to him for forfeiting the lands of his principal
by pronouncing that shameful word, he is
deemed as a recreant amittere liberam legem,
that is to become infamous being
supposed by the event to be foresworn; and
therefore, never to be put upon a jury or
admitted as a witness in any cause!"

The proceedings in criminal cases were
very similar to the above, only the oaths of
the two combatants were much more striking
and solemn. Blackstone gives the following
as the form; the accused party holding the
bible in his right hand, and his antagonist's
hand in the other, said:—

"Hear this, oh, man! whom I hold by the hand,
who callest thyself John by the name of baptism, that
I, who call myself Thomas by the name of baptism,
did not feloniously murder thy father, William by
name, nor am any way guilty of the said felony, so
help me God and the Saints, and this I will defend
against thee by my body as this court shall award."

The accuser answered in the same form,
making oath to his antagonist that he was
perjured, which he will defend with his body,
&c., as before. The same weapons were
employed, and the same oaths, against amulets
and sorcery as in the civil combat. If the
accused party yielded, he was ordered to be
hanged immediately; but, if he could vanquish
his opponent, or maintain his ground from
sunrise to starlight, he was acquitted. The
same penalties of infamy and loss of citizenship
awaited the accuser if he yielded, as fell
to the lot of the recreant champion; in
addition to which, the victor could recover
damages for the false accusation.

Such were the laws which regulated the
old institution of the wager of battle. But
all these things have passed away, and
it is left now for poor unlettered roughs
assembled at street corners, or disputing in
their tap-rooms, and for duellists, to fight by
way of proving the best man. Yet not
entirely so, either. When a despotic sovereign
bent on self-aggrandisement lays claim to
territories not his own: when other nations
interfere, and tell him he has no right to back
his claims, and when at last the question is
put to the dread arbitrement of war. What
is this after all, but a gigantic fight to prove
the better man?

LUTFULLAH KHAN.

Among the Mahommedans of India, the
definition of the word gentleman, as applied
to a native, is of a very vague character. It
may mean merely what is called a Bhula
Admee, or respectable person; and that
respectable person may exercise any calling not
absolutely unclean or servile. Also, the
gentleman may be a courtly noble of Delhi or
Hyderabad, proud of his ancestry and refined
manners, or a Moslem Zemindar, or a great
Rajpoot landholder, compared with the
antiquity of whose race the Bourbons and
Hapsburghs are mere mushrooms. Lastly,
the title of gentleman is given to those
descendants of the kinsmen or companions of
the prophet who are called Synds in Hindostan,
and Emirs in Turkey, and whose right
to wear turbans of the sacred colour is an
inheritance, fruitful in the respect and
contributions of less holy believers.

To this last class belongs a remarkable
Mahommedan named Lutfullah—well
educated, intelligent, and singularly devoid of
prejudices, as compared with the majority of
his brethren in the faith; and who, having
seen much of his countrymen and of ours;
having had experience of war, of diplomacy,
and of adventure, has favoured the Faithful
with his autobiography. This has been
admirably edited by Mr. Eastwick, for the
benefit of us Feringhee Unbelievers. The
result is a book, which for every kind of
interest to charm the reader who delights
in eastern advent'ure and eastern manners,
is not equalled in modern literature.
Lutfullah's manners are polished, his learning
unusual for an Asiatic, and his pedigree
eclipses any which the Heralds' College could
produce; for it commences with Adam, and
ends, at the ninetieth descent, in Lutfullah
himself. This distinction, however, is
not very uncommon in Asia; where a Hindoo
Rajah, a Tartar, or an Arab horse-dealer is
always prepared to furnish authentic family
trees, equine or human, extending to the first
man or the first horse. Lutfullah's family
was not only ancient, but had great pretensions
to sanctity.

An ancestor had, in the fifteenth century
of our era, not only been canonised as a
saint, but was high in favour with a pious
sultan. Accordingly, a superb shrine was
erected over his ashes, and his descendants
were appointed its guardians, and provided
for by a liberal endowment. For three
centuries the saint's posterity were rich
and prosperous; but, when the Mahratta
conquest occurred, Anno Domini seventeen
hundred and six, the pagan intruders conficated
the property of the shrine. When
Lutfullah, therefore, came into the world, at
the beginning of the present century, he found
himself heir apparent to two acres of land
which had been left in possession of his
fore-fathers, and of a share of such offerings as
might be made at the tomb.

This heritage, miserable as it was, attracted
to Lutfullah the hatred of his cousins; and
their greedy envy, as we shall see, nearly
proved fatal to him at the outset of life. His
native place was a decayed city of Malwa, in
Western Hindostan, a part of the country
where Synds are less plentiful, and where
they are more considered, than in the Delhi
district. But the offerings of the faithful
were still scarcely enough to keep the saintly
family from starvation.

Lutfullah's father died, leaving him, at
the age of four, to the care of his mother
and uncle. Mother and uncle had enough