By the WaySri Aurobindo
Bande Mataram
Calcutta, June 29th, 1907
Part Four. Bande Mataram under the Editorship of of Sri Aurobindo (28 May – 22 December 1907)
By the Way
The Newmaniac is abroad again. He has been to Chandpur, in the flesh or in spirit, and the result is a fresh attack of delirium newmans. He has discovered a Babu Kingdom in Barisal and a phantom army of secret National Volunteers. To the unsophisticated unaided eye there are no National Volunteers; the red shirt, the dreadful yellow turban, the awe-inspiring anti-regulation lathi all have disappeared, but the detective ability of the Newmaniac is not to be baffled or bamboozled. He can still discover the National Volunteer by the one thing left to him – the now world-renowned or at least Times-renowned “insolent stare”. Wherever there is a National Volunteer there is an insolent stare, and wherever there is an insolent stare there is a National Volunteer. The Newmaniac is down on that stare like a flash of lightning; he has come out with a new description of it and its accompaniments, very picturesque and painful. “The man stands with his legs apart and his hands behind his back, and looks at you unblinking, the very picture of insolent defiance. Gradually the eyes become bloodshot, and the face puffs out a little, then the lips twitch and the teeth are bared, and as you pass, the man either spits on the ground, or laughs a kind of snarling laugh, a mixture of contempt and triumph.” Isn’t that a wonderful bit of delirium newmans, gorgeously and grotesquely horrible? We sympathise with the Newmaniac in his lament that he is gripped by the law he himself has made and held back from going for this apoplectic nightmare. We are glad to learn that the authorities are going to take an immediate action on the Newmaniac’s complaint. We learn by telegram from Simla that the Legal Member has drawn up for the Viceroy’s approval the following notes for a Draft Bill to amend the Indian Penal Code.
Note for additional sections (draft) to the Indian Penal Code.
1. Whoever, being a native-born subject of His Majesty the King-Emperor, shall be observed to separate or suspected of 
separating his nether limbs when he is in the presence or within the vision actual or potential of an European, shall be guilty of a seditious offence henceforth to be known as breach of the legs, and may be bound over in personal securities of not less than Rs. 10,000 to keep his legs together for six months or a year according to the discretion of the trying Magistrate.
a. The expression “in the presence or within the vision” shall be held to apply to any distance of not more than four hundred yards to the right, to the left, before or behind the accused.
b. The word “European” in this and the following sections shall be understood as including Australians and Americans as well as natives of India of a white complexion and European descent and Imperial Anglo-Indians, but it shall not be held to cover the Nawab of Dacca. Provided that nothing in this section shall debar the Governor-General in Council from extending the section to the Nawab of Dacca by a special ordinance for a given period in case of emergency.
c. It shall not be incumbent on the prosecution in cases under this or the following sections to prove that any European was actually on the scene of the separation; it will be enough to prove that an European might have been there or that the accused had reason to believe that an European was or might, could, should or would be within 400 yards of him.
d. It shall be a sufficient defence to prove that the legs in question were already separated, with or without any necessity, before it was possible for the accused to know or believe that an European was, might, could, should or would be within the legal distance, and that the error was rectified within three seconds of his becoming aware of the presence.
e. If it be proved that the crural separation was directed against or in view of the presence of the European, no motive or necessity or plea of urgency shall be admitted in justification or mitigation of the offence.
2. Whoever, being a native-born subject etc., puts his hands behind his back, or joins them over his stomach, or pats his stomach, or twirls his moustache, or touches his nose, or twiddles 
his thumbs, or uses any other gesture which is or may or can be or might, could, should or would be considered offensive, seditious, libellous, mutinous or rebellious, in the presence etc. of an European, shall be guilty of a seditious publication and liable to prosecution and punishment under section 124a.
3. Whoever, being a native-born etc., is observed to look or suspected of looking with unblinking eyes at an European shall be guilty of breach of the peace and liable to rigorous imprisonment for six months, with or without fine.
a. It shall not be an offence under this section to look with unblinking eyes at the back of an European or at his legs or at his stomach or at any other portion of his anatomy except his face.
b. It shall not be a sufficient defence under this section to prove that the accused blinked once, twice or thrice during the commission of the offence. The blinking must be continuous, as when one is looking at the sun.
4. Whoever, being a native-born etc., is observed to suffer or suspected of suffering from epilepsy or apoplexy at the sight of an European, shall be guilty of seditious apoplexy and liable to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment which shall include two years’ solitary confinement.
a. The following symptoms shall be held when found together, to constitute the offence of seditious apoplexy, viz. eyes bloodshot, face puffed out, lips twitching and teeth bared.
b. It shall be a sufficient defence under this section to show that the accused was suffering from eye-disease or a cold in the head, or that his teeth naturally and unavoidably project, or that he suffers from a nervous labial disorder, or that he was frightened out of his wits, or that he mistook the European for a lunatic or a special correspondent of the Englishman.
5. Whoever, being a native-born etc., by accident or intention forgets to retain his saliva in the presence etc. of an European, shall be guilty of seditious spitting and liable to two years’ rigorous imprisonment or in the alternative, to transportation for life.
6. Whoever, being a native-born etc., is observed to laugh or is suspected of laughing a kind of snarling laugh or snarling a kind of laughing snarl in the presence etc. of an European shall be guilty of seditious cachinnation and liable to be bound over to keep the peace (which shall include abstention from inaudible as well as audible laughing or snarling) for six months or a year according to the discretion of the trying Magistrate.
a. An ordinary or average or pure, simple, uncomplicated domestic laugh shall not count as an offence under this section.
b. A pure, peaceable or innocent snarl directed at the weather or any other inanimate and non-European object and guiltless of either contempt or triumph except for or over the said inanimate object, shall not be an offence under this section.
c. As it is impossible for the offence to be precisely defined, the complainant shall be asked to reproduce in the witness-box the said snarl or laugh as he saw or imagined it and the nearest available canine being shall be held up by his side and induced to snarl and if there is any resemblance between the two performances, the offence shall be considered proved.
N.B. With this exception no corroborative evidence will be required in cases under these sections; the unsupported testimony of the complainant or the belief of the trying Magistrate shall be considered sufficient.
This work was not included in SABCL, vol.1 and it was not compared with other editions.