While，however，IfullybelievethattheBrehonlawpossessedgreatauthority，Ithinkalsothatitwasinallprobabilityirregularlyandintermittentlyenforced，andthatpartialandlocaldeparturesfromitwerecommonalloverancientIreland。
　　AnybodywhointerestedhimselfinthequestionofitspracticalapplicationwouldhavetoencountertheveryproblemswhicharesuggestedbytheBrahminicalHindoolaw。Thestudentofthislastsystem，especiallyifhecomparesitwiththeinfinityoflocalusagepractisedinIndia，isconstantlyaskinghimselfhowfarwasthelawoftheBrahminjuristsobservedbeforetheEnglishundertooktoenforceitthroughtheirtribunals？TheEditoroftheThirdVolumeoftheAncientLawsofIrelandhasgivenaveryappositeexampleofaproblemofthesamekindiii。146，byextractingfromtheCarewPapersthestoryofafamousdisputeastotheheadshipofthegreatirishhouseofO’Neill。ConO’Neill，itschief，hadtwosons，MatthewandShane。MatthewO’NeillwasheirtoConO’Neill’searldomofTyrone，accordingtothelimitationsofthepatent。ShaneO’NeillurgedontheEnglishGovernmentthattheselimitationswerevoid，becausetheKing，ingrantingtheearldom，couldnothavebeenawarethatMatthewO’Neillwasanadulterinebastard，havingbeenintruthbornofthewifeofasmithinDundalk。ShaneO’NeillhasbeenregardedasthechampionofpurelyIrishideasseeFroude，’EnglishinIreland，’I。43；butthoughtheruleoflegitimacyuponwhichheinsistedconformstoournotions，itisdirectlycontrarytothelegaldoctrineoftheBookofAicill，whichinoneofitsmostsurprisingpassageslaysdownformallytheprocedurebywhichthenaturalfathercouldbringintohisfamilyasonbornundertheallegedcircumstancesofMatthewO’Neill，onpayingcompensationtotheputativeparent。UnlessShaneO’Neill’sapparentignoranceofthismethodoflegitimationwasmerelyaffectedforthepurposeofblindingtheEnglishGovernment，itwouldseemtofollowthattheBookofAicill，thoughitsauthorshipwasattributedtoKingCormac，hadnotanuniversallyrecognisedauthority。
　　IdonotknowthattheomissionoftheEnglish，whentheyhadoncethoroughlyconqueredthecountry，toenforcetheBrehonlawthroughtheCourtswhichtheyestablished，haseverbeenreckonedamongthewrongsofIreland。Butiftheyhaddonethis。theywouldhaveeffectedtheverychangewhichatamuchlaterperiodtheybroughtaboutinIndia，ignorantly，butwiththeverybestintentions。Theywouldhavegivenimmenselygreaterforceandamuchlargerspheretoasystemofruleslooselyandoccasionallyadministeredbeforetheyarmedthemwithanewauthority。Evenasitwas，IcannotdoubtthattheEnglishdidmuchtoperpetuatetheBrehonlawintheshapeinwhichwefindit。TheAnglo-NormansettlementontheeastcoastofIrelandactedlikearunningsore，constantlyStatingtheCelticregionsbeyondthePale，anddeepeningtheconfusionwhichprevailedthere。Ifthecountryhadbeenlefttoitself，oneofthegreatIrishtribeswouldalmostcertainlyhaveconqueredtherest。Allthelegalideaswhich，littleconsciousasweareoftheirsource，cometousfromtheexistenceofastrongcentralgovernmentlendingitsvigourtothearmofjusticewouldhavemadetheirwayintotheBrehonlaw；
　　andthegapbetweentheallegedcivilisationofEnglandandtheallegedbarbarismofIrelandduringmuchoftheirhistory，whichwasinrealitynarrowerthaniscommonlysupposed，wouldhavealmostwhollydisappeared。
　　BeforeIclosethischapteritisnecessarytostatethattheBrehonlawhasnotbeenunaffectedbythetwomaininfluenceswhichhavemadethemodernlawofWesternEuropedifferentfromtheancient，ChristianmoralityandRomanjurisprudence。IthasbeenmodifiedbyRomanjuridicalideasinsomedegree，thoughitwouldbehazardoustolaydownwithanyattemptatprecisioninwhatdegree。Ihavetrustworthyinformationthat，inthetractstranslatedbutnotyetpublished，acertainnumberofRomanlegalmaximsarecited，andoneRowanjurisconsultismentionedbyname。Sofarasthepublishedtractsaffordmaterialsforanopinion，IaminclinedtothinkthattheinfluenceoftheRomanlawhasbeenveryslight，andtoattributeitnottostudyofthewritingsoftheRomanlawyers，buttocontactwithChurchmenimbuedmoreOrlesswithRomanlegalnotions。WemaybequitesurethattheBrehonswereindebtedtothemforoneconceptionwhichispresentinthetracts——theconceptionofaWill；andwemayprobablycredittheChurchwiththecomparativelyadvanceddevelopmentofanotherconceptionwhichwefindhere——theconceptionofaContract。TheoriginoftherulesconcerningtestamentarybequestwhicharesometimesfoundinWesternbodiesoflawotherwisearchaichasbeenmuchconsideredoflateyears；
　　andtheweightoflearnedopinioninclinesstronglytotheviewthattheseruleshaduniversallytheirsourceinRomanlaw，butwerediffusedbytheinfluenceoftheChristianclergy。ThisassertioncannotbequitesoconfidentlymadeofContracts；butthesacrednessofbequestsandthesacrednessofpromiseswereofaboutequalimportancetotheChurch，asthedoneeofpiousgifts；and，asregardstheBrehonlaw，itisplainuponthefaceofthepublishedsub-tractwhichischieflyconcernedwithContract，theCorusBescna，thatthematerialinterestsoftheChurchfurnishedoneprincipalmotiveforitscompilation。TheCorusBescna，inwhich，Imayobserve，acertainconfusionnotuncommoninancientlawmayberemarkedbetweencontractsandgrants，betweenthepromisetogiveandtheactoroperationofgiving，containssomeveryremarkablepropositionsonthesubjectofcontract。Here，andinotherpartsoftheSenchusMor，themischiefsofbreachofcontractaresetforthinthestrongestlanguage。’Theworldwouldbeinastateofconfusionifverbalcontractswerenotbinding。’’Therearethreeperiodsatwhichtheworlddies：theperiodofaplague，ofageneralwar，ofthedissolutionofverbalcontracts。’’Theworldisworthlessatthetimeofthedissolutionofcontracts。’Atfirstsightthislooksagooddeallikerthedoctrineoftheeighteenthcenturythanofanycenturybetweenthesixthandthesixteenth。Letussee，however，whatfollowswhenthepositionthusbroadlystatedhastobeworkedout。Wecome，intheCorusBescna，uponthefollowingattemptatclassification，whichIfearwouldhavedeeplyshockedJeremyBenthamandJohnAustin：’Howmanykindsofcontractsarethere？’askstheBrehontextwriter。’Two，’istheanswer。’Avalidcontract，andaninvalidcontract。’This，nodoubt，isabsurd，buttheexplanationappearstobeasfollows。
　　Theprincipleoftheabsolutesacrednessofcontractswasprobablyofforeignorigin，andwasinsisteduponforaparticularpurpose。ItwasthereforelaiddowntoobroadlyfortheactualstateofthelawandtheactualconditionofIrishCelticsociety。UndersuchcircumstancesatreatiseonContracttakesnecessarilytheformingreatmeasureofatreatiseonthegroundsofinvalidityincontracts，onthemanifoldexceptionstoanover-broadgeneralrule。Anciently，thepowerofcontractingislimitedonallsides。Itislimitedbytherightsofyour。
　　family，bytherightsofyourdistantkinsmen，bytherightsofyourco-villagers，bytherightsofyourtribe，bytherightsofyourChief，and，ifyoucontractadverselytotheChurch，bytherightsoftheChurch。TheCorusBescnaisingreatpartatreatiseonthesearchaiclimitations。Atthesametimesomeofthemoderngroundsofinvalidityareverywellsetforth，andthemeritmaypossiblybeduetothepenetrationofRomandoctrineintotheBrehonlaw-schools。
　　SomethingmustbesaidontheextenttowhichChristianopinionhasleavenedtheseBrehonwritings。Christianityhascertainlyhadconsiderablenegativeinfluenceoverthem。ItbecamenolongerpossiblefortheBrehontoassertthatthetransgressorofhisruleswouldincurasupernaturalpenalty，andtheconsequencesofthiswerenodoubtimportant。Butstill，asyouhaveseen，inthecaseof’fastingonaman，’or’sittingdharna，’theheathenruleremainedinthesystem，thoughitssignificancewaslost。Again，onepositiveresultofthereceptionbytheBrehonsoftheso-called’lawoftheletter’
　　appearstohavebeenthedevelopmentofagreatmassofrulesrelatingtotheterritorialrightsoftheChurch，andtheseconstituteaveryinterestingdepartmentoftheBrehonlaw。ButtherehascertaintybeennothinglikeanintimateinterpenetrationofancientIrishlawbyChristianprinciple。Ifthiskindofinfluenceistobelookedforanywhere，itmustbeinthelawofMarriage，andthecognatebranchesofDivorce，Legitimacy，andInheritance。These，however，aretheveryportionsoftheBrehonlawwhichhavebeendweltuponbywritersconvincedthat，asregardstherelationsofthesexes，theprimitiveIrishwerenearakintothoseCeltsofBritainofwhosepracticesCaesarhadheard。B。G。，v。14。The’BookofAicill’
　　providesforthelegitimationnotonlyofthebastard，butoftheadulterinebastard，andmeasuresthecompensationtobepaidtotheputativefather。Thetracton’SocialConnections’appearstoassumethatthetemporarycohabitationofthesexesispartoftheaccustomedorderofsociety，andonthisassumptionitminutelyregulatesthemutualrightsoftheparties，showinganespecialcarefortheinterestsofthewoman，eventotheextentofreservingtoherthevalueofherdomesticservicesduringherresidenceinthecommondwelling。Oneremarkought，however，tobemadeontheseprovisionsoftheBrehonlaw。Itisnotinconceivablethat，surprisingastheyare，theymaybetheindextoasocialadvance。CaesarplainlyfoundtheCeltsoftheContinentpolygamous，livinginfamiliesheldtogetherbystringentPaternalPower。He，aRoman，familiarwithaPatriaPotestasasyetundecayed，thinksitworthyofremarkthattheheadofaGallichouseholdhadthepoweroflifeanddeathoverhiswivesaswellashischildren，andnoticeswithastonishmentthat，whenahusbanddiedundersuspiciouscircumstances，hiswivesweretreatedwiththesamecrueltyasabodyofhouseholdslavesatRomewhosemasterhadbeenkilledbyanunknownhand。
　　B。G。，vi。19。Now，thoughverymuchcannotbeconfidentlysaidaboutthetransitionwhich，nevertheless，isanundoubtedfact
　　ofmanysocietiesfrompolygamytomonogamyunderinfluencesotherthanthoseofreligion，itmayplausiblybeconjecturedthathereandthereithaditscauseinlibertyofdivorce。Thesystemwhichpermittedapluralityofwivesmayhavepassedintothesystemwhichforbademorethanonewifeatatime，butwhichdidnotgofarther。ThemonogamyofthemodernandWesternworldis，infact，themonogamyoftheRomans，fromwhichthelicenseofdivorcehasbeenexpelledbyChristianmorality。TherearehardlyanymaterialsforanopinionuponthedegreeofinfluenceexercisedbytheChurchoverthetransformationofmarriage-relationsinIreland，butthereareseveralindicationsthattheecclesiasticalrulesastotheconditionsofavalidmarriageestablishedthemselvesveryslowlyamongtheruderracesontheoutskirtsofwhathadbeentheRomanEmpire。MrBurton’HistoryofScotland，’ii。213，inspeakingofthenumberofillegitimateclaimantswhobroughttheirpretensionstotheCrownofScotlandbeforeEdwardtheFirst，observes：’ThattheyshouldhavepushedtheirclaimsonlyshowsthattheChurchhadnotyetabsolutelyestablishedtherulethatfromherandherceremonyandsacramentcouldalonecometheunioncapableoftransmittingarightofsuccessiontooffspring。’Thetracton’SocialConnexions’noticesa’first’wife，andtherecognitionmaybeattributabletotheChurch，butonthewholemyimpressioncertainlyisthattheextremelyasceticformunderwhichChristianitywasintroducedintoIrelandwasunfavourabletoitsobtainingaholdonpopularmorality。Thecommonviewseemstohavebeenthatchastitywastheprofessionalvirtueofaspecialclass，fortheBrehontracts，whichmaketheassumptionsIhavedescribedastothemoralsofthelaity，speakofirregularityoflifeinamonkorbishopwiththestrongestreprobationanddisgust。AtthepresentmomentIrelandisprobablytheoneofallWesterncountriesinwhichtherelationsofthesexesaremostnearlyonthefootingrequiredbytheChristiantheory；noristhereanyreasonabledoubtthatthisresulthasbeenbroughtaboutinthemainbytheRomanCatholicclergy。ButthispurificationofmoralswaseffectedduringtheperiodthroughwhichmonksandmonasticismwereeitherexpelledfromIrelandorplacedunderthebanofthelaw。
　　IwilltakethisopportunityofsayingthattheinfluenceofChristianityonamuchmorefamoussystemthantheBrehonlawhasalwaysseemedtometobegreatlyoverstatedbyM。Troplongandotherwell-knownjuridicalwriters。Thereis，ofcourse，evidenceofChristianinfluenceonRomanlawinthedisabilitiesimposedonvariousclassesofhereticsandinthelimitationsofthatlibertyofdivorcewhichbelongedtotheolderjurisprudence。
　　But，eveninrespectofdivorce，themodificationsstrikemeaslessthanmighthavebeenexpectedfromwhatweknowoftheconditionofopinionintheRomanworld；and，asregardscertainimprovementssaidtohavebeenintroducedbyChristianityintotheImperiallawofslavery，theywereprobablyquickenedbyitsinfluence，buttheybeganinprincipleswhichwereofStoicalratherthanofChristianorigin。IdonotquestionthereceivedopinionthatChristianitygreatlymitigatedanddidmuchtoabolishpersonalandpredialslaveryintheWest，buttheContinentallawyersofwhomIspokeconsiderablyantedateitsinfluence，andtakefartoolittleaccountoftheprodigiouseffectssubsequentlyproducedbythepracticalequalityofallmenwithinthepaleoftheCatholicpriesthood。ButIprincipallydeprecatethesestatements，whichinsomecountrieshavealmostbecomeprofessionalcommonplaces，fortworeasons。Theysluroveraveryinstructivefact，thegreatunmalleabilityofallbodiesoflaw。andtheyobscureaninterestingandyetunsettled，problem，theoriginoftheCanonlaw。ThetruthseemstobethattheImperialRomanlawdidnotsatisfythemoralityoftheChristiancommunities，andthisisthemostprobablereasonwhyanotherbodyofrulesgrewupbyitssideandultimatelyalmostrivalledit。