Again all these different matters are so arranged and printed as to be easily distinguishable from one another, and not to put the reader into confusion.* He may refer to them, or to any of them, in case of his considering any of the principles not sufficient by itself, or his requiring authorities or further authorities for the same. Although the Sirájiyyah is considered to be very brief and abstruse,† yet the passages from this authority, which are used in the present work, can no longer be complained of being so; since I have regularly translated Sharif's commentary on almost every one of the passages of the Sirájiyyah herein contained, and have inserted the same below its text. Thus it will be seen that the desideratum felt by Mr. Baillie and others is now supplied by me in the present work.

*The principles or texts are, for the above purpose, printed in larger type, and kept clear of the other matters. Then the passages, explanatory and illustrative, are separately printed in a comparatively smaller type. Under these are placed annotations and foot notes in different types and under different lines.

"The Sirájiyyah," says Mr. Baillie, "is very brief and abstruse; and without the aid of a commentary, or a living teacher to unfold and illustrate its meaning, can with difficulty be understood even by Arabic scholars. With the assistance of the Sharifiyyah, it is brought within the most ordinary capacity; and if the abstract translation of that commentary, for which we are also indebted to Sir William Jones, had been more copious, nothing further would have been requisite to give the English reader a complete view of this excellent system of Inheritance."-B. M. L., Pref., page 1.

Strictly speaking, however, the commentary written by Sir William Jones is not even a nabstract translation of the Sharífiyyah, or Sharíf's commentary, but it only gives, though not invariably, the purport of the Sharífiyyah, with illustrations generally from the learned writer's own pen.

In the Introductory Discourse I have given an account of many of the Arabic books of law with a short history of their respective authors from Kashf-uz-Zunún, an Asámí ul-Kutabi wal Fanún, Kashsháfu Istilahát ulFunún, Tabzíb ul-Asmá, An-Nabaví, Wafíát ul-Ayán, Ghuniyat ut-Tàlibín, Makhzan-i Afghání and several other works. I have, however, to thank Mr. Morley for his saving me the trouble of translating several of the passages of the first mentioned work, which I found in his Digest (vol. i) rendered into English from the Latin version of Professor Gustavus Fluegel, to which also I had to refer occasionally.*

Mindful of the justness of the opinion expressed by the Commissioners appointed under the first Royal Commission issued for considering "the Reform of the Judicial Establishments, Judicial Procedure, and Laws of India,"† and conscious of such being the fact, I have not inserted in the present work any matter that is not authentic. The principles, explanations, illustrations, and annota

* Vide Annotations at page 17 and the foot note at page 66 of the Introductory Discourse.

†The first Royal Commission was issued for considering "the Reform of the Judicial Establishments, Judicial Procedure, and Laws of India ;" and it did not seem improbable that the subject of the Muhammadan law might, at some period of their labours, come under the view of the Commissioners. But, in their second Report, they gave it as their opinion that—“ no portion either of the Muhammadan law or of the Hindú law ought to be enacted as such, in any form, by a British Legislature;" assigning as one of their reasons, that -"a Code of Muhammadan law, or a Digest of any part of that law, would not be entitled to be regarded by Muhammadans as the very law itself, but merely as an exposition of law which might possibly be incorrect."-B. Dig., Introd., page xxiii.

tions are, almost all of them, versions of passages from Arabic books*-books that are of very high authority, as already noticed.

In quoting the important passages from the Fatáwá-i Alamgírí, I could not help taking and adopting Mr. Niell Baillie's translation of the same, partly because it is very difficult to make a more accurate translation of the work, and partly because when his version is used as an authority, it is not advisable to introduce a new one, which, even if done accurately, could not, in my opinion, differ from the above, except perhaps in style, and in the use of some synonymous or corresponding terms. I have, therefore, to offer my grateful thanks to the learned gentleman, not only for the aid I have received from his excellent work, but also for his having rendered to the public very valuable assistance by translating almost all the important parts of the Fatáwá-i Alamgírí, which is one of the three greatest authorities in India, and without which scarcely any fatwá (law opinion) can be given on any difficult point of law, excepting on Inheritance.

་

The few principles which have been laid down by the Privy Council and the highest Courts in India upon the

* Of these, as the Hidayah and Sirájiyyah have been already translated, and as those translations are passed as authorities, I had to adopt the same in the present work, though not without collating them with their originals, and rectifying the parts which appeared to me erroneous. And here I take the opportunity to observe that the translation of the Fatwás in the Hidayah, which almost always form the first part of particular paragraphs, generally give the meaning of the original. It is the argumentative parts which often do not agree with the original, and in which are to be found the interpolations, alterations and deviations so much complained of.

opinion of the appointed law officers, have also been included in these Lectures, as well as some of the important precedents.

In short, I have endeavoured to collect and incorporate in the present work all that appeared to me important, taking great care not to leave out anything that is useful; so much so, that some of the Lectures, especially the Lecture on Divorce, would, at first sight, appear rather redundant; but if the reader will read the law of Divorce, at least in Hamilton's Hidayah and Baillie's Digest, he will find that, in the former it extends over 218 pages, and in the latter it is covered by 156 pages; that there are scarcely any general rules on the subject, but peculiar phrases, sentences, and terms expressive or implicative of the husband's intention, which, used once or repeatedly at a particular time or times, effect one or two divorces revocable or irrevocable, or three divorces. These sentences, phrases, and terms, though very numerous, are, almost all of them, inserted in the Fatáwá-i Alamgírí, and for the greater part in the Hidayah. It is impossible, therefore, to frame general rules showing as to how one or two divorces revocable or irrevocable, and how three divorces, take place, and how many divorces are effected at a time. I have nevertheless endeavoured my best to frame rules with respect to the above, and have succeeded in framing a few rules,* and have, in consequence, been obliged to insert separately several of the sentences, phrases and terms which did

*

Vide, for instance, Rules or Principles, 373, 423 & 424.

not fall under those rules, and yet they seemed important for the determination of cases of similar descriptions. To most of the Lectures are prefixed Preliminary Remarks, which give not only an insight of the law about to be treated of, but often also an abstract of the law itself.

Here I have nothing more to add-having already expressed in the Introductory Discourse and Preliminary Remarks all that I had to say with respect to other matters which formed the subject of a Prefatory or an Introductory Discourse. I, therefore, conclude by observing that as no time and labour have been spared in making the present work replete with useful matters and complete in its kind, and in rendering it adapted for the study of students, as well as for reference in the conduct of cases and administration of justice, I think I may hope the work will meet the approbation of that august body-the Senate of the University, and be useful to the Public in proportion to the pains taken by me to execute the same.

*To learn the laws herein inculcated, the student is required to study mainly the principles,-except those which are not of vital importance. The latter are numbered as follow :-38, 43, 50, 111, 112, 142-160, 198, 233, 234, 235, 249, 281, 298, 310-313, 336-338, 347, 348, 361-372, 379-383, 401, 402, 406-409, 411-418, 421, 429, 442-444, 463, 465-469, 475, 476, 504-507, 515, 517 and 542.