non. The fowls of the air, he
reflected, neither ploughed nor sowed, but they managed to pick up
valuables. Why should he not show a similar trust in Providence? He
resolved to set up as a freebooter, made proselytes, and finally became
the ancestor of a clan. His tribe were moral and decent people at home;
they had their religious rites, initiated their children solemnly, and
divided their earnings on system. After setting aside 3-3/4 per cent.
for the gods, 28 per cent. was divided between the chief and the thief,
while the remainder went to the tribe at large. Their morality, however,
was conterminous with the limits of the clan. They considered themselves
to be in Hobbes's 'state of nature,' with regard to other men. They
wandered far and wide through India, and made enough to live in greater
comfort than could be got out of legitimate occupations. They were only
one among other more important and dangerous tribes of criminals, who
adopted the same judicious principle of carrying on their operations at
a distance from their homes. The Punjab government had dealt with these
tribes by registering them, compelling them to live within certain
limits, and settling them upon waste lands. It had been discovered,
however, that these regulations were beyond the powers of the executive.
The system had to be abandoned and the tribes promptly returned to their
old practices. When members of another well-known criminal tribe were
arrested on the eve of one of their operations, they were set at liberty
by a judicial decision. The proof, it appears, ought to have conformed
to the precedent set by certain trials of Fenians in England. A measure
was therefore introduced giving power to restore the system which had
been previously successful; and sanctioning similar measures in regard
to a more atrocious set of criminals, certain eunuchs who made a system
of kidnapping children for the worst purposes. It was passed October 12,
1871.
The case illustrates the most obvious difficulties of our position in
India. I suppose that the point of view of Thugs and of these
respectable robbers seems perfectly obvious and natural to them; but the
average Englishman cannot adopt it without a considerable mental effort.
In such cases, however, we might at least reckon upon the support of
those who suffered from predatory tribes. But there was another
department of legislation in which we had to come into conflict with the
legal and religious ideas
|