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
Page:Isvar Chandra Vidyasagar, a story of his life and work.djvu/642
This page has been validated.
DIFFERENCE WITH SIR G. CAMPBELL.
595