Consider what this means. I am the mortgagee of a piece of land. If I
improve it so that its value is increased the owner can come back,
borrow money to redeem it, and re-mortgage it for double the amount
next day to someone else. Therefore I certainly won't improve it. I
can't sell it. I can work it of course. I have also to defend my
title every now and then from attack. It may be that the original
mortgagor did not own the land at all. He may have simply been the
member of the family in whom the occupation was vested. The other
members can challenge my right. They do. And this sort of thing can
go on for sixty years. That is not the sort of law to encourage
progress. It encourages litigation, but that is all. The whole
country groans under it naturally. But before any relief could be
given there would have to be some consensus of opinion among the people
as to the change. Government could not do it themselves. Even if
their amendment were good it would raise a hornets' nest about their
ears.
Thus here again is an _impasse_, and a dangerous one, typical of many.
By our system of Civil Law and Civil Courts, of precedent and case law
we have petrified the bonds in which India lay when we arrived and made
them far more rigid than before. While by our introduction of new
ideas and of greater material progress we have rendered the old laws
more and more obsolete, we have at the same time stopped all evolution
of these laws, and killed any capacity they had for accommodating
themselves to change. Some lawyers even, enthusiastic as they are
about their own profession, have seen this danger. Here is what Sir
Henry Sumner Maine, who was Legal Member to the Government of India,
says:
"What that law and usage"--Indian law and usage--"was, the Sudder Court
used to ascertain with what some would call most conscientious accuracy
and others the most technical narrowness. Under the hand of the Judges
of the Sudder Courts the native rules hardened and contracted a
rigidity which they never had in real native practice. Among the older
records of their proceedings may be found injunctions couched in the
technical language of English Chancery proceedings which forbid the
priests of a particular temple to injure a rival fane by painting the
face of their idol red instead of yellow, and decrees allowing the
complaint of other priests that they were injured in property and
repute because their neighbours rang a bell at a particular moment of
their services. There is in truth but little doubt that until
education began to cause the natives of India to absorb Western ideas
for themselves the influence of the English rather retarded than
hastened the mental development of the race."
And it does so more and more, because however much they may absorb
Western ideas theoretically, they cannot express them practically owing
to our petrifaction of their law and custom.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account