in the Courts of the Madras Presidency. 31 



I am inclined to think that even at first a considerable 

 number would be willing to avail themselves of the option. 

 All those classes who have no law, or no ascertained law, 

 such as Jews, Armenians, and Parsees would probably at 

 once accept the status of an Englishman, and feel a pride in 

 doing so. So would those Native Christians, whose wealth 

 and social position made the law by which they were govern- 

 ed a matter of any interest to them. In time, though per- 

 haps not at first, their example would be followed by 

 Natives who were founding their own fortunes by trade, 

 professions, or official employment. In dealings with Hill- 

 tribes and others, who appear to have no system of their own, 

 the law of England might be tacitly introduced. Indeed we 

 might go further and lay it down as a rule, that the English 

 law should apply to all persons, and in all cases, where no 

 recognised Native law appropriate to such persons applied. 



Two great advantages, form a merely legal point of view, 

 would arise from such an enactment. First, it would sup- 

 ply the want which has been so much felt, of a lex loci, 

 capable of ready application in all cases not governed by 

 Native usages. In the next place, the necessity of applying 

 English law in India would probably compel many improve- 

 ments in it, of which it is readily susceptible, and which 

 alone are wanting to make it nearly perfect. 



I am aware that the mere suggestion of introducing Eng- 

 lish law, at once draws forth an outcry from persons of every 

 shade of intellect, from that of Mr. Bentham to that of Mr. 

 Dickens. But those who know anything of the subject will 

 at once see the emptiness of such an outcry, when directed 

 against English law in India. Most of the sound objections 

 to English law arose from its procedure, not from its princi- 

 ples. But in India the principles only, and not the pro- 

 cedure would apply. For instance, the system of common- 

 law pleading was defective in giving neither party suf- 



