prising command of the English language; the readiness, the precision and the force with which he used that language are not common even among those who speak it as their mother tongue and were the theme of constant admiration."
The two friends were fellow-workers and coadjutors in many affairs. They consulted each other on all difficult points. The two were generally of the same opinion. Their opinions diverged only in one case—on the question of the right of inheritance of a fallen woman. The case had been instituted in the High Court before Dwarka Nath's death. Before the decision of the case, Pandits Isvar Chandra Vidyasagar, Mahes Chandra Nyayratna, and Bharat Chandra Siromani were called upon for their opinions. The point at Issue was—if a Hindu widow, who had once inherited a property, subsequently loses her character—whether that fallen woman should be deprived of her inheritance. Vidyasagar was for the inheritance, whilst the other two Pandits were against it. Dwarka Nath was also of opinion that the fallen woman should be deprived of her inheritance, but he could not carry his point. A full bench consisting of ten justices sat to decide the case. Out of the ten, only Mr. Phear agreed with Dwarka Nath. The Hon'ble C. E. Buckland, in his 'Bengal under the Lieutenant-Governors,' says:—"The Hindu widow's unchastity case, in which it was contended that property once vested in a
