Part 4 (2/2)

[1] It is extremely doubtful if there were any slaves in India in the corresponding period of Indian history. At least, Megasthenes, the Greek amba.s.sador at the Court of Chandra Gupta, did not find any in northern India, though his opinion is not accepted as quite correct. It is said that slavery did exist in a mild form in the southern peninsula.

[2] _The Conflict of Colour_, by PUTNAM WEALE, The Macmillan Co., New York, 1910, pp. 20-21.

[3] _Public Administration in Ancient India_, by P. BANERJEA, Macmillan, London, 1916, p. 42.

[4] _Vedic India_, by MACDONNELL & KEITH. Vol. II. p. 210.

[5] BANERJEA, p. 43.

[6] _Buddhist India_, p. 9.

[7] _Ancient India_, _Alexander's Invasion_ (MCCRINDLE, p. 292), quoted by Mr. BANERJEA. p. 44.

[8] ARRIAN, _Anabasis_ (MCCRINDLE), p. 154; quoted by Mr. BANERJEA, p.

154. If the Greek writers were familiar with the conceptions of democracy and republicanism they knew what they meant by the use of these terms in relation to Indian inst.i.tutions.

[9] BANERJEA. p. 46.

[10] MACDONELL & KEITH, _Vedic Index_, Vol. II, p. 214.

[11] BANERJEA. p. 95.

[12] Footnote, _Ibid._, p. 96. Original authority quoted by Mr. BANERJEA in footnote on p. 103.

[13] _Ibid._, p. 104.

III

THE PRESENT IDEALS

The wishes, the desires, and the interests of the people of these countries [speaking of German colonies] themselves must be the dominant factor in settling their future government.

DAVID LLOYD GEORGE

”Causes and Aims of the War.” Speech delivered at Glasgow, on being presented with the freedom of that city, June 29, 1917.

Every nation has a fundamental right to determine, fix and work out her own ideals. Any interference with this right by individuals or nations of foreign origin is unnatural and unjust. The consent of the governed is the only logical and just basis of governments. These principles have been reiterated with added force and masterly eloquence by President Wilson in his addresses during the War. They have been accepted and adopted by the Allied statesmen. No statesman or publicist of standing in any of the Allied countries can dare question the principles. The difficulty, however, arises when we come to apply them practically. At this point the practical politician's genius for diplomacy discovers flaws that provide excuses for the non-application of those principles if such course seems helpful to his nation or his sovereign.

President Wilson has a.s.severated that ”the day of conquest and aggrandis.e.m.e.nt is gone,” which, in plain language, means that the day of Imperialism is over. And, in conformity with the principle stated in the Declaration of Independence, that ”All nations have the right to a.s.sume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature's G.o.d ent.i.tle them,” President Wilson has also said that ”every people have a right to choose the sovereignty under which they shall live”; that ”national aspirations must be respected, and that 'self determination' is not a mere phrase; it is an imperative principle of action, which statesmen will henceforth ignore at their peril.” Yet as _practical men_ we must not ignore the facts of life. The world is not at once going to be an ideal place to live in even if it may become one. It may be that the advanced nations of the earth which just now divide the political and economic control of the world between themselves may accept the underlying policy of the following statement (of President Wilson) that

”This war had its roots in the disregard of the rights of small nations and of nationalities which lacked the union and the force to make good their claim to determine their own allegiance and their own forms of political life.”

and the proposed League of Nations might see that a continuance of the injustice thus far done to small or backward nations is no longer permitted. Being practical men, however, we cannot build on the a.s.sumption that at the end of this war the world is at once to be transformed into a paradise and that full justice will be done to all nations and all peoples alike. We already notice a tendency to restrict the application and the enforcement of these principles to the nations of Europe by the more frequent use of the term ”free nations.” ”Free nations” do not need to be freed. It will be wise, therefore not to be carried off our feet by these declarations and statements. Mr. Montagu and Lord Chelmsford have pointedly reminded us of the Indian saying, ”hanoz Delhi Dur Ast” (i.e. ”Delhi is yet far away”). But even if they had not done so we were not so simple as to be swept away by the mere language of the war declarations. The wording of the announcement of August 20, 1917, itself did not leave us in doubt about the truth of the saying quoted by Mr. Montagu and Lord Chelmsford. We have, therefore, to test our ideals and aspirations by the touchstone of practicability and expediency. Happily for us there is, in theory, at least, a full agreement between the political goal set up by the Indian Nationalists of the Congress school (since endorsed by the Home Rulers) and that set up by the authors of the announcement of August 20th. This goal is ”Self-Government within the Empire on terms of equality with the other parts of it,” in the language of the Congress school or, ”Responsible Government as an integral part of the British Empire,” in the language of the announcement. There is a party of Indian politicians who want complete independence, but at present their number is so limited that we need not take serious consideration of their position in the matter. The vast bulk of the educated cla.s.ses are agreed:

(_a_) That they are content to remain within the British Empire if they are allowed a status of equality with the self-governing dominions of the Empire.

(_b_) That what they want is an autonomous Government on the lines of Canada, Australia and the South African Union.

<script>