Page:Isvar Chandra Vidyasagar, a story of his life and work.djvu/654

Rh widow can never be divested on the ground of subsequent immorality, had a very strong opponent in Mr. Justice Dwarka Nath, with whom Mr. Justice Phear concurred. But the opinion of the majority prevailed, and the widows were left undisturbed in their course of life." In this connection, Vidyasagar said to one of his friends;—'How could I give a wrong opinion? Supposing I gave one, who should hear me? Of course, I am not a supporter of lewd character; but when one had already inherited a property, how could I say, that one should be divested of it? In that case, there would be no end of litigations on this plea.' It must be said, that in this case Vidyasagar wanted in foresight, and the whole Hindu community was disappointed in him; but it should be borne in mind, that he gave his opinion according to his own conviction. Some insinuate that Vidyasagar was afraid, that if a fallen widow were deprived of her inheritance, obstacles might rise in the way of the furtherance of his widow marriage cause, and he therefore gave his opinion in favour of the inheritance. But such insinuation is quite baseless. Vidyasagar was not a hypocrite—he was not a man to go astray or to designedly mislead others for the sake of his self-interest.

Dwarka Nath often said,—'Vidyasagar is the root of my prosperity. It was he who advised me to appear at the Law Examination. But for his advice, I might have taken a different course.'