From what has been stated above it appears that the general impression that democratic institutions are _entirely_ foreign to India is nothing but the survival of a prejudice originally due to ignorance of Indian history. In collecting his evidence Mr. Matthai has principally drawn upon South Indian sources. There can be no doubt that abundant evidence of a similar kind is available as regards North India and is waiting to be collected, collated and sifted by other Matthais. We do not contend that India had the same kind of representative institutions as Modern Europe has. In fact no part of the world had. They are all recent developments. The democratic nature of an institution does not depend on the methods of election but on the people's right to express their will, directly, or through their representatives, in the management of their public affairs. It is clear that that idea was never altogether absent from Indian life either in theory or in practise. Even under the most absolute autocracies, the bulk of the people managed their collective affairs themselves. They organised and maintained schools; arranged and paid for sanitation; built public works; provided for watch and ward; administered justice, and for all these purposes raised revenues and spent them in a democratic way. They did so, not only as regards the internal affairs of a village, but applied the same principles in the larger life of their district or districts. Such a people cannot be said to have _always_ lived a life dictated and held together by force. Nor can it be said with justice that the introduction of modern democratic methods in such a country, among such a people, would be the introduction of an exotic plant, with the spirit and working of which it will take them centuries to be familiar. FOOTNOTES: [1] It is extremely doubtful if there were any slaves in India in the corresponding period of Indian history. At least, Megasthenes, the Greek ambassador 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 institutions. [9] BANERJEA. p. 46. [10] MACDONELL & KEITH, _Vedic Index_, Vol. II, p. 214. [11] BANERJEA. p. 95.