“A social anthropological approach to property as a social institution leads us to the position where we look upon inheritance not as ‘the entrance of living persons into the possession of dead persons’ property’ (a) or even as ‘succession to all rights of the deceased’ (b) but rather as the transference of statuses from the dead to the living with respect to specific property objects.”2 A man holds many statuses each of which probably gives rights and duties in respect of property; on his death these statuses do not necessarily pass to a single individual—they may well pass individually to a number of persons each of whom succeeds to the rights and duties of the particular status which has passed to him. The status may be transferred or may even disappear. If we analyse the Yoruba customary rules of succession in this manner we shall, I believe, be able to dispel some of the confusion which surrounds the concept of ‘family property’, with its attendant problems—the respective rights of sons and brothers to the deceased's property, the rights of daughters to inherit, the rights attaching to individual and family or inherited property, the distinction between movable and immovable property, the rights over individually held houses or cocoa farms situated on family land.

It is axiomatic that in colonial constitutional development events move more swiftly each year in response to ever-increasing pressures. Major changes made or proposed during 1958 for dependent territories in Africa reflect considerable ingenuity and variety of approach: in order to indicate them in outline, it will be necessary to be consecutive only in a geographical sense.