profound, entered at St John's College, was third classic in 1848, and, with a brief interlude at Marlborough, spent all his years, full as they were of work and achievement, in his own college. On the last day of November he dined in hall, where he said grace, and on December 1st he was dead-a swift and painless conclusion to a life given to literature. Reading was at once his toil and his recreation. He confessed that he never walked for the sake of walking. Books were his one and only solace, and, prizing them highly, he presented them to others with a free hand. Twenty years ago he had already given away 25,000 volumes of the class which had been his faithful friends through life. His generosity was not always appreciated at its proper worth. "Books for which I gave a pound," he wrote in 1891, "the modern Orbilius spurns when offered for a shilling. Nay, he will not take them as a gift. . . . Sometimes they ask if they may sell what I have given; more often they sell without asking." In brief, he was a scholar, simple and single-hearted, a sound Tory, who began a flysheet within ten days of his death with these admirable words: "Offi cialism militant is in the air, Cabinets wagged by their extremities gag Parliaments into dumb voting booths." He dedicated his life to the Muses, and nobly did they repay him for his obedience. His humanity equalled his learning. His humour threw a veil of gaiety over what in other men might appear pedantry. Justly might he be described in the terms which Casaubon reserved for Scaliger: "A man who, by the indefatigable devotion of a stupendous talent to the acquisition of knowledge, has garnered up vast stores of uncommon lore. His memory has so happy a readiness that when the occasion calls for it, whether it be in conversation or whether he be consulted by letter, he is ready to bestow with a lavish hand what has been gathered by him in the sweat of his brow." In truth, he was 8 gentler, smoother Scaliger, and there is scattered up and down his books, pamphlets, and sermons a wealth of aphorisms, observations, and discoveries in life and letters, which if gathered together might make a book as erudite, as various, as lightly entertaining as the Scaligerana' itself. Is there no pious disciple who will undertake this task of devotion? 1 To this statement Mayor appended the characteristic note that follows: "I buy every edition of the one progressive Latin Lexicon-that of my venerable friend K. E. Georges,-and give away the last but one. One such copy had cost me 50s.—30s. for binding, a pound for the book. Within a few weeks after I had given it to a seat of learning (I hope, sound), I saw it offered in a second-hand bookshop for 4s. I had not the wit to buy it and give it again to the grateful recipients. Thrift, thrift, Horatio." Rumour has it that the seat of learning was Girton College. INDIAN UNREST. THERE is a large number of men residing in the United Kingdom who have lived for years in India, and are intimately acquainted with the people and the machinery of the Government. Most of these men are well educated and of more than average ability, and capable not only of forming sound opinions on Indian affairs, but of giving expression to them. Yet there is more ignorance about the Indian Empire than about any other of our dependencies, and less interest is taken in its history, past or present. most retired Indian officials the doors of official knowledge have been thrown open to him, and that he has dealt with the information placed at his disposal with an unbiassed judgment. It would be difficult for a man who has lived and served in India for half a lifetime to put his finger on a mistake or find a point on which Mr Chirol has been deceived. Several causes contribute to this condition of things. Very few of the retired Indian administrators float on the surface of English society. Unless there is a war on, or some one of note has been assassinated, no one wants to hear about India, and the man who tries to talk on Indian politics is shunned as a bore. The men who could "Indian Unrest" has bespeak, and are sufficiently dis- come a stock phrase. What tinguished to command do we mean by it?" The audience, are sometimes more human and not unnatural imconcerned with their own in- patience fretting under an terests, and fear to be ticketed alien rule not always too as old Indians or sun-dried sympathetic"; or "An irrebureaucrats. If they dare to concilable reaction against all criticise the liberal measures that not only British rule but for presenting India with a Western civilisation stands mock Constitution on a rep- for "? If we take " "unrest resentative model, they are they are in the first sense, it is cercondemned as narrow and tainly no new thing. We prejudiced. The result is that have heard a great deal too an 1 Unrest in India. By Valentine Chirol. London: Macmillan. much about "the new spirit." The talk about it began as soon as Lord Morley assumed office. He made no secret of his intention to make a great step forward, even before he could have formed a sound opinion on the conditions of the vast Empire committed to his care. The truth is, that there has never been a time when the people did not fret more or less under our rule. Writing in 1830, Sir Charles Metcalfe, as the result of extensive intercourse with high and low, rich and poor, over a large area of the interior, recorded his opinion that force alone kept us in India, and that if we were supposed to be weak, "the figure of an enemy starting from the earth would, to appearance, be almost realised in the swarms of enemies which would show themselves if they thought that they could assail our power with any hopes of success." 1 It was not so long afterwards that Lord Dalhousie said that India was quiet only so long as we were strong; and in 1857 we had the Mutiny to emphasise this. Ever since the Mutiny, and before the end of the nineteenth century, there have been several organised movements against the British Government. It is therefore unreasonable to talk as if unrest of this sort was a new thing. The probability, nay, certainty, is that the masses are more contented than they were in 1830, and, until they were mis led by lies and roused by agitators, much more contented, as the administration is far better and gives them more protection. The upper classes, the landowners and merchants, and generally those who have much to lose, are certainly loyal to the British Government, in so far that they have no desire to see it overthrown. The unrest that is new, at least in its extent and expression, springs, in fact, from race hatred, and is directed against the European and all his ways. In the volume before us, Mr Chirol has set himself to trace the genesis of this revolt and to discover the causes which have led in the past few years to its violent outburst. Whether he is right in all his facts and conclusions some people may doubt. No one can deny that he has drawn a clear and fascinating picture of the present political condition of India, -a picture which will attract the attention of most thinking men in Europe. It is not easy to reduce this picture within smaller dimensions without blurring the lines and injuring the proportions. It will be best to give our readers the impressions which it has left on our minds. The great multitudes who live in India and are infinitesimally divided by race, religious divisions, and the subdivisions of caste, are cultivators of the soil. Outside the petty affairs of their own villages they have never had, and do not 1 See Shore's Indian Affairs,' vol. i. p. 531. London: John W. Parker. 1837. want to have, a voice in the government of the province or Empire in which they live. If the course of their daily lives, their religious and caste rules, and their domestic privacy are not interfered with, all they ask is to be allowed to till their plot of soil in peace and to retain a moderate share of the produce. Granted these conditions, it does not give them much thought whether the ruler of the Empire is a Moghul at Delhi or a Mahratta at Poona or a "Company Bahadur" or King in London. The peoples of India — we should always use the plural form-may not have liked white people to take the country. But they saw little of them, and after the new rulers began to know what they were doing, they proved to be more just and considerate and more concerned to protect the poor than those who preceded them. The classes who did not like the change of Government were those whose power and influence suffered, the Mahommedans and the Mahrattas. During the first century of our rule the Mahommedans, although many of them were entirely on our side, were perhaps the least acquiescent in British supremacy. With the collapse of the Mutiny and the removal of the puppet Emperor from Delhi, the idea of ever restoring the rule of the Moghuls passed away from the minds of sane men. For not only had they no leader, no money, and no arms, but they had against them a vastly more numerous body of Hindus. The extent to which they were outnumbered was probably not realised by either section until the census taken by the British Government made it clear to all men. Before 1893, when the cow question became so prominent, their superiority in numbers was fully understood by the Hindus. The Musalmans were convinced that their existence was threatened by a Hindu supremacy, and that such a supremacy might be created by changes in the constitution of the Government of India. When they saw that the political claims of the Hindus were pressed by means of organisations like the Congress, while they had no similar weapons, the younger Mahommedans were for starting political agitation on their own account. They were controlled, however, by leaders like Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, who exhorted them to put their trust in the fairness of the British Government. The Mahommedan community have maintained that attitude, and have acquired a fresh title to our respect and gratitude by taking no advantage of the situation brought about by the party of sedition. When they saw that their worst fears were about to be realised, and that Lord Morley proposed to treat them with a strange lack of consideration and fairness, then, and not till then, did they organise their forces and compel the Secretary of State to deal justly with their community. It is a pity that they should have to owe this to their own action and not to the spontaneous policy of the British Govern- The Mahrattas had even Maharashtea, and which supplies an overwhelming majority of Government officials. They have extended their influence and power all over India, and especially in the native States. Many of the most enlightened Indians and some of our ablest servants have come from this clan. "But," says Mr Chirol, "amongst many others-perhaps, indeed, amongst the great majority-there has undoubtedly been preserved for the last hundred years, from the time of the Peshwa dominion to the present day, an unbroken tradition of hatred towards British rule, an undying hope that it might some day be subverted and their own ascendancy restored." The name of Nana Sahib is known to all English men. He was a Chitpavan Brahman, and an exponent of the tradition of hatred spoken of by Mr Chirol. It was in Poona that the native press, conducted by Brahmans, "first assumed that tone of virulent hostility towards British rule and British. rulers which led to the Press Act of 1879." Lord Lytton was then Viceroy. He and his advisers knew that teaching of the Poona type must lead in India to much mischief, and, if not actually translated into deeds, would arouse evil feelings of all kinds. He was not, perhaps, an altogether wise Viceroy, but had both experience of men and great natural ability. To the Liberal party he himself and the policy of which he was the exponent were anathema. When Disraeli's Government fell, Lord |