Above all, he had a care for education, and this brought him face to face with a difficulty in India which he did not hesitate to solve in a Christian spirit. With a quotation from a minute written on the 27th of July, 1848, regarding a grant - in - aid asked for a school conducted on Christian principles for the 2nd regiment of Bombay Light Cavalry, this chapter must be closed. Objection was raised to the grant on the ground of novelty, and because it would give alarm to the natives. Lord Dalhousie thus replied

I altogether dissent from the view that the appointment by the English Government of a schoolmaster for the education of English or Christian children in any given regiment would be regarded by Hindu or Mussulman with either alarm or disapprobation. If it were a military question I would at once defer to the opinions of Lord Hardinge or Lord Gough. If it were a question, the solution of which depended on intimate knowledge of native character, I should refer to the Court of Directors, conscious of the inadequacy of my experience. But it is not so. It is a question, the solution of which is to be found in the general principles of human nature, and which may be answered by the pages of history. . . . The cultivation of our own religion by ourselves, the observance of its precepts and ceremonies by ourselves, the instruction of our children and our own people by ourselves, are matters which are and ought to be, so far as Government is concerned, altogether distinct from any attempt at proselytism. So long as they are kept so, I utterly deny that the strict culture of our own religion by ourselves, and the instruction of our own people in it, will ever lessen our influence with the native population. I will go further, and I will say that they will tend to lessen it least of all with Hindus and Mahomedans, themselves so rigidly attentive to the precepts of their own creed. The whole scope of modern history tends to show, that that which has really lessened the respect in which European nations have been held by barbarous people has been the gross violation of their own precepts; the scandalous inconsistency of their lives with the doctrines of the religion they profess, and the practice of every vice which their teaching forbade. Then to say nothing at all

about duty, surely it is our policy not to allow these children to grow up in a state of ignorance, until ignorance leads them to vice. The Government provides instruction for native children by their own teachers in regiments. Upon what ground can the governing authority refuse to provide aid, at least, to the instruction of children of their own blood and their own creed?

Outline of Lord Dalhousie's policy towards Oudh-History of Oudh before the battle of Buxar-Oudh brought under British protection, 1765-Its misgovernment-The treaty of 1801-Comments upon its international character-Misrule continues between 1801 and 1837-A new treaty made in 1837 but disallowed from home-A decade of misrule follows-Col. Sleeman's appointment and report— The home authorities advocate interference-The views of Lord Dalhousie Col. Outram is appointed Resident-His report-Why Oudh is not depopulated-Lord Dalhousie is opposed to annexation His plans explained - Opposition of his colleagues in Council Hesitation at home Lord Dalhousie prepares for action-Decision of the home Government arrives-Conference with and instructions to Outram-Outram's negotiations and interview with the King-The King refuses to transfer the administration, and annexation is proclaimed-The plan of administrationThe failures in carrying it out-Lord Dalhousie was not responsible for some of them, and in other instances his intentions were frustrated-Remarks on the whole question.

THE most serious indictment brought against Lord Dalhousie's policy in India is that of having annexed the kingdom of Oudh to the Company's dominions, and of so carrying out the operation as to inspire a widespread feeling of discontent which conduced to, or at least helped to intensify, the outbreak of the Sepoy

1 See papers relating to Oudh printed by order of the House of Commons, dated the 12th of July, 1861; and those presented by command, 1856, to both Houses.

rebellion. Those who repeat this charge are too ready to forget that the problem was one which had reached an acute stage before the year 1848, and demanded an early solution, that the proposals submitted to the home authorities by the Governor - General did not involve annexation, that the decision of those authorities was so delayed as to give him no time to carry out his plans for the pacification of the province after its incorporation in British India, and that many essential parts of his scheme, including even his public promises, were disregarded under the rule of a successor who, being new to India, had not fully realised the position. But for these unfortunate departures in the execution of the measure, there is no reason to suppose that Oudh would not have shown itself in 1857 as loyal and peaceful a part of the empire as the Punjab proved to be. Lord Dalhousie himself was under no delusion as to the gravity of the question. He saw the dangers that lurked behind an incomplete settlement, he knew that vested interests in disorder and corruption would suffer if peace and justice were established in the land, he had before him full accounts of the armed retinues by which society had been held together, and the strong forts that might defy authority, and he left upon record his conviction that the whole success of the policy which was forced upon him would depend upon the maintenance of an adequate force upon the spot, and the adoption of “ measures to conciliate the minds of all persons whose interests would be affected by the change. Only if a stronger man armed held possession of Oudh could its peace be assured.

Few provinces in India have suffered greater 1732-1764. vicissitudes of fortune than the rich alluvial country occupying the central portion of the Gangetic plain and

watered by the Ganges, the Gumti, the Gogra, and the Rapti. Of its history before the battle of Buxar only a bare sketch can be given. In the earliest days of which we have trustworthy record it witnessed the fierce struggle between Buddhism and Brahmanism, a struggle that ended in desolation so complete that the work of civilisation had to begin afresh. No sooner had an aboriginal tribe in the ninth century cleared the jungle than a Jain family stepped in to reap the profit of their labour. These in their turn were forced to surrender their territory to the kingdom of Kanauj. At the close of the twelfth century the Mahomedans overran Oudh, and the province, torn from Bengal, became an outlying dependency of Delhi. Passing later on under the rule of Jaunpur, it was once more the scene of revolution until it entered upon a period of peace and prosperity under a Hindu Raja. Another interval of disorder followed from which the strong hand of Akbar rescued it; and its feudal barons, who, throughout all these shifting scenes had clung to the soil, gradually grew strong under the decaying empire of Aurangzeb. About the year 1732, Saadat Khan, a merchant of Khorasan, who had risen to power in the reign of Mahomed Shah, obtained the appointment of local governor. When Nadir Shah advanced against Delhi, Saadat Khan, instead of rendering assistance to his imperial master, thought only of securing his own position. By an act of treachery he succeeded in retaining his title of Nawab Wazir and established his independence. Thenceforward the most serious danger to Oudh lay in the advance of the Marathas, and Saadat Khan prudently reserved his strength to defend his own possessions instead of engaging in the hopeless task of trying to arrest the general break-up of the empire of Delhi.