Only as I write I get a letter to this effect from an officer of long
experience. He had "never seen anything wrong with the Courts."
Therefore I have set out the facts to the best of my ability. I want
the reader to see for himself. I don't want him to accept my authority
that they are bad; I don't believe in authority. I want him to think
over the facts I have laid before him and frame his own judgment. I
think that he will see that the Courts which have been declared
impregnable are very vulnerable indeed.
The reason I chose the Village is because it is the unit of
self-government.
The reason I chose the Opium and Excise was different. Whereas
Government has never been criticised for its Courts and its law, which
are bad, it has received unending criticism for its Opium and Excise
policy. Yet, mistakes apart, I don't see how it is much to blame. The
difficulties are inherent. They are the same in nature as those that
beset liquor legislation in England. The question has not been solved
here; far from it. In fact, it is insoluble by Act; it is only soluble
by education of the individual. The right and temperate use of alcohol
and drugs is a personal, not a State question. Therefore where
Government could have been criticised it was not, and where it did its
best in great difficulties it was abused. This will give a key to
another difficulty in India: Government receives hardly any good and
useful criticism from any side. It is abused and praised, but that
understanding criticism which is of the greatest value to individuals
and Governments is wanting. The Indians are feeling serious unrest,
and they cannot diagnose the cause--no one can diagnose himself--so
they strike out at random against Government measures and officials.
They are like a certain party in England who also are unhappy with
things as they are, and who express their dissatisfaction at, say, the
marriage laws--which were made not by man, but by Churches, whose great
supporters were and are women--by smashing the orchid house at Kew. It
reminds me of Andrew Lang's ghost. What he wanted to say was that the
drains were out of order and a danger to all the inhabitants of the
castle. But he suffered from aphasia, and the nearest he could get to
an indication of his meaning was driving round and round the castle at
midnight in a hearse and four.
Most changes arising in societies are incoherent in the same way, but
it must not be supposed that because the expression is irrelevant there
is no real and serious cause beneath it. When an overboiling kettle
spills and scalds the cat who never did the kettle any harm, it is hard
luck on the cat, but it is not unnatural in the kettle. And it would
be dangerous therefore to stop up the spout. Later on the kettle might
explode and damage the cat's master.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account