With reference to the Karens of Burma, Dr. Bunker informs me that, though they never marry outside their own tribe, they avoid marrying with near relations, their prohibited degrees being nearly the same as those of the ancient Hebrews. Among the Kukis, according to Lieutenant Stewart, “the most strict rules exist forbidding too close intermarriage in families; cousins cannot be so allied.”[1798] The Nagas never permit marriage within the same family;[1799] and, among the Chukmas, if near relatives, within certain prohibited degrees, fall in love with each other, it is usual for both of them to pay a fine of fifty rupees, corporal punishment being also administered.[1800] Among the Kandhs, “intermarriage between persons of the same tribe, however large or scattered, is considered incestuous and punishable with death.”[1801] The Santals make it a rule not to intermarry into the same tribe;[1802] and, among the Sakais, a man goes to a considerable distance for a wife, generally to a tribe speaking quite a different dialect.[1803] The Juángs, Hos, Mundas, and other peoples in India are divided into clans, and a man is not allowed to marry a girl of his own clan.[1804] Among the Garos, no one may take to wife a woman of the same “mahári,” or motherhood.[1805] According to Lieutenant-Colonel Tod, no Rajput can marry in his own clan.[1806] “In all pure Hindu society,” Sir Alfred Lyall states, “the law which regulates the degrees within which marriage is interdicted, proceeds upon the theory that between agnatic relatives _connubium_ is impossible.”[1807] Hence it is unlawful for a Brahman to wed a woman whose clan-name is the same as his own, a prohibition which bars marriage among relatives in the male line indefinitely. But besides this, connections on the female side are also forbidden to take place within certain wide limits.[1808] In the ‘Laws of Manu’ we read that a damsel “who is neither a Sapindâ[1809] on the mother’s side, nor belongs to the same family on the father’s side, is recommended to twice-born men for wedlock and conjugal union.”[1810] Yet in the older literature marriage with the daughters of the mother’s brother, and sons of the father’s sister, is permitted.[1811] This still holds good among the Reddies of Southern India, and, as it seems, among other tribes belonging to the Hindu stock; whereas children of fathers’ brothers and mothers’ sisters are considered equal to brothers and sisters, and marriage with them is looked upon as highly incestuous.[1812]