The Sun.
London, England, 1859-01-29 00:00:00

IDOLATROUS OATHS IN ,HINDOO
COURTS OP JUSTICE.

The Rev. Dr. Duff, writing to the Witness on the
subject of oaths, says :—" Here is another notable
sign of reaction under the new reginze. In former
times sundry anti-Christian and idolatrous oaths
were administered in all our courts to the natives.
The Mahommedan was sworn on his Koran, the
Brahmin on a text of the Vedas, and other Hindoos
by the water of the Ganges, or the name of some
tutelary deity. To the Hindcos themselves, these
oaths, particularly tl at of swearing by the water
of the Ganges, were very offensive. Indeed, rather
than take them, they often submitted to imprison-
ment for contempt of court. Need I say how utterly
abhorrent the administration of them became to
the real Christian judge. At last the conscience of
one man forbade his being a party to the idola-
trous usage; he refused any longer to administer
these oaths. In his honesty and consciousness he
paid the penalty, by being degraded, if not vir-
tuallysuspended, for two years. This precipitated
the discussion of the question as to their total abo-
lition. And soon it was found that if they were
aNslailst
not speedily abolished, other civilians, high in office,
would resign the service. At length, in 1840, a de-
cree
oa passed,ur
x,
instead.ce excellent
andl eantln
form
friendof
eo fole ai their abolition
ui oisubstituted vbring-
in
g about this happy re
Hawkins had an influential share. What, then, will
he say now—what will the Christian people_ of
Great Britain say, when they are told that, about a
week ago, a bill was introduced into our Legisla-
tive Council, and read a first time, for the express
purpose of restoring these idolatrous oaths ?
It is not, however, to be read again a second
time till the lapse of four months—the ieclared
object being to allow time for obtaining an expres-
sion of opinion alike native and European. We
shall not fail to do what we can here. But it is at
home that the mainspring of influence is to be found.
May we not, then, expect that, on receipt of the
deplorable intelligence, all the Evangelical Churches
of the British Isles shall rise in one mass, and give
forth such an expression of sentiment:oas may
serve to blast the odious measure in its bud, and
cover its authors with confusion and shame ? May
not the Indian Minister be called on to interfere in
t'he matter without delay ? Or, if he is not armed
with power to control our Legislative Council, may
not the Imperial Parliament be called on to inter-
pose its resistless authority to deliver us from the
threatened iniquity ?
" The only pretext alleged for bringing forward
so disgraceful a bill is the exceeding prevalence of
perjury. The prevalence of this high offence against
God and man is, alas! a matter of immense noto-
riety. Perjury is as rife as rice in India ; but the
restoration of idolatrous oaths is surely not the cure
for it. When these oaths were formerly adminis-
tered, fraud and chicanery, bribery and corruption,
lying and perjury, formed in all our Indian courts
the almost absolute rule ; truth, the rare and soli-
tary exception. Affirmation, with or without
oath—it is all one ; with or without oath, it is
an almost universal lie ; and the idolatrous oath
only adds one sin to another. No, no ; apart
from the only effectual remedy which the re-
novating-influence of Christianity supplies, the true
and proper legal remedy is the enactment of a law
for the summary punishment of perjury. At present
the state of the law on the subject of perjury is
such that, practically, the most notorious perjurer
can escape with absolute impunity. This he knows
full well; and hence he scruples not openly and un-
blushingly to pei jure himself, with a smile of im-
pertinence, or a scowl of defiance, in the very face
of the judge ! Let the British people, then, insist
on the non-restoration of the abominable idolatrous
oaths ; let them insist on the abolition of them in
the Queen's Supreme Courts ; let them insist on
the passing of an effective law against perjury, and
one important step will be gained towards the
clearing of the horrid Augean stable of our judicial
system. When asked why such a law should not
be passed at once, the usual answer is, that many at
least of the present judges, could not be trusted
with the administration of it. Let us, then, have
proper law, and proper judges to administer it.
Here is a subject worthy of the deliberation of
Lord Stanley and his new Council."

A DIABOLICAL EXHIBITION.

(Front the New Orleans Delta.)

In the year 1832, said to us yesterday a distin-
guished legal gentleman of New Orleans, I visited
Paris in the course of a professional tour, that my
Americanism might be polished down by a little
attrition among the gentle particles of Parisian
society. I found the world of Paris in a very con-
siderable state of excitement, in consequence of an
extraordinary performance which was nightly
exhibited by an eastern juggler, and which was
nothing more or less than the apparent decapitation
of a man in the presence of an audience, under the
very noses of a committee of medical gentlemen,
who stood only so far distant while the operation
was being performed as to escape the swing of the
long two-edged sword with which the juggler smote
off the head. I went to see the exhibition, which
took place in the theatre, in company with several
American gentlemen. The theatre was crowded
with between two and three thousand spectators,
and the curtain was up, displaying a common table,
six feet long, upon the stage, at the very edge of
which I obtained a seat, having gone very early.
At the given time, the juggler, a singular-look-
ing man, came upon the stage, with his shirt sleeves
rolled up to his shoulders, and bearing a long
heavy, two-edged sword. He upset the table upon
the boards, and showed that there was no con-
cealed drawer or other recess, and placed him-
self in the blaze of the footlights, near the
edge of the stage. In a few words he stated what
he was going to do, and requested some of the
audience to come forward upon the stage, that they
might see there was no deception. A number of
medical gentlemen, who had been chosen as a com-
mittee to investigate the matter, if possible, took
their position upon the stage, and soon after the
victim, who had been sitting in the parquette,
mounted the stage removed his coat and cravat,
turned back his shirt-collar, and laying down upon
his back on the table, elevated his chin to more
fairly expose his neck to the headsman's weapon.
The juggler then raised his keen and fearful-looking
sword, and, giving it a wide sweep, brought it down
—I say brought it down upon the neck, for no one
could see that he did not, even those within three
`eet of him—upon the neck of the subject with great

force.
Blood spurted high into the air, some of it falling
on our party, and deluged the stage, while the
most fearful sound, a something between a groan
and a shriek of horror from the whole assemblage,
shook the building, and numerous women and
some males fainted in their seats, and were borne
out by the ushers of the house. The juggler raised
his sword again, repeated the blow, and the dis-
severed head fell upon the floor ! Taking it by the
hair he held. it up to the audience for about five
minutes, until the blood had ceased to flow from
the severed arteries, the lower jaw had fallen,
and the face had assumed the appearance of a
corpse, then throwing it heavily upon the stage
he requested the committee to examine it, which
they did, passing it from hand to hand. They then
examined the dy on the table, from the head-
less neck of which the blood had not yet ceased to
drop upon the floor of the stage ; they lifted the
limbs and, let them fall with the limp Inertia of
lifeless matter, and, of course, pronounced the man
dead to all intents and purposes.
After they had concluded the investigation, the
juggler informed the audience that he was going to
put the man's head on again, and restore him to life.
Taking up the head, he laid it on the table, fitted
the two parts off the neck to each other, and begs
to about
to mutter and make signs over the corpse.
five minutes the lately decapitated man turned
ghastly and horrible face, white as
snow, towards
exceeding,
the audience, and excitement followe ,
the first blow
if anything, that which occurred when
the eyelids
of the sword fell. In a few momentswearinea.
Inolarhdsia
lifelike
a glassy, corpse-like stare; by degreesolour returned to
gradually opened, and displayed the ey-esa,
speculation came into them, somec
coat, and walked
rose from the table, resumed
the face, and, after stretching his
mingled with the crowd.
down from the stage andlimbs, the man
-
bore a red mark and scar
rently decapitated man.
of
c ane -
wly heal d wound.
All woun .
around it, like the cicatric
with 1 - owl eyes, which were as
The exhibition was over. The neck of the appa-
rently
All this I saw n y
effectually deceived as those of tens of thousands of
other persons. I could in no .way, consistently with
reason, account for any feature of this horrible
bti:irilig
of trickery.
3, .any
. I never heard of the trick
other man, and possibly it
originated and died with him. However, it is
scarcely more unaccountable than " many displayed
feats of the adroit fraternity of Eastern jugglers.
thrilling
featform

DISGRACEFUL ATTACK ON CARDINAL WISEMAN.
—His Eminence Cardinal Wiseman, while proceeding to
the residence of Edward Chaloner, Esq., at Old Swan, near
Liverpool, on Thursday night, in the carriage of that gen-
tleman, was followed by a crowd of people, who hooted and
yelled most furiously, and some of them threw stones at the
carriage, which was much damaged—fortunately, however,
no person was hurt. The police succeeded in apprehending
the ringleader, a lad about 19 or 20, who was brought up at
the police-court yesterday (Friday). The prisoner, who
gave his name as John Lever, residing at 13, Ray-street,
said that he did not throw any stones. This statement was
contradicted by the officer who took him into custody, and
Mr. Mansfield severely reprimanded the prisoner on the in-
famous outrage which he had been guilty of, and finedhaiin?
u
£2 and costs, or two months' imprisonment with 4