Hindu Manners, Customs and Ceremonies - DUBOIS, Abbé Hindu Manners, Customs and Ceremonies, Dubois | Seite 698

PECUNIARY PENALTIES
658
her seducer would also be fined to the same amount. If
the guilty pair were unable to find the money, the fine would
fall on their nearest relatives, who would be obliged to pay
The same form of punishment was meted out
it for them.
in any cases of a glaring nature where caste customs had
been broken. These fines were collected by the revenue
officer of the district in which the offences had been com-
mitted.
It was further the custom for the offenders to give
a feast to the headmen of their caste after their fines had
been paid, in consideration of which their fault was con-
sidered to be wiped out.
There used to be, and still are in some districts, con-
tractors who farmed the revenue derivable from such fines.
These men agree to pay a fixed sum to the public treasury,
and in exchange they are allowed to keep all the fines they
collect for minor offences against caste customs, or other
peccadilloes.
One can well imagine that all their energies
are directed to preventing any person-; from going un-
punished.
As to more serious crimes, such as theft, homicide, &c,
either the ruling prince, his minister, or the governor of a
province usually passed sentence on them. The governors,
however, had not the right to condemn a man to capital
punishment without the ruler's sanction. Thieves, as a
rule, got off by giving up what they had stolen, and a good
deal more besides, if they had it.
The unfortunate man
whose goods were stolen only received a very small portion
of what he had lost, by far the larger portion remaining in
the hands of the judge who had kindly consented to look
into the matter.
Highway robbery was punished by muti-
lation
the right hand, nose, and ears of the robber being
cut off.
Murder itself was rarely punished by death. If the person
accused was rich and knew what to give to the governor who
tried the case, means could always be found to divert well-
merited punishment from the culprit. If the offender was
a poor man, they took away the little that he possessed and
banished him and his family from the province.
Thus the most abominable outrages on society were en-
couraged or only lightly punished in India, whilst imaginary
crimes invariably entailed punishment on any who might be
—