A question about Jewish domestic practices in Bible times...?

When a son became of age, did he have full access to his father's power, authority and wealth? And could he command his father's servants, punish them, and spend his father's resources?

You need look no farther than Jacob and his sons for the answer. The father is always the patriarch, he is always the leader.

A son normally succeeded to his father's power, authority, and wealth only upon the father's death. When the so-called "Prodigal Son" asked his father to distribute his portion of his expected inheritance, prior to his father's death, he was, in effect, saying that he wished his father were dead.

An interesting question that comes to every son's mind. There are a few facts that the son might not have considered.
1. The father is always at least 25 years advanced to his son, in regards to achievements. In studies, the father is ahead, in job, in performance, and finally the goods he delivered. For a son to claim full authority of his father's power, authority, and wealth, he has to be superior to his father in job, performance, and goods delivered. This is not possible, because his father has the edge of being ahead by 25 years.
2. In the setting of graduates, every senior graduate in charge of the junior keeps a father-to-son relationship. Here the junior desires strongly to equal his senior and then get a higher promotion. This again is not easily possible, because every senior is one to 5 or more years senior to the one he is responsible for.
What I would hence like to point out is that a son can have access to his father's belongings right from childhood, but not full access. Though he can share family life, and the wealth, he does not become a full owner at any time, and does not get full access. Therefore, a son is successful because of what he earned by his own Merritt and hard work from the outside world, and not by inheriting wealth from his father. The wealth earned by the son by working hard is much more than what the father gives him.

God created the Universe from nothing (empty darkness) via heaven, light, Earth, etc. plants and finally on the sixth day, a rational man. But, God did not create a human being at that time.
God has six attributes or virtues.
1. Obedience to God (Adam).
2. Patience for God. (Seth).
3. Honesty to God. (Noah).
4. Faith in God and Peace. (Abraham).
5. Charity. (Jacob).
6. Chastity and Purity. (Judea and Josea).

These over 2500 years made rational man more a human person. We see this incarnate in Jesus, who gave God's Love to mankind, even unto death on the cross. The first to share this are the twelve disciples.

Nope- his father's possessions were not his, nor were his servants, wealth or anything else. The only time those would become his property would be on the death foe his father- or on receiving them as a gift from his father. It was exactly the same as today- a child does not get to take over a parents possessions until the parent gives them to the child or dies.

Look no further than the parable of the tenants in Matthew 21: 33-46. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+21%3A33-46&version=NIV

In it, Jesus describes how a father planted a vineyard and built (ironically) a watchtower, then rented it to some farmers and went away on a journey (note that the father is still quite alive.) Three of the father's servants were sent to collect a portion of the fruit produced, but the tenants first killed the father's servants, then killed a second, larger batch of servants sent in for the same purpose.

So the father's response is to then send his son, thinking that the tenants would respect the son more than they did the servants. Absent the father, the tenets think that they can kill the son and take what is his.

It's evident in this parable that A) there is most definitely a difference between the power of the son and the power of the servant, both in the mind of the father AND in the mind of the tenets, B) the son has authority that the servants do not have, C) the father's property is the son's property, and killing the son gives them possession of what is his.

Another interesting note about this parable: the Pharisees understand that Jesus is talking about them, finding fault with them, and in response they would like to arrest him. There is no mention of them wanting to kill him. The scripture says that the people think Jesus was a prophet.

Contrast that to other times where the Pharisees understand Jesus calls himself the Son of God, and they immediately want to KILL him for blasphemy, because it equates him with God (giving him the authority described in this parable.)

The Pharisees do not like the challenge to their authority, but they tolerate it. They cannot, however, stand the claim that Jesus is the Son of God, which makes him (like the son in this parable) have the authority of the Father, equating him with God.

For an example of this desire to kill Jesus for claiming to be the Son of God, see:
John 5:18 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%205:18&version=KJV
or John 8:57-59 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+8%3A57-59&version=NIV
or Matthew 26:62-66 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+26%3A62-66&version=NIV