conferred an absolute independence on the people, without appointing any head or ruler. The people, thus suddenly left to themselves, remained under an infinite number of petty chiefs, and before any of those had time to acquire power, or to extend their sway, the Company established their influence, and perpetuated this state of division.

The people had previously been converted to Mahomedanism, but its tenets do not appear to have been ever thoroughly understood, and it was considerably modified and softened to suit their previous ideas and customs. This religion has been introduced into the Eastern Islands in a different manner from most other parts of the world, and never by force of arms; which may in some measure account for the modified and milder form under which it there appears, and the absence of the usual bigotry of the true Mussulman. This exemption from religious prejudices is a remarkable feature of their character. Of Mahommedanism, as a civil code, they seem to know nothing; at least it has not been allowed to supersede their original institutions. These breathe a higher sentiment of freedom than those of the prophet of Islam; and the actual independence which we have seen that they early possessed, and the circumstance of their never having been subjected to the full pressure of a strong government, will account for the spirit of republicanism and contentiousness which appears among them. Their chiefs having never been much raised above their own condition, could inspire but little awe, and though they bowed to their decisions in concert with the elders and respectable men of their villages, it was more from a sense of propriety and justice than of fear. They never forgot that they had rights, nor ever feared to assert them. This sentiment, though not extinguished, has been weakened since the establishment of courts under the Company's authority. The compulsory cultivation of pepper, the habit which all ranks have acquired of looking to the Company for support and subsistence, and the poverty and depression produced by the general system of monopoly and restriction, have infused a spirit of avarice, of all others the most debasing, and the most adverse to the developement of high qualities. This makes them have recourse to the courts whenever they have prospect of pecuniary advantage, and to this perhaps may be ascribed their more seldom seeking revenge in cases of murder, when they can obtain in the courts the bangun or compensation. To this spirit of avarice too, combined with their VOL, V.—No. 10.

X

indolence and want of occupation, may be traced the propensity to gambling and cock-fighting which prevails so much among them. Though these vices, the state of poverty and servitude in which they have been kept, the privation of stimulus, their general ignorance, and the little idea they have of regular and efficient government, have lowered their character, and debased the original sterling metal, there still appears to remain a portion of that spirit of freedom and impatience under what may appear to them injustice, which must never be overlooked, and which may, under proper management and direction, be made the source of future improvement. They are accustomed to exercise their reasoning powers upon every subject, and though the course of their ideas be peculiar, they are open to conviction. They are not deficient in quickness of apprehension, but are slow in resolution, and cautious in action. Their passions appear to be much under control, and both sexes are remarkable for decorum.

There is nothing, perhaps, more difficult than to draw a true and accurate character of a people, nor shall we pretend to do so; but we think the observations we have offered, will justify the opinion we have expressed, that under prudent and judicious management, there exist qualities and powers which may be expanded and directed, and a foundation on which a better order of things may be established,

On Testamentary Bequests.

THERE appears to be a great defect in legislation, that so little control exists over the disposition of property by will. Testamentary Bequests, however they may have been dictated, by folly, vanity, caprice, superstitious feeling, or the vindictive passions, are still held to be sacred; and, on any question arising in our different courts, on the construction of a will, the object is not to inquire into the justice and propriety of the case, but, what was the intention of the testator; and, if idiocy or insanity cannot be sustained, the most flagrant injustice, and the most consummate folly, receive a legal sanction.

Property being a deposit, for the correct application of which during life a moral obligation exists, it would seem,

that in its distribution after death the same principle should govern its disposal. By the law of nature, and the obligations of religion, a man's first care is his natural relations. But, how often do we witness, in the dotage of age, the alienation of property from natural descendants, by the artifices of domestic servants, and the sycophancy of pretended friends: and although injustice, or caprice, is apparent in every line of the will, yet, unless undue influence* can be proved, which is frequently very difficult, the will is established. Again, there are immoral restraints enjoined with testamentary bequests, to which the law interposes no remedy. Property is left on the condition of a marriage between parties where no attachment exists, and with whom, from dissimilarity of tastes and dispositions, no true affection can ever grow. An income is bequeathed to a widow, with the obligation that she shall not marry again. This case is highly aggravated, when it is found that the fortune brought by the wife, or property left by her relations, was the prosperous gale, which lifted the husband from the shallows of adversity, and bore him on to respectability,to influence, and to wealth. So, in the sacrifice, unhappily too frequently made, of virgin beauty to doting age, the law allows the miserly dotard to withhold from the generation he has left, the possession of a treasure he is no longer capable of enjoying, and to deny to a young and amiable woman, all the sweets of conjugal affection, and the endearments of maternal love, but on the condition of renouncing her subsistence.

In the present day, when juster views of moral obligation are inculcated, and more liberal sentiments prevail, which withhold a man, during his life-time, from bestowing his property on mercenary domestics,-from lavishing on public charities the support and expectation of his family,-and would lead him to hesitate, if not to shudder, at presenting a young woman with a sum of money, with the injunction that she should never marry; the same principles, we might expect, would guide his pen, and restrain him, in the last disposition of his property, from devising acts equally injurious to his posterity, and repugnant to morality. It is not attempted to be controverted, that a man may not, if he sees sufficient reason, devise his property to an estimable friend rather than to a profligate son; or limit it, in cases of

*No influence short of that coercion which the law terms duress, will set aside a will made by a man, who, however influenced by persuasion, is not under restraint.-EDIT.

imbecility in a child, or dissoluteness in a wife: but it is contended, that where there are evident traces of weakness, caprice, superstitious folly, or vindictive feeling, the law, as a mighty mother, with maternal feeling, should step in, and claim for the rightful heir that property which folly or bigotry would alienate.

In the darker ages, when death-bed injunctions were viewed as almost oracular, and dictates then given were most religiously followed, from the superstitious fear of being visited by the perturbed spirits of the departed, in case of disobedience, we cannot so much wonder that such implicit reverence should be paid to, and strict observance follow, the testimentary dispositions of property; but, at present, when these idle fears have passed away, executors need fear no alarm; and were they empowered to call in the powerful interposition of the law, to control the absurdities and rectify the injustice of testators, we should not have to lament the accumulation of funds to improvident charities, at the sacrifice of the parental duties, the enrichment of base dependants, to the neglect of the natural ties of consanguinity;-and many a deep curse would be spared on memories, which, if not recalled with cherished feelings of respect, might be suffered to rest in oblivion.

tion;

There is another order of Testamentary Bequests which assume a character of much higher importance, as operating most injuriously on the wealth of the state. Those we have been considering are unjust to individuals, as sequestrating property from the rightful heirs, and as violating those ties of kindred which nature deems sacred: but in addition to this, these inflict an injury on the community at largeI mean Testamentary Bequests in perpetuity, and demised for specific purposes. Property belongs to the existing generaand I assume it as a principle, that no man has a right to control property after his death:-under the limitations we have already considered, a man has unquestionably the right to demise his property at death; but, that he should have the power to tie it up for ever, and control its expenditure, is monstrous and absurd. It is much to be wondered at, that the law of England should still recognize such a principle. In cases not actually immoral, there is scarcely any absurdity a man may devise, but the law, having diligently inquired if such were really his intention, gives it its fiat. Were a man to leave the interest of £10,000 in the funds for ever, to furnish a pageant on Lord Mayor's day, and appoint the corporation of London the trustees, I ques

tion not but it would be confirmed ;* and thus £10,000 of the national wealth would be withheld from a healthy circulation, to give an idle spectacle to children and apprentice boys. The legislature very early and wisely interposed to check the rapacity of priests, and the exorbitant demands of mother church, in the alienation of landed property to their uses for ever. In the confirmation of Magna Charta by Henry III. in the year 1225, religious houses are withheld from holding and appropriating to themselves lands in mortmain: and the mortmain act, which took place in the reign of George II.:+ after stating, "that the improvident "alienation and disposition, by languishing and dying per"sons, of lands, tenements, and hereditaments, to charitable "uses, to the disherison of the lawful heir, was prejudicial "to the common utility, and a public mischief, it enacts, "that all such devises shall be void." But this restricts the alienation of landed property alone; and to charitable uses only. A man may still devise the soil he has enjoyed during his life, to be held in perpetuity after his death, for any purposes his folly or vanity may suggest. In devises of funded property, the same principle of posthumous control is admitted. The national debt is likely to be as permanent as the soil. No dreamer of visions could ever dream of its being paid off; and the convulsion which may extinguish the one, will shake the landmarks of the other. The locking up of so much capital, may therefore be viewed as highly detrimental to the state. Ten thousand pounds tied up for charitable, or other uses, throws into circulation one twentieth part; the rest is a dead inert mass. Ten thousand pounds let loose in agriculture, manufactures, or commerce, is a river flowing through the country with golden sands.

The opposite direction, which convulsions in the state, or the circumstances of the times, have given to Testamentary Bequests, the abuses of most, and the absurdities of many,-might teach us, that the existing generation are the best proprietaries, and the best dispensers, of property.

*

Certainly it would, if he were sane when he made the bequest.-Edit. Technically speaking, the 1x Geo. II. c. 36. is not the mortmain act, but one of a long series, extending the provisions of the original Statute of Mortmain, Edw. I. st. 2. which was itself an extension and explanation of 1x Hen. III. st. 1. c. 36. and of Magna Charta, c.36.-ED.

Were a man to bequeath his estate with the injunction, that not a deer in the park should be slain for fifty years, nor a tree felled for a hundred, there is no question but it would be registered, and ratified, and the interdict most religiously observed, however the country might be distressed for wood or venison.