While the proceedings in connection with the Probate apphcation were going on, Mr. Tilak had approached the High Court for a transfer of the case from Mr. Aston, who having granted several interviews to Tai Maharaj and having advised Tai Maharaj—according to her own admission—on certain points, had refused even to see the Trustees and had thus betrayed his prejudice against Mr. Tilak. But the High Court did not grant Mr. Tilak's request for a transfer of the case, though when a regular appeal was made against Mr. Aston's judgment, the High Court reversed the Probate Decision. So Mr. Tilak and his colleagues were once more restored to their powers as trustees and executors.
A special Magistrate was appointed to go into the seven big charges against Mr. Tilak. The proceedings commenced on September 15th, 1902. The alleged false complaint made against Mr. Nagpurkar by Mr. Tilak was first taken up for hearing. Mr. Justice Beaman, while finally disposing of this question declared, that there was nothing wrong or illegal about Mr. Tilak's complaint against Mr. Nagpurkar, a "salaried servant and agent for the estate and as such a responsible custodian of the valuable jewllery entrusted to him." It was his clear duty, said the learned Judge, "to allow inspection of the ornaments when demanded by a majority of the trustees, on pain of dismissal for suspected dishonesty and criminal misappropriation." Indeed, the Prosecution counsel himself, had to admit, that there was not a single untrue statement in the complaint! Mr. Justice Beaman further said: " Mr. Tilak said to the Magistrate exactly what he had said to Nagpurkar himself. He said 'Nagpurkar has been in posses-
