No. II. THE PANJAIT. Plate sin with gold, And the strong lance of justice hurtless breaks : SHAKSPEARE. THE engine of Hindoo government, in ancient times, was beautifully simple; and so well calculated to ensure happiness to the full extent of human possible enjoyment, that it is still cherished by the mass of the people, and held as sacred as their religion. It may be useful to draw attention to a subject so interesting. I need say very little of the ministers of a raja, or native prince. All governments, both in Asia and Europe, must divide themselves into departments. A Hindoo raja, like a British king, has his prime minister, his secretaries of state, his chancellor of the exchequer, his civil and military branches, his sirdars or headmen, and his courts of justice, and law officers. The obligations of king and subject are reciprocal; both receive valuable considerations for the parts they perform. These principles were well understood at a very remote period in India; and civilization has left us a monument, in Hindostan, of simple justice, which it would be well if we imitated. I shall confine myself, therefore, to the administration of the laws in India, as that part of the machine which is most useful, and least understood, or practised in this country. To secure men in the possession of acquired property, to protect the weak against the strong, to redress grievances, and to make justice poise the balance of right; neither inclining to the rich, nor declining from the poor and to pioneer the road towards the gates of equity, so that they may be easy of approach and open to all, are indubitably the duties which government has to perform, as essentially connected with the subject's welfare. Some of its other duties are in self-defence; but these are peculiarly required for political happiness. Now I will ask, with great humility and respect, the following questions: Is justice administered with us in as simple a form as possible? Has it not become a science, and a means of acquiring vast fortunes to one out of four great professions, into which we are divided, like the castes of Hindostán? Can a poor man obtain justice with the same ease as a rich one? No. But I wave this question, because, I believe, except in Utopia, the affirmative of the proposition is an impossibility: when two things are constitutionally unequal, they cannot be matched. Well, let that pass. Does a man obtain redress in our free land, where injury has been inflicted; and is he able to punish the man who has wronged him, immediately? We know the contrary. I need not urge the distance we may have to travel to the assize town; the length of time we may have to wait for the judges; the penalty under which a prosecutor is placed to ensure his evidence, and answer the purposes of justice. Why, he who has been injured, robbed, assaulted, half-murdered, is punished, and threatened with fine or imprisonment, before he can obtain redress; and a prisoner, who is consi dered innocent in the eye of the law till tried, is punished with six months' incarceration, though he knows his witnesses could prove him not guilty. A grand jury may throw out a bill, after the person whom they thus discharge has been punished-for nothing! Good God! The fact is, habit blinds understanding. Men cannot see the absurdity, the cruelty, the horrible folly, of things which have become familiar-which time and precept have consecrated. It requires a convulsion-some extraordinary concurrence of events—or a serious lapse of time, to overwhelm prejudice and error, by the force of public opinion: because, what has grown to maturity recreates itself, and clings to nine-lived existence; whereas, that which has to beat it down must outstride the other before it can strike. But I have said as much on these points as my subject requires; though volumes might be written on one so fertile. All these objections vanish before the simplicity of Hindoo jurisprudence. Wherever a native prince, or raja, reigns in India, every town and village are independent; each has its own invested |