But," says he, "Sujah Dowlah levied a fine of twenty lacs for a right of
succession."
Good God! my Lords, if you are not appalled with the violent injustice
of arbitrary proceedings, you must feel something humiliating at the
gross ignorance of men who are in this manner playing with the rights of
mankind. This man confounds a fine upon succession with a fine of
penalty. He takes advantage of a defect in the technical language of our
law, which, I am sorry to say, is not, in many parts, as correct in its
distinctions and as wise in its provisions as the Mahometan law. We use
the word _fine_ in three senses: first, as a punishment and penalty;
secondly, as a formal means of cutting off by one form the ties of
another form, which we call levying a fine; and, thirdly, we use the
word to signify a sum of money payable upon renewal of a lease or
copyhold. The word has in each case a totally different sense; but such
is the stupidity and barbarism of the prisoner, that he confounds these
senses, and tells you Sujah Dowlah took twenty-five lacs as a fine from
Cheyt Sing for the renewal of his zemindary, and therefore, as a
punishment for his offences, he shall take fifty. Suppose any one of
your Lordships, or of us, were to be fined for assault and battery, or
for anything else, and it should be said, "You paid such a fine for a
bishop's lease, you paid such a fine on the purchase of an estate, and
therefore, now that you are going to be fined for a punishment, we will
take the measure of the fine, not from the nature and quality of your
offence, not from the law upon the subject, or from your ability to
pay, but the amount of a fine you paid some years ago for an estate
shall be the measure of your punishment.
Pages:
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312