would also insert in the eye of a needle. As a reward, he would fly to his master's hand for food. Should you place a few coppers in your hand, he would later fly to you and fetch the coins to the family treasury. He seemed to know where his bread came from. Being fed, I suppose, though free, he had no ambition to forage for himself, and so he came to love his chains; which reminds me of the attitude of the city child, and, indeed, many children of larger growth, towards freedom. This child said compassionately on his first visit to the country, after observing the birds flitting aimlessly about, "Poor little things, they have no cages"!

The conservative man of commerce cannot understand why Indians want greater freedom. He cannot follow the lark that soars to heaven's gate!

He might understand that the bird would prefer on occasions the succulent worm to the weevily rice. But grain is a staple-surer to get. Has the Indian discovered the worm, and feels no dependency upon prepared food? Or have rations become short and hard to get? Can he fare better by going out and working for himself? These are the conflicting questions.

The Indians see the crops going into the export trade, while they starve, and sixty-five per cent of their revenues go into the cost of maintaining the British establishment. These are the growlings that are heard in the bazaars as well as in the provincial and imperial councils. In Bengal, the Council to save taxes, refused to vote funds for the police. The English Governor, having the power under the new law, however, forced action. Parliamentary freedom has its limitations.

The poet blithely sings:

"A day, an hour of glorious freedom,
Is worth a whole eternity in bondage."

But is it? For a man with a family, the "bondage" of regular employment, rather than the pickings of sporadic freedom, looks rather attractive! Idealists lead the way to human betterment, but, like Moses, they never enter the promised land. Their people, however, who follow behind, feeling their way, do. An Englishman once tersely observed that, on politics, the English habitually think in terms of realities. "We employ all sorts of resounding phrases and political abstractions and pretenses," he said, "but we do not think in them-whereas the Irish and the Indians do. They care more for a verbal admission of their 'independence' than for the realities of freedom."

Those who engage in empire building have to study the nature of the people they expect to govern, or guide. The English hold themselves aloof and consider themselves superior, an attitude which has humiliated the educated and thoughtful Indian. They apparently cannot change this pose, and the only bond that will continue to hold the dependent people at all will be the conviction on their part of the need of force to preserve order, insure stability, and, more particularly, protect their country from external aggression.

Gandhi was told that, if the English evacuated as a consequence of his campaign, India would have the Amir of Afghanistan in Lahore, Holkar in Delhi, and Gurkhas in Bengal. He replied: "If we can break English rule, no other rule can stand against us." "If the English go," he

was told, "you will have anarchy." He answered, "I prefer anarchy to alien rule." He, the Hindu, has joined hands with the Mohammedans, whose creed he secretly despises, and has induced them, with great political skill, to adopt the policy of "non-cooperation." India is now waiting for the wheels to stop. Mirabeau said, "Beware of the people who, to become dangerous, have only to fold their arms!"

But this Hindu, who might well shudder at the thought of Mohammedan domination, has expressed a preference for it! As a strategist, he knows how the English fear the word "Jihad," the "Holy War." This accounts for the tender treatment which has been accorded the Sultan of Turkey, the spiritual head-the Caliph of the Mohammedan faith. The prophet provided for a Caliphate before his death, and, while granting Moslems the right to be loyal to governments which do not molest them, declared a "holy war" on all who obstructed or opposed them. Hence the Caliphate in Indian politics. Its influence is dreaded. England is accused of attacking the temporal power of the Sultan in the peace terms, and is anathema!

The British have done great things in India by way of development. Railroads and wagon roads have been constructed. Education has been encouraged, civil service employment given to natives and order maintained. This means much for the world, because it is safe to assume that the Indians, lacking in initiative, but not in indolence, would be as unprogressive as they have been in all the centuries. In the "glorious past" slave masters built monuments to themselves and all that remains are remains. The beautiful Taj Mahal of Agra, the pride of Indian art and