062 PERJURY RAMPANT AMONGST HINDUS
A certain young woman who lived close to my house became the victim of her husband ' s jealous suspicions. To prove her innocence, he forced her to plunge her arm up to the elbow into a bath of boiling oil. The unhappy woman, sure of her inviolable virtue, did not hesitate to obey, and
the result was that she was most frightfully scalded. The wound became inflamed and blistered, finally mortified, and
caused the unhappy woman ' s death.
No doubt the disregardof the sanctityof an oathprevailing among the Hindus has, to a certain extent, necessitated the adoption of this system of trial by ordeal.
Certain it is that there is no nation in the worldwho think
so lightly of an oath or of perjury. The Hindu will fearlessly call upon all his gods— celestial, terrestrial, and infernal— to
witness his good faith in the least of his undertakings; but should fresh circumstances demand it, he would not have the smallest scruple in breaking the word that he had so solemnly pledged. Woe to the imprudent person who confides to Hindus any private matter that affects his fortune, his honour, or his life! If it served their purpose, they would
divulge it without any hesitation.
The unscrupulous manner in which Hindus will perjure
themselves is so notorious that they are never called upon to make a statement on oath in their own courts of justice,
abuses of this system to have escaped the eyes of the judges who were bound to uphold it, some people have suggested that, while the long ceremonious prayers and exorcisms which preceded the ordeals were
going on, the judges were able to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused by their demeanour, and that in the former case they left them
to the ordeal, while in the latter they found means, either by the application of medicines or drugs or by some other trickery, to ensure their
passing through the ordeal safe and sound. It appears moreover that Hindu judges used to protect by other means the accused who were to undergo any dangerous ordeal. Thus, for instance, in some provinces, if a stolen object was of small value, such as a gold ornament, the judges would order a vessel full of water to be brought, and each suspected person received a smaller vessel of soft clay, which he had to place in the larger vessel. These soft earthen vessels were easily dissolved in the water, and the lost property was generally found at the bottom.
Thus the culprit escaped undiscovered, and there was no need for the ordeal to take place. Dubois.
The detection of crime by ordeal is not entirely dead even now. But
it is not, of course, recognized in the regular courts, and in fact is illegal.
— Ed.