and the terms upon which those who have been prevented from burning have subsequently lived with their relations and neighbours, I am decidedly of opinion that the abolition of the practice by law would not be attended with any evil consequences: on the contrary I think the enactment of such a law is dictated by every principle of humanity; nor does it appear to me that the abolition of the practice is altogether inconsistent with the spirit of toleration which has ever distinguished the British Government. The greater proportion of the men are unable to give a reason for the performance of the sacrifice, and it is surely fair to infer that the women are not better informed on the subject; and therefore to suppose that the resolution to become Suttees cannot proceed so much from their having reasoned themselves into a conviction of the purity of the act itself, as from a kind of infatuation produced by the absurdities poured into their ears by ignorant brahmuns, most of whom, if asked, would be found unable to give a reason for the doctrines they inculcate. I am persuaded that ninetynine out of a hundred women sacrifice themselves more under the influence of this infatuation than from any conviction of their own minds."* (E. Molony, Esq., Mag. Burdwan, Dec., 1818.) "It was the prevalent opinion amongst the natives that this sacrifice would not be tolerated by the British Government."+ (S. Marriott, Esq,, Tannah, Sept., 1819.) V. Hale, Esq., Judge in the Southern Concan, (Oct., 1819,) thus shews the state of public opinion relative to the Suttee in that part of India:-"I was much gratified on finding on my arrival in this part of the Concan, that the ceremony of Suttee, at no time so commonly practised as in most parts of British India, had, on the institution of the Hon. Company's Government entirely ceased, apparently caused by a very general opinion which prevailed among the natives, (though certainly without reason), that the performance of this sacrifice was totally repugnant to the laws, as well as the feeling of Government; in short, that it would not be permitted. This sentiment, particularly as no specific rules at that period existed for the guidance of Magistrates, and as no bad effect apparently was the result of it, I did not most certainly take the smallest pains to remove; contenting myself, in the very few instances where my permission was applied for, by neither giving nor withholding my consent, declaring, as was then literally the case, that I was ignorant whether the usage was permitted by the Government or not. The state of doubt in which these evasive answers left the minds of the applicants, I found had all the effect I could have hoped for, and in a very short time I heard no more of them: the result being that in the bounds of the late Malwan residency not a single case of Suttee has ever occurred; at least not in my time: and I believe I am correct when I add, neither within the four years my predecessor was stationed there; if there has it must have been performed (a very improbable circumstance) with such secrecy as to prelude the possibility of its coming to the knowledge of the local authorities."+ One more extract may be made from the Par. Papers, (printed * Par. Papers. p. 236. + p. 256. p. 258. Account of York Meeting, p. 26. Pormed a recommend Pract may be bushad, inte morder, which t heit sa sound extince symptoms of di to be the great prevalence Se croft in others; but it is Voer of in the greater proport Beds Sin of Police, Loyaca Had the most ancientÉ W Butter it was therefore in t I a app Flown, but not mention the wary of the modern shrive. By the service. In the first leade tute in line, but the las imed Ser authority is subsequently ending or acinating on the ne effec , or some other passion f wing that it could be re o my t e fo and the terms on which those who have been prevented from burning have subsequently lived with their relations and neighbours Tom decidedly of opinion that the abolition of the practice by las cold mot be attentel with any call consequences on the contrary think the enactment of such a law is dictated by every principle of humanity's nor does it appear to me that the abolition of the practice is altogeth er inconsistent with the spirit of toleration which has ever distin guished the British Government. The greater proportion of the mon are unable to give a reason for the performance of the sacrifice, and it is surely far to infer that the women are not better informed on the subject; and therefice to suppose that the resolution to become tees cannot proceed so much from their having resoned themselves into a conviction of the purity of the act isell, from a kind of th tuation produced by the absurdities poured into their ears by ion brahamus, most of whom, if asked, would be found unable to prie a reason for the doctrines they inculcats. I am persuaded that we ine out of a hundred comes sacrifice themselves more under the luence of this infamation than from any conviction of that ow inds (E. Malony, Esq, Mag. Burdwan, Deo, 1818) "It was the prevalent opinion amongst the natives that this se ice would not be tolerated by the British Government (& Ma fott, Esq. Tamah, Sept, 1819) V. Hale, Esq, Judge in the Southern Concan, (Oct, 1818) thus the Hon. Company's Government entirely cose, apply 1821), of similar import with the preceding:-"I feel emboldened, in the cause of humanity, to state, that the practice (of Suttee) is neither prescribed by the shastra, nor encouraged by persons of edu cation or influence. I can speak, from positive authority, that his Highness the Rajah of Tanjore, has ever discouraged it; and I feel assured that, with the exception of a few brahmuns, who derive a nefarious reward for presiding at this infernal rite, the prohibition of the practice would give universal satisfaction."* (C. M. Lushington, Esq., Mag. at Combeconum, Sept., 1813.) We could, with no consistency declare that to be murder to day, which we yesterday declared to be justifiable, and I do not think we ever can do so until we are armed with law opinions, that the practice of Suttees is not conformable to the Hindoo law and it by no means seems certain that such a construction of the law would be unattainable."+ (W. Leycester, Esq., Chief Judge of the Nizamut Adawlut, Calcutta, May, 1821.) "The ordinances of Menu, which are one of the principal law authorities in this part of India, do not encourage the sacrifice in the same manner as others quoted in the vivade changamana, translated by Mr. Colebrook. 'Let him not wish for death! Let him not wish for life! Let him expect his appointed time, as a hired servant expects his wages,' are doctrines more agreeable to the institutes of the oldest Hindoo legislator, who mentions doctrines very averse from self-immolation of widows; such as the raising up a son to the deceased by the widow. Here the marriage of widows is now deemed illegal, but not so in some of the most southern parts of the Peninsula. The Hindoo shastra lays down rules for securing proper provision for the widow, and confidence on the uninterrupted validity of such claims has probably proved, as a solace to their afflictions, one of the most efficacious considerations to operate to the prevention of the practice; while the persuasion which the priesthood use to widows to induce them to devote their bodies to this sacrifice, have the greatest influence on those who, being without future protection and maintenance, regard a future sojourn in this world with despair."‡ "I look upon this inhuman practice as one tolerated to the disgrace of the British Government; it is ever abominated by the better sort of natives themselves, and no where is it enjoined by Hindoo law. The authorities against self-immolation are Menu, Bhooraspattee, and several others. The weight of authority is in favour of a rigid practice of austerities, because it is that prescribed by Menu, revered by the Hindoos as the first and greatest law of authority. Custom can only be legally upheld when it does not militate against law, 'consuetudo pro lege servator,' will only extend to cases where no specific law exists. In the present instance there is a specific law, sanctioned by Menu, in direct opposition to authorities of inferior weight. I apprehend, the obvious absurdity of the law (exempting brahmuns from death) and the impossibility of reconciling it with our notions of jus. tice induced its abolition. If then a law can be repealed from its inconsonancy with reason, the same arguments exist in a stronger de. *Par. Papers, No. i. p. 270. + Par, Papers, No. ii. p. 63. p. 98. gree against an inhuman, barbarous, and unjust custom."* (C. M. Lushington, Esq., Mag., Trichinopoly, Oct., 1819.) The Hon. Court of Directors, in a letter addressed to the Governor General in Council, at Fort William, Bengal, dated London, June 17, 1823, thus expressed their views of the obligatory nature of Suttee, and the means of its abolition :-"Connected with the opinions expressed by many intelligent men, that the practice of Suttee is not a tenet of religion to which the people are enthusiastically attached, but rather an abuse, fostered by interested priests and relations. These instances of partial success do lead us to regard the notion of prohibition, modified according to circumstances, of this barbarous custom with rather less of apprehension than it has generally produced. Assuredly the most acceptable form of success would be that which would be brought about by such an increase of intelligence among the people as should shew them the wickedness and absurdity of the practice; next to this, we should rejoice to see the abolition effected by the influence and the co-operation of the higher order of natives."+ It is gratifying to see this awfully interesting subject discussed by every class of society, and there can be no doubt that the abolition of the Suttee would be hailed in India as an act expected from the British Government, and reflecting lustre upon its administration. O may those in whose hands are the lives of thousands of hapless widows, and the destinies of millions, reflect upon the language of the Almighty :-" If thou forbear to deliver them that are drawn unto death, and those that are ready to be slain; if thou sayest, 'Behold we knew it!' doth not He that pondereth the heart consider it? and He that keepeth thy soul, doth not he know it? and shall not he render to every man according to his works." Pro. xxiv. 11, 12. J. H. Harington, Esq., now member of Council in Calcutta, in a very interesting Minute relative to Suttees, dated Dec., 1824, thus gives his view of the fecility and safety of suppressing Suttees :-"If, as appears from the exposition of the shastra, given by the pundits of the Sudder Dewanny Adawlut, the assistance of brahmuns and others be requisite to enable the widow to devote herself in the prescribed or customary way, whether of sahamaran or anoomaran, (burning with or without the body,) it would surely be possible to prevent such aid being given by a public interdiction, with a declaration that any person hereafter causing, aiding, or in any manner promoting a female sacrifice, such as that commonly denominated a Suttee, shall be liable to a criminal prosecution, as principals or accomplices, for homicide; and that on conviction it will not be held any justification of the homicide that the person so convicted was desired by the deceased to cause, aid, or in any manner to promote her death, or that the deceased became a Suttee by a voluntary act of self-devotion. It is impossible that a legislative enactment to prevent assistance being hereafter given in the Suttee immolation, with a view to preserve the lives of a number of miserable women from suicide, in a state of affliction from the recent death of their husbands, and to put a stop to the horrible abuses and cruelties which, unsanctioned by Hindoo laws, have *Par. Papers, No. ii. p. 103, 104. + Par. Papers, printed 1824, p. 45. K V |