________________
APPENDIS B.
123
eridence of the defendants, oral and documentary, relates to no less than 23 instances of Jaina vidonis making gifts of their husbands' property and the gifts being ralid. The oldest of the instances is abo 40 years old. This is quite enough
o establish an usage in a small scattered section of the Jains community. Eren Hindu midors can spend their estates on religious and charitable purposes. A Jaina widuts like Bhagabai could certainly do that. But the powers giren to her br the ancient and refered Lars of her community are much wider and are not limited either to charitable purposes or to the self-acquired property of her husband. The doctrine of the Jaina books is sound in principle also. It differs from the Hindu Lar books just where you trould expect it to. The reasons-the spiritual efficacy and need of a son and other male relations to sare the soul of the deceased from the postmortem troubles in the next Torld do not obtain among the Jaidas, and the ridor mar hare eren greater rights than her own sons. But it is cot necessary to go into that wider issue in this case; and judicial conservatism and cantion make me arerse to pronounce aos opinion on that as a matter of juristic speculation. The earlier history of Hindu Larr, or at least practice of Hindu sages, does not seem nogatory of a Troman's right being more extensive than the restricted Hindu tridor's estate allows them. This lends some support to the position taken up by the Jaina books.
The argument bf the learned pleader for the plaintiffs as to the ancestral character of the property, making it inalienable by the midot, does not hold rater. This is practically the only issue in the case. It is not and cannot to-daş be seriously disputed that a Jaina childless widow has absolute rights orer the self-acqnired property of ber deceased lord and master. It is only the ancestral property of a separated Jains copaicener, as to which some doubt may be said to hare existed. This
