=Rights of Sanctuary.=—The extension of the sanctuary beyond the vicinage of the shrine became a subject of much animadversion; and in delegating judicial authority over the whole of the villages in the grant to the priests, the Rana committed the temporal welfare of his subjects to a class of men not apt to be lenient in the collection of their dues, which not unfrequently led to bloodshed. In alienating the other royalties, especially the transit duties, he was censured even by the zealots. Yet, however important such concessions, they were of subordinate value to the rights of sanctuary, which were extended to the whole of the towns in the grant, thereby multiplying the places of refuge for crime, already too numerous. =Violation of Sanctuary.=—In all ages and countries the rights of sanctuary have been admitted, and however they may be abused, their institution sprung from humane motives. To check the impulse of revenge and to shelter the weak from oppression are noble objects, and the surest test of a nation’s independence is the extent to which they are carried. From the remotest times _saran_ has been the most valued privilege of the Rajputs, the lowest of whom deems his house a refuge against the most powerful. But we merely propose to discuss the sanctuary of holy places, and more immediately that of the shrine of Kanhaiya. When Moses, after the Exodus, made a division of the lands of Canaan amongst the Israelites, and appointed “six cities to be the refuge of him who had slain unwittingly, from the avenger of blood,”[4.19.66] the intention was not to afford facilities for eluding justice, but to check the hasty impulse of revenge; for the slayer was only to be protected “until he stood before the congregation for judgment, or until the death of the high-priest” [527], which event appears to have been considered as the termination of revenge.[4.19.67] The infraction of political sanctuary (_saran torna_) often gives rise to the most inveterate feuds; and its abuse by the priests is highly prejudicial to society. Moses appointed but six cities of refuge to the whole Levite tribe; but the Rana has assigned more to one shrine than the entire possessions of that branch of the Israelites who had but forty-two cities, while Kanhaiya has forty-six.[4.19.68] The motive of sanctuary in Rajasthan may have been originally the same as that of the divine legislator; but the privilege has been abused, and the most notorious criminals deem the temple their best safeguard. Yet some princes have been found hardy enough to violate, though indirectly, the sacred _saran_. Zalim Singh of Kotah, a zealot in all the observances of religion, had the boldness to draw the line when selfish priestcraft interfered with his police; and though he would not demand the culprit, or sacrilegiously drag him from the altar, he has forced him thence by prohibiting the admission of food, and threatening to build up the door of the temple.