25. MY HELPLESSNESS :




AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY:
THE STORY OF MY EXPERIMENTS WITH TRUTH
by Mohandas K. Gandhi



It was easy to be called, but it was difficult to practise at the bar. I had read the laws, but not
learnt how to practise law. I had read with interest 'Legal Maxims', but did not know how to apply
them in my profession. 'Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas' (Use your property in such a way as
not to damage that of others) was one of them, but I was at a loss to know how one could employ
this maxim for the benefit of one's client. I had read all the leading cases on this maxim, but they
gave me no confidence in the application of it in the practice of law.


Besides, I had learnt nothing at all of Indian Law . I had not the slightest idea of Hindu and
Mahomedan Law. I had not even learnt how to draft a plaint, and felt completely at sea. I had
heard of Sir Pherozeshah Mehta as one who roared like a lion in law courts. How, I wondered,
could he have leant the art in England? It was out of the question for me ever to acquire his legal
acumen, but I had serious misgivings as to whether I should be able even to earn a living by the
profession.


I was torn with these doubts and anxieties whilst I was studying law. I confided my difficulties to
some of my friends. One of them suggested that I should seek Dadabhai Naoroji's advice. I have
already said that when I went to England, I possessed a note of introduction to Dadabhai. I
availed myself of it very late. I thought I had no right to trouble such a great man for an interview.
Whenever an address by him was announced, I would attend it, listen to him from a corner of the
hall, and go away after having feasted my eyes and ears. In order to come in close touch with the
students, he had founded an association. I used to attend its meetings, and rejoiced at
Dadabhai's solicitude for the students, and the latter's respect for him. In course of time I
mustered up courage to present to him the note of introduction. He said: 'You can come and have
my advice whenever you like.' But I never availed myself of his offer. I thought it wrong to trouble
him without the most pressing necessity. Therefore I dared not venture to accept my friend's
advice to submit my difficulties to Dadabhai at that time. I forget now whether it was the same
friend or someone else who recommended me to meet Mr. Frederick Pincutt. He was a
Conservative, but his affectation for Indian students was pure and unselfish. Many students
sought his advice, and I also applied to him for an appointment, which he granted. I can never
forget that interview. He greeted me as a friend. He laughed away my pessimism. 'Do you think,'
he said, 'that everyone must be a Pherozeshah Mehta? Pherozeshahs and Badruddins are rare.
Rest assured it takes no unusual skill to be an ordinary lawyer. Common honesty and industry
are enough to enable him to make a living. All cases are not complicated. Well, let me know the
extent of your general reading.'


When I acquainted him with my little stock of reading, he was, as I could see, rather
disappointed. But it was only for a moment. Soon his face beamed with a pleasing smile and he
said, 'I understand your trouble. Your general reading is meagre. You have no knowledge of the
world, a sine qua non for a vakil. You have not even read the hisory of India. A vakil should know
human nature. He should be able to read a man's character from his face. And every Indian
ought to know Indian History. This has no connection with the practice of law, but you ought to
have that knowledge. I see that you have not even read Kaye's and Malleson's history of the
Mutiny of 1857. Get hold of that at once, and also read two more books to understand human
nature.' These were Lavator's and Shemmelpennick's books on physiognomy.


I was extremely grateful to this venerable friend. In his presence I found all my fear gone, but
as soon as I left him I began to worry again. 'To know a man from his face' was the question that
haunted me, as I thought of the two books on my way home. The next day I purchased Lavator's
book. Shemmelpennick's was not available at the shop. I read Lavator's book and found it more
difficult than Snell's Equity, and scarcely interesting. I studied Shakespeare's physiognomy, but
did not acquire the knack of finding out the Shakespeares walking up and down the streets of
London.


Lavator's book did not add to my knowledge. Mr. Pincutt's advice did me very little direct
service, but his kindliness stood me in good stead. His smiling open face stayed in my memory,
and I trusted his advice that Pherozeshah Mehta's acumen, memory and ability were not
essential to the making of a successful lawyer; honesty and industry were enough. And as I had a
fair share of these last, I felt somewhat reassured.


I could not read Kaye's and Malleson's volumes in England, but I did so in South Africa, as I
had made a point of reading them at the first opportunity.


Thus with just a little leaven of hope mixed with my despair, I landed at Bombay from
S.S. Assam. The sea was rough in the harbour, and I had to reach the quay in a launch.


PART :- 1. ENDS.


Next :-PART :- 2.


1. RAYCHANDBHAI-

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Future of Tamil Nadu Politics and Governance :-Rajinikanth not Fit for Politics says Subramanian Swamy?

It was her manipulations of democracy that started its downward descent, a process that has expanded exponentially and diversified in every conceivable direction with the passage of decades.Part-4.

For over three decades, Sasikala lived in the shadows of the late Jayalalithaa. As she now looks to step out and gain control over the AIADMK, her family, once loathed by Jayalalithaa and viewed with suspicion by others in the party, could prove the biggest hurdle. Chinnamma: Will Sasikala’s family be AIADMK’s biggest hurdle? Part-1.