \"." when dead) the oblation of food and libation of water, to perform the other rites for her, and to deliver her from the hell (called) ‘put’.” 889. She cannot however adopt a son without her husband's assent.t # * She being in this act entirely dependent on her husband and the adoption being made not *" only for herself but also for the benefit of him.;
- This necessity can be superseded, in case “ht, when a widow, devote herself to pious austerity, but for a sun-loss woulan dying during coverture, there is no alternative. See ante, p. 830,
t in Mithilá, a woman can however al pt, in her own right and for her own sake, a bon in the Aritrimm form ; but such ad option is not provisiod for by the law as current in Hungaj,
- The right of adoption, where it exists, is, as between husband and wife, about, in the husband, though adoption having taken place, the adopted becomes the son of both, and as such, is capable of per
fruit; funeral rites to the one as well as to the other. Str. H, I, vol 1, pp tiss, 67 Mr. Sutherland, in his Synopsis, says: “ The same reason, which impose the necessity of adop. taon on a man, not equally applying to a woman, the latter ( at heast such bretts to in the Intire accurate and prevailing doctrine) is neopable in her own right of adoption, though it is admitted that, by his sanction, she may affiliate on the part of her hu-hand a so, who would nossarily be filially related to hers. If.” The first part of this remark, namely, the sole r. son which imposes the necessity of *loption on a man, does not equally “pply to a wortion, d its not appoir to be quite correct, inasmuch as the inequality alluded to by him is rot in respect of the to “essity set aloption, ( which is the same for both. “e ante, p.) but in respect of the power to adopt, the hu-band hong able to adopt a son without his wife's assent, even against her wiłł, and the wife being entirely dependent on him in this natter. As to the means of devoting to pious austerity, it is available not only to a widowed woman, but also to a man untuarriud, married, or widower.---See ante. pp. 828 -830,
