66 among their countrymen." If really worthy to be guides and instructors to their countrymen, if acquainted with their true interests, and with the history of their own country, they would never disseminate principles which might not be safely tolerated by the British Government, whose power is not at variance with, but will gain strength from the gradual communication of every attribute of freedom of which the natives shall appear susceptible. The grant of a free press would not suddenly impart the desire and power of asserting pretensions inconsistent with the foundations of British ascendency; it would only promote, accompany, and manifest the development of pretensions, which it would be the duty and interest of Government to satisfy, by equitable modifications of its laws and institutions. The advancement of the native press would doubtless be slow. At first, and for a long time, its efforts would exhibit those indications of modesty and imbecility by which they are now characterized.* Ac

* For the indifference with which the natives would regard the privilege, we have the authority of Mr. Elphinstone:"At present, nobody would take a part or an interest, in po"litical discussions, but the Europeans, of whom more than "nine-tenths compose the strength of the army."-Letter, dated August 14th, 1823.

cording to Sir John Malcom himself, " a very "long period must elapse before freedom of dis"cussion and action is naturalized in a land to "which its very name is hitherto unknown." A long time it might be under the concurrence of the most favourable circumstances: but does he intend the sun should ever that morrow see? Under the 66 'improvement" which, he thinks, we may "and ought to impart" to them, does he contemplate the acquisition of a capacity for free discussion by the latest generation? No; 66 we

may change the character of the natives of In

dia, in the course of time, but we never can change "the character of our Government over that coun

try." He is lavish in professions of seeking "the accomplishment of just and liberal views by the "institution and maintenance of well regulated

colleges and schools, and the circulation of good " and useful compositions;" but by justice and liberality he means the denial of all effectual means of improving the character of the natives, their everlasting retention in a state of incapacity and exclusion from all offices of power, honour, and emolument, and our perpetual exposure to the dangers with which so unnatural a system is pregnant.

The non-existence of Englishmen in India,

not in the service of Government, except those "who reside there for a period by license,” liable to be cancelled at the pleasure of Government, is strangely assumed as an insuperable bar to the concession of a free press. It is said to be incompatible with "a society so constituted," where "there is not an individual" whose reflections on public measures may not be confuted by his instant transmission to England. But the alleged ground of incompatibility would be at once removed by the repeal of the prerogative on which the power of coercing the press by censorship, license, or deportation, entirely depends. That prerogative is the only sign, as far as British subjects are concerned, of the supposed "abso"lute power," by which some pretend that India is, and ought to be, governed, at the same time that they magnify the multitude and excellence of the checks, under which power is there exercised. The efficiency of the checks which do exist is of no avail to the protection of Englishmen, if they are left mortally vulnerable in a single point. But the very existence of so many checks, and the narrow field that is left to the wantonness of arbitrary power, prove that the Government is not absolute, but that there is a higher authority which sets bounds to its discretion and

which will not long permit the continuance of a power in the highest degree injurious to the public interests, and derogatory to the national honour.

232

CHAPTER VII.

ON THE CONVERSION OF THE NATIVES OF INDIA TO CHRISTIANITY.

THE extreme jealousy of the inhabitants of India respecting the interference with their religious sentiments and usages, and their readiness to resent affronts offered to them as attacks on their point of honour, constitute a source of danger to our power against which we cannot always find security in the most careful abstinence from every cause of offence. To excite the spirit of bigotry, and array multitudes under the standards and emblems of their faith, it is not necessary that any particular offence should have been intended on our part, or imagined on theirs; it is sufficient that the moment for revolt should appear favourable, and that adverse circumstances should give a beginning to sedition. Whatever may have originated the impulse, an appeal to reli