HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0605 and id is 1 raw text is: IX MOORE IND. APP., 199 ABRAHAM V. ABRAHAM [1863]
the power to afford a remedy, though in a different way. They doubt not that when
it is represented to those authorities that this suggestion emanates from the Judicial
Committee, they will not be loth to examine into the circumstances of the case, and to
do that which justice may require.
We have only one word more to say on the present occasion. Their Lordships
do not think it necessary to eater at all into the question which has been discussed
at the bar this morning ; it would require a very nice examination of the Statutes
and the criminal law of India, which could only end in the same way. Whatever
might be the result of that examination, we have no hesitation in saying the course
we are now about to adopt would be the course we should then recommend Her
.Majesty to pursue.
We cannot grant this application.
[S.C. 1 Moo. P.C. (N.S.) 272. See Reg. v. Bertrand, 1867, 4 Moo. P.C. (N.S.) 460
L.R. 1 P.C. 530; and note to In 9-e Ames, 18:37, 3 Moo. P.C. 413.]
[199] CHARLOTTE ABRAHAM and DANIEL VINCENT ABRAHAM,-Appellants;
FRANCIS ABRAHAM,-Respondent * [Feb. 17, 18, 19, and 20, 1863].
On appeal from the Sudder Dewanny Adawlut at Madras.
The status of Native Christians, known as East Indians, and the law of
inheritance and succession, as administered in the Mofussil Court in respect
to their rights and property, considered. Mad. Reg. II. of 1802, sec. XVII.
provides, that in cases coming within the jurisdiction of the Zillah Courts,
for which no specific rule may exist, the Judges are to act according to
justice, equity and good conscience; and Mad. Reg. III. of 1802, sec. XVI.
cl. 1, prescribes, that in suits before the Native Courts regarding succession,
inheritance, caste, etc., the Hindoo law with respect to Hindoos, and the
Mahomedan law with regard to Mahomedans are to be considered the general
rules by which the Judges are to form their decision. Held, that the latter
Regulation applied to Hindoos and Mahomedans, not by birth only but by
religion [9 Moo. Ind. App. 243].
Held, also, in a case of succession to the estate of a deceased of pure Hindoo blood,
who had married a European wife, professing, with his family, the Christian
religion, and whose ancestors for generations had embraced Christianity,
that such case was within the provisions of Mad. Reg. II. of 1802, sec. XVII.,
and was to be decided by reference to the usages of the class to which the
deceased attached himself and the family to which he belonged.
Upon the conversion of a Hindoo to Christianity, the Hindoo law ceases to have
any continuing obligatory force upon the convert [9 Moo. Ind. App. 241,
242].
The convert may renounce the old law by which he was bound, as he renounced
his old religion, or if he thinks fit, he may abide by the old law notwith-
standing he has renounced the old religion. For though the profession of
Christianity releases the convert from the trammels of the Hindoo law, yet
it does not of necessity involve any change of the rights or relations of the
convert in matters with which Christianity has no concern, such as his rights
and interest in, and his power over, property. The convert, though not
bound as to such matters, either by the Hindoo law, or by any other positve
law, may by his course of conduct after his conversion, have shown by what
law he intended his rights to be governed. He may do so either by attaching
himself to a class which in this respect has adopted and acted upon some
* Present: Members of the Judicial Committee,-The Right Hon. Lord Kings-
down, the Right Hon. the Lord Justice Knight Bruce, the Right Hon. the Lord
Justice Turner, and the Right Hon. Sir John Taylor Coleridge. Assessors,-The
Right Hon. Sir Lawrence Peel, and the Right Hon. Sir James W. Colvile.
716](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0605&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)