fhort of two hundred-, becaufe a proprietor of a Nj®-(namely, two
hundred dirms') is held to be opulent,-—(not oue “who is poflefled of a
/mailer number,) whence it is that .the proprietor of a Nijdb. is. required
to aid and affift others, and not he who is poflefled of a /mallet
number.—The reafoning of Hanee/a is. founded upon principles, peculiar
to the Arabic language,
or toDiRMs, If the acknowledger fhould fay “ I owe dir ms," he is fuppofed to
g a t e d y . mean three, as that- is dhe leaft number of plurality. But if he fhould
himfelf explain a larger number, it- mult be admitted, as the word
dir ms may be applied to any number.—The weight 6f the dirms muft
be eftimated from what is cuftomary *.
S E C T ! O N.
Acknow- I'F a perfon. fay “ I am bound, for a thouland dirms, to the con-
Iedgment “ ception in the womb of a.certain woman;” " and afterwards add that
vour of an' “ the laid fum is due in virtue of a bequeft of a,particular perfon,”—
CTnueofL- or that “ it is the right of the conception in virtue of inheritance from
ju ift or inbe- “ its parent,”—the acknowledgment fo made is valid, in as much as
valid, it relates (in thefe inftances) to a caufe which is fit and adequate to
provided the the eftablifhment of a right to property, in a conception.—If. there-
place within fore, the woman fhould afterwards: bring forth-a living child within
peri&i;^6 ^ c h a periqd as evinces the conception, to. have exiftedin the womb at
* A confiderable portion o f the text which immediately follows has been omitted by
the tranfiator, as the cafes which it contains, relating entirely to verbal criticifm, cannot
eafily be tranflated, and are fuch as belong more properly to the province o { grammarians
than o f lawyers.
the
the time of the acknowledgment, the acknowledger is bound to the
child for a thoufond dirms.—If, on the other hand, the woman fhould
bring forth a dead child, the acknowledgment in that cafe relates to
Hat teftator or the inkeritee, and the amount of it muft accordingly be
divided amongft their heirs; becaufe the acknowledgment was in. reality
in, favour of the te/ator, or the iwheritee, and was to veft in. the.
offspring only on condition' of its being born alive, which did not
afterwards take place.—If the woman fhould bring; forth two living
children, then the thing acknowledged muft be divided equally between
them...
If a perfon fay “ I am bound to the conception of a certain woman
“ for athoufand dirms, being the price of an article I purehafed from
“ the faid conception,” or “ being money, borrowed from, it,”-—no
obligation refts -upon the acknowledger, as he explained it to arife
from a caufe which could not have happened, lince a. conception is
incapable of either lending or filling.
If a perfon acknowledge his being bound to a conception, without
fpecifying the caufe, fuch acknowledgment (according to Aboo Too/af)
is invalid.—Mohammed maintains that it is valid; for, as acknowledgment
is proo/, it is neceflary to fulfil .it as far as may be pradi-
cable; and it is practicable to fulfil it, in the prefent. inftance, by
conftrutng the caufe to have been fuch as was competent to the eftablifhment
of a right of property in the conception.—The argument
of AbooToo/qf is that an acknowledgment, when abfolute, is con-
ftrued to be in virtue of trtffic-, (whence it' is that the acknowledgement
of a privileged Have, <or of one out of the two partners by-reciprocity,
is underftood to be an acknowledgment founded upon h-afjic/)
the cafe, therefore, is the fame as if the acknowledger had exprefsly
lpecified the caufe to be traffic-,—and as that would have been invalid,
fo alfo is it invalid where the caufe is underftood to be. fuch from implication.
and i f the
embryo prove
JHll horny the
thing a cknowledged
muft be divided
among
the heirs;
or, i f twins
be born, it
m uft be divided
ber
tween them:
but i f fuch
acknowledgement
be
aferibed to an
impoj/ible
caufe, it is
null $-1
and fo alfo,
i f it be made
without Ipe-
cifying any.
caufe.
If