not open to the multitude, and the universal desire for respect is satisfied by the organization of society in response to the prevailing sentiment. Family life is of the patriarchal type: a man throughout his life is lord of his sons and responsible for keeping them. And in India the caste system provides the humblest member of society with a definite status, and attaches him to a cirIcle in which he feels himself of some account. But, from the economic point of view, the most important result of this habit of mind is the enormous expenditure it occasions in the maintenance of dependents, who live in a man's house, receive food at his hands, and offer him in requital their morning salutations. Not merely does a householder accept without murmur the idle dependence of grown-up sons: he supports sons-in-law, widowed sisters and daughters with their families, and even distant cousins, with no sense of grievance. No sooner does a man rise in the world than a host of relations and connections cling to his skirts, expecting not merely patronage but maintenance in return for nothing but their respectful clientship. All this, it may be said, illustrates the abounding charity of the East. True; but we may be sure that this charity would not be so wide and undiscriminating were there in competition with it the Western desire for increased comfort, and larger possessions. distinctive feature of the Oriental habit of mind is that this desire possesses little of the strength which it has acquired in Europe. The richest men live under conditions which an English artisan would despise. They have not learnt the convenience of chairs and tables, of knives and forks, or of glass and crockery: their food is a monotonous repetition of the simplest dishes: they have practically no amusements. A man with surplus income hoards it if he does not spend it upon others. The For centuries India has been absorbing treasure from Europe, burying what is not spent upon subsistence. She banks under ground, and we may almost regard the country as pitted with receptacles for gold and silver. The only clue we obtain to the extent of these unutilized resources is the surprisingly large amounts which are from time to time extracted by dacoities. These remarks, it should be observed, require at the present day some qualification. Things are changing, and in the large towns at all events there is a growing appreciation of Western habits. But in the main it is still true that the East values dignity far higher than comfort. Until this feeling changes we cannot look for rapid industrial development. It is the consumer who supports the workman, not the capitalist who finances him. It is not so very far back, one may say, that this description would apply pretty nearly to Europe. This is so; but we have travelled very far since then. Dignity, in the Oriental sense, has lost its attractiveness: indeed, its assumption is held to verge upon the ridiculous. Men search for happiness in more practical directions, and desire the control of things rather than of other men's feelings. The ideals are comfort and amusement-that is to say, riches-and the most general desire is to add to one's possessions. In order to satisfy this desire that is to say, to manufacture and sell desirable possessions-society has been reorganized upon an industrial basis, a revolution which has been assisted by the discoveries of science, and a growing appreciation of man's power over Nature. In the East labor is organized for service: in the West for production. The ultimate effect of both systems is the same -the distribution of subsistence to members of the community—and under both systems the lowest class of the community receives little beyond the bare necessities of life. But in the East, where material possessions are not in great request, labor receives its remuneration more or less directly. In return for services, real or sentimental, men with means give to men without means the necessities they require. In the West the desire for material possessions has developed a highly complicated organization in which skill and intelligence are rewarded not merely by the receipt of subsistence, but, so to speak, by the usufruct of subsistence which is ultimately to reach the hands of others. The men with means-that is to say, the purchasers of commodities-hand over to those from whom they make their purchases the subsistence not only of these latter, but of multitudes who are connected with or subordinated to them; and, in the form of further purchases, the payment filters down from hand to hand. Each retains so much as is needed for his own support and passes on the balance -by making purchases or payments for services until finally an irreducible balance reaches the lowest stratum of the community. In the West, as in the East, the organization of society leaves vast numbers of people in a state of the narrowest poverty. But in the West a larger proportion of the people have the handling of subsistence which is ultimately destined for others, and are remunerated thereby for their skill or energy. An artisan, for instance, receiving 31. a week, requires, let us say, only half this amount for the subsistence of himself and his family: he passes on the balance in purchases, but is, of course, the richer for his purchases. An Indian and an Englishman, each with 100l. to spare, spend it, the one in maintaining a retinue of ill-paid servants, the other in the purchase of furniture for his house. The Indian has nothing to show for his money: he has merely supported a num ber of people. The Englishman has gained a substantial return in the furniture. But he has accomplished much more. The price of the furniture, as it gradually filtered down from the upholsterer, through the manufacturer, and his artisans, to the laborers who produced or transported the raw materials, has assisted to provide, not merely subsistence for the laborers, but an adequate remuneration for those higher up the scale. They have, as already stated, passed on the subsistence which they did not require. But they have passed it on in exchange for articles that they purchased with it, and are so much the better off by the transaction. The stream of subsistence, which in the East may be likened to the flowing of a number of small runnels, in the West falls, as it were, through a series of sieves. But this complicated arrangement, with the rewards that it offers to industrial proficiency, ultimately rests upon a fashion or mode of human desire-the general wish to secure comfort and amusement, and the general willingness to spend resources in acquiring them. Were a desire to purchase non-existent, vain would be the efforts of capital to establish manufacture. In the East the desire is still undeveloped: comfort, possessions, and the refinements of luxury are there much less attractive and this appears to be the fundamental reason for the striking difference between East and West. ple are gaining some material ambitions. But as a general proposition it may still be correctly stated that the East and the West have different goals of happiness, and that the former sets small store upon that which to the latter makes life worth living. To assert that in the West dignity has lost its attractiveness is, it may be objected, altogether out of accord with the most prominent fact in modern social development-the growing consciousness amongst the masses of a feeling of self-respect-a feeling which has wrought wonders in uplifting their standard of conduct, and which, prompting them to demand a voice in the government, lies at the root of latter-day democracy. But this sentiment has really little in common with the Oriental's solicitude for his dignity. It is in the main self-regarding, and depends comparatively little upon the attitude of others. Dignity, on the other hand, results from the impression one makes upon others; and a man may be dignified when no atom of self-respect may justly remain to him. There is little akin between a desire to feel oneself as good a man as anyone else in the country, and a desire to impress the admiration of one's fellows. The first of these desires may be experienced by the most independent of cynics. The Oriental's care for his dignity is fruitful of the most admirable qualities. It breeds courage, fidelity, generosity, and good manners. On the other hand, it besets human nature with some special dangers. It discourages effective exertion. Dignity is not to be won by manual labor, and to work with one's hands is regarded as degrading. Accordingly, the whole of the educated intelligence of the nation directs itself to one branch only of employment-the literary branchthe functions of which do not add to the comfort and wealth of the country. The candidates for literary employ become far more numerous than the opportunities for employing them, and numbers of young men find that their education has been wasted, and that they are adrift with no hopes or means of livelihood. It may be said that a predilection for clerical, as opposed to manual, work is not peculiar to the East: it is very evident in England, where young men will thankfully accept wages that an artisan would refuse, in return for the right to wear a black coat. Even in so new a country as Australia respectability counts its victims by thousands in the society of the towns. Human nature is, of course, very much the same all the world over: the differences are not essential: they are merely exaggerations of traits that are common to all. But the dislike of manual labor is in the East infinitely deeper seated and more general than in Western countries. The intelligent artisan-the most typical product of Western civilizationhardly exists. The pursuit of dignity, further, encourages idleness. If men are willing to maintain dependents whose clientship gratifies their dignity, persons willing to accept this position will not be lacking. To be dependent is to be unemployed; and the extent of unemployment in India is extraordinarily great, and constitutes a tremendous drain upon the resources of the country. Moreover, an excessive regard for dignity narrows the scope of human endeavor. It is undignified to be worsted in competition with others, and there is an inclination to shrink from competition as risky to one's esteem. This is very evident in connection with elections to municipal or other offices. The best men can often not be persuaded to stand; and, where a board is constituted partly of nominated and partly of elected members, to hold by nomination is generally preferred as the more honorable status. A further evil is the wasteful expenditure which is encouraged by a sensitive regard for one's position. On ceremonial occasions, such as marriages, Orientals feel compelled to expend amounts that are enormous in proportion to their resources. An Indian coolie, earning 3d. or 4d. a day, will consider himself disgraced if he spends less than 31. or 41. in marrying his daughter: higher up the scale expenditure upon a marriage commonly dissipates a whole year's income and even more. And this outlay, be it remembered, represents for the most part nothing more substantial than the feeding of a crowd of relatives and castefellows. It But most harmful of all are the jealous feelings to which those who are set upon personal dignity are especially liable. Since the beginning of history jealousy has been a rock for the shipwreck of Oriental politics. It is by no means confined to the East. ruined classical Greece, and has brought much trouble to modern Greece also. But Eastern society is pervaded and corrupted by it: its influence is felt everywhere, and it is the constant experience of its strength and its results that makes so many of those who know India doubt whether Indians can effectively combine to govern themselves. It has before now completely broken up the Indian National Congress. The political history of Turkey and Persia, in their new conditions, has consisted of little more than the jealous animosities of rival statesmen, and the multitudes' jealous distrust of their chosen leaders. What success Turkey has achieved she owes not to her Constitution but to the commanding abilities of one of her generals, who for a period has wielded almost undisputed authority. For jeal ousy wil veil itself before the exceptional: indeed, it does not arise when all are in submission to the authority of a despot. But the resulting situation is in no way democratic. And it lacks the guarantee of continuity which it is one of democracy's credits to supply. So long as jealousy debilitates Oriental society, eating out the heart of co-operative effort, there can be little hope for democratic institutions. These, whether Cabinets or cricket teams, are nourished by the sacrifice of individual dignity. History, so far, supports the fanciful idea that jealousy increases in virulence with the heat of the climate. Oriental views of life have their peculiar dangers. So also have the aspirations of the modern West. Each year's discoveries add to our resources: our winnings from Nature are so large that they entirely engross us, and we are more and more inclined to a material view of life. Our pleasures, our interests, have increased enormously, and we are convinced that life is a very excellent thing. There is nothing of the pessimism of the East. Amidst present attractions the future loses interest for us; the promises offered by religion are held in light esteem, and the obligations that it imposes are analyzed out of existence. The most sceptical of critics will hardly deny that religion has been a most useful instrument of police: when its bonds are cast off society may scarcely be able to control such bitter animosities as recently convulsed the Champagne districts of France, and threatened England with paralysis of railway transport. The more desirable it is to live, the more fearful it is to die; and it seems doubtful whether Europeans in future will face death upon the battle-field with the courage of their ancestors. They will have too much to lose, especially if they are town-bred. These tendencies, it will be said, all make for the blessings of peace. This is true, if death becomes equally fearful to all the nations of Europe. It is perhaps fanciful to think that Asia may give birth to an aggressive danger for Western civilization. But Europe has interests in Asia which she wishes to maintain. She can maintain them only by courage and self-denial. These alone give strength to her fingers. And within the borders of Europe an army is growing up which is already a menace to the easternmost members of her family. The soldiers of Turkey measure life by the standards of Asia; and Christian armies may learn before long the strength of an adversary to whom death is not appalling. It is fortunate for Italy that her descent upon Tripoli did not bring her to death-grips with such antagonists, and that her soldiers were protected from them by the sea. How far, and how soon, is the East likely to change and accept the material ideas of Europe in place of its own? This opens a discussion of wide proportions, and space but remains for a few reflections. The material tastes of Europe are the result of change: in former days comfort was appreciated as little as it is to-day in Asia. A social ideal of Aristotle's was a man so sensitive in his pride that he would give but not receive, so as to be beholden to nobody. An Oriental would to-day accept this ideal: but it is very far from the figure which now attracts the eyes of the West-the pushing, self-advertising man of business. If Europe bas changed, Asia may change also. The Japanese have apparently commenced their metamorphosis. They measure their successes in terms of commerce and industry as well as of war. But it seems doubtful whether the mass of the people regard material comfort as outweighing sentiment. They showed no sign of this during the struggle with Russia. And there is very little affinity between the governinent which they approve and the democratic ideals of European nations. In India, Persia, and Turkey, the material advantages of European civilization are becoming widely known and appreciated. But there is an uncomfortable feeling that an Oriental cannot copy Christian people in clothes or in habits without disclaiming his religion and dishonoring his past; and this contest between desire for the new and affection for the old has given a peculiar feature to Indian unrest-a really sincere appreciation of modern methods being accompanied by demonstrative attempts to revive archaic prejudices. In Constantinople, Teheran, and Calcutta, you will find numbers of men who in dress, habits, and thought, might belong to London or Paris. But they are for the most part free-thinkers; by cutting themselves adrift from the religion of their fathers, they have rid themselves of this embarrassing feeling of inconsistency. For a similar reason, in India, conversion to Christianity is commonly followed by a very distinct rise in the standard of comfort. An Indian who is a Christian no longer feels antagonism towards the West: he becomes identified with the West, and can consistently adopt its manners and customs, So also a native Indian official who is promoted to rank that is ordinarily reserved for Europeans will think himself justified-and is held justified by bis associates-in openly adopting European habits of life, and will even give dinner parties at which his wife sits at the head of the table. He is identified with the West by his position, and Western habits appear no longer incongruous. But, so far, it appears that for the adoption of Western habits and standards there must be some effective reason for a breach with the past; and that, failing such reason, a change of habits appears in the light of a disloyalty. No doubt, amongst Indians who cling to their faith, there is a growing expenditure |