not only in Rugby men, is his influence manifested; the great moral force of this excellent man tells in every direction; it has revolutionized public school management throughout England; it has raised an ideal of manly worth; it has communicated principles of exertion to men, who were always grieving his righteous heart while they were under him, and to men who were never personally connected with him at all. And our children's children, aye, perhaps the children's children of these apparently God-forgotten Asiatics by whom we are now surrounded, may have few greater causes of thankfulness to Almighty Providence, than that he raised up, in the second quarter of the nineteenth century, such a teacher as Thomas Arnold.

It is right to say a word in reference to the new Preface, which has appeared since this Article was commenced. It consists of two parts; the former containing a long letter by a friend of the author on "bullying"-a point on which he thinks enough stress has not been laid in the chronicle of Tom Brown's School-days. He suggests, as a remedy, the separation of boys of different ages into different schools in different localities; so that boys of ten years old shall not be associated with boys of fifteen, and the sports and pursuits suitable to each age shall be appropriated accordingly. Now, it is very true that very young boys at Rugby were, under Arnold, rather oddly deprived by the custom of the school, of the games best adapted to their strength and habits. Marbles, peg-tops, trap-bat, rounders, and prisoners' base, all good games in their way, were entirely proscribed at Rugby; and the only games ever played were cricket, foot-ball, fives, and hare and hounds. But this pedantry was unnecessary, and the Masters could have done away with it. On the other hand, another correspondent to whom the author must have shewn the letter referred to, truly objects that the real bully is often younger than his victim; that Masters have a good deal of power without the introduction of "sneaking" habits among the boys; and omits to mention that, if the separation recommended were possible, it would be an unnatural deviation from the practice of Providence, and the analogies of life.

An accomplished friend of the present writer, speaking from experience as Master, and also as pupil, thus expresses himself:

My opinion always was, that people blessed with such adwpa dopa as precociously sensitive boys, had much better not plunge them into a boisterous sea of school boys, about as politic a proceeding as pitching a brat off London Bridge to take his chance of getting to a wharf...... As to outrageous

6

bullying, such as the roasting scene in Tom Brown,' that must be partly the fault of those in authority, and very often the fault of the sufferer himself...... My receipt against bullying (bien entendu that very thin-skinned little fellows 'should not be sent at all to a public school) would be to encourage manly games as much as possible, a point in which I believe Dr. Arnold failed.* And as to long winter evenings, if the boys have jolly games outside, they will have plenty to talk about inside."

6

The other part of the Preface is taken up with a defence, (perhaps almost superfluous) against a charge of "preaching," which it seems, has been brought against the author. As an open Kingsleyite, it is the author's "mission" to preach; and the words with which he concludes form an eloquent summary and justification of the serious tone of some of the writing in Tom Brown, and of the similar character often urged as an objection to the Rugbeans of Arnold's time generally" I won't say that the reviewers have not a certain plausible ground for their dicta. For a short time after a boy has taken up such a life as Arnold would have urged upon him, he has a hard time of it. The more seriously he buckles to his work, the oftener these mischances seem to happen ; and in the dust of his tumbles and struggles, unless he is a very extraordinary boy, he may often be too severe on his comrades, may think he sees evil in things innocent, may give offence when he never meant it. At this stage of his career our reviewer comes across him, and ... at once sets the poor boy down for a prig and a Pharisee, when in all likelihood he is one of the humblest of the reviewer's acquaintance.

6

"But let our reviewer come across him again in a year or two, when the thoughtful life' has become habitual to him, and fits him as easily as his skin; and if he be honest, I think 'he will see cause to reconsider his judgment, for he will find the boy grown into a man, enjoying every day life, as no man can, who has not found out whence comes the capacity for enjoy'ment, and who is the Giver of the least of the good things of this world-humble as no man can be, who has not proved his own powerlessness to do right in the smallest act which he ever had to do-tolerant, as no man can be, who does not live daily and hourly in the knowledge of how Perfect Love is for ever about his path, and bearing with and upholding him." Of course all Arnold's boys did not become all this; but it is his peculiar glory to have created the ideal.

* The few games studied at Rugby actually beame a science, and helped to drive many boys into idle habits; this is an undoubted fact,

ART. VII.-1. Statistics of Cawnpore. BY R. MONTGO

MERY, C. S.

2. Report on the 24-Pergunnahs.

SMYTH. Calcutta.

1857.

BY MAJOR RALPH

3. Alarer Ghorer Dulal. BY TEKCHAND THAKUR.

N the fifteen years during which this Review has been

are topics which have not

been treated of in its pages. Few salient points in either Indian literature, or Indian history, or Indian politics, have remained entirely unnoticed. Many subjects have been considered from more than one point of view, until we fear the patience of our readers must be exhausted. Thus, we have had India in Provinces, and India in Departments; articles on kingdoms as they were, and on kingdoms as they should be: on the causes that should lead to annexation, and on the effects of annexation duly carried out; articles on all the principal sources of our revenue, and on the land tax, as it appears under its different modes of realisation, and with all its striking features, of village, ryotwary, and zemindarry settlements. We have had reviews of books, and reviews of biographies; we have had criticisms on the works of travellers, who have speculated in Diaries, and in Tours and Bird's-eye views, on some of the most complicated problems ever presented for the solution of the statesman. The condition of the police, the administration of justice, the deficiencies of the law, have been thoroughly dissected and laid bare. Enquiries have been pushed even into the purlieus of great cities, into hill sanataria, into the physically unhealthy condition of masses of the population, and into the mineral treasures that lie concealed beneath the earth. In short, we have had articles on almost every conceivable subject, that could interest the scholar, the reformer, or the mere Dilettante. From their self-importance many matters will require to be cut and carved again and again; and from the gradual changes in public opinion alone, it may be necessary from time to time regularly to pass in review the working of particular systems, or the condition of important branches of the public service. What a vast field for enquiry is now presented, by the disordered state of our finances, the re-organisation of a moderate native army of some kind or other, and the re-establishment of security and order over districts, where the fiends of rapine and lawlessness have been for months let loose! What room for an elaborate paper on the expected pacification, and settlement of Oude! How many SEPT., 1858,

BB

a

interesting theories may be either established or exploded by the comparison of swift, summary, and pro-consular government, with government by acts and regulations, alarming statements on paper, repeated checks, and never-ending appeals! There is no limit, just now, to variety of subjectmatter or to shades of opinion. In this paper, however, our researches will be confined within a narrower bound. We shall endeavour to engage the attention of our readers not on a new army, or a newly subjugated kingdom, not even on "fertile but neglected" district, nor on an ancient Hindu or Mohammedan capital, nor on any one remarkable tribe or number of communities, but on a village. What the Presidency is to India, what a province is to a Presidency, what a district is to a province, that, obviously, is a village to a district. We do not mean an imaginary village, combining the characteristics of half a dozen, skilfully dovetailed together. But to be precise, we beg our readers to follow us through two real villages, one composed entirely of Hindus, the other almost as entirely of Mohammedans. We shall say something on the trades, occupations, and social position of almost each one of the adult inhabitants of either; on their discomforts or comforts and peculiarities; on their land tenures, and, as far as they can be entered into by Europeans, on their feelings and hopes.

We commence with the village inhabited by Mohammedans. We should state that both villages are situated within half a mile of each other; that, with regard to advantages of position, climate, and convenience, they are not unfavourably situated, being only two miles from a large station, and that in them are to be found specimens of ryots of all kinds, from substantial grihasts and thrifty husbandmen, to those who from ill-luck or carelessness are living, literally, from hand to mouth. These two villages are average villages, not teeming with pucka houses, nor mere collections of fishermen's hovels, and they may be the more instructive from the very contrast of particular cases of well-being, and of downright poverty. The Mohammedan village is named, with the usual recourse to a high sounding nomenclature, "the Seat of Prosperity;" the Hindu village is "the City of Fortune." We do not pretend to give an accurate census of every man, woman, and child in either, or to describe the entire fortunes of every single individual in the two villages-but we are in a position to give a fair outline of each distinct house or bari. This word, be it observed, has with the native often a distinct meaning from the word ghur. The latter is, simply, a house, with its raised mud floor, its bamboo posts, and

its thatch of straw. The bari is both home, family, and residence. To speak correctly there may be a dozen houses in one and the same bari. Men may live in the same bari, but with huts or houses (ghur), arrangements for cooking, eating and sleeping, entirely distinct. Our village, then, to be described on this principle, will be gone through by numbering each bari in succession, as No. 1 to No. 50, with such particulars of the number of houses or huts visible in each, and of the occupations and trades followed by the principal inhabitants, as we have been able to collect after a series of somewhat minute and careful enquiries. Afterwards we shall enter on such generalities as may seem fitted to illustrate the condition of the ryot. But we invite our readers, first, to visit him quietly at home, and pick up a few particulars of each man's biography.

No. 1, at the corner of the village, is a good sample of a poor hard-working man, just one degree above positive indigence. He himself, wife, and three children, live in one single house. His three cows, which are all his stock, live in a mere shed with open sides, close by. His jumma or assessed holding is three rupees a year, and the land gives him a few plantains, some pumpkins and a little rice. Owing to the smallness of his tenure he lives by working as a day-labourer, by digging, planting, building, weeding, or mending fences, at the bidding of any one who may hire him at from seven to nine pyce a day.

No. 2 is a specimen of a similar kind. He has one house, a wife and child, and no cattle of any sort. His jumma is two rupees eight annas a year, consisting of garden-land fenced in, immediately round his dwelling. He has no rice ground at all. His sole means of subsistence is daily manual labour, eked out by the few bamboos, plantains, or mangoes, which may ripen in his garden. When not hired by any one in the village, he goes to the neighbouring bazar, which is not much more than two miles off, where he is pretty sure to pick up employment. His wife is powerless to aid him by any skill in handicraft, and remains at home to look after their one child and to cook the meals. Both Nos. 1 and 2 are genuine samples of scanty fare and constant hard work.

No. 3 is an individual of a better class. His property, consisting of two different jummas or holdings, amounting to twenty-three rupees a year, is held by him with his brother, jointly, although the two have ceased to mess in common. Both, however, still live in the same enclosure. The land consists of rice, vegetable garden, and date garden, the last portion having no less than 160 trees upon it. No.