the Parsees at the same Presidency are subject in criminal, as well as in civil cases, to the English law. The practice also of Courts, as regarding the forms of action, and modes of proceeding, together with what appertains to their jurisdiction, is foreign to this work ;—the end of which is, to ascertain and elucidate such doctrines of the law in question, as apply to the subjects of suits instituted in the English Courts with reference to it; not to point out how they are to be framed and conducted. And the same may be said of the canons of evidence, and rules for determining the competency of witnesses; ([1]) upon both which, as upon the matters last before alluded to, the Hindu law is copious and minute; and, it may be added, in general, sensible. But, its provisions in these respects are, in the Courts of the King, superseded by his instructions, as conveyed in the Royal Charters; and, in those of the Company, by the Regulations under which they act. At the same time, it is to be observed, that important questions sometimes arise out of the adaptation of English process to suits between Natives; and rigour, bordering upon injustice, would be but too often the consequence of adhering strictly to forms of our own, not consonant to their feelings and usages; to obviate and provide against which is, from time to time, the province of our Courts, exercising therein a sound and careful discretion; and this, in instances of frequent recurrence, by rules expressly framed
- ↑ Menu ch. VIII, v. 61, et seq. Syed Ally v. Syed Kullee Mulla Khan; Notes of Cases at Madras, vol. ii. p. 180.
