Absolute Justice, Kindness and Kinship — Page 237
— Part II 232 it. The land did indeed belong to the family estate of the Promised Messiah as , but when preparing the case, the plaintiff’s lawyer entered a false plea in one small section. This was an attempt on the part of the prosecution to strengthen its case. If the defendant could prove that this one small part of the claim was untrue the whole case would be dismissed. Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as was called as a witness for the defence. The defendant knew for certain that he would never give false evidence, no matter how great the consequential loss. The lawyer acting for Mirza Sul ta n Ahmad approached Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and inquired how he intended to testify. In response, he asserted that his evidence would be based only on the truth, no matter how great the loss to his brother and family estate. The lawyer decided that there was no point in pursuing the matter further, so he withdrew the case. 37 Much earlier when he was about 25-30 years of age and was not yet the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Community, he used to work for the family estate at the command of his father. Once his father became involved in a dispute with some of his land tillers over the felling of a tree. Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was sent by his father to Gurdaspur to represent his interest at court. He was accompanied by two other witnesses. Addressing his two companions he said, 'My father is needlessly making this an issue. Trees can be considered part of the farmland. The people