of the Evidence Act. It is, he says, 'a
wonderful piece of work, boiling down so much into so small a compass.'
It is 'an achievement to be proud of,' although parts of it, he adds,
are open to criticism, and especially to the criticism that it is 'over
the heads of those who have to deal with it.' It presupposes outside
knowledge which they often do not possess. These criticisms do not
altogether coincide, and I shall not endeavour to reconcile or
discriminate. I am content to say that I have heard on all hands, from
persons qualified to express an opinion here, that Fitzjames's work made
a marked impression upon Indian legislation, and, with whatever
qualifications, is admitted to have been of very great service to the
administrators of the country.

I shall venture, however, to add a word or two upon the qualities,
mental and moral, thus displayed. Sir C. P. Ilbert says that Fitzjames
was a 'Cyclopean builder. He hurled together huge blocks of rough-hewn
law. It is undeniable that he left behind him some hasty work,' which
his successors had to remove and replace. In half the ordinary term of
office he did work enough for five law members, and 'left the
Legislative Council breathless and staggering,' conscious of having
accomplished 'unprecedented labours,' but with some misgivings as to the
quality of parts of the work. Fitzjames, that is, was a man of enormous
energy, who fulfilled only half of the famous maxim; he laboured
'without rest,' but not 'without haste.' As for the energy displayed,
there can, I imagine, be only one opinion.[115] And if unflagging zeal
in doing the duty which lies nearest, and an entire devotion of a man's
whole powers of mind to what he sincerely believes to be a great and
worthy task, be not virtues deserving of all respect, I do not know what
qualities are entitled to that name. A vigorous constitution of mind and
body applied to the discharge of appropriate duties describes a most
felicitous combination of circumstances, and indicates a character which
I, at least, cannot regard without cordial admiration. It is true that
he loved his work; but that is just what constitutes his merit. I might
express my feeling more strongly if I were less closely connected with
its object.

The direction, though not the extent, of the shortcomings of such an
intellectual force may be easily imagined. If there was one thing which
Fitzjames hated it was needless subtlety, and the technicalities which