been fairly met by Dr. Chalmers, who says truly, that Moses does not affix any date to the creation of the chaos, out of which this globe was framed. But might not God, if he pleased, have formed the earth in its present state? Might it not as well be argued that there was not time, in the period assigned to the creation of the several parts of this system, to secure their solidity and perfection, as that it must take so many centuries to form certain rocks: 66 He spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast."

The recession of the waters was gradual; a wind of a drying nature, partaking probably of the nature of the Simoom, was made to pass over the earth, by which the waters were partially evaporated; the oceans of the earth again found their beds; the rains of heaven were restrained; and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat. The delight which. Noah must then have felt may be more easily conceived than expressed. His subsequent anxiety in watching the progressive receding of the waters, and drying of the ground was natural, but patient. Upwards of two months elapsed between the resting of the ark, and the discovery of the mountain tops, like little islands in the sea. Forty days after this, Noah opened the window of the ark to look abroad on the surrounding desolation. His weekly attempts to ascertain the state of the case are as interesting memorials of his piety, as they were in themselves simple. The raven from the first could find food: it was, therefore, unnecessary to receive it again into the ark. The dove could find no resting-place, and returned to him again. The

second week she came back with an olive leaf in her mouth, a circumstance from which probably the olive became the emblem of peace and reconciliation. At the end of the third week she returned no more. The plucking of the olive suggests also the idea that as the world was created at the autumnal equinox, it was restored at the same period, and in a similar state of verdure and fruitfulness.

The entire period of Noah's residence in the ark was a "full year," or 365 days. At the expiration of this period, and by the command of God, who "shut him in," he disembarked, and with him all that had entered into the ark. Of those which God gave him, he had lost none; whether the creatures had increased in the ark, cannot be determined. His first object was gratefully to acknowledge his deliverance. He built an altar and offered sacrifices of thanksgiving. God graciously regarded the service, and proceeded to assure him of the future safety of the world from destruction by water, and the certain regularity of its established laws and seasons, even to the times of the end. "O that men would praise the Lord for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men." He preserveth all nature by his word, and by the same word the heavens and the earth which are now, are reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. Nevertheless, we, cording to his promise, look for

new

66

ac

heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness." "Wherefore seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.”

S. N.

WHILE Christians of various denominations in this country and the United States of America, for many years past, have been making the most costly sacrifices of life and property, to diffuse amongst our fellow subjects in India the knowledge and blessings of Christianity, there exists, in the ancient codes of those dependencies, enactments which, at least in the judgment of worldly men, place their conversion "out of the range of probability;" for, on their change of religion, both by law and usage, they lose their birth-rights, they are disowned by their family, and in fact, looked upon as a degraded people.

We have often heard our brethren, on missionary anniversaries, refer, in terms of almost hopeless regret, to "the adamantine chain of caste which binds the millions of heathens to the idols of their forefathers;" but surely, as the time is now approaching when Indian affairs will occupy the attention of the legislature and the country, it is the duty of British Christians no longer to utter impotent lamentations, but to avail themselves of the opportunity to urge upon the government the justice of such modifications of those laws as shall protect the rights of conscience, and remove those formidable barriers which now impede the progress of the only system which can renovate and ennoble the interesting but degraded inhabitants of British India.

As we have been favoured with a series of documents from the Bombay Missionary Union, which have been printed at the American mission press in that town, we shall attempt to put our readers in

N. S. No. 86.

possession of the legal facts in question, and then give such illustrations of their baneful influence as must surely arouse the Christian Churches to a sense of the propriety, justice, and necessity of making a prompt and energetic appeal to the British legislature upon it.

The following questions were proposed to the Shastrees of the Sudur Udalut in Bombay. We insert them, with the replies, because they come from the highest native legal authorities in that Presidency. They are in every respect unfavourable to converts as far as law is concerned.

666

Quest. 1st.-If a person, who is living with his near relations, change his religion, is his claim to a share in the property of his father and ancestors valid, or is it not? What is said on the subject in the Dhurmu Shastru?

"Ans.- His claim is not valid. (Signed) NEERBHUYU RAMU DYARAMU, Shastree,

KASHINATH VISHWUNATH,

Shastree, GOVIND NARAYUN, Shastree.

66 6

Quest. 2d.-If a person, who has taken his share of patrimonial property, have lived apart from the other members of the family, and then change his religion, has he right to retain his portion, or does it lapse, and belong to his heirs, according to the Shastres?

"Ans.-He who has so changed his religion, is to be viewed as an abandoned person, and has forfeited his right to that property, and his heirs inherit it, according to the Shlok.

(Signatures as above.)
M

"Quest. 3d.-If a person, having a wife and family, change his religion, has he the right of retaining his wife and family still with him, or has he not?-and if he has, do his children succeed to his property and means of subsistence, or otherwise, according to the Hindoo law?

“Ans.—If, of his own choice and free will, he has changed his religion, there is nothing expressed in the Shastrus respecting an expiation. Thus far is said, that he is to be accounted dead,an effigy of him is to be made, and funeral rites are to be paid to it as if it were him. His wife and children are his heirs.

"These two subjects, Putnee and Prayuschit, are treated of in the Mitaksharu.'

(Signatures as above.)

The Gospel has induced many, in the ages which are past, to sacrifice friendship, and ease, and comfort, and property, and even life itself, for the cause of Christ. In India, it has led to this bold profession; and in India it will still exhibit it. But why should not every Christian, both in India and throughout Britain, exert himself to remove this stone of stumbling. The Legislature will, in all probability, listen to the reasonable appeals which may be made to it. There are few, if any, of the Company's Civilians, who are acquainted with the facts of the case, who do not greatly bewail them, and who do not ardently wish to see an improvement in the administration of the law referred to.

"The Moohummudan Law on these subjects is equally express, and quite as oppressive as the Hindoo. The requisitions of the Koran, on which the code of civil law is founded, are well known. According to them, a Moosulman,

on becoming an infidel, is liable to a deprivation of the property he has himself acquired, as well as that which descends to him by inheritance. It is laid down by Mr. W. H. Macnaghten, in his principles and precedents of Moohummudan Law, p. 1, as a principle of inheritance, according to the Soonee doctrine, that Slavery, homicide, difference of religion, and difference of allegiance, exclude from inheritance;' and by a precedent quoted at p. 86 of that work, it is evident that although apostasy from Moohummudanism, would not invali date the descendant's right to property devolving on him by the death of his ancestors before his conversion, he would be entitled to none whatever originally devolving on him, after his change of religion. See also Sect. vi. p. 21, of the same work, where it is assumed that, ' entire exclusion from inheritance is produced by becoming an infidel. That the Scia doctrine of inheritance on this point agrees with the Soonee, is mentioned in the same work, p. 40, and of course the results, by this interpretation, would be equally oppressive.'

The legitimate conclusion deducible is, that in British India a renouncement of Moohummudanism necessarily deprives the convert of all right to property, ancestral or acquired, devolving on him, or possessed by him at the time of his conversion.'

"The following extract of the speech of R. Macan, Esq. of the Honourable Company's Civil Service, and late Judge at Juanpore, supplies an eloquent and decided testimony to the fact that the Hindoo and Moohummudan laws of property and inheritance are interpreted as opposed to the rights of converts to the Christian religion; and, in a very feeling

Ward, one of the Serampore Missionaries, advised with several magistrates on the subject, particularly with the judge of the court at Guyah; but being informed, that according to the Hindoo law, as administered in the provincial courts, he (Narapot Singh) had forfeited all claim to his property, he advised him to suffer the loss rather than engage in a law-suit, which must, according to the present regulations, be decided against him. He is, therefore, now suffering the loss of about 8000 rupees a-year; and this having continued for 20 years, makes a total of 1,60,000 rupees, besides interest, which he has forfeited merely for becoming a convert to Christianity. At present, Narapot Singh is engaged as a native preacher in Calcutta, under the patronage of the London Missionary Society. Should it be considered necessary, the most indubitable evidence can be obtained to substantiate the above facts.'

The Rev. J. Peggs, of Coventry, late missionary in Orissa, relates the following incident in his valuable and interesting pamphlet, "The Claims of India," which must deeply affect every pious reader.

"After preaching at ChitporeRoad Chapel, Calcutta, having inquired if any wished to receive Scriptures or tracts, in looking round I observed a young Baboo, of respectable appearance, sitting on one of the benches, apparently considerably interested in what was going on. I asked him if he would accept of a book. Yes,' he replied, if you will give me a Christian Catechism.' I wished to present him with the Gospels in English and Bengalee, to which he objected, saying, I have the whole Bible in English, which I not only read, but believe to be

the word of God.' Do you indeed?' said I. Yes,' he replied, for I am a Christian.' I inquired whether he belonged to any church. He said, No:' but added, that he had a strong desire to unite with Christians, from which he was deterred by the present state of the Hindoo law, respecting inheritance, and the disposition of his relatives, who, when they knew that he had avowed himself a disciple of Christ, would immediately disinherit him. Being taught in English, and recommended to read the Bible about fourteen years ago, by an elderly English gentleman, of the name of Scott, from that time he had been convinced of its truth. In the course of conversation, he gave me his name, and referred me, for the truth of what he had said, to two respectable English gentlemen; he also added, respecting it, three or four times, that he knew several respectable and rich Bengalee gentlemen, who were similarly situated, believing the truth and excelleney of the Christian faith, but fearing to confess their sentiments, lest they should be plunged at once into poverty.'

It is lamentable to perceive that a spirit of subserviency to these national prejudices has been displayed in the Indo-British army. Bishop Heber states, that at Meerut he attended a small congregation of native Christians, about twenty people were present, among whom he found the Naik, or corporal, who, in consequence of his embracing Christianity, was very absurdly, not to say wickedly, disgraced, by being removed from his regiment, though they still allow him his pay!

It is surely high time for sincere Christians of every name to unite in one firm protest against such intolerant and mischievous laws; but suggestions upon that subject must be reserved for another paper.