JAPANESE CIVIL CODE 397 



and the succession to the property of house-members, both of which 

 are new institutions introduced by the Code and are not bound by 

 the limit of the house. In most other cases, the house takes precedence 

 of the kindred, and a man's rights and duties, capacities and in- 

 capacities are usually determined by his position as a member of 

 the house, and not by his position as a member of the kindred. 

 Parental power which is based on the conception of kinship is limited 

 by the conception of the house, and is recognized only so far as the 

 parent and child are in the same house. So if a son is not in the 

 same house with his father or mother, he does not stand under the 

 paternal power of either. The consent of the house-head is always 

 necessary for the marriage, adoption, divorce, or the dissolution of 

 adoption of the house-member, but the consent of parents is only 

 required when the offspring is in the same house with them. 



Here again appears the difference between the Roman and Japan- 

 ese family laws. The former recognizes only one authority of the 

 head of the family, in the patria potestas of the highest male ascendant 

 and merges the parental power of the members of the family in that 

 of the paterfamilias, while the Japanese law recognizes parental 

 authority of the house-member side by side with the authority of 

 the house-head. The authority of the house-head includes the 

 right of consent above referred to, right of determining the residence 

 of house-members, right of expelling them from the house or for- 

 bidding their return to it on certain grounds specified by law, and 

 the right of succeeding to the house-members' property in default of 

 other heirs. The parental power includes the custody and education 

 of children who are minors, right of correction, right of determining 

 their place of abode, business or profession, of managing their pro- 

 perty, or performing several legal acts on their behalf, subject in 

 some cases to the approval of a family council. Most of the rights 

 falling under the parental power were formerly included in the 

 house-head's power, but the new Civil Code recognized the authority 

 of parent and transferred them to the parental power, and greatly 

 curtailed that of the house-head, only leaving those rights to him 

 which are necessary to the preservation and proper management 

 of the house. This recognition by the Civil Code of the parental 

 power beside the authority of the house-head shows the transient 

 state of Japanese society and is one of the points regarding which the 

 framers of the new code took pains to adjust the laws to the pro- 

 gressive tendencies of the society. Formerly, there was only one 

 authority recognized by Japanese law, as in the case of Roman 

 law that of the house-head. But the new Civil Code took a 

 decided step and recognized the parental power, besides the house- 

 headship, due deference being paid to the long-existing custom 

 among the people, by not going so far as to extend that recognition 



