It would be impossible, I think, to furnish two better instances of the evils of caste to people desirous of shaking off in any way the habits of their forefathers; and a more melancholy picture than that of this unfortunate man setting out with his dead child without a single friend to accompany him it would indeed be difficult to find. Many other illustrations might, of course, be given; but enough has been said already, and we may safely consider it as a settled question that, as far as the people of the towns are concerned, the sooner caste is abolished the better.

I may here be permitted to remind the reader that we have considered the effects of caste, as regards the country population, in two very important particulars: first of all, as to the morality of the sexes, which is controlled to such a large extent by caste law; and secondly, we have looted at the effects of caste as controlling the use of alcohol, and consequently limiting the crimes and evils that can in most countries be traced to drinking. On both of these points we have compared an Indian county with any county in Great Britain, and saw reason to think that morality, as regards the points under consideration, is better in Manjarabad than in any British county. And, by facts which may be brought from many quarters of the globe, we have seen that it is a universal law that inferior races have a tendency to adopt the vices rather than the virtues of superior races, and that, therefore, caste laws which enjoin social separation are of the highest value. We have seen, too, the value of caste in keeping up feelings of superiority and self-respect. We have also seen that these caste laws can exist without retarding the progress of the people, or their desire for education. And, finally, taking all these points into consideration, we concluded that there were no drawbacks, and many striking advantages, connected with caste as far as the country populations are concerned.

In the next place, we looked at the circumstances of the people of the towns, inquired as to how caste has affected them for good or evil, and came to the conclusion that not only does no good arise from caste, but that it is plainly and unmistakably an unmitigated evil.

Keeping these conclusions firmly in mind, let us now advance to the consideration of a third question, which naturally arises out of those facts which I assume to have been established.

That question is—How far has caste acted beneficially, or the reverse, in helping to retard our interpretation of Christianity? Pursuing the same order as before, let us ask, in the first place, whether caste has, as regards the country populations, acted beneficially in this as well as in the other points we have looked at. But, before attempting to answer this question, it may be as well to offer a few general remarks which tend to show that, independently of any question of caste, it is hopeless to expect that any ignorant and generally unenlightened race can possibly derive any benefit from adopting the formulas and dogmas of a pure faith.

To illustrate this old and well-established truth, let us point to four of the many instances which may be adduced as decisively confirming it—the history of Christianity in Europe, of Islam amongst the Indian Mahomedans, and the history of Christianity in Abyssinia and India. As to the first, to use the words of Buckle, "after the new religion had received the homage of the best part of Europe, it was found that nothing had really been effected." Superstition was merely turned from one channel into another. The adoration of idols was succeeded by the adoration of saints, and for centuries after Christianity had become the established religion it entirely failed to produce its natural fruits, because ignorance imperatively demanded superstition in some shape or other. To some it may seem, at first sight, a curious circumstance that the same remarks may be applied to the history of Mahomedanism in India. The idols were broken and the one God declared. But how long was it before the people, like the Israelites of old, fell away from the grand central doctrine of Mahomedanism—the unity of God? How long was it before the adoration of idols was followed by the adoration of saints? The exact coincidence, however, is no more striking than that given causes produce fixed results with an Eastern as well as with a Western people. When we turn, thirdly, to Abyssinia, what do we find? How have the dogmas of Christianity fared there? The Abyssinians did not rise to the level of the dogmas and principles of Christianity—that we all know. They simply reduced it to their own level. Look, lastly, at our native Christians in India. I believe it is quite certain that, in the general opinion of Englishmen, they are, to say the least, very far from being the best class in India; in fact, I do not think it too much to say that most Europeans hold them to be about the worst class of people in India. I confess that I do not share this opinion altogether. The fact probably is that, in consequence of their extreme ignorance and generally debased state, they are, in the rural districts, neither better nor worse than the classes from which they are principally drawn. In our cantonments, however, and especially in those where European soldiery abounds, there is every probability of their being worse than the classes from which they have sprung; and I have little doubt that the low estimation in which the native Christians are held is owing to the fact that our countrymen have generally come in contact with the specimens that have been nurtured amidst the scum of our Indian towns. Were we to believe the assertions of our English missionaries, very different conclusions would, of course, be arrived at; but unless they can show that the lowest and most ignorant classes of natives, who from their habits, and from having nothing to lose, are under great temptations, form an exception to all specimens of humanity in other quarters of the globe, I am afraid there can be little reason to doubt that the opinions I have expressed are fairly correct. I doubt very much, in fact, from my intimate knowledge of the lower classes of natives—and it is from these, as I said before, that our converts are mainly derived—whether they are capable of comprehending our religion at all. Of one thing I think we may be quite certain, and that is, that the moment the missionary's back is turned, these people return to their devils in the event of any danger or sickness arising. This might be arrived at deductively with perfect accuracy, and arguing solely from our knowledge of humanity under certain conditions; but I may mention that in Ceylon instances of people reverting to their devil-worship are common amongst the native Christians, and instances might, no doubt, be soon collected in India, if anyone thought it worth the trouble. While alluding to missionary assertions, I may mention that the credulity of these gentlemen seems only to be equalled by the credulity of the British public. If they would only extend their belief in the goodness of natives a little further, one might be tempted to sympathize with this amiable weakness. But the peculiar part of their statements lies in the fact that their converts have got all the virtue and morality in India, while the respectable classes of the community seem, by their account, to be very badly off in these respects. The most curious instance, however, of missionary credulity that I have met with is to be found in the evidence of Mr. Underhill, given before the Committee on Colonization (India) in 1859. And it certainly is a surprising result of conversion to find that the wives of the converts become not only more beautiful, but also more fertile, than their heathen sisters. Two heathen natives had been heard to testify to these facts, and it is wonderful to observe the complacent air of satisfaction with which these statements are accepted by the witness, who added that this difference evidently arises from the more chaste and regular modes of life in which they fall.[35]

I have said that the native Christians are probably neither better nor worse than the lower classes from which they are drawn, and the painfully truthful remarks given in the note below[36] seem to show that, whatever may be the case now (and I believe that the low-class converts are somewhat better than they were then), the converts to Christianity must have been originally a very indifferent set of people. Christianity, however, if it did not make these classes much better, at any rate made them no worse. When we turn, however, to the middle-class farmers, it is evident that to have converted them, unless that conversion had been preceded by enlightenment, and a more advanced civilization than they had hitherto enjoyed, would have inflicted on them an incalculable injury, by depriving them of restraints which, as we have seen, are in some particulars of immense importance. To become a Christian, the first thing required of a man is that he should give up caste, and deliver himself to the sole guidance of his conscience; that he should give up a powerful and effective moral restraint; that he should abandon a position which carries with it feelings of self-respect and superiority, and resign himself to the degrading reflection that he may eat from the same platter and drink from the same vessel as the filthiest Pariah; and that this would be degrading there can be little doubt. Were he an educated and enlightened man, he would be sustained by feelings which would raise him above the influence of such considerations. But, in the absence of enlightenment, sad would be his fate, and melancholy the deterioration that would inevitably ensue. The way in which that deterioration would take place, the way in which he would become careless of what he did, or of what became of him, has been sufficiently indicated in the previous pages of this chapter; and to give in detail the principal reasons against a change of faith which involved the abolition of caste, would only be to repeat what I have already said as to the effect of the institution in controlling the morality of the sexes and the use of alcohol. Not only, then, I repeat, would a change of dogma be as unimproving and superficial as changes of that sort always are with unenlightened people, but a number of positive evils would follow from the necessary abandonment of the restrictions of caste; and we may therefore conclude that, as regards the whole population, the effect of caste in helping to prevent the adoption of our interpretation of Christianity is of incalculable advantage.

When we turn to the town populations the case is widely different. We have seen that for them the practical advantages of caste can hardly be said to exist at all, and therefore a change of religion which involved its abolition would, as regards any part of the society, at least produce no evil. Here, at least, we are on safe ground. But this is not all. We see that with the better classes education and enlightenment have borne their natural fruit, and demanded a pure faith, which has already sprung up in the shape of Deism. Enlightenment, then, will produce a pure faith, which will in time react on society, and push it forward with accelerated speed. Now, it cannot be denied that caste laws do retard the free and unfettered adoption of a pure faith; and if we assume that a pure faith will in turn become a cause, or even an accelerator, of progress, then it is certain that, as regards the peoples of the towns, caste, as retarding the adoption of the most advanced principles of religion, is an undoubted calamity.

We have now looked at the bearings of caste on three very important points—its moral bearing amongst the Indians themselves, its effects in maintaining a social separation between the white and dark races, and its effects in retarding the adoption of a religion which involves the entire abolition of caste laws. In the first place, we looked at the effects of caste laws on the rural populations, and came to the conclusion that on all these points caste has operated, and continues to operate, advantageously. In the second place, we looked at its effects on the peoples of the towns, and came to the conclusion that caste confers on them no advantages, while it is often productive of serious evil.

Let us now glance for one moment at the causes of the general outcry which you everywhere hear against caste institutions, and at the same time suggest the line of conduct that the people of the towns ought to adopt with reference to this question.

And here I need not occupy much space in indicating the causes of that abuse of caste which has always been so popular with my countrymen. In fact, if we admit the truth of the facts and arguments hitherto adduced, these causes are so apparent that the reader must have already anticipated the solution I have to give. Caste, as we have seen, is a serious evil to the peoples of the towns. Now, it is amongst towns and cantonments that our principal experiences of this institution have been acquired, and the educated natives of the Indian capitals, feeling all the evils and experiencing none of the advantages of caste, are naturally loud in its condemnation. Hence the cry arising from all Europeans and a trifling section of the Indians, that caste should be abolished from one end of India to the other. But how is it that no response comes from these country populations amongst whom I have lived? How is it that these shrewd-headed people[37] are so insensible to the evils of caste, and that you never hear one word about it? The answer is extremely simple. They have never felt these evils, because for them they do not exist. If they felt the pressure of caste laws as do the people of the towns, the outcry would be universal, and the institution speedily done away with. Need I add that when the people of the country are as advanced as the people of the towns, that then, and not till then, will the pressure, which is now confined to the latter, be universally felt; that then, and not till then, will this institution, being no longer suited to the requirements of the age, be universally discarded.

Let us now say a few words as to the line of conduct that should be adopted, as regards caste, by those who are desirous of freeing themselves from the restrictions of that institution.

In the first place, the opponents of caste should not weaken their case by talking nonsense; and, in the second place, they should remember, above all things, that, to use a common saying, "if you want a pig to go to Dublin, the best thing you can do is to start him off on the way to Cork." I shall now enlarge a little on both of these recommendations.

To illustrate my first suggestion—and to this suggestion I shall again have occasion to allude further on in this chapter—a few sentences may be devoted to glancing at some of those remarkable conclusions which sound so well in the observations one often hears when anything is said about India. The tendency of caste, you will hear it gravely urged, is to elevate the upper classes on the highest possible pinnacle, and keep the Pariah grovelling in the dust. "What," continues the speaker, "keeps the Brahmin at the top and the Pariah at the bottom?" Why, let me ask in turn, is a cow's tail long, and a fox's tail bushy? Is it in this nineteenth century that we are to try and din into people's ears that the upper classes in India were at the top of the social scale, and the Pariah at the bottom, centuries before caste, in its present shape, ever existed, and that the relative position of the two races would continue with little change if caste was to be abolished to-morrow morning? "What," gravely asks another, "has prevented the peoples of India uniting into one grand nation, and destroyed all hopes of political fusion?" Nor, to many, would the absurdity of the question be apparent till you asked them what has prevented all Europe becoming one nation; or, to take things on a smaller scale, till you asked what prevented the Highland clans forming themselves into a nation. In short, whenever a man is in difficulty, and at a loss to account for anything connected with the state of the people of India, he takes refuge in caste, combined, perhaps, with what is called native prejudice, though what that last means I do not pretend to explain. Now, it is not improbable that some of my readers may have heard of Holloway's pills, and we know, in fact, that thousands believe that medicine to be an efficacious remedy for every constitutional ailment. Only swallow Holloway, and you are a cured man. Well, the abolition of caste, with an incredible number of people, is, in like manner, confidently pronounced to be a universal remedy for all the political and social complaints of India. Remove that, and you will at one stroke secure social liberty, national unity, the removal of idolatry, and, some even are rash enough to affirm, the universal adoption of Christianity. Such, then, are a few examples of the nonsense you will hear commonly talked about caste, and I think I need not waste time in pointing out that the opponents of caste must take very different ground if they wish to obtain a hearing from the peoples of India.

In the second point to which I have called the attention of the reader I alluded to the general law of opposition, and used a common saying which exactly illustrates the probable result of violent and ill-judged attacks on caste. In fact, so apparent is this, that the reader must have already anticipated the line that, in my opinion, the opponents of caste should follow. What the opponents of caste should preach is, not the abolition of that institution, but toleration for the educated and advanced members of the community who, finding caste an impediment and a burden, wish to discard it. They should admit that this institution has been, and is at the present moment, of value amongst the rural populations, but they should, at the same time, point out that times are changing, and that the peoples of the towns ask for some toleration, not because caste is necessarily a universal evil in itself, but because it is, as far as they are concerned, highly inconvenient. This is the way—and, if this plan does not answer, I feel sure no other will—that the evils of caste are to be mitigated, and I urge these views accordingly on the serious attention of all enlightened Indians.

The reader will have observed that, when pointing out the advantages of caste in repelling our interpretation of Christianity, I have assumed that the adoption of Christianity necessarily involves the entire abolition of all those social distinctions that make up what we call caste. Such have been the terms on which Christianity has been offered to the peoples of India by our English missionaries; and I, for one, do most sincerely rejoice that their hide-bound interpretation of the Protestant faith has been as promptly as it has been decidedly rejected. But why should caste—which, as I have shown, can be proved to have produced such favourable results as regards drinking, and as regards the morality of the sexes—why should this institution, which in these respects can be proved to have produced better results than Christianity has over done in Great Britain—why should this be swept away because you wish to introduce the religion of Christ? It has been alleged to be entirely incompatible with Christianity; and were this so, there would, of course, be no more to be said. But this I wholly deny. It is, of course, incompatible in some respects with exalted conceptions of the most advanced Christianity; but there is no reason why Christianity should not be allowed to exist alongside of abnormal social growths, and why, in short, Christianity should not be stretched to tolerate caste, in the same way that it was allowed by the apostles to exist alongside of evils with which the institution of caste cannot, for iniquity or for general ill effects, be for one moment compared. Christianity was not held by the apostles to be an impossibility because the professors of that faith bought and sold slaves; it was not held so by their descendants for hundreds of years; and will those interpreters of Christianity whom we have sent to India venture to assert that the Americans had no right to the name of Christians until the close of the late war? Slavery was driven out at length, or at least in a great measure driven out, by Christianity; but Christianity, remember, had first of all to be introduced; and taking into consideration the acts of the apostles, the way in which they yielded to the customs and prejudices of their converts, and the resolution they came to "not to trouble those of the Gentiles who were turning to God," on what grounds do our missionaries rest their claim to debar from the advantages of Christianity those people who, wishing to retain their place in society, desire to become Christians? This is not the first time that these questions have been asked. They were asked at great length by Mr. Irving in his "Theory and Practice of Caste." Hitherto they have been asked in vain; and owing to the indifference of people in this country, and to the slavish submission of the laity to the opinion of the missionaries, a system of attempting to propagate Christianity has been allowed to exist which has been of incalculable mischief. But I think we may even go further than this. I think it may be asserted that the line taken up, as regards caste, by our missionaries has acted more prejudicially to the interests of Christianity than if we had deliberately dispatched emissaries to India with the view of preventing the people from adopting the religion of Christ. These may seem harsh, and I have no doubt they will prove to be unwelcome, expressions of opinion. They will hurt, and I am afraid will shock, the feelings of many a good and worthy man. I regret that this should be so, but I cannot help it. In any case good must arise. If I am right, as I firmly believe myself to be, the cause of enlightenment and Christianity will be advanced; and if I am wrong, and it can be proved that the missionaries are right, they will have as great, and it may even be a greater claim to public support than they ever had before. But it must be clearly understood that, as an individual desirous of propagating truth, I have a right to demand an answer. If that answer is satisfactory, well and good. If it is not satisfactory, or if no answer be supplied at all, I would then propose to ask the public here to consider whether it would not be better to withhold all their subscriptions from our English, or at least transfer them to such missions as will consent to attempt to propagate Christianity on the widest possible base.

In considering this important subject I shall, in the first place, glance at Bishop Heber's "Letter on Caste;" Bishop Wilson's "Circular;" the "Report" of the Madras Commissioners; and the "Statement" of the Tanjore German missionaries. This may seem a formidable list of documents to commence with, but it is my intention to make only the most cursory allusion to each, as to consider these papers at any length would occupy far too much space. Having thus stated the difference of opinions, as regards caste, between the Germans and the Protestant missionaries, I shall then proceed to inquire whether caste can or can not be traced to an idolatrous source; whether it was in any way necessarily wound up with religion; and whether, further, it is at all necessary that, supposing it to have been at any time wound up with religion, there should therefore be at the present day any necessary connection between the religions of the peoples and their caste customs.

In Bishop Heber's "Letter" of March 21st, 1826, he says that, "with regard to the distinctions of caste as yet maintained by professing Christians, it appears that they are manifested—(a) in desiring separate seats at church; (b) in going up at different times to receive the Holy Communion; (c) in insisting on their children having different sides of the school; (d) in refusing to eat, drink, or associate with those of a different caste."

On the first of these points the bishop observes, with great justice, that points of precedence have constantly been granted in Christian churches to people of noble birth and of great fortune, and that in the United States of America these distinctions were always maintained between the whites and the negroes. He also points out that a Christian gentleman conforms to those rules because, if he neglected them, he would lose influence with his own degree in society, and that a native of the better classes acts exactly on the same principle. And on this point he concludes that distinctions of caste in church may still be allowed, provided that due care is taken to teach the natives that in the sight of God they are all equal.

With reference to the second point the good bishop says nothing, because, I surmise, he concluded the going up at different times to receive the Sacrament was included in his remarks on precedence in church.

As regards the schools, and amongst the children, he observes that caste must, as to taking places, etc., not be taken into account, "but," he adds, "even here caution should be observed to disgust no man needlessly."

As to the fourth point, he was decidedly of opinion that, as regards private meals and social intercourse, we had no right to interfere whatever.

After alluding to the objections raised by some zealous missionaries to the processions in marriages and other matters, he intimates pretty plainly that he has some fears that recent missionaries have been more scrupulous in these matters than need requires. He then concludes by saying that "God forbid we should wink at sin; but God forbid, also, that we should make the narrow gate of life narrower than Christ has made it, or deal less favourably with the prejudices of this people than St. Paul and the primitive church dealt with the almost similar prejudices of the Jewish converts."

The bishop then framed a set of questions as regards caste observances, to which he required particular answers; but, in consequence of his untimely death, and of the short tenure of office held by his successors, Bishops James and Turner, no further official action was taken till the middle of 1833, when Bishop Wilson's "Circular"[38] dealt the most fatal blow to Christianity that it has ever received in India. For this "Circular" imperatively declared that the distinction of castes, as regards all the relations of life, must be abandoned, "decidedly, immediately, and finally." And in order that this mandate might be intensely galling to the upper class vegetarian Christian, it was especially ordered that "differences of food and dress" were to be included in those overt acts which were to mark out for condemnation the Christian who still clung to the habits of his fathers in these innocent and, as regards food, healthful restrictions. To cling to these differences of food and dress, and to abstain from alcohol, was to cling to caste; and it was especially ordered that the children of native Christians should not be admitted to the Holy Communion without a full renunciation of all those social differences which might distinguish them from other members of the society in which they lived. This was quite sufficient. "The 'Circular' was read in the churches of Tanjore. It was received by the native Christians with great displeasure, and they showed their views by seceding in a body."

Turning now to the Report of the Madras Commissioners, which was written in 1845, we shall at once see the cause and root of this violent attack on social usages. For the Commissioners commence their Report by stating that the institution of caste and the divisions of society were things of priestly invention, and that, in fact, the whole of Hindoo society, as we at present see it, originated in, and is maintained by, Hindoo idolatry. And they further allege that the tyranny of this institution is such as to be perfectly unaccountable on any other supposition. How any body of priests had the power to issue and enforce mandates regarding the extraordinary diversities as to food and dress that we see prevailing throughout India, where the council sat that issued these decrees, and where the members of this council came from, they give no account. They do not seem to have even thought of such questions, and, for evidence of these astounding assertions, they refer us to what they call "the laws of Manu,"[39] and to Halhed's "Gentoo Hindoo Code." Caste and idolatry, then, according to them, are not only inextricably wound up together, but caste itself was caused by, and is a part of, idolatry; and we are, therefore, plainly told that it is impossible that a man should abandon the one without abandoning the other, and that, in other words, the two institutions must stand or fall together. Leaving this part of these assertions to be commented on further on, I now pass on to the statement and arguments of the Tanjore German missionaries.

Shortly after Bishop Heber's "Letter," which I have referred to at the commencement of these remarks, he drew up a number of questions regarding caste practices amongst native Christians, to which he required special answers. These "Articles of Inquiry," as they are termed, were sent to the Tanjore missionaries, and by them a statement in reply was furnished. They were asked for their opinion in 1828, and though no date is affixed to these statements, I conclude that they probably replied towards the close of that year.

They commence by observing that the distinctions of caste had been observed since the establishment of the mission by the Rev. Mr. Schwartz, soon after the year 1762, and that he himself had been guided, partly by his own discretion, and partly by the example of the clergy of the Tranquebar Mission, which was started in the year 1705, by those good and amiable men of whom I have given some account in another part of this work. These successors of Schwartz, then, observed that they had persistently imitated the conduct of that able and good man; but that, while they took care to imitate his caution, and forbearance, they seized every opportunity of softening the mutual prejudices arising from distinctions of caste; and they also observe that, in consequence, those distinctions of caste have gradually lost a great deal of their importance.

Alluding, in the next place, to the assertion that castes had been invented and entirely originated by the Brahmins, the authors of the statement observe that, in the opinion of the most intelligent natives who were not of the Brahminical order, the social distinctions which constitute caste existed long before the Brahmins came into the country at all; and they assert, further, that though the Brahmin priests blended those social distinctions with their idolatry, and framed a convenient legend to account for their divine institution, the whole thing was a mere fiction, which had been invented with the view of adding to the power of an ambitious priesthood. But the missionaries of Tanjore asserted, further, that even if the legend of caste was a true one, and that caste had been a part of idolatry, still those who abandoned the worshipping of idols and superstitious rites were not therefore to be required to abandon such practices as had nothing of idolatry about them at all, and they distinctly declared that no rites of an idolatrous or even mixed nature were tolerated amongst their converts.

The missionaries then pointed out that their high-caste converts simply retained these privileges and social customs because they would lose the respect of their neighbours if they abandoned those marks of station which they had inherited, and which they looked upon entirely as a civil prerogative. It was also pointed out that high-caste priests gained ready access to the houses of the better classes, and had, therefore, bettor chances of spreading Christianity than Pariah priests, whom no good-caste native would allow to cross the threshold of his house.

At church those of the upper classes sat on one side, and those of the lower on the other, and the higher and lower castes went up at different times to the communion-table.

In the schools no difficulty was experienced, and high and low caste children sat quite indiscriminately.

As regards social intercourse, they observe that none of their converts have any objection to partake of food prepared by another caste, as long as that caste is of superior rank to them, but that no one would touch food prepared by a man of lower caste than himself. The distinction of caste was also preserved as regards marriages, though these, of course, were always solemnized in the church.

Finally, these good and sensible men regret the tendencies of caste, but seem to consider that more good was to be done by letting it alone, and, in short, letting it die a natural death, than by forcibly opposing the prejudices of the people. And they very justly observe, that to oblige a man of high caste to eat with the lowest is doing force to common delicacy and to natural feelings of sense, and may be sometimes of serious consequence to bodily health.

I may here mention that about thirty-five years ago, Dr. Graul, the head of the Leipsic Missionary Society, visited India, remained there three years at the various missionary stations, and was firmly convinced that to interfere with the social customs of the native Christians would be at once unjust and impolitic. As regards the exact action of the Roman Catholics at present, I have no information to lay before the reader, but I know that they always had the wisdom to interfere as little as possible with the prejudices of the people, as long as they did not involve idolatrous rites.

Having thus laid before the reader an outline of the views of the supporters and opponents of caste, I shall now offer the conclusions I have arrived at, partly from my own observations and partly from the writings of others. I shall

1. Inquire into the origin of caste.

2. I shall inquire into the sanitary uses of caste, more especially as it concerns the approaching the communion-table promiscuously, as to the sitting together in church or other places, and as to its effects as regards general social intercourse.

3. I shall inquire whether there are not some compensating advantages, as regards caste institutions, which tend in a great measure to neutralize the prejudicial effects that arise from people's sympathies and feelings being confined to the members of their own caste, instead of being evenly distributed over the human race, considered as a whole.

And, first of all, as to the origin of caste—a point which seems to have been thought of no little importance by our caste-condemning missionaries. I confess that I, for my part, do not attach much importance to this question of the origin of caste, and think it of far more importance to ascertain its present bearing and effect. But, as many have raised the question, and asserted that caste had an idolatrous origin, and was the invention of an idolatrous priesthood, it may be worth while to gather together such facts as we can lay our hands on regarding this somewhat obscure subject. And it seems to me that the first thing we have to do is to clear away the rubbish which has been piled upon it in common with most Indian institutions—to ask what is evidence, and what is not. Our missionaries have asserted that caste can be clearly traced to an idolatrous origin, and that the institution is entirely unaccountable on any other supposition, and they pointed to the Code of Manu in proof of that assertion. But, on referring to Mrs. Manning's valuable work on "Ancient and Mediaeval India," we can find no evidence that caste originated in any special way whatever. And we are told, on the authority of Mr. Muir, that the sacred books of the Hindoos contain no uniform or consistent account of the origin of caste, and that the freest scope is given by the individual writers to fanciful and arbitrary conjecture. The story that the castes issued from the mouth, arms, thighs, and feet of Brahma was simply an allegory, which, in the course of time, hardened into a literal statement of fact. The Brahmins, of course, came out of the mouth of Brahma; and, considering that they were the authors and compilers of all the principal books relating to castes and customs, it would have been extremely odd if they had not exalted their own order, and indulged in a tone of Oriental exaggeration which was eminently calculated to deceive, not perhaps, their successors, but the Englishmen who went to India. But the most curious thing is, that it never seems to have occurred to our missionaries to suspect that what they took as evidence of facts, and of a state of things really existing, was, in reality, only evidence of what an order or set of people could write, with the view of exalting themselves, and depressing the rest of the society amongst which they lived. The Brahmins chose to assert that the castes were of divine origin. They wrote that down and handed it on. We came to India, and finding these statements ready to hand, have simply swallowed them down, and added them to the number of illusions existing as regards India. But the facts really are, that castes and orders of men sprang up, we don't exactly know how. Brahmin writers described the castes, or at least part of them, and, in the course of time, the writings were said to have caused the castes, instead of the castes having caused the writings.

But whatever may be the facts as regards caste, we know that caste can exist without idolatry, and idolatry without caste; and that though the Brahmins, with their usual desire to incorporate everything in life with religion, gathered caste into their garners, and endeavoured to increase and extend it, still there is fair evidence for asserting that these two institutions have no necessary connection, and that, as it was perfectly possible to wind them up together, so it is perfectly possible to unwind them and produce again an entire separation. In a word, it is perfectly possible for a man to retain caste, not as believing it to be part of his native idolatrous religion, but as believing it to be (what it really was till the Brahmins seized hold of it and attached it to their faith) a civil institution which had sprung up in remote times, and had been inherited by him, just as rank and station are inherited in this country.[40] And that caste can exist without religion, and alongside of a religion as opposite to Brahminism as Christianity is, we have the most indisputable evidence supplied by the late Sir Emerson Tennent, in his "History of Christianity in Ceylon."

"Caste," he wrote, "as it exists at the present day amongst the Buddhists of Ceylon, is purely a social distinction, and entirely disconnected with any sanction or pretensions derivable from their system of religion. Nor is evidence wanting that, even at a comparatively modern period, such was equally its aspect amongst the natives throughout the continent of India, by whom caste was held not as a sacred, but as a secular discrimination of ranks. The earliest notice of India by the Greek historians and geographers enumerates the division of the people into Brahmins, Kistrayas, Vaisyas, and Sudras; but this was a classification which applied equally to the followers of Buddha" (who preached that, in the sight of God, all men were equal) "and of Brahma, nor were the members of either section held ineligible for the offices of the priesthood." And, in the note below, the reader will find additional evidence which will show him that caste in Ceylon, just as it originally was in India, can and does exist merely as a division of ranks, and that it need not at all be necessarily connected with any idolatrous rites or worship.[41]

Having thus shown how caste did not originate, it may, perhaps, not be altogether superfluous if I hazard a few remarks as to the way in which it did probably originate.

The common idea of caste is that it is simply a combination of troublesome and fanciful restrictions, imposed upon the various peoples of India by those of the upper classes who desired to keep themselves above the jostling of the crowd. But this institution (if that be a correct term for it) arose naturally and regularly out of the circumstances of the times, and where these circumstances no longer exist, it will as naturally disappear; and that the last must happen we have seen from, the fact that altered circumstances have already caused the commencement of its removal amongst the people of the towns. But the general circumstances which gave birth to caste require a few words of explanation, and the following solution seems not an unnatural one.

We know, as a certain fact, that peoples to whom we have given the names of Dravidians and Aryans entered India from the north and north-west; that they increased and multiplied, overspread the whole of India, and reduced the aborigines to serfdom. We also know that these tribes from the north, who were, comparatively speaking, fair, very naturally regarded the black, ugly, carrion-eating aborigines with disgust. Hence, naturally, must have arisen the opinions as regards Pariahs which all the superior castes hold to this day. Even to have food touched by people of such abominable habits must have been repulsive, and therefore the separation into men of caste and men of no caste, or, in other words, into browns and blacks (for the word for caste means colour), followed as a matter of course. Caste, then, seems naturally to have arisen from the idea that to associate in any way with people of bad habits and grovelling ideas is an intolerable degradation. The superior races, therefore must have considered it a matter of importance to retreat as far as possible from the habits of the aborigines; and when we take into consideration the influence of religion, the natural ambition of the priestly classes, the splitting up into sects, and the fondness of the Hindoo mind for subtle distinctions, the rest easily follows. But, though numerous castes arose amongst the invaders, the main line of demarcation, is still the original one of race—between the races of the north and the aborigines whom they found in possession of India. The base, then, of caste, we may rest assured, was simply the result of a people, or rather of peoples, wishing to keep themselves uncontaminated when coming in contact with a debased population.

This was exactly the case with the Jews. They were simply a very strongly guarded caste, with a number of regulations as to what they were and were not to eat, and with rules which prohibited them intermarrying or associating with peoples with whom they came in contact. Many of those rules may seem to us ridiculous and fanciful, but they were calculated to prevent the Jews from any chance of adopting the manners and customs of the peoples around them; and the Indians, having had similar views, naturally adopted similar means. Such then is a brief generalization of the causes which led to caste laws, which were, no doubt, carried in some instances to a ridiculous length, but which were founded in common sense, and were admirably adapted to carry into effect the opinions of the superior races.

We have now, in the second place, to consider caste with reference to the approach of native converts to the Lord's table, the sitting apart of the various castes in church, and the effects of caste as regards what is called social intercourse.

The whole difficulty of the caste question, as regards the Sacrament, lies in this, namely, that a high-caste vegetarian objects to drink wine at the same time and after a low-caste meat-eater. And here I find a great difficulty in finding words or illustrations that will at all convey the feelings of a high-caste vegetarian at the very idea of drinking after a low-caste carrion-eater. If from the lowest, filthiest, and most poisonous dens in London, you were to take a man, reeking with beer and tobacco, and with his clothes crawling with vermin, and presenting, in short, every appearance of foulness, dirt, and disease; if you were to take that man and place him between two ladies at the administration of the Holy Communion, I do not say that they would there and then refuse the Sacrament on these terms, but I think we may be pretty sure that, from sanitary motives, if from no others, they would in future take the Sacrament in a place where they would not be liable to such contact. Their feelings and senses would be shocked by such contact as I have imagined, but their sensations would merely bear the same proportion to the sensations of a high-caste vegetarian Hindoo who had to drink after a Pariah that a trifling cause of disgust would bear to the most intolerable and lasting degradation. Now, to people in this country, this may seem an extraordinary thing; but they will think it less extraordinary when I tell them that, if I could not take the Sacrament unless amongst Pariahs, I would never take it again, unless perhaps, I were to put myself bodily into one of Professor Tyndall's cotton-gauze air-cleansers, and drink the sacramental wine after it had been boiled at a temperature of 212 degrees, and passed through a filter. And when I talk of the lowest castes as carrion-eaters, I must tell the reader that I am not in the slightest degree guilty of exaggeration, and that they are carrion-eaters in exactly the same sense that vultures are carrion-eaters. In fact, these men never get any meat unless that of animals that have died of disease; and as in these climates decomposition is extremely rapid, the reader can imagine the result of coming in contact with a man who has, perhaps, a few hours before been eating a mass of diseased and half decomposed meat. And in case the reader should not be able to imagine what the result is, I may mention the following circumstance. A few days after I had killed a bison I had occasion to point out some pieces of sawn wood which I wished to be removed from the jungle to my house, and I accordingly took with me a native overseer, and two coolies to carry the timber. When I was pointing out the pieces to them, I smelt a strong smell of putrid meat, which seemed to fill the air so entirely that I at once concluded that a tiger must have killed some animal and left the carcase near the spot. My overseer and myself looked about everywhere, but at last happening to pass the coolies, I at once perceived that the smell arose from their breath, and on questioning them, I found that before coming to work they had been feasting on decayed bison flesh. In fact, after killing a bison, we could never go near our coolies for some days afterwards. But to see a party of these men sitting like vultures around the carcase of some animal that has just died of some abominable disease is quite enough to inspire even an unprejudiced European meat-eater-with the most wholesome horror; and the reader need not, I think, be surprised at the feelings of disgust which these men's habits inspire amongst the respectable classes of the community. But independently of all feelings of disgust, there are sanitary considerations which are of infinitely more importance, for it so happens that, at a time when the weather is hottest and the season most unhealthy, a larger number of animals die; and I have very little doubt that this eating of rotten meat causes amongst the Pariahs a large quantity of disease, and especially of cholera, which they would not fail to disseminate with fatal certainty amongst all classes, were the native Christians compelled to take the Sacrament indiscriminately. And, in my own experience, I have observed that cholera has passed through districts, that the upper classes have been free from it, but that amongst the lower the victims were many. And the same sanitary reasons that apply to the Sacrament apply equally well to the mixing of castes indiscriminately in the churches; for it might so happen, as it frequently does, that fever and cholera may be prevalent amongst the lower castes, while the higher may be at that time comparatively free from such diseases. So that, when we take all these points into consideration, we shall find that the German missionaries were perfectly right in placing the men of the higher caste on one side of the church, and those of the lower on the other, and that they were equally right in allowing the higher castes to approach the Sacrament at a different time from the lower. I may here remark that I once mentioned this taking of the Sacrament in a sort of order of precedence to a clergyman in a country parish, when he told me that exactly the same sort of thing occurred in his parish, and that the lord of the manor invariably took the Sacrament first, and, if I recollect rightly, the parish clerk last; and a special instance of this in a Scotch parish was mentioned to me not long ago.

The same sanitary considerations will also naturally be of value when we come to consider that indiscriminate social intercourse which the missionaries so much insist upon as one of the necessary signs of grace. I do not, of course, say that it is not advisable, and that it would not be desirable to see a little more intercourse between class and class than exists at the present. But between all the better classes there is a much greater degree of intercourse than our missionaries would have us believe; and it is not true that one caste will eat only the food prepared by a person of his own caste. I cannot, of course, say what may be the case as regards other parts of India; but, as regards my own district, each caste will eat of the food prepared by any of the castes higher, or at least purer, than its own. For instance, a Gouda, who will not allow that the Lingayet caste is better than his own, will eat of food prepared by a Lingayet, while a Lingayet will not eat of food prepared by a Gouda. And the explanation of this is, that the Lingayet is a vegetarian, and meat might have been boiled in the Gouda's pots, while there would be nothing to offend the Gouda customs in the pots of a vegetarian host. But in these matters I entirely agree with the good Bishop Heber, who said that we had no right to interfere in their private life, or to meddle in any way with their social customs, as long as there was no idolatry in them.

Turning now to the third point I proposed to consider, I have a few remarks to make regarding the only (from a Christian point of view) solid objection that can, I conceive, be made to the institution of separate orders of men; namely, that the tendency of caste is to shut up the bowels of compassion towards all the world outside of a man's particular class. And here I confess that I am very much in want of information, and can think of no unprejudiced individuals to whom to apply for the facts as really existing in other parts of India. As for books, when I look into them for any information, I am at once met by quantities of unlimited condemnations, or a host of contradictory statements. And, as an instance of the latter, I may mention that in Kerr's "Domestic Life of the Natives of India" we are informed, at page 31, that "alms are given to the poor without distinction of caste," while at page 343 of the same volume we are told that "to extend kindness and hospitality to one of a different caste is regarded as sinful." But in matters of this sort we want the experience of individuals who have actually lived amongst the people, as much as anyone can who is not actually one of them. As for my own part of the country, I can answer for it that caste has no such effect as has been alleged to arise from it regarding the extension of hospitality and kindness to people of various castes; and, as a confirmatory illustration, may mention that I have found members of every caste assembled at the house of a toddy man to inquire how he was, and to see whether they could do anything for him. These toddy-drawers rank at least third amongst the castes in Manjarabad, and though none of the members of the farmer castes above them would eat of food prepared in a toddy-drawer's house, yet there were numbers of both these castes present. This feeling would not, that I am aware of, go as far as one of the carrion-eating Pariahs, but I am quite certain that it would extend to any other caste but theirs in the country. But on this point I do not offer any decided opinion, as, for what I know to the contrary, acts of kindness and hospitality may, no doubt, often have been extended even to the lowest. And I may also mention here that I have slept in the veranda of a farmer's house, in which members of the family slept close to some of my people, who were of the toddy-drawer caste above alluded to, and who, I am sure, were quite as welcome as members of their own caste would have been. But as regards all these matters concerning the inner life of the people, we know nothing, unless we actually live amongst them, and sleep in their houses, and, in fact, see the people at home; and as it is extremely difficult to find anyone who has done anything of the kind, it naturally follows that it is almost impossible to find anything like reliable sources of information regarding native habits throughout India. You may, it is true, stuff your very soul with information of some sort or other, if you go about asking questions, but if you do you will find yourself much in the same predicament that Johnson found himself in his tour to the Hebrides; and the reader may recollect that the worthy doctor very soon found that nothing could be more vague, unsatisfactory, and uncertain than the answers of an unsophisticated simple people, who were not much in the habit of being asked questions of any sort. However, the reader may, in the meantime, reasonably infer that the conduct of the people in the rural districts of India, and situated under similar circumstances, would not materially differ, as regards matters of caste, from the practice as existing in Manjarabad. And should that turn out to be the case, it is plain that those notions, as regards the practice of caste, which have been so industriously circulated in England, are almost entirely false.

I have said that I proposed inquiring, further, whether there are not some compensating advantages in this division of the people into castes which tend, in a great measure, to neutralize the prejudicial effects that arise from people's sympathies and feelings being more or less confined to members of their own caste, instead of being distributed over the human race considered as a whole. Now, it is perfectly true that the tendency of caste is to weaken the claim that humanity in general has on an individual; but though the claim of society in general is weakened, it must be remembered that the claims of each caste on the members of it are strengthened. And though this fact may militate against an enlarged and Christian philanthropy, the aggregate force of claims will be found to amount to a much larger sum than if one part of a society had no more claim on a man than another. A man of one caste would not, for instance, perhaps feel that a man of another caste had much claim on him; but he would distinctly and strongly feel that a member of his own caste had. And every caste acting on the same principle of supporting and helping its members, I am convinced that the aggregate force of assistance rendered must be greater than in a country where there is little or no caste principle. This may seem a rash assertion, and of course it is one that it is impossible, as far as I am aware, to prove. But the fact that there is not a poor-house from one end of India to the other, seems to me a significant and satisfactory circumstance; and the only way I can account for there being no need of such a thing is,[42] that caste feeling must often come in where all other aids fail. Nor are we in this country without instances of the value of caste feelings, and both the Jews and the Scotch may still be pointed to as illustrations of what I mean. A Scotchman still has a sort of caste feeling for a Scotchman, and would do things for a man, as a Scotchman, that he would not do for people of either English or Irish descent. This principle may now have lessened, and is, no doubt, daily lessening. But when I started in India, I very soon experienced the benefit of this caste feeling; and, as one illustration to the point, I may mention that, before my estates came into bearing, I was attended in a long and serious illness by two Scotch doctors (one of whom attended on me for six weeks incessantly), both of whom resolutely declined any remuneration whatever. I cannot, of course, positively assert that these gentlemen would not have attended me on the same terms had I been an Englishman, but, from my general experience with other doctors, I am sure that these gentlemen must have been not a little influenced by caste feeling. And I have no doubt whatever that the way the Scotch get on, wherever they go, is to be attributed, in no small measure, to the existence of the same feeling. It may seem to many of my readers that to use the term caste as a principle which impels one Scotchman to help another is not exactly correct; and I must admit to having some doubts on the subject myself. The case of the Jews, however, admits of none; and, if ever there was a caste of people in the world, in the strict Hindoo sense, they are certainly an unmistakable example. And what are the results of caste feeling with them? As to other parts of the world I have no precise information; but in England I have ascertained from the best authority that caste feeling has produced some extremely favourable results. In the first place, Jews are seldom or never found in our workhouses; and all cases of poverty are carefully investigated by a visiting committee, or board of guardians, and relief or employment is always afforded to every Jewish pauper. Then, again, no Jewish child ever was, and no Jewish child is now, without the means of obtaining elementary instruction; and it would be difficult to find an English Jew unable to read and write. Means are taken to secure the attendance of all poor children, and a sound middle-class education is afforded, while the study of the Hebrew language is compulsory. There were only, when I obtained my information on the point, about twenty Jewish (principally foreigners) convicts in England, and no female convict was to be found.

Another of the principal complaints brought against caste is the fact that it has a tendency to keep one caste fixed below another; but even here we shall find some compensating considerations which are of great value. For, if caste in this respect has a keeping-down tendency, it has also a levelling one. It may keep one order above another, but within the limits of that caste order it has a levelling tendency, and in one respect the poorest of each class feel themselves on a level with the richest. Nor is a poor man of good caste made to experience the bitter sense of degradation which falls to the lot of a gentleman who, from poverty and misfortune, has fallen out of his original class into another far below him. The Indian may descend into the most humble spheres, but if he attends to the regulations of his caste he is always a member of it, and his feelings of self-respect are maintained by the fact that, however poor, it is quite possible that his daughter may be married by a man of wealth and position. But in this country, where a man has gone a long way down the hill, when he has descended—as many gentlemen especially do in our colonies—into the lower ranks of life, he loses all connection with people who are of his own rank by birth. I do not, of course, mean to allege that this want of caste feeling is to be lamented with us, but I am merely stating facts which seem to me to show the number of ways in which this much-reviled caste system can be proved to have compensating advantages which tend to counterbalance the drawbacks of the situation.

Before concluding this chapter, it may be useful to make a few remarks as to the way in which caste laws act as regards the social condition of people who have by wealth raised themselves above the general average of their order; and I shall at the same time notice a few instances that have fallen within my observation as to the way in which caste laws of the most stringent nature are occasionally set aside by universal consent.

The old idea we entertained of caste was that, to use the words of Tennent, "each class is stationed between certain walls of separation, which are impassable by the purest virtue or the most conspicuous merit;" or that, to come to more recent times, and to use the words of the late Mr. Wilson, in his speech before leaving for India, "in India you see people tied down by caste, and, whatever their talents or exertions may be, they cannot rise." Now the history of many families that have risen to eminence entirely belies this assertion, and the evidences are so numerous that I need not weary the reader by quoting them. But one instance I may perhaps mention, as the circumstances seem to me somewhat extraordinary, and a reference to them here may induce some one to make more particular inquiries in the locality alluded to. Buchanan notices that "in Bhagulpore there were certain families who, from having adopted a pure life, had within the memory of man risen from the lowest dregs of the people to the highest ranks of the nobility." In this instance, however, I cannot help suspecting that the families must have risen on something more substantial than their pure habits. But in matters of this sort we are very much in want (as indeed we are on almost every Indian subject) of more detailed and particularly substantiated evidence. As regards the subject of low castes raising themselves in the social scale, I know of no instances that have fallen within my own observation, but I have obtained information from other parts of Mysore, the truth of which I have no reason to doubt, although I would advise the reader to receive what I have to say on this point with the same caution that he should receive all information which is even in the smallest degree removed from the experience of personal observation. With this caution, I may then observe that, from information I have received, I have ample reason to believe that in the interior of Mysore there are many families of Pariahs who are as well off, in point of cattle, cash and land, as the average of the farmer caste, notwithstanding that the forefathers of these Pariahs were merely the servants of the farmer tribe. Nor is this all. Many instances, I believe, may be pointed out of members of the farmer tribe being the tenants of the once-despised Pariah. The Pariah, it is true, does not reap all the advantages from his altered circumstances that might be expected in other countries, but it is a mistake to suppose that wealth does not tell in India as it does elsewhere.[43] The well-to-do Pariah (and in the Nuggur division of Mysore I am told there are many such) receives that respect which is invariably paid to those who have much substance. He no longer stands respectfully without the veranda of a farmer of ordinary position, but takes his seat in the veranda itself, and on terms of perfect equality. But the farmer will not eat with his visitor, nor give him his daughter in marriage. This to us would be a disagreeable reflection, no doubt; but, in their present political state, I cannot see that the happiness or prosperity of the people is in any way affected by these facts, nor am I aware that any one has attempted to prove that the natural comforts of the people have been in any way lessened by these social separations.

Turning now to glance at the way in which caste laws are sometimes set aside, it is impossible to avoid suspecting that the instances given of caste feeling in these respects, though perhaps true in themselves, are not fair examples of what would universally occur in cases of emergency even with the most caste-observing people in India. From the instances given (and those most commonly given refer to natives preferring to die of thirst rather than take water from the hands of a person of inferior caste), people are led to believe that under no circumstances will a breach of caste take place, or be overlooked if it does take place, by members of the caste. But the illustration I have to give seem to point to a contrary conclusion, and if that is the case with people whom I know to be extremely strict, it seems very probable that we have adopted some very exaggerated notions as to the rigidity of caste laws. And what has contributed not a little to these delusions is, that tricky servants frequently make caste a most convenient pretence for avoiding to do this or that, or as an excuse wherever an excuse is for any purpose convenient. But however all this may be, the reader may form his opinions from the following cases.

The first I have to give of violation of caste law is certainly the most extraordinary that I ever heard of. The act was, indeed, a remarkable and touching tribute of regard, or I may even say of affection, on the part of a native overseer of the farmer caste in Manjarabad, and was a better monument than any that could have been erected to one of the best and most unselfish men I have over met. When Mr. W——, my late manager, unhappily died on the estate, this overseer in question, understanding that it was considered by us as an honour to the deceased, volunteered to make one of the carrying party. This extraordinary determination was absolutely forbidden by the caste potail, or head man, who was present; but Rama Gouda[44] showed the same coolness and resolution that he always did in the case of a bear or a tiger, and simply saying, "Let my caste go to-day," he made one of the carrying party in spite of every remonstrance. Hundreds of all castes were present, but so strong were their feelings of regard for Mr. W——, that no notice whatever was taken of the offence which was so publicly committed. The repugnance of all castes, except the very lowest, to touching the body of a European, is very well known to everyone who has been in India, and so fearful was the caste head man of sanctioning, even with his presence, this violation of caste law, that he immediately went home.

In the next instance I have to give, one of the Lingayet caste (vegetarians, and abstainers from intoxicating drinks) was wounded by a tiger, and there was a caste question raised, as to whether, under the circumstances, he should take wine. The occurrence came about in this way. Some miles from my house I once wounded a tiger, somewhat late in the day, and, owing to the broken nature of the ground, and a general confusion that seemed to take possession of the people, it seemed impossible to bring the affair to a satisfactory conclusion, so I went home. The following morning I returned to take up the track of the tiger, but it was unluckily reported that the animal had quitted the jungle we had left him in, so the party (I having been posted at a point where the tiger would probably break cover, in case the report should prove false), it appears, blundered carelessly into the place where the animal had been last seen the evening before. Now, this particular spot was full of a long sort of reed that grows in swampy ground, so that the people could not see far before them, and, to make a long story short, it seems that the tiger bided his time, sprang suddenly into the party, and gave one of them a fatal bite in the loins. The moment I heard the three roars, I expected that something disagreeable must have occurred, and, on arrival at the scene of events, I found a fine young fellow of the Lingayet caste lying bathed in blood, and my people vainly endeavouring to stanch the wounds. He was half swooning away from loss of blood, and I offered him some wine to keep up his strength. This, however, he refused to take, unless the head man of his village, who happened to be present, would consent. The head man, evidently wishing to shirk the responsibility, shook his head doubtfully; but the members of his caste all called out—"It's no matter; let him drink;" and he drank accordingly. While this was going on, I had a rough stretcher made, and, doing up his wounds as well as we could, sent him off on the way to his village. While we were attending to the wounded man, rather an amusing incident occurred. It appears that when the tiger charged, one of the party, a toddy-drawer, at once climbed up a tree, and when the party retreated, carrying off the wounded, he was afraid to come down. His absence had not been remarked, and when we were engaged in doing up the wounded man, the toddyman, who had taken heart and come down, slunk quietly out of the jungle, and startled some of the party not a little, as they thought that it was perhaps the tiger coming down on them again. However, this toddyman reported that the tiger was still almost in the same spot where he had been lying when he made his attack: and I then proposed we should go into the jungle, and see how we liked the look of him. But the tiger had given such indications of temper that the main body of the people seemed to have no desire to see him again, and I think that only ten (and those mostly my own people) accompanied me. As I was, Europeanly speaking, single-handed, this may have seemed an imprudent course, and no doubt it was not altogether unattended with danger; but it luckily turned out that the tiger was stone dead, though he was lying in such a natural position that we had some doubts as to whether he might not be shamming, even when we got within fifteen yards of him. As we were skinning the tiger, the wounded man (who had by that time only been carried a few hundred yards) expired: so, observing that it was "written on his forehead,"[45] we took up our man and our skin, and went home.

These instances of infringement of caste rules will show the reader the way in which they are sometimes abandoned; and I could mention other minor points where I have seen them occasionally abandoned. But not only are these rules thus, on urgent occasions, summarily set aside, but within a very short distance I have observed an alteration of custom. For instance, on our side of the river which separates our county from the next, neither the farmers nor the toddy-drawers will eat of an animal that has even been touched after death by a Pariah; whereas, on the other side of the river, the Pariahs who came out shooting not only touched, but carried a couple of wild boars we had killed. And yet the people on one side of the river are exactly of the same caste as those on the other. But the fact seems to be, that many of the minor points of what is called caste law have arisen from some accident, and in the course of time have hardened into local customs.

And here, before bringing this chapter to a close, I find it impossible to refrain from again alluding to the numerous instances where caste has been made the common scapegoat of every Indian difficulty. What is the meaning of this? What is the meaning of that? Why won't the natives do this, and why won't they do that? Caste—and caste is the common refuge; and with most of our countrymen who have tried to introduce new customs or a new religion, caste has ever been a handy and convenient peg on which to hang any difficulties they may meet with, or any problem they cannot readily solve. In short, it is hard to say what difficulty has not been disposed of in this fashion. Let us glance at two instances to illustrate my meaning.

For the first instance, I cannot select, perhaps, a better example than that afforded by the Rev. G. U. Pope, in the notes he has made when editing a second edition of the valuable work of the Abbe Dubois. And, in alluding to these footnotes, it is impossible to repress some feeling of annoyance that the valuable work of the Abbe should, in an evil hour, have fallen into the hands of a writer who has thought fit often, in a few brief and contemptuous words, summarily to dismiss and overrule those conclusions which were the result of a life spent on more intimate terms with natives than any I have ever been able to hear of. And Mr. Pope's statements are the more calculated to impose on the general reader, as he speaks of having had "more than twenty years of a somewhat intimate intercourse with the Hindoos;" the fact being that he spent the greater part (in fact, all but a few years, as far as I have been able to ascertain) as head of the Grammar School on the Nilgiri Hills, where he had no more opportunity of having any intercourse with natives than a Hindoo would have of gaining experience of the natives of England, were he to take up his residence on the Grampians, and interchange a few words occasionally with the shepherds of those mountains. But as to what caste has done. "Caste," says Mr. Pope, "has prevented the Hindoos from availing themselves of the opportunities afforded them of acquiring the sciences, arts, and civilization of nations with whom they have come in contact." Caste, "the great petrifier," we are again told, is the real cause of the stagnation that everywhere abounds. Caste, again, "upholds immutable distinctions by arbitrary and absurd laws, which are enforced by irresponsible authority, and maintains a standard of right and wrong entirely independent of the essential principles of moral science;" and, in order that everything may be included at one blow, we are finally told, in a note appended to the remarks of the Abbe on the moral and social advantages of caste, that "caste, and its offspring custom, are among the hindrances to all good in India."

But it is still more curious to observe how men of intelligence and observation can be led, by the force of inherited opinion, into statements as to the effects of caste which are actually contradicted by their own experience. And in Mr. Raikes's interesting work, "Notes of the North-Western Provinces," we find an instance of how people will always attribute everything to this universal bugbear. Observing on the pride of high caste, "which withers whatever it touches," Mr. Raikes informs us that the Brahmins and Rajpoots of the rich province of Benares will not touch the plough owing to pride of caste. He next tells us that caste is little regarded to the north of Allahabad, where, from various causes, the demand for labour is greater. All of which, being traced to its true cause, simply amounts to this, namely, that where landed proprietors of good family are well off they naturally do not care to work, whereas in another part of the country where they are not well off, or cannot procure labourers, they do work. In the same way, the author, after telling us that infanticide has at one time or other been common all over the world, tells us that in India it is entirely caused by caste. Now, if we take caste to mean family pride solely, it certainly has influenced the matter, or at least tended to maintain the evil complained of; but I know of one instance, at least, in India where infanticide can be traced to satisfactory causes, and amongst a people who have always been observed to be remarkably free from what are called caste prejudices. The Toda tribe, on the Nilgiri Hills, are polyandrists, and, in order to keep down the number of the tribe, they naturally had recourse to female infanticide. This they have now abandoned, and my Toda guide very soon told me the reason. He said, "Formerly we used to kill the females, because we had little more than the produce of our buffaloes to depend on; but now that more people have flocked to the hills we can let our lands and get plenty to eat." He added, also, that the Government had ordered them not to kill their children; but, unless their means had improved, it is plain that a Government order would have had little effect. But, as regards this subject of infanticide, it seems to be a thing difficult to avoid, whenever conditions arise which are favourable to its extension; nor will repressive measures alone ever place any very complete check upon it. Like every other demand, it rises and falls with the necessities of the situation, and can never be originally caused by anything in the shape of caste feelings or regulations; and amongst these necessities I, of course, include the desire to avoid shame, or the prospect of shame in the family, or starvation, as well as the fact that women are an encumbrance to some tribes. Some people, I may add, are under the impression that polyandric habits, when once established, become necessarily a cause of infanticide. But we have no means of knowing that this was ever the case, while the Coorgs may be pointed to as a race who once were polyandrous, but who were never, that I am aware of, accused of infanticide. The explanation of this, I apprehend, is to be found in the fact that their circumstances were comfortable enough to preclude any necessity for keeping down the population.

It is time now that I should bring this chapter to a close, but, as it may be a convenience to the reader, I think it well, before doing so, to sum up those conclusions which I assume to have been established; in doing so I shall, however, merely take notice of those points which seem to me to be of paramount importance.

In the first place, then, we compared the morality of our British counties, as regards the connection of the sexes and the use of alcohol, with the morality of the Indian county of Manjarabad; and having seen that, owing to caste laws, the morality of Manjarabad is superior, I think we are justified in concluding that these laws have acted more effectually than all the religious instruction that has for centuries been lavished on the people of this country; or, to put the case in shorter terms, we may assert that, as regards the branches of morality alluded to, caste has beaten Christian influences.

In the next place we took into consideration the action of our missionaries as regards caste, and having seen that they have always insisted on their converts entirely renouncing customs which can be proved to produce the most valuable results, we came to the conclusion that it has been a fortunate thing for India that its peoples have rejected our hide-bound interpretation of Christianity. We then inquired as to whether the missionaries had any right to debar from the advantages of Christianity those who, wishing to become Christians, yet desired to retain their social customs; and, having come to the conclusion that there is nothing idolatrous in these customs, we have distinctly asked those interpreters of Christianity whom we have in India to tell us by whose authority they have ventured to act in a way which, as has been shown, the Apostles never did as regards the prejudices of their Jewish converts. And generally, as regards the action of our missionaries in this matter, we have felt ourselves justified in asserting that our English missions have inflicted an incalculable injury on the cause of Christianity by presenting it to the people of India as something that must necessarily tear the whole framework of their society to pieces.

We then inquired more particularly into the origin of caste, and, having seen that it never could have originated in the way our missionaries suppose it to have done, we hazarded a conjecture as to the way in which it probably did originate, and saw grounds for supposing that the distinctions of caste came naturally about, and that they were in principle calculated to effect exactly the same ends that the Jewish lawgivers had in view when they framed that Levitical law which effectually prevented the Jews from mingling socially with the races they lived amongst. We then looked at caste from a sanitary point of view, and came to the conclusion that in consequence of the carrion-eating habits of the lowest castes, and of their liability to transmit the germs of disease, the rules which prevented them from coming into contact with the higher castes, either in the way of taking the Sacrament, or in any other way, are of the greatest value. We next inquired into the effects of caste as regards social intercourse, and especially as regards the exercise of hospitality amongst people of different castes, and saw reason to think that the restrictions of caste, with, perhaps, the exception of the very lowest, formed no bar whatever to the exercise of hospitality. Glancing subsequently at the action of caste feeling in confining the sympathies of individuals more especially to the members of their own caste, we came to the conclusion that, though caste had undoubtedly the effect of contracting the feelings within a narrow circle, there was to be found a compensating advantage in the fact that the claims of caste produced, in the aggregate, a greater amount of charity, and, in short, were calculated to produce a better general result than would be arrived at in the absence of caste feelings. And as illustrations of the advantages of this caste feeling, we pointed to the fact of there being no poor-houses in India, and especially to the Jews in England, as affording an example of the favourable effects of caste feeling. After this, we pointed to the fact that, though caste had the effect of keeping one caste or order of men above another, it had also a levelling tendency within each caste, and produced an important point of equality which no poverty can destroy. We then took into consideration some facts which seemed to show that families could raise themselves to a higher rank in society by adopting the purer habits of the classes above them; and we also saw that the influence of wealth does, to a very great degree, elevate a man of low caste in the social scale. We next saw reason to suppose that we have hitherto been labouring under very exaggerated notions as to the stringency of caste regulations, and two instances were given to illustrate the way in which caste laws are sometimes set summarily aside. And, finally, we pointed out, and gave some illustrations to prove, that with most of our countrymen who have either tried to introduce new customs or in any way to alter native habits of action, caste has ever been made, and very unjustly made, the common scapegoat.

One word more. The absolute good that caste has done may be briefly summed up. It has acted as a strong moral police, and as a preserver of order and decorum in the community,[46] and it has prevented the spread of bad habits and customs, more especially that of drinking, as far as large numbers of the people are concerned.[47] On the other hand, caste is said to have hindered the progress of the people taken as a whole. But in every instance where we have really tried the introduction of any art, the removal of any public crime (as suttee and human sacrifice, for instance), the improvement of any cultivation, the introduction of education, or of new means of moving from place to place, we have either found caste to be no impediment at all, or an impediment so slight as not to be worth mentioning.

* * * * *

NOTE.—With the view of obtaining information I briefly allude here to two points with reference to caste and its effects—the (1) curious custom of the Marasa Wokul tribe in Mysore, and (2) the influence of caste in developing improved aptitudes which afterwards descend by hereditary transmission.

As to the first, the mother of a girl is compelled to submit to the amputation of the terminal joints of the third and fourth fingers of the right hand on the occasion of the betrothal of her daughter, and in the event of a girl being motherless the mother of the bridegroom-elect must submit to the operation.

The custom is alluded to in the well-known work of the Abbe Dubois, and in the appendix the editor of the second edition confirms the account given, and quotes confirmatory evidence from Colonel Wilks' "Mysore," in which is published the legend which is reported to have given rise to the custom. Colonel Wilks, early in this century, saw some of the women who had been operated on. The tribe in question lives in the north-east of Mysore, but after inquiry through the medium of natives in the interior of the country, I cannot now learn that the custom is continued. Perhaps, being a disagreeable one, it may have been given up. I should feel much obliged for any information as to the point in question.

As to the second point, I was informed in 1891 by Mr. Chatterton of the Engineering College at Madras, that he had many Brahmins under him in the workshops, and that, though more intelligent than other castes, they are less efficient, owing to their ancestors never having been practised in any mechanical work. The influence of caste was here most perceptible, and he could always pick out the work done by boys whose caste had been employed in that particular work, and he further informed me that boys showed poor proficiency in work out of the line of their particular caste.

FOOTNOTES:

[31] Manjarabad is a talook or county on the south-west frontier of Mysore.

[32] And that, I may observe, was a case in which a toddy-drawer, the third caste in Manjarabad, was concerned.

[33] I observe in the Administration Report for Mysore, 1867-68, that nearly all the cases in the lunatic asylum were traced either to drinking or bhang-smoking.

[34] Vide Sproat's "Studies of Savage Life."

[35] It may be observed here that there are few who know so little as to the sexual morality of the people around them as clergymen. It does not become them, of course, to enter into the gossip of the village, nor does anyone care to broach such subjects in the first instance; and I may mention here that a relative of my own, a clergyman in a country parish, told me that if anything went wrong in these respects he was the very last person in the world to hear one word about it.

[36] The Abbe Dubois makes the following remarks: "During the long period I lived in India, in the capacity of a missionary, I have made, with the assistance of a native missionary, in all between two and three hundred converts of both sexes. Of this number two-thirds were Pariahs or beggars, and the rest were composed of Sudras, vagrants, and outcasts of several tribes, who, being without resources, turned Christians in order to form new connections, chiefly for the purpose of marriage, or with some other interested motive. Among them are also to be found some who believed themselves to be possessed with the devil, and who turned Christians after having been assured that on receiving baptism the unclean spirits would leave them and never return; and I will declare it with shame and confusion that I do not remember any one who may be said to have embraced Christianity from conviction and from quite disinterested motives. Among these newcomers many apostatized and relapsed into paganism, finding that the Christian religion did not afford them the temporal advantages they had looked for in embracing it; and I am very much ashamed that the resolution I have taken to tell the whole truth on this subject forces me to make the humiliating avowal that those who continued Christians are the very worst among my flock."—DR. ALLEN'S India, p. 522.

[37] I may mention here that Sir Bartle Frere, in his paper on "Indian Public Works," said, with reference to opening up districts hitherto unpierced by roads, "And here let me observe, in passing, without any disparagement of my own countrymen, that I have generally found the agricultural and commercial classes of India quite as intelligent on points of this kind as the agricultural and commercial classes of our own old-fashioned country." But I have always found that the people who have had the best opportunities of judging have formed very favourable opinions as to the intelligence of the agricultural classes, who are generally painted as being entirely indifferent, and even hostile, to the best schemes undertaken for their benefit.

[38] In this Circular of Bishop Wilson's, it is surprising to observe the contradictions that exist. At one part of the Circular we are told that the apostle's language is conclusive: and "Seeing ye have put off the old man, and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of Him that created him, where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free, but Christ is all, and in all," is quoted as evidence of the Divine wishes. "So overwhelming," continues the bishop, "is the flood by which all petty distinctions of nation, caste, privilege, rank, climate, position in civilization are effaced, and one grand distinction substituted." And yet, at another part of the Circular, we are told that the distinctions in civil society are acknowledged by the Gospel, when they are "the natural result of difference of talents, industry, piety, station, and success." Another decision of the apostle is quoted in the same Circular, and it is this—"There is neither Jew or Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female, for we are all one in Christ Jesus;" and so, of course, we are all equal in his sight. And yet this is quoted as being a decision in favour of doing away with the civil institutions of caste, which are undoubtedly the marks of that "station" which the bishop tells us is acknowledged by the Gospel, and in no way different from the station that a member of the House of Lords inherits from his predecessors. And here, though I do not think that it is advisable to cling to isolated texts as evidence of the general conduct of the apostles regarding the prejudices of their converts, I may mention that Peter, in his first Epistle, says, "Submit yourself to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake." And if we take Dean Alford's interpretation of this, and consider it as equivalent to a command, extending to every human institution (and I can see no reason why we should not), it is plain that our missionaries in India, if they wish to follow the examples of the apostles, should yield to the prejudices of caste as long as they do not involve idolatrous rites. But it is in the general action of the apostles, as illustrated in Acts xv. 19, that the safest guide may, I apprehend, be found; and when, with reference to difficulties as regarding the customs of their converts, St. James said (Dean Alford's edition), "Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them which from the Gentiles are turned to God; but that we write to them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood;" and again: "For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than [these] necessary things; that ye abstain from meats offered unto idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which, if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well;"—when the apostle said thus, I think we ought to feel little doubt as to the course we ought to pursue regarding the social customs of the peoples of India.