Character, Manners, and Customs of the People of India,' published in 1817, he thus he thus expresses his opinion on the point under consideration: "The ancient and barbarous custom, which imposes it as a duty on women to die voluntarily on the funeral pile of their husbands, although still in force, is by no means so general or frequent as it was in former times. It is also more rare in the Peninsula than in the northern parts of India, where it is by no means uncommon, even in the present times, to see women offering themselves up as the willing victims of this horrid superstition; and devoting themselves, out of pride or vanity, to this cruel death. It is confined to the countries under the government of the idolatrous princes, for the Mahomedan rulers do not permit the barbarous practice in the provinces subject to them; and I am persuaded the Europeans will not endure it where their power extends." (p. 236.) Here the Abbé intimates a conviction of the propriety of using force, in order to put an end to Suttees; and so far from apprehending any danger from such a line of conduct, quotes the Mahomedan rulers as having adopted the measure with success, and as an example worthy of European imitation. Perhaps the reader may be disposed to desire the opinion of some safer guide, and to pay no attention to the Abbé's representation, either for or against the measure under consideration; seeing that one or other of his opinions must of necessity either have been formed without reflection, or have been uttered without sincerity. I would then beg to cite the opinion of the late Charles Grant, Esq.; one possessed of long and intimate acquaintance with the natives of India, and more particularly of those among whom the Suttee is principally practised—one whose judgment was as sound as his heart was benevolent. In his Observation on the Manners of the Natives of British India,' he adverts to this custom, and intimates, that to say we should continue to allow of these great disorders, in "all time to come," would be "too daring a conclusion." I may here with propriety introduce a further extract from the report of the British magistrate of Hooghly, already alluded to, wherein he plainly avows his opinion that the Suttee may be abolished with perfect safety. "I do not hesitate in offering my opinion," he says, speaking of the practice in question, "that a law for its abolition would only be objected to by the heirs, who derive worldly profit from the custom; by Brahmins, who partly exist by it; and by those whose depraved nature leads them to look on so horrid a sacrifice as a highly agreeable and entertaining show." I may also state, that the native who instructed me in the Bengalee language, who was a Brahmin of more than ordinary intelligence, frequently expressed his surprise to me that government did not issue an order that no more Suttees should be permitted, intimating his conviction that no commotion whatever would ensue. But last of all, and above all, I would lay stress upon the unseen, but not on that account the less effectual, aid and blessing of Him who holds all hearts in his hands, who "stilleth the noise of the seas, the noise of their waves, and the tumult of the people." In discussing a great moral question like the present, there is one important axiom which should never, I conceive, be lost sight of,-that the path of duty is the path of safety. If God approve the conduct of the British rulers of the Indian empire in their effort to purify the land of blood-guiltiness, they need not fear, though a host should encamp against them; for if God be for them, no one can oppose them with success. If the question be asked, Is it according to the revealed will of God, the duty of the British Government in India to interpose their authority, and forcibly put an end to the practice of consigning widows to the flames? I would quote one passage, out of many, from the Sacred Scriptures, and a part of the commentary made upon it by that great and justly esteemed divine, the late Rev. Thomas Scott, rector of Aston Sandford. In the thirty-fifth chapter of the book of Numbers, are the following words, "So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it." (v. 33.) Upon this the above-mentioned distinguished clergyman thus comments :-" The connivance of our government in the burning of widows, and in human sacrifices, and in other species of murder, committed in our East Indian dominions, under the pretext of an idolatrous religion, is wholly unjustifiable, and burdens our land, and all connected with those distant regions, with the guilt of blood not expiated by that of those who shed it." Such was the opinion of one, who for sobriety of mind and solidity of judgment in expounding that sacred Book, which contains the revelation of God's will to man, has in no era of the church been surpassed, or perhaps equalled. As a warm friend to India, and by duty, interest, and gratitude, cordially attached to the British rulers, whom Providence has placed over the principal part of that vast empire, my humble prayer is to Him, "at whose command nations and empires rise and fall, flourish and decay," |