Nor is this mode of justice, primitive as it is, ever used with impartiality.
Witnesses are never subpoenaed by the courts, and no oath is required of them for the truth of their depositions; also on account of the spirit of fanatical animosity which exists mutually between the Christians and Mohammedans, no unbiased testimony is to be procured. Indeed, formerly, the Christians were not even allowed to appear as witnesses.
The judges themselves being men of low birth and grovelling principles, only hold their offices as sources of personal emolument, as the wealth of various of these functionaries fully attests. The late Sheikh-ul Islam, at his death, left the sultan, by bequest, nearly a million of dollars!
Although strictly prohibited by the Koran, they are in the constant habit of receiving bribes to any amount; notwithstanding the precepts of their religion, which are ever and anon held up as barriers to all reform, they are so corrupted, that their consciences are immediately lulled, whenever the requisite bonus is slily slipped under the cushions on which they sit, and the testimony of hired witnesses is then winked at by them, and even supported, as their interest may demand.
The only qualification requisite for a witness to appear before these courts of justice, is to be omniscient, and never to utter the fatal word Bilmem, I don't know.
When conflicting interests occur, which induce the judges to take side against the witnesses--and such occasions are by no means rare, since justice is not only put up at auction, but a single recommendation from a grandee suffices to turn the scale--the scene is truly farcical, and its sketch worthy of the pen of Dickens himself.
The Kadis adopt a singular method to disqualify the testimony. The questions which are put in the cross-examination, are not only entirely irrelevant to the subject matter in dispute, but would even puzzle the "cutest Yankee" how to answer. Their object is to disqualify the testimony by questions, no matter how ridiculous, but by which the witnesses will be forced at last to utter the ominous word Bilmem--I don't know.
With a view to ascertain whether the witnesses are well acquainted with the party in whose behalf they are testifying, they are asked, "who was the grandfather of the plaintiff?" The usual and formal answer in such cases is, "Abraham," meaning the old Patriarch. "His great grandfather?" "Adam," beyond whom he (the plaintiff), is not supposed to have any ancestors.