Maharani v. 13

Christian white citizens of Seattle, who tut-tutted when their Miss Nancy Ann Miller mated with an Indian potentate (TIME, March 12), were not a little stirred last week when she gave birth to a girl-child of swarthy skin, jet black hair and beady brown eyes. Since the event was somewhat premature, the babe's father, Sir Tokuji Rao Holkar, deposed Maharaja of Indore, was suddenly obliged to break off playing baccarat at Cannes, French Riviera, whence he rushed to his wife's bedside at St. Germain, near Paris, arriving just in time. Though naturally disappointed that the offspring was not male, Sir Tokuji at once ordered a splendrous and pompous Hindu christening.

"Since it is a girl," he said resignedly, "the child must be named on the 13th day, according to Hindu custom." Later, however, he advanced the date one day, explaining, "I have discovered that the Maharani has a peculiar American aversion to the number 13."

As the ceremonials began there arrived as Dharmadhikari or High Priest the Pundit Vishnu Raghunath Karandikar, representing the Hindu Primate, His Holiness Jagadguru Shankaracharya, who was simultaneously understood to be offering potent prayers for the babe in India. Presently the Goddess of Destiny was invited to enter the birth chamber and inscribe upon the forehead of the newborn child its fate. When a decent interval had elapsed, Pundit Karandikar went in to see what had happened, and clearly beheld upon the infant's brow these prophecies, or rather ordinations of the Goddess: 1.) "She will be an artistic genius, witty and intellectual." 2.) "She will marry a noble and wealthy Hindu at the age of 20."

Incredulous folk found more interesting than these holy doings the hard fact that in New Delhi, India, last week, the Indian Legislative Assembly rejected (53 to 24) a bill which would have made illegal the notorious Indian practice of "Child Marriage." Cried several members, "Shame! Shame!" As everyone knows, there are numerous recorded instances, claimed by Hindus to be exceptional, wherein mature and even senile Indian males have taken unto themselves wives under eight years old. The bill rejected last week would have set the ages of consent at 18 and 14 for youths and maids respectively.