Isvar Chandra Vidyasagar, a story of his life and work/Chapter 32
CHAPTER XXXII.
LOSS OF FATHER.
About this time, he had some difference with Sir George Campbell, the then Lieutenant Governor of Bengal, with respect to the Smriti branch of the Sanskrit College. Campbell was a man of highly enthusiastic and revolutionary spirit and rather chary of expenditure on high education. He revolutionised almost every department of the government under him.
The Hon'ble C. E. Buckland in his 'Bengal under the Lieutenant-Governers,' says,—"Reform was the principal feature of Sir G. Campbell's Government. The experiment of appointing a Lieutenant-Governor who had not graduated in Lower Bengal certainly led to great changes, and it seemed as if every department and institution had to justify its method of working. It would have been impossible for any one, in such a position and bent on such a mission as Sir G. Campbell, to avoid running counter to many cherished ideas in conservative Bengal: and it was no wonder that the pressure he applied on all officers and classes tended to render him unpopular."
A contemporary writer thus described Sir George Campbell:—"That he was more than a mere executive officer every one knows who knows India. His Governorship represented a virtual revolution, succeeding that of Sir William Grey. It was a change from desk management to root-and-branch administration, resting on fixed and matured views as to political principles underlying action. As a statesman, Sir G. Campbell stands foremost among the Lieutenant-Governors, and it is unpleasant to add that he was the least popular."
He was a great enemy of the high education of the natives of the soil; he lowered the status of the Berhampur, the Krishnaghar, and the Sanskrit Colleges from the first to the second grade.
The Hon'ble C. E. Buckland, in his 'Bengal under the Lieutenant-Governors,' says;—"Reductions were carried out in the Berhampore, Krishnagar and Sanskrit Colleges, which provoked some expression of dissatisfaction among the upper and literate classes of Bengal. Sir G. Campbell's policy was to reduce the number of Colleges educating up to the highest point, concentrating in the remainder improved means of the highest education. The reduced Colleges were not abolished, but were still efficiently maintained to teach to the point to which experience proved that the greatest demand existed i.e. up to the First Arts standard."
It was this too excessive economical policy of his government that led him to resolve upon making a monthly saving of 650 rupees from the establishment charges of the Sanskrit College by the abolition of the posts of the Professors of Smriti and two professors of English. This resolution threw the whole country in a state of great agitation. Protests and oppositions were raised from every quarter, but without the desired success. It was, however, finally settled that the Smriti department should be placed under the tuition of the Professor of Rhetoric. The Bengal Government had previously asked Vidyasagar for his opinion on the point, and he had opposed the retrenching policy. But still, it was stated in Government resolution published in the Calcutta Gazette, that in this matter Vidyasagar's opinion had been taken. The people of the country very naturally suspected that Vidyasagar must have supported the policy of Government. He was, therefore, obliged to address a letter to Luttman Johnson, Private Secretary to the Lieutenant Governor, contradicting the statement of Government. The letter ran as follows:—
- "To
- "H. Luttman Johnson Esq.
- "Private Secretary to His Honor, the
- "Lieutenant Governor of Bengal.
- "Private Secretary to His Honor, the
- "H. Luttman Johnson Esq.
- "My Dear Sir,
- "Adverting to the Government order on the reorganisation of the Sanskrit College, published in the last Calcutta Gazette, I find that reference has been made to me and the Principal of the Sanskrit College as the persons among others with whom His Honor the Lieutenant Governor was pleased to discuss the subject, and His Honor considers their suggestions 'to be so moderate and reasonable that he has much pleasure in being able substantially to comply with their wishes pending further trial of the arrangements now to be made.' These arrangements are that the first Arts classes should be revived and that the Professorship of Hindu Law should be merged in that of Rhetoric and Philosophy by giving an increment of Rs 50 to the present incumbent for this additional duty.
- "As I was asked by you under instructions of His Honor to consult the leading members of the Hindu community, who take interest in Sanskrit studies before meeting His Honor, and as it might lead to an impression that the above suggestions emanated from me, I think it my duty to remind His Honor that so far as the proposed arrangement for instruction in Hindu Law is concerned, it did not come from me. Indeed I told His Honor distinctly that the importance of the subject demanded a separate chair, and I still entertain the same opinion. Hindu Law, as His Honor is aware, is a vast subject—it forms the life-study of a man. It is true that there may be versatile persons, who may combine a thorough knowledge of Sanskrit literature with a profound acquaintance with Hindu Law, but such versatility is rare. To merge the chair of Hindu Law with other chairs is to give it a secondary rank and to reduce its practical usefulness, for a professor who will teach it at his leisure moments as it were cannot be expected to devote that attention to it, which the vastness of the subject demands. I find it stated in the Government letter that according to the Principal of the College "Smriti or Hindu Law is now taught in a most satisfactory manner by the professor in addition to some other duties." From my experience of the working of the college as ex-principal I cannot however persuade myself to subscribe to this opinion. Perhaps His Honor would form a clear idea of the anomaly of the proposed arrangement if he would consider the effect of calling upon a Professor of Literature, Philosophy or Mathematics in the Presidency College, who may have attended Law lectures but who has not made law his special study, to fill the chair of Law in addition to other duties; I have no doubt that the legal profession would scout such an idea, and yet this is exactly the arrangement proposed for giving instruction in Hindu Law in the Sanskrit College. I have high respect for the attainments and scholarship of Pundit Mahesh Chandra, but I fear that the union of so many duties in his hands will not only result in a falling off in the study of Law but also of those branches, which he is prominently qualified to teach. His Honor observes, 'it was and is intended that the teaching of Hindu Law shall be fully maintained', but as I have endeavoured to show above His Honor's intention will be but ill-fulfilled by the arrangement proposed. I would therefore earnestly and respectfully solicit His Honor to consider this part of his recent orders. The saving which the absorption of the chair effects is so small, viz. Rs. 100 a month, that I earnestly trust that His Honor will see the propriety of making this concession to the Hindu community, particularly as His Honor has shown a commendable spirit of moderation and conciliation in these orders.
- "As it might be inferred from the tenour of the Government letter referred to that I have advised His Honor the proposed arrangement for filling the chair on Hindu Law, and as I am consequently liable to be misunderstood by the Hindu community, whose feeling is very strong on the subject of the chair of the Hindu Law, I would respectfully request that in justice to me His Honor may think fit to remove the erroneous impression which his too general allusion to my suggestions regarding the reorganisation of the Sanskrit College is calculated to produce on the public mind.
"I remain &c.
(Sd.) "Isvar Chandra Sarma."
To this letter Luttman Johnson the Private Secretary replied, as follows:—
"Belvedere Alipore.
"The 25th May 1872
- "My dear Pundit,
- "I have laid your letter of the 23rd current about the recent orders for reorganisation of the Sanskrit College before His Honor the Lieutenant Governor. His Honor has no doubt that you are correct in saying that you did not individually recommend the absorption of the Professorship of Hindoo Law. His Honor desires me to assure you that he proposes to make the Hindoo Law the primary and not a mere secondary object of one of the chairs. He has every reason for believing that Pundit Mahesh Chandra is at least as qualified for the duty of teaching Hindoo Law as any other gentleman whom he could have selected to succeed the late Professor, and he has the distinct assurance of the Principal that the Pundit is teaching the subject in the most satisfactory manner. Upon the whole, therefore, His Honour thinks that he has been well advised in the orders which he has passed. He must in the present experiment sufficiently before he can consent to make another change.
"Dear Sir,
"Yours faithfully
Sd. "H. Luttman Johnson
With a view to remove the erroneous impression from the minds of the public, Vidyasagar afterwards addressed a letter to the Hindoo Patriot, which was published in its issue of the 10th June, 1872. The letter is quoted below:—
"To
- The Editor of the Hindu Patriot.
"Dear Sir,
"As considerable misapprehension prevails among my countrymen as to the opinion I expressed to His Honor the Lieutenant-Governor, when he did me the honour of consulting me regarding the Sanskrit College, particularly in reference to the constitution of the Chair of Hindu Law, I deem it due to lay before the public through the medium of your paper the accompanying correspondence which I hope will remove the erroneous impression entertained on the subject, I am always reluctant to rush into print, but when I find myself actually abused and looked upon as the individual, who has advised the Lieutenant-Governor the arrangement about the Chair of Hindu Law, which is unhappily regarded as a piece of downright jobbery, I cannot in justice to myself refrain from letting the public know the part I have taken in this business. I need hardly add that I am compelled to resort to this step by the equivocal terms used in the letter of Mr. Bernard, Secretary to the Director of Public Instruction, on the subject. I however feel much indebted to His Honor for completely exonerating me in the last letter of his Private Secretary to my address.
His relations with Sir George Compbell being thus much strained some of his publications were excluded by Government from the list of textbooks prescribed for schools in Bengal. As a matter of consequence, his income from books, which formed the main portion of his means, was considerably diminished. He was therefore obliged, though most painfully, to curtail some of the stipends which he had kindly settled on poor families. But as soon as he again found sufficient means for it, he raised the allowances to their former rate, which he had been constrained to retrench.
In this connection, we will notice here, in passing, the appointment of Pandit Mahes Chandra Nyayratna as a Professor of the Sanskrit College. On the retirement of the old professor, Pandit Premchand Tarkavagis, his place in the College fell vacant. There were two candidates for the post—Rammay Bhattacharyya, a brother of the retired professor, and Mahes Chandra Nyayratna. Both were qualified men; the people naturally expected that the first-named Pandit would get the appointment. Although the second candidate was not a student of the Sanskrit College, yet he was highly proficient in Belles-lettres and Rhetoric, and had acquired a great reputation as the most learned man in the six Darsuvs (Philosophy). Mr. Cowell, the Principal of the college, found a difficulty in making the choice. At last, he asked for Vidyasagar's opinion in the matter. Vidyasagar said,—'To teach the Kavyaprakas to the students of the Rhetoric class, the professor should have a sound knowledge of the Nyaya philosophy. Pandit Mahes Chandra Nyayratna has mastered the whole Nyaya Sastra; I therefore think him to be duly qualified for the post.' Nyayratna was accordingly appointed to the vacant place.
The continued physical and mental sufferings combined with intense afflictions and griefs at the loss of his nearest and dearest relations and friends completely broke down his already unpaired health. A secluded and retired life in some salubrious climate was now absolutely necessary for him. About this time, a Bungalow was notified for sale at Deoghur, a most healthy place in upper Bengal. He offered to purchase it, but the terms being immoderately high, he gave up the idea. He then rented a plot of land, very close to Karmatar, a Station midway between Jamtara and Madhupur on the East Indian Railway Line. The place lies in the Santhal Pergunnas. It had, at that time, a somewhat jungly appearance, being covered on all sides with dense woods, and was, in consequence, very well suited to the purpose. He laid out the land, and erected there a nice Bungalow to his mind. In its compound he planted flower plants and fruit trees, and thus turned it to a most comfortable habitation. The poor, savage Santhals were his only neighbours. The Santhals are believed to be one of the aboriginal tribes of India. They are honest and truthful They soon perceived the flow of natural kindness and benevolence of their new neighbour, and became his objects of love and endearment—his friends and relations. In fact, some of them addressed him father, some brother, some uncle, and so forth. Their poor huts of leaves were overflooded with the flow of Vidyasagar's genial kindness and assumed a gay, cheerful aspect Vidyasagar supplied them with food in hunger, clothes in nudity, medicine in sickness. He fed them with delicious fruits and confectionery. In winter, he gave them warm clothes. He was by their sick-bed, drenching them with physic, dieting them with light food, and nursing them with the tenderest care. He kept with him a large supply of Homœpathic drugs for their treatment. The reader is aware that he had acquired a great proficiency in the healing art of Hahnemann. His heart was a fountain of universal love and kindness. Wheresoever he was, there was nothing but love and kindness. In his daily morning walks, he visited the hut of every one of his Santhal neighbours, and very cheerily accepted their little presents of gourd, cucumber, or brinjal. He then returned to his neat and clean villa, accompanied with some of his honest, savage friends, to whom he gave whatever they required. He made them dance their barbarous dances, which gave him an infinite pleasure. In fact, in this country seat he felt a heavenly tranquility and happiness. Not only did he minister to their external improvement and physical comfort, but he also provided for their internal advancement, intellectual culture, and moral correction. For the education of their children, he founded a vernacular school at his own expense.
There were no fish-mongers in the vicinity of the place, as there were very few purchasers of fish. Vidyasagar proclaimed that he would buy all the fish that would be brought to him. The poor Santhals now found a fresh source of income. They brought to him very large quantities of fish, for which he gave them the price they demanded. He then distributed the fish among the Bengalee gentlemen—officers and servants of the Railway Station and the Post Office. He now and then invited the Babus to dinner, and passed the days that he stayed at the place in merriment. Whenever he went to Karmatar, one of his own children or grandchildren always accompanied him. Sometimes his friends resorted to the place for a change. Vidyasagar received and entertained them hospitably. On one occasion, Pandit Nilmani Nyayalankar, being seriously ill, went to Karmatar for restoration of his health. Vidyasagar tended and nursed him with affectionate care. He used to remove the discharges of the patient's bowels and kidneys with his own hands. Nyayalankar felt awkward and ashamed that so great a man should trouble himself with such menial services. But the noble-minded Vidyasagar smiled and said,—'Never mind, my dear, I pay you in earnest,' meaning that Nyayalankar would serve him similarly, in case he himself should fall ill. We have already said, that Vidyasagar was very witty, and whenever an opportunity presented itself, he would be sure to give expression to his merry humour. On one occasion, he attended the Governor's Darbar, accompanied by four other Pandits. The Pandits saw that all other Indians had their heads covered with turbans, except the Bengalees. They enquired of Vidyasagar the cause of it. He smiled, and replied,—'When the Bengalees failed to do anything for their father-land, they gave up wearing turbans and thus lightened the weight of its burden.' This was, no doubt, a merry joke, but very cutting indeed.
One Abhiram Mandal, a Santhal, was employed by Vidyasagar as his chief gardener at Karmatar. The poor savage was a great favourite with his master on account of his truthfulness and honesty. Vidyasagar sometimes sent to him clothes for distribution and cash remittances for payment of monthly allowances to the poor Santhals.
The Santhals were quite enamoured of him. Whenever they heard a report of his intended visit, they looked out anxiously for his arrival, and as soon as he arrived, they flocked to him with their little presents—some with gourds, some with cucumbers, some with brinjals, and some with other vegetables of the like nature. A poor Santhal having nothing else to offer to his dear benefactor, brought a cock-fowl for him. Vidyasagar smiled, and producing his holy thread, said to the innocent savage,—'You see I am a Brahman. I cannot accept your present' The poor Santhal at once burst into tears, and insisted on his acceptance of the fowl. Vidyasagar's. tender heart was moved at the sad disappointment of his poor neighbour, and for his satisfaction received it from his hands. The Santhal felt highly delighted. When he was gone, Vidyasagar set free the fowl. On one occasion, another Santhal came to him, accompanied by a woman of his race. He said to Vidyasagar,—'Would you give this woman a piece of cloth?' The latter replied by way of joke,—'I have no cloth; and why should I give her?' Santhal.—'That won't do; you must give her a piece of cloth.'
Vidyasagar.—'No. I have none.'
Santhal.—'Let me have your key. I will open your trunk, and see whether you have got cloth.'
Vidyasagar laughed at the simple familiarity of the savage, and handed his key over to him. The Santhal opened the chest, and cried out in great delight,—'Why, there is an abundance of cloth here.' With this, he drew out a piece of nice cloth, and gave it to the woman.
About this time, Vidyasagar had to suffer a most heart-rending affliction at the loss of his most sincere friend, the Hon'ble Dvvarka Nath Mitter, a Judge of the Calcutta High Court, who passed away on the 25th February, 1874. The Englishman, a leading Anglo-Indian newspaper, in its issue of the 3rd March of the same year, in noticing the lamented death of the deceased Justice, thus said of him:—" * * *
Amongst his more brilliant qualities was his surprising command of the English language; the readiness, the precision and the force with which he used that language are not common even among those who speak it as their mother tongue and were the theme of constant admiration."
The two friends were fellow-workers and coadjutors in many affairs. They consulted each other on all difficult points. The two were generally of the same opinion. Their opinions diverged only in one case—on the question of the right of inheritance of a fallen woman. The case had been instituted in the High Court before Dwarka Nath's death. Before the decision of the case, Pandits Isvar Chandra Vidyasagar, Mahes Chandra Nyayratna, and Bharat Chandra Siromani were called upon for their opinions. The point at Issue was—if a Hindu widow, who had once inherited a property, subsequently loses her character—whether that fallen woman should be deprived of her inheritance. Vidyasagar was for the inheritance, whilst the other two Pandits were against it. Dwarka Nath was also of opinion that the fallen woman should be deprived of her inheritance, but he could not carry his point. A full bench consisting of ten justices sat to decide the case. Out of the ten, only Mr. Phear agreed with Dwarka Nath. The Hon'ble C. E. Buckland, in his 'Bengal under the Lieutenant-Governors,' says:—"The Hindu widow's unchastity case, in which it was contended that property once vested in a widow can never be divested on the ground of subsequent immorality, had a very strong opponent in Mr. Justice Dwarka Nath, with whom Mr. Justice Phear concurred. But the opinion of the majority prevailed, and the widows were left undisturbed in their course of life." In this connection, Vidyasagar said to one of his friends;—'How could I give a wrong opinion? Supposing I gave one, who should hear me? Of course, I am not a supporter of lewd character; but when one had already inherited a property, how could I say, that one should be divested of it? In that case, there would be no end of litigations on this plea.' It must be said, that in this case Vidyasagar wanted in foresight, and the whole Hindu community was disappointed in him; but it should be borne in mind, that he gave his opinion according to his own conviction. Some insinuate that Vidyasagar was afraid, that if a fallen widow were deprived of her inheritance, obstacles might rise in the way of the furtherance of his widow marriage cause, and he therefore gave his opinion in favour of the inheritance. But such insinuation is quite baseless. Vidyasagar was not a hypocrite—he was not a man to go astray or to designedly mislead others for the sake of his self-interest.
Dwarka Nath often said,—'Vidyasagar is the root of my prosperity. It was he who advised me to appear at the Law Examination. But for his advice, I might have taken a different course.' He had a great fond regard and esteem for Vidyasagar. He is said to have acquired a drinking habit; but he was always very cautious not to offend his friend by giving him occasion to be aware of his intemperance. He often visited Vidyasagar at the latter's residence after Court hours. When he was a pleader, he appeared before him in his professional dress, and even when he became a Judge, he never felt degrading to present himself before his old friend in his gown, Now and then he passed his nights with Vidyasagar. He was a great help to our benevolent hero in many of his noble deeds, particularly in rescuing the poor tenants from the hands of the oppressive zemindars. When Dwark Nath was still a pleader, some Brahmans one day came to Vidyasagar and charged their Zemindar, Babu Jaykrishna Mukharji of Uttarpara, with usurpation of their Brahmotra (rent-free) lands. Vidyasagar aided them in their law-suits against their Zemindar. At his instance, Dwarka Nath conducted these cases without fee or remuneration. On one occasion, Dwarka Nath said to his friend,—'Lest you should think, that I return these cases simply because I am not paid for them, I come to offer my explanation. These people have no title to the lands in dispute. Had there been the slightest evidence in their favour, I would surely have given my life for them.' Vidyasagar now saw that Jay Krishna was quite blameless in the matter. He had entertained very different views of the Zemindar, and his esteem for the latter had also lessened a little; but what he heard from Dwarka Nath served to rekindle his former feelings for the wealthy gentleman. He was afterwards heard to say, that he came to learn subsequently that Jay Krishna never usurped the lands of those who could produce evidence in support of their title. Vidyasagar often praised him for his manly exertions by which he rose to such eminence, and for his very liberal charities. The two had a great intimate familiarity. Vidyasagar always kept himself aloof from politics and political meetings, but he now and then entered the rooms of the British Indian Association, only to have an interview with Jay Krishna Babu.
His health being, at this time, completely broken down, Vidyasagar drew up a Will on the 31st May 1875. His son, Narayan Chandra, was excluded from inheritance of his assets, which were settled on other lawful heirs in accordance with the Sastras.
It may not be out of place to mention here, that after his death, a case was instituted in the High Court for decision whether Narayan Chandra, being the only son of his father, could be legally debarred from such inheritance according to Hindu Law. The case was decided in favour of Narayan Chandra, who has since inherited the assets of his father.
The Will was drawn up in Bengali. Its language is chaste and refined. The document testifies to his generous feelings and high liberalities. For the edification of the reader, we will give its purport in English:—
'2. Babu Kali Charan Ghosh of Chaugachha, Babu Kshirod Nath Sinha of Pathira, and my nephew (sister's son), Babu Beni Madhav Mukhopadhyay of Paspur—these three persons I appoint executors of my this last Will; they shall execute every thing in accordance with the provisions of this Will.
'3. On my death, all my assets shall go into the hands
of these executors.
'4. For the information of the executors, a schedule of
all my present properties is annexed to this Will.
'5. The executors shall liquidate my debts and realise
my dues.
'6. The expenses of the maintenance of my dependents
and some other helpless kinsfolk and relations, and the performance of some rituals and ceremonials are being defrayed from the income of my property; my creditors are not such men as to seek to realise their dues by causing a total stoppage of these expenses. With their permission, the executors shall make such arrangements as will keep the under-mentioned stipends current, and at the same time contribute to the realisation of their dues by slow Instalments.
'7. It is not possible that, on my death, all the recipients of monthly stated allowances should be awarded stipends at their present rate. A list is given below, determining the monthly stipend payable to each from the income of my property.—
’FIRST CLASS.
'My father, Thakurdas Bandyopadhyay 50 fifty rupees; my second brother, Dinabandbu Nyayaratna 40 forty rupees; my third brother, Sambhuchandra Vidyaratna 40 rupees; my youngest brother, Isan Chandra Bandyopadhyay 30 rupees; my first sister, Manomohini Devi 10 ten rupees; my second sister, Digamvari Divi 10 ten rupees; my youngest sister, Mandakini Devi 10 rupees; my wife, Dinamayi Devi 30 rupees; my eldest daughter, Hemlata Devi 15 fifteen rupees; my second daughter, Kumudini Devi 15 fifteen rupees; my third daughter, Binodini Devi 15 fifteen rupees; my youngest daughter, Sarat Kumari Devi 15 fifteen rupees; daughter-in-law, Bhavasundari Devi 15 fifteen rupees; grand-daughter (son's daughter), Mrinalini Devi 15 rupees; elder grand-son (daughter's son), Sures Chandra Samajpati 15 fifteen rupees; younger grand-son (daughter's son), Jatis Chandra Samajpati 15 rupees; youngest brother's wife, Elokesi Devi 10 rupees; mother-in-law, Tarasundari Devi 10 rupees; eldest daughter's mother-in-law, Svarnamayi Devi 10 ten rupees; eldest daughter's sister-in-law (husband's sister), Kshetramani Devi 10 ten rupees,—daughter of my mother's maternal uncle, Umasundari Devi 3 three rupees, wife of Gopal Chandra Chatto, grandson of my mother's maternal uncle 3 three rupees; wife of Trilochan Mukhopadhyay, son of my father's sister 3 three rupees; daughter of my father's sister, Nistarini Devi 3 three rupees; Baibahiki Sarada Devi 5 five rupees; Madan Mohan Tarkalankar's mother 8 eight rupees; Madan Mohan Basu's wife, Nrityakali Dasi 10 ten rupees; Madhu Sudan Ghosh's wife, Thakamani Dasi 10 ten rupees; Kall Krishna Mitra of Barasat 30 thirty rupees; after Kall Krishna's death, his widow, Umes Mohini Dasi 10 ten rupees; Sriram Praamnik's wife, Bhgavati Dasi 2 two rupees.
'SECOND CLASS.
'Son of my mother's sister, Sarvvesvar Bandyopadhyay 10 ten rupees; my sister's daughter Mokshada Devi 5 five rupees; my first sister's Nanad (husband's sister), Taramani Devi 5 five rupees; daughter of my father's sister, Mokshada Devi 2 two rupees; son of the sister of my mother's mother, Syama Charan Ghoshal 5 five rupees; family of Ramesvar Mukhopadhay, son of the sister of my mother's father, 5 five rupees; daughter of my mother's maternal uncle, Barada Devi 2 two rupees; widow of Nabin Krishna Mitra of Barasat, Syamasundarl Dasi 10 ten rupees; Madan Mohan Tarkalankar's daughter, Kundamala Devi 10 rupees; Madan Mohan Tarkalankar's sister, Bamasundari Devi 3 three rupees; widow of Pyarichand Mitra of Burdwan, Kamini Dasi 10 ten rupees.
'8. If the executors see that the payment of monthly allowance to any of the second class stipendiaries is not necessary, that is, if they consider that he or she can manage without the stipend, then they shall be at liberty to withhold his or her stipend.
'9. If the sons and daughters of my second and third daughter that will be existing at the time of my death, should from any cause whatsoever be too inconvenienced to defray (he expenses of their maintenance, education, &c., then each of them shall get a monthly stipend of 15 fifteen rupees up to the age of 22 twenty-two years.
'10. If any of those of my grandsons and grand-daughters (whether they be issues of my son or daughters) that will be living at the time of my death should be physically defective from blindness, lameness, &c., or should have any incurable disease, then he or she shall get a monthly stipend of 10 ten rupees from the income of my property for whole life.
'11. If my second or youngest sister should be widowed before any of her sons is competent to earn a living, then from the proceeds of my property she shall get a monthly stipend of 20 twenty rupees in addition to the stipend stipulated in the seventh clause, until such time as any of her sons should be able to earn.
'12. If Nrityakali Dasi should be widowed before any of her sons is competent to earn a living, then from the income of my property she shall get a monthly stipend of 10 ten rupees in excess of the stipend stipulated in the seventh clause, until such time as any of her sons should be able to earn.
'13. From the proceeds of my property, the executors shall pay a monthly stipend of 30 thirty rupees to Sarada Devi, widow of Nilmadhav Bhattacbaryya, for the maintenance of herself and of her three sons; and when her sons will attain majority, the executors shall pay her 10 ten rupees monthly for her whole life. But if she should remarry or lead an immoral life, they shall pay her neither of the two-aforesaid allowances.
'14. A list is given below of the monthly expenses for different affairs that are to be defrayed from the proceeds of my property;—
'School established by me at my native village, Birsingha, 100 hundred rupees. Dispensary established by me at Birsingha 50 fifty rupees. Helpless and poor people of Birstagha 30 thirty rupees. Widow Marriage 100 one hundred rupees.
'15. If Jagannath Chattopadhyay, Upendra Nath Pallit, and Govinda Chandra Bhar should remain in my service till the last moment of my life, then the executors shall give to each of them a lump sum of 300 three hundred rupees.
’17. If the provisions and arrangements made by me should not suit the person or affair on whose behalf they are made, then the provisions and arrangements which my executors will make, after taking the matter into their serious consideration, shall be binding and valid as if made by myself.
'18. If the income from my property should in future
be less than what it is at the present time, then the executors shall be at liberty to make less payments than what are settled by me.
'19. If any necessity should arise, the executors shall
be at liberty to sell any share of my property.
’20. The books of my own composition and those published by me are being sold from the Sanskrit Press Depository; I earnestly wish that, so long as Babu Braja Nath Mukhopadhay will be living and will remain proprietor of the said Depository, my publications should be sold from that place: but if the system under which the business of the Depository is being managed should run into disorder, and if in consequence thereof, the executors should see that much loss is accrued or inconvenience is felt, then the executors shall be at liberty to arrange for the sale of the publications from some other place.
'21. The executors shall act unanimously, and in cases
of difference of opinion, the majority shall prevail.
'22. If any of the executors should die or refuse to act in accordance with the provisions of this Will, then the other two executors shall appoint a third executor in his place. Such appointed executor shall have all the powers as if appointed by myself.
'23. If the executors appointed by me should be unwilling or unable to take charge of the execution of this Will, then those that are entitled to receive allowances in accordance with the provisions of this Will, shall apply to Law Court and have a competent executor appointed. The executor thus appointed shall execute everything according to the provisions of this Will.
24. Until my debts are cleared off, the charge of everything shall continue in the hands of the executors appointed under the provisions of this Will. When the debts will have been paid off, those lawful heirs that will be existing at the time, shall inherit all my assets and shall enjoy the proceeds after paying the stipends determined by the seventh, ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, fourteenth, and fifteenth clauses. When those heirs will attain majority, the executors shall make over everything to the heirs, and then retire.
25. * * * I have given up all conection and intercourse with my son * * Narayan Chandra Bandyopadhyay. In consequence of this, in determining the stipends, his name has been excluded, and in consequence thereof, although he should be living when the debts will have been cleared off, he should not be reckoned as my heir in accordance with the provisions of the twenty-fourth clause, or he shall not be appointed executor in accordance with the twenty-third clause. Those that would become my heirs unless he should be living when the debts will have been cleared off in accordance with the determination of the twenty-fourth clause, shall inherit my assets although he should be living at the time. Dated the 18th Jyaishtha, 1282 B. E, corresponding with the 31st May, 1875 A. D.
Sd. 'Isvar Chandra Vidyasagar
'At present residing in Calcutta.
'WITNESSES.
| Sd. | 'Raj Krishna Mukhopadhyay. |
| Sd.„ | 'Radhika Prasanna Mukhopadhyay. |
| Sd.„ | 'Giris Chandra Vidyaratna. |
| Sd.„ | 'Syama Charan De. |
| Sd.„ | 'Nil Madhav Sen. |
| Sd.„ | 'Joges Chandra De. |
| Sd.„ | 'Bihari Lal Bhaduri. |
| Sd.„ | 'Kali Charan Ghosh. |
'SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY MENTIONED IN THE FOURTH CLAUSE:-
- '(A). One-third share of the Sanskrit Press.
- '(B). Books of my own composition and those published by me.
- '(A). One-third share of the Sanskrit Press.
'BENGALI :—
- '(1) Barnaparichaya, Parts I and II. (2) Kathamala; (3) Bodhodaya; (4) Charitavali; (5) Akhyanamanjari, Parts I and II.; (6) Bangalar Itihas, Part II.; (7) Jivana-Charita; (8) Vetala-Panchavinsati; (9) Sakuntala; (10) Sitar Vanavas; (11) Bhranti Vilasa; (12) Mahabharata; (13) Sanskrita Bhasha Prastava; (14) Bidhava-Vivaha Vichara; (15) Bahnvivaha Vichara.
'SANSKRIT :—
- '(1) Upakramanika; (2) Vyakarana Kaumudi;(3)Rijupatha, 3 Parts; (4) Meghaduta; (5) Sakuntala; (6) Uttara-Charita.
'ENGLISH :—
- '(1) Poetical Selections. (2) Selections from Goldsmith. (3) Selections from English Literature.
- '(1) Poetical Selections. (2) Selections from Goldsmith. (3) Selections from English Literature.
- (C) "Books whose copy-right has been purchased:—
- (1) Sisu Siksha, Part I., II., III. by Madan Mohan Tarkalankar.
- (2) Kulina-Kula-Sarvvasva by Ram Narayan Tarkaratna.
- (1) Sisu Siksha, Part I., II., III. by Madan Mohan Tarkalankar.
- '(D) Kadamhari; Annotated Valmiki's Ramayan and other Sanskrit works published by me.
- '(E) Library of Sanskrit, Bengali, Hindi, Persian, and other books collected for my own use.
- '(F) Bungalow and Garden at Karmatar.
On the 13th July, 1875, Vidyasagar married his third daughter, Binodini Devi, to Suryya Kumar Adhikari B. A., a graduate of the Calcutta University. This son-in-law was dearer to him than his own children. After the estrangement of his son, Narayan Chandra, he bestowed his whole paternal affection on Suryya Kumar. He was a teacher in the Hare School. In the year 1876, Vidyasagar appointed him Secretary to the Metropolitan Institution, and afterwards made him Principal of the College.
In the latter part of 1875, our hero had to suffer a most painful calamity in the death of his very dear friend, Pyari Charan Sarkar, who was a Professor of English in the Presidency College at Calcutta. The two were most intimately attached to each other. Both were engaged in what they sincerely believed to be the social reforms for this country. It was this Pyari Charan, who had published an appeal in the Education Gazette, of which he was the editor, calling upon the public for contributions towards the liquidation of Vidyasagar's debts, alluded to before. That Vidyasagar should be heartily grieved at the loss of such a sincere friend and fellow-worker is not at all strange. The depth of his grief will be evident from the under-quoted letter, which he addressed at the time to doctor Bhooban Mohun Sircar.
"My dear Bhoobun Mohun,
"I regret exceedingly that in the present state of my health, of which you are aware, I am unable to attend this evening's meeting of the Bengal Temperance Society. No one knows better than yourself the profound grief with which the lamented death of my beloved friend, Babu Pyari Charan Sircar, has filled me. We knew each other from early youth, and we were so closely attached, that in him I have lost a dear and affectionate brother. To the public the loss cannot be easily replaced. His great ability, high character and single-minded zeal in work of humanity rendered him highly useful to society at large, whilst his devotedness to the cause of temperance, which was manifested in the foundation of the Bengal Temperance Society, in the publication of very many valuable tracts in English and Bengali and in other acts, will doubtless be long cherished in grateful remembrance by all lovers and promoters of temperance in this country.
We embrace this opportunity to say a few words in connection with the Society referred to in Vidyasagar's letter quoted above. No sane man can question the incalculable good the British Government has done to this country. May we ever live in peace under the benign rule which was so providentially offered to us, when the country was groaning under the miseries of anarchy. But, at the same time, no man of sense can deny that Europeans have been, in a manner, eating away the vitals of the land by bringing in with them the alcoholic poison of Europe. With the foundation of the British rule in India, most of the natives of the upper classes, in endeavouring to imitate the manners and practices of their rulers, whose peculiarities in every respect fascinated them, imbibed their habits of drinking spirituous liquors and wines. During those early days, we are deeply pained to say, most of the highly educated and influential promising youths of the country succumbed prematurely to the dreadfully fatal effects of the evil practice, who, but for it, might have lived to a good old age and done infinite good to their father-land. To demonstrate the truth of our statement, we could give an exhaustive catalogue of the names of those gentlemen, but out of respect for their departed souls, we forbear.
Babu Pyari Charan Sarkar was profoundly grieved at this state of things, and he was firmly resolved upon adopting some means to uproot this baneful vice, which was slowly undermining the Indian Society. It was mainly through his exertions, that "The Bengal Temperance Society" was formed at Calcutta in the beginning of 1864. Vidyasagar and some other influential and leading personages joined the Society since its very foundation. Raja Radha Kanta Dev Bahadur, in a letter addressed to the Secretary of the Society, congratulated him on its establishment. He "hailed with joy the inauguration of this Society, promised to take the deepest interest in its progress, and to give his cordial concurrence to all measures it may adopt for the eradication of the dreadful vice, and the reclaiming of those who have succumbed to its influence."
At the inauguration meeting of this Society, were present Woodrow, Dall, Vidyasagar, Pyari Charan Sarkar, the Hon'ble Sambhu Nath Pandit, Dr. Gurudas Banarji, and a number of respectable gentlemen of station and influence, European, American and Indian. After several gentlemen had delivered their speeches, Pyari Charan requested his friend, Vidyasagar, to say something, but he moved his head, indicating his unwillingness. Subsequently, Dall, Woodrow, Sambhu Nath, and some others also urged him to speak, but nothing could move the resolute Vidyasagar to stand on his legs. In fact, our hero always judged his own merits rightly. He was fully aware of his incapacity of making speeches in public meetings, and he was not prepared to stand himself a laughing-stock of the company. Besides, he was a true appreciator of merits, and he was ever glad to see the right man in the right place. It was this characteristic of his innate nature that served to make him so much attached to Michael M. Datta in spite of his many frailties, and to select Krishto Das Pal for the editorship of the Hindoo Patriot.
It is needless to say, that Vidysagar was a teetotaler and a great enemy of taking intoxicating drinks and other similar vices. Most of his friends, therefore, who had acquired the evil habit more or less, always stood in awe of him. It was for this reason, that his great friend Dwarka Nath Mitter, who, it is said, was given to drinking habits, conducted himself very carefully in his dealings with our hero. The letter quoted below, written to him by one of his particular and influential friends shows how bitterly he hated these vices and how his acquaintances always tried to prove to him the immaculateness of their moral character. For decency's sake, we will suppress all names."Having heard the conversation you had with my friend * * * yesterday evening it becomes indispensably necessary for me to give you a detailed account of my conduct in the garden party complained of.
"The fact was that I accompanied by Baboos * * *, and * * * reached the place at 9 P. M. on the night previous. Some of my friends pressed me to drink, I protested, pleaded ill heath, but finding them too importunate to be refused did at length take two sips. The quantity imbibed was literally not more than a kutcha, the remainder of the liquid in the glass being somehow managed to be poured down upon the floor. This was the actual extent of my drunkenness on that night. The following morning I was again pressed to drink, but I steadfastly refused. Now as to the other and more serious part of the charge that has been brought against me by * * *, circumstanced as I was I had no other alternative but to remain where I was. To return home at that hour of the night would have been exceedingly inconvenient, and even if it were otherwise I did not like to play the Puritan unnecessarily. Several times I attempted to run away into an adjoining room but was on each occasion compelled to come back by sheer physical force. That I did not quit the company that very instant, is the only impropriety I have been guilty of, but beyond that I can most solemnly aver that I did not by my act, word or even gesture in any manner encourage or even countenance the proceedings. * * * I whiled away my time as best I could tell. About half past twelve or one O'clock, when dinner was ready, I finished my meal as hastily as possible, ran to the Bytuckhana before every other member of the party and locked myself up alone in a separate room for the rest of the night."
We have already said, that Vidyasagar did not visit Benares for some length of time after his mother's death. By the latter end of 1875, he received a letter from his father, who was living in the holy shrine, to the following effect:—
'My best blessings on you!—
'I am now 83 years old; in this my decrepit state, my memory generally fails me. You are the eldest of my descendants; you have been providing for my maintenance and defraying other expenses. I now wish to see your face. I would therefore ask you to come to me without much loss of time, if you are in sound health.
'Your well-wisher
Sd. Thakurdas Deva-Sarma.'Vidyasagar at once proceeded to Benares, where he stayed with his father for a few days, and after providing for every comfort and ease of his old parent, returned to Calcutta. On the 26th March, 1876, information reached him that his father was seriously ill. He hastened to Benares, and the other inmates of his family followed him one by one. On the 11th April following, old Thakurdas departed from this world of troubles, leaving his children and grand-children and a numerous family to mourn over his death. Vidyasagar had always the highest esteem and reverence for his parents; he idolised them, who were his sole gods of worship. He had already lost one of the two—his mother, and had the other left to him for his solace. When he lost that other too, he saw nothing but blank vacancy—nothing but pitch dark, all about him. His grief knew no bounds. The usual calm fortitude of the strong-minded, highly talented Vidyasagar was swept away by the vigorous current of his excessive grief. He wept and lamented bitterly like an insensate child. In excess of his grief, he had forgotten that the corpse of his dear parent was lying before him and that the funeral rites had yet to be performed. When he was reminded of his duties of the time, he assumed a somewhat calm external appearance, and then carried the dead body to the Manikarnika Ghat on the shores of the Ganges. Many outsiders offered their help, but Vidyasagar prevented them with kind and gentle words. After finishing the cremation and Tarpana ceremonies, he returned to his father's quarters, and seeing his father's room empty, again fell to crying and lamenting in most pitiful terms. No one knew how to console him.
Thakurdas was a devoutly religious man. He was honest, truthful, and resolutely firm in purpose. He performed all his household duties from a religious point of view. It was his highest sense of duty that led him to provide for the education of his sons in spite of his great pecuniary difficulties. James Mill has immortalised his name in the annals of European history by providing for the proper education of John Stuart Mill. Poor Thakurdas has also perpetuated his name in the pages of Indian history by giving his son the means of acquiring a sound scholastic knowledge. John Stuart Mill felt himself an orphan at the loss of his dear father. Vidyasagar also had a sorrowful feeling of helpless vacancy at the loss of his beloved father. So there is a great deal of similarity between the two pairs. Thakurdas provided not only for the education of his sons, but also aided the performance of different religious ceremonies by the female members of his household with gifts of money from his slender income. It was all these attributes and conduct of his parents that had chiefly served to help Vidyasagar in the formation of his noble character. Vidyasagar had once spoken to Babu Isvar Chandra Ghoshal, Deputy Magistrate of Jehanabad, of the persecutions and ill-treatments accorded to Thakurdas and his party by the opponents of widow marriage. On one occasion, the said Deputy Magistrate paid a visit to Birsingha, where he was hospitably entertained by Thakurdas. At last, he asked his host for the names of the opponents of widow marriage who persecuted him. Thakurdas smiled, and said,—'Vidyasagar lives in Calcutta; he might have spoken to you from hearsay. Do not do anything from such hearsay. I have nothing to complain against these people; towards me they always behave in a friendly manner.' With this, he pacified the Deputy Magistrate on the one hand, and on the other, he sent for the villagers privately, and warned them that the Deputy Magistrate had heard of the outrages of the opponents of widow marriage and that he had asked for their names, but that he (Thakurdas) had given no names. He therefore advised them to pay him friendly visits before the Deputy Magistrate, which would serve to soften the embittered feelings of the judicial officer. Are not such instances of noble and forgiving patience rare in this world?
On the second day of his father's death (i. e. on the 12th April, 1876), Vidyasagar had a very severe Diarrhoea with the symptoms of Cholera. His relations and friends at Benares were afraid of his life. His immediate removal to Calcutta was decided upon by them. He at first refused to be removed, because his beloved father had desired him to perform the Sraddha ceremonies at the sacred place of the last days of his life. But the use of medicines being forbidden during the prescribed period of a Hindu's mourning for his parent, the disease took a serious turn, which compelled him to return to Calcutta. Here he recovered in a few days, and at the end of the prescribed period, performed the usual rites of his father's Sraddha. He then led a secluded life for some time. When he regained sufficient strength to undertake a journey, he again went to Benares and there fulfilled the last wishes of his dear parent—performed his Sraddha with great pomp, feasted many Brahmans and the hungry, and distributed alms to the poor and the needy.