It will not, I fear, be possible for me to convey to you any adequate notion of the mistakes into which the framers of the present system of Indian politics have fallen, unless I succeed in previously laying before you an intelligible sketch of the systems which preceded it. In doing this, it will, I am aware, be necessary to go over a good deal of ground which has already been trodden, and to recall your attention to controversies which have long ceased to agitate the public mind. Nevertheless, if you and I succeed by these means, in opening the eyes of our rulers to the perilous state of their Asiatic possessions; far more, if we shall be in the slightest degree instrumental in obtaining for our Hindoo fellow-subjects the blessings of an efficient government, we shall have no cause to regret-I, that I toiled through so many dusty documents for your edification, and you, that you admitted the results of my labour into the pages of Maga. By way of a preface to that sketch, I beg leave to subjoin the following extracts from the recorded opinion of S. Davis, Esquire; a gentleman whose intimate acquaintance with Indian affairs no one will question. The original will be found among the answers to Court's Queries, in the volume already referred to, namely, vol. II. of Selections from the Records at the India House. "It must appear," says that intelligent servant of the Company, "that the natives of British India are entitled to good government, whatever may be the expense attending it. We have moulded the system of finance, of judicature, and of police, at our pleasure, and have experienced their perfect submission under every change. Though certain measures bore hard upon the higher classes, and though they were excluded from all offices of high trust and emolument, no clamours or expressions of discontent have been heard. This may have been less owing to their insensibility and indifference, than to their habits, formed under an absolute government, which endures submission until the

grievance approaches the extreme point. With the few of them who reason at all on the subject, it may be ascribed to their having distinctly perceived the general policy of the British government to be dictated by humane and liberal motives, and pursued with unceasing endeavours for their general welfare, and that the errors committed have proceeded more from a want of knowledge and experience, than from any other cause. The want of knowledge, founded on local experience, was conspicuous in Lord Cornwallis, and to this may be justly ascribed the defects in the system established by his lordship, which it is now become indispensable for the Court of Directors to inquire into and correct. Lord Cornwallis went out to India under a persuasion that the landholders had been oppressed, and that their hardships arose principally from the changeable system of the internal government. His I.ordship was surrounded by theorists who might be thought to have caught the spirit of innovation, at that time prevailing in Europe. The ill effect of bad administration was ascribed to the rules and laws administered, and an entire change in the machine was determined on, without any attempt to correct its movements. The most important of the changes introduced, and from which the others followed, as matters of course, was that which invested the Zemindars with proprietary right in the land on assessments fixed in perpetuity. This alteration, which placed the Zemindar, as nearly as could be done, on a footing with a British freeholder, was followed by an abolition of those checks, which appeared to be necessary, only while he acted as collector of the revenue. The Canongoes lost their land and their offices; those ancient functionaries, the Chowderies, Moccuddims, and Mundulls, with the whole economy of a Hindoo village community, or such remnants as had survived the Mahomedan rule, were left at the discretion of the Zemindar; and a host of Paicks, who had held service

lands, were deprived of their maintenance by an order of the government,

and left to shift for themselves.* Innovations of this nature would have been dangerous to the state in other countries, but they were submitted to in India without any public disturbance. These arrangements, and the municipal rules founded on them, have now been more than twenty years in operation, and a competent judgment, it is presumed, may be formed of that policy which has extended them to the territories subsequently acquired. On their effects in Bengal, different opinions appeared to be entertained. Those who think most favourably of Lord Cornwallis' system, see in the increased population, cultivation, and internal commerce, which has certainly occurred, what they deny could have been experienced under the former regulations of the government; they even deny the possibility of such effects being produced under what is understood to have been either the Mahomedan or the Hindoo system of government. To so unfounded a prejudice, it might be sufficient to oppose the evidence arising from the vestiges of public works of ornament and of use abounding throughout India, some of which rival the stupendous labours of the ancient world, and could be effected only under tranquil and prosperous governments; but on this point I am happy to be supported by the Sanscrit Professor at the Oriental College, whose acquaintance with the history and literature of India, gives peculiar weight to his opinions on this subject. His words are these:-'I hope I shall not appear inconsistent, if I here state my conviction, that at the time of the Mahomedan invasion, Hindustan had reached a higher degree of order, riches, and population, than it has since obtained.' Again, he says, I beg it may not be imagined, that I, in any degree, entertain the opinion, that Bengal was misgoverned until the English obtained possession of it. The high state of prosperity in which they found it, would, to every unprejudiced mind, repel so gross a calumny. For my own part, I not only agree with Mr Hamilton in re

gard to the effects which have been produced under former governments, but perhaps go farther than he does, in thinking the system under which these were produced, to be still the system best adapted to the genius and condition of the people, so that our deviations from it have been attended with inconvenience to the government, and evils to the people, which go far to countervail any good to either, that can be ascribed exclusively to the change."

The system of which Mr Davis here speaks so highly in praise, may yet be seen in active operation in the Mahratta territories. That it formerly extended throughout the whole of that country where Hindooism, however modified, exists, cannot be doubted, though it is to the provinces conquered from the Peishwa that we must now look for a distinct view of it in our own possessions; indeed, there are too many traces of it, even in the old provinces of Bengal, Bahan, and Orissa, to suffer a doubt to arise, as to its universal prevalence at no very distant period. Taking the Reports of Sir Thomas Munro, and the Honourable Mountstuart Elphinstone, therefore, as my chief authorities, in referring you generally to the Fifth Report of the Select Committee of 1812, with its voluminous appendices, I

proceed at once to lay before your readers a brief outline of their native arrangements, such as they were whilst yet the Hindoos maintained their independence, and such as they afterwards became under the Mussulman dynasties.

Long prior to the year 1000, when the first Mahomedan conquests were made, we have every reason to believe, that the whole of that immense territory, which we usually, but improperly, denominate Hindostan, was governed not by one prince or emperor, but by a number of petty princes, called Rajahs. Among these there appears to have been one, namely the MahalRajah, of a rank superior to the rest, to whom the others looked as a sort of federal chief, in case of need, and a general protector against the encroachments and oppressions of each other; but with

whom they seldom kept up any decided Intimacy, except when their necessities compelled. Within his own principality, each Rajah seems, on the contrary, to have been quite as absolute as the Mahal-Rajah; and in all the principalities the Rajahship was hereditary, by neither more nor less than a sort of patriarchal monarchy.

When I speak of the absolute authority of an Hindoo Rajah, it is not my intention to assert, that he stood above the reach of law, or the control of public opinion. On the contrary, he was placed, by the rules of his religion, in a great degree, under the guidance of his Brahmins. His religion imposed upon his passions very considerable restraint; nor was it possible for him to violate these, without, at the same time, stirring up against himself a power more to be dreaded than anything of which we can form a conception."The magistrate,' says the code of Gentoo laws, "shall keep in subjection to himself his lust, anger, avarice, folly, drunkenness, and pride; he who cannot keep these passions under his own subjection, how shall he be able to nourish or protect the people? Neither shall he be seduced by the pleasures of the chase, nor be perpetually addicted to play; nor must he be always employed in dancing, singing, and playing on musical instruments; nor must he sleep in the day time; nor shall he falsely accuse any person; nor shall he always remain concealed in his private apartments, nor practise the drinking of wine; nor shall he go to any place without a cause, and shall not dispraise any person without knowing his faults; nor shall he cause any molestation to men of worth; nor shall he put any person to death by artful and deceitful practices; nor shall he take away the property of any person; nor shall he envy another person's superior merit; nor shall he say that such persons as are men of capacity are men of no capacity; nor shall he abuse any person; and shall not hold any person guilty without the commission of a crime." Again, "Such things as are not proper for him to take, he shall not take on any pretence; and of such things as are right and proper for him to take,

even although they are exceedingly minute, he shall not press his claim; and he shall esteem the subjects in the light of his children."

Such are the rules laid down for the private conduct of the Rajah. To as sist him in the concerns of government, again, he is commanded "to erect in his kingdoms some buildings of strength and elegance, and to place therein, with all dignity and respect, ten Brahmins, learned in the Buds of the Shastu, (who are also men skilful in the works of piety, and who employ themselves in worthy actions, and who are men of compassion and clemency, and of an exalted family, and acquainted with all business, and who know the excellencies and blemishes of each particular caste,) to instruct and control the affairs of the kingdom, both religious and otherwise." Justice, moreover, was administered by the prince in person, who sat, as we read that David and Solomon sat, at the gate of the city, or in the porch of his palace, to hear such complaints as might be brought before him. On these occasions it is required, that "the magistrate shall not be impatient and angry at hearing any subject's complaints; and if any person, not having gained his cause, speaks abusively to the magistrate, even then he shall not be enraged against that person, but shall forgive him his error."

That the Hindoos were by no means ignorant of the reciprocal duties of a sovereign and his subjects, the following sentences, extracted from the same writer, will prove. "The magistrate shall collect from his people the neces sary tribute, and shall never commit injustice; he shall listen upon all occasions, to such men as are possessed of an acute judgment, and who are very expert in all affairs. If a plunderer should attack the magistrate's kingdom, and grievously molest the people, the magistrate shall most sureÎy punish him; if he does not, he is unworthy of the magistracy;" and "A magistrate, who, without protecting and taking care of the subjects, collects the accustomed tribute from them, will go to hell." Mr Halhed has, indeed, assured us, that more than one instance is on record of a Rajah being

deposed by his people, on account of tyranny and oppression; from all which, we are justified in concluding, that no such arbitrary authority was claimed by Hindoo princes as modern writers would lead us to believe. That many of them might have proved tyrants is extremely probable; but tyranny and regal power go together in other countries besides India, according as the absolute monarch chances to be surrounded by wise or unwise, by righteous or unjust councillors.

With respect, again, to the general condition of society, as it subsisted under the guidance of the aboriginal princes of India, it is difficult to conceive any more remarkable, or better calculated to nourish those feelings of passive content, and unambitious indolence, for which the race of Hindoos are, to this day, distinguished. In the entire organization of the social state, no arrangements were made for the purpose of meeting those changes which the very passage of time is continually producing; indeed, the possibility of change appears either not to have occurred to the founders of the Hindoo institutions, or, having occurred, to have been with the utmost anxiety guarded against. Hence none of the ancient regulations make the slightest provision, as far as we can judge, for the probable extension of commerce, for the formation of foreign alliances, or the increase of public wealth; but each political maxim seems to point rather to the continuance of things as they were when that maxim was composed, than to any alteration in the state of the country, or the condition of its inhabitants, either for the better or the worse.

It is to this spirit, indeed, and to it alone, that we may attribute those enactments, originating, no doubt, in views of civil policy, though afterwards confirmed by the influence of religion, which divide the natives of Hindostan into different castes and tribes; from the trammels of which neither they nor their children can hope, at any future period, to escape. To the same spirit, likewise, may be attributed those regulations, which, in India, as in ancient Egypt, render each trade or profession hereditary in the family of him who exercises it; which condemn the offspring of a mechanic, for example, to the cultivation of a mechanical art, and the son of an agriculturist to the VOL. XVII.

prosecution of agricultural labour. By these a line of demarkation is drawn between man and man, so decided, as to preclude, not only all hope, but every possibility, of its being, in any age, or by any exertion, overpassed; and hence each individual, being froin his earliest infancy brought up in the contemplation of an unalterable destiny awaiting him, not only makes no attempt to change, but absolutely knows not what it is to murmur at the lot which he readily believes that the wisdom of divine providence has cast for him.

But if such be the case even now, when the original institutions of the country are mixed and blended with foreign customs, how much more effectual must have been the force of these institutions when they flourished in all their vigour, under the native princes! Then, indeed, the son of a Brahmin, being early impressed with the conviction, that the pursuit of knowledge (such as it was) constituted his business through life, betook himself to it with cheerfulness, and with cheerfulness submitted to the various kinds of abstinence and self-denial which the more strict rules of his caste required him to practise, whilst the son of the Sudra, with equal cheerfulness, addressed himself to the discharge of those meaner and more servile offices, which the fortune of his birth determined that he should discharge. In like manner, the child of each individual, no matter to what caste belonging, turned his whole attention to the principles of that trade or business which his father had followed before him, without running the smallest risk of being diverted from his pursuit, by the whispers of ambition, or the allurements of avarice.

To speak in any other terms than those of unqualified condemnation of institutions and customs similar to the above, will, I am aware, expose me to the ridicule of all who have adopted the liberal principles of the present age; nor am I disposed to deny, that, under such institutions, no people can ever arrive at the highest degree of civilization or greatness. But the happiness of a nation is not to be estimated entirely by a contemplation of its splendour or its strength. There' is a state of society, on passing which, nations, though they may become more 4 Y

refined and more powerful, cease to be more happy; exactly as, in individual cases, we generally look for the greatest degree of happiness in what are termed the middle walks of life. That the Hindoos attained even to that state, I am not prepared to affirm; and that they are not now likely to attain to it, at least in our day, is perfectly certain but we are grossly deceived by those who ought not to deceive us, if they were not a great deal nearer to it under their own, than under our guidance. It may, therefore, I humbly conceive, admit of a question, whether even these restrictions were not, on the whole, conducive to the prosperity of that singular people; whilst their unabated attachment to them proves, that they were at least not disagreeable, since no set of human beings ever were, or ever can be, attached to customs, the continuance of which they consider as a grievance.

One immediate consequence of these arrangements unquestionably was, to render the people at large the very reverse of turbulent or restless. Restrained, as they were, by religious prejudices, from emerging from the sphere into which nature had thrown them, they entered, at no period, into plots and conspiracies against their rulers. It is, indeed, true, that since the first conquest of Mahmood,revolutions have occurred in India more frequently, perhaps, than in any other part of the known world, but these will be found to have originated invariably with a few discontented nobles, whilst the mass of the population looked on, as at a matter in which they had no concern. Indeed, the facility with which India has submitted to so many changes of masters, differing not only from the aborigines, but from one another, in habits, customs, and religion, furnishes ample testimony that the native institutions, if they have been productive of no other virtue, have at least given birth to a degree of patience, such as we shall vainly look for elsewhere.

It is not, however, to the existence of castes alone, and to the hereditary nature of trades among them, that we are to attribute the singular submissiveness of the Hindoo character. The whole of their political arrangements tended to produce the same effect. Even the petty Rajahships were, by these arrangements, placed each in the

light of a combination of little commonwealths, rather than in that of a single state; the affections and patriotism of the people being confined almost exclusively to their own immediate neighbourhood, and to their own domestic institutions. To an Hindoo Ryot, the preservation and culture of his hereditary field formed the only legitimate object of ambition, whilst his allegiance was confined exclusively to the magistrates and legal customs of his own village. In the proceedings at the court of the Rajah he took no concern; and hence, as long as the village institutions to which he had been accustomed, were permitted to continue in the state in which they had continued from his earliest recollection, the gentle Hindoo cared not how the Rajahship was disposed of, or by what hand the helm of state was guided.

If ever you have given your attention to Indian matters, you must have been struck with the frequent recurrence of such terms as Soubadan, Zemindar, Dewan, Nazim, and I know not all what. These appear to have crept into use long after the period of which I am now speaking. Most of them, indeed, owe their origin to the Mahomedan conquerors, who, from the union of so many nations, previously independent, were compelled to invent new offices, and new titles for these offices; whilst the rest began to be employed, when the limits of the various Rajahships extended themselves, and the less powerful became subject to their more powerful neighbours. In very ancient times, however, the sole distribution of society was into villages, and the only functionaries were those who presided over their judicial and financial affairs. Of the nature of one of these I shall now proceed to give you an account, referring you for farther particulars to the very able report of Mr Elphinstone, when acting as commissioner for the settlement of the territories conquered from the Paishwa.

You are probably aware that the chief part, in ancient times the whole, of the revenues of a native prince, were derived from the land. Under the Hindoo dynasties which existed previous to the Mahomedan conquestindeed for many centuries under the Mahomedan emperors-it was customary for the government to divide the crops with the cultivators; and, ha