a critical time. By the early summer of 1858 the movement had been completely crushed all over India.

It is of course true that the Indian Mutiny was by no means a national movement. On the contrary, it brought out in strong relief the steadfast loyalty of many among the princes and peoples of India. Yet, though it failed from a military and political point of view, it undoubtedly left behind it bitter and mischievous memories. It was not easy for Indians to forget the men blown from the mouths of British guns. Nor could white men and women forget the innocent sufferers whose martyrdom is commemorated at Cawnpore.

All this, however, was as yet beneath the surface. There followed, as Chirol calls it, "a long period of paternal but autocratic government."1 During those years railways increased from a mileage of 200 to 28,000; telegraph lines from 45,000 to 60,000; and though famine and plague came with terrible severity, the population continued to grow by leaps and bounds, till India contained one fifth of the world's inhabitants.

By virtue of the Act for the Better Government of India, passed immediately after the suppression of the Mutiny, India came under the Crown. The administration of the Company was over, and the Governor-General was for the first time known officially by the title of Viceroy. During the next years many signs were forthcoming that India was a dependency of the British Crown. One was the visit of the Prince of Wales (afterward King Edward VII) in the winter of 1875-76. A still more spectacular indication of the fact was the proclamation of Queen Victoria as Empress of India in 1877.2 The great Durbar on the Ridge overlooking Delhi must have carried back the imagination of men to the days of Akbar. Yet beneath all the outward manifestations of Lord Lytton's brilliant Oriental policy there were felt the gathered mutterings of popular discontent. This discontent had many causes. There was the terrible famine of 1877-78, which entailed suffering such as had never 1 See Chirol, The Occident and the Orient, ch. IV.

2 An Oriental stroke due to the brain of Benjamin Disraeli, Earl of Beaconsfield.

before in historical times visited Hindustan. There was the Afghan War, which, inevitable as it was, both in India and in England was viewed with much misgiving. Above all was the rankling sense on the part of Indians, particularly those who had received Western training and education, that the promises of earlier days had not been fulfilled. There were many Indians who, having learned all their rights and more than all their wrongs, felt that high administrative office was not open to them, however well they were qualified by intelligence and training. In the army, too, there were many capable of leadership, but they must always rank beneath the rawest of English subalterns. Even when Lord Ripon arrived to reverse the policy of Lytton and to introduce liberal reforms, the result was too frequently the increase of ill-feeling between Indian and European. An example of this is the famous Ilbert Bill, which, intended to give justice to Indian officials, was regarded by many as a plan for putting Indian magistrates in authority over white subordinates, so the Bill was whittled down, by way of concession to agitation, till nothing much remained except a sense of resentment. The discontent of the intelligentsia expressed itself at length in the formation of the Indian National Congress, which held its first session at Bombay on December 28, 1885. There was at first no intention to propagate disloyalty. It was desired simply to agitate by constitutional methods for a larger share in the administration of the Indian Empire. Nor was this constitutional agitation ineffective. Though, to save face, the Government was but little inclined to acknowledge its debt to the Congress, the passing of the Indian Local Government Act of 1888 and, under Lord Lansdowne, of the Indian Councils Act of 1892 was to a considerable degree the result of Congressional activity. Yet the spokesmen for a new India wanted not so much more councils as some measure of representative government. Of this there was as yet no sign on the political horizon. So the agitation continued to ferment. Unfortunately, interest in social and religious reform seemed in a corresponding degree to be dying out.

Such was the situation when the ablest Indian administrator of modern times, Lord Curzon,' took the helm, and in an unlucky moment proposed the partition of Bengal. This measure served more than anything else to reveal the gulf which had opened between the governors and the governed. For the great wave of unrest which marked the assumption of the viceroyalty by Curzon in 1898 there was an accumulation of causes. Certainly it was not through any lack of earnestness and ability on the part of the Governor-General. Curzon's administration, on the contrary, was marked by many important and significant reforms. For example, there was notable advance in matters of education and of police. Extensive works of irrigation were carried out, providing for large additional population. There was also the formation of the Imperial Cadet Corps in connection with the feudatory states. Of a more public character was the great Coronation Durbar at Delhi in 1903. And a military measure of far-reaching importance was the expedition of General Younghusband to Lhasa in 1904. All these things, however, were forgotten in the indignation aroused by the partition of a province which, with a population of 70,000,000, was confessedly in need of subdivision. All the world over, nationalism in some form or other was in the air. Boers were fighting against British. Abyssinians were celebrating their victory over the Italians. Above all, the triumph of Japan over Russia was raising the question as to whether the white man might not, after all, be ejected from Asia altogether. The very language which the British Raj had given to India as a common tongue served to spread and make more effective the agitation for ending a foreign rule. Thus, in spite of all the splendid services Lord Curzon rendered to India and the Empire, his fall-consequent upon a disagreement with Lord Kitchener, the commander-in-chief- was hailed with delight. Taken with the defeat of the Unionist party at the general election of 1905, the retirement of Curzon seemed to promise well for reform in India.

1 Afterward British Foreign Minister. Died in 1925.

That no radical change came at any rate, immediately from the new Viceroy, Lord Minto, or from the new Secretary of State for India, Mr. John Morley,' was the cause of keen disappointment. Agitation was renewed- agitation of a more extreme type. The Moderates in the Indian National Congress found themselves derided for their patience and more and more under pressure to advocate disloyalty. The cry of “Swaraj" (self-government), began to be heard on all sides. The press and the schools seethed with expressions of discontent. Moreover, as Chirol writes: "The cult of the bomb was easily grafted on to the cult of Shiva, the destroyer; and murders, of which the victims were almost as often Indians in Governmental service as British-born officials, were invested with a halo of religious and patriotic heroism."

This agitation, which in 1907 had produced a very critical situation, was severest in Bengal and Eastern Bengal. It took not only the form of violence and dacoity, but also the more subtle form of the Swadeshi movement for the boycotting of British-made goods. Moreover, the conspiracy against the British Raj ramified through many lands, as was shown by the assassination of Sir William Curzon-Wylie by an Indian student in London. The Government was confronted with a double task of delicacy and difficulty. In one direction it had to suppress with a heavy hand the outbreak of lawlessness; in the other, it had to hasten forward the contemplated measures of reform. In the former direction we have the passing of such measures as the Explosives Act, the Prevention of Seditious Meetings Act, and the Criminal Law Amendment Act. In the other direction, the occurrence in 1908 of the fiftieth anniversary of Queen Victoria's proclamation after the Mutiny - to the effect that the government was assumed by the Crown furnished a fine opportunity for the announcement that the principle of representative government was something which England had always intended to introduce, however gradually.

1 Afterward Lord Morley of Blackburn.

2 Chirol, op. cit., p. 131.

"The time has come when, in the judgment of my Viceroy and Governor-General and others of my counselors, that principle may be prudently extended."

This promise was fulfilled by the passing through Parliament in 1909 of the Indian Councils Act. Naturally enough, the measure disappointed the expectations of many. It did, however, add elected members to the legislative councils, and conceded to the councils much greater powers of discussion. The system of election was necessarily complex, because of the composition of an Indian electorate, but it did reach the desires of the various Muhammadan and Hindu communities. The elected councils, however, suffered from the fact that they were as yet little more than "debating bodies, with the power of criticizing the executive."

Efforts were made by the extremists to secure the rejection of the reform; but largely through the influence of notable Moderates such as Mr. Gokhale, and also because the most notorious extremist, Mr. Tilak, was at the time undergoing a term of imprisonment, the unrest was to a considerable extent allayed. Lord Minto's viceroyalty was beginning most satisfactorily, especially as arrangements were made with the feudatory princes which considerably increased their administrative liberty, and, in consequence, their self-respect. “The foundation stone," said the Viceroy, "of the whole system is the recognition of identity of interests between the Imperial Government and the Durbars, and the minimum of interference with the latter in their own affairs."

On Lord Minto's retirement in 1910 there was some alarm in India lest, as rumor had it, Lord Kitchener-whom Indians did not dislike as a man but feared as a soldier should succeed. The new Viceroy, however, was Lord Hardinge, whose six years of office were eventful and critical. The first event of his term was the visit of the King and Queen, who were welcomed with real enthusiasm. The occasion was marked by several dramatic announcements, including that of the transfer of the capital from Calcutta to Delhi - or rather, to