ting　to　govern　a　dependency；　is　about　the　worst；　and　betrays　in　its　advocates　a　total　want　of　comprehension　of　the　conditions　of　good　government。　To　govern　a　country　under　responsibility　to　the　people　of　that　country；　and　to　govern　one　country　under　responsibility　to　the　people　of　another；　are　two　very　different　things。　What　makes　the　excellence　of　the　first　is　that　freedom　is　preferable　to　despotism：　but　the　last　is　despotism。　The　only　choice　the　case　admits　is　a　choice　of　despotisms：　and　it　is　not　certain　that　the　despotism　of　twenty　millions　is　necessarily　better　than　that　of　a　few；　or　of　one。　But　it　is　quite　certain　that　the　despotism　of　those　who　neither　hear；　nor　see；　nor　know　anything　about　their　subjects；　has　many　chances　of　being　worse　than　that　of　those　who　do。　It　is　not　usually　thought　that　the　immediate　agents　of　authority　govern　better　because　they　govern　in　the　name　of　an　absent　master；　and　of　one　who　has　a　thousand　more　pressing　interests　to　attend　to。　The　master　may　hold　them　to　a　strict　responsibility；　enforced　by　heavy　penalties；　but　it　is　very　questionable　if　those　penalties　will　often　fall　in　the　right　place。　　　It　is　always　under　great　difficulties；　and　very　imperfectly；　that　a　country　can　be　governed　by　foreigners；　even　when　there　is　no　extreme　disparity；　in　habits　and　ideas；　between　the　rulers　and　the　ruled。　Foreigners　do　not　feel　with　the　people。　They　cannot　judge；　by　the　light　in　which　a　thing　appears　to　their　own　minds；　or　the　manner　in　which　it　affects　their　feelings；　how　it　will　affect　the　feelings　or　appear　to　the　minds　of　the　subject　population。　What　a　native　of　the　country；　of　average　practical　ability；　knows　as　it　were　by　instinct；　they　have　to　learn　slowly；　and　after　all　imperfectly；　by　study　and　experience。　The　laws；　the　customs；　the　social　relations；　for　which　they　have　to　legislate；　instead　of　being　familiar　to　them　from　childhood；　are　all　strange　to　them。　For　most　of　their　detailed　knowledge　they　must　depend　on　the　information　of　natives；　and　it　is　difficult　for　them　to　know　whom　to　trust。　They　are　feared；　suspected；　probably　disliked　by　the　population；　seldom　sought　by　them　except　for　interested　purposes；　and　they　are　prone　to　think　that　the　servilely　submissive　are　the　trustworthy。　Their　danger　is　of　despising　the　natives；　that　of　the　natives　is　of　disbelieving　that　anything　the　strangers　do　can　be　intended　for　their　good。　These　are　but　a　part　of　the　difficulties　that　any　rulers　have　to　struggle　with　who　honestly　attempt　to　govern　well　a　country　in　which　they　are　foreigners。　To　overcome　these　difficulties　in　any　degree　will　always　be　a　work　of　much　labour；　requiring　a　very　superior　degree　of　capacity　in　the　chief　administrators；　and　a　high　average　among　the　subordinates：　and　the　best　organisation　of　such　a　government　is　that　which　will　best　ensure　the　labour；　develop　the　capacity；　and　place　the　highest　specimens　of　it　in　the　situations　of　greatest　trust。　Responsibility　to　an　authority　which　bas　gone　through　none　of　the　labour；　acquired　none　of　the　capacity；　and　for　the　most　part　is　not　even　aware　that　either；　in　any　peculiar　degree；　is　required；　cannot　be　regarded　as　a　very　effectual　expedient　for　accomplishing　these　ends。　　　The　government　of　a　people　by　itself　has　a　meaning　and　a　reality；　but　such　a　thing　as　government　of　one　people　by　another　does　not　and　cannot　exist。　One　people　may　keep　another　as　a　warren　or　preserve　for　its　own　use；　a　place　to　make　money　in；　a　human　cattle　farm　to　be　worked　for　the　profit　of　its　own　inhabitants。　But　if　the　good　of　the　governed　is　the　proper　business　of　a　government；　it　is　utterly　impossible　that　a　people　should　directly　attend　to　it。　The　utmost　they　can　do　is　to　give　some　of　their　best　men　a　commission　to　look　after　it；　to　whom　the　opinion　of　their　own　country　can　neither　be　much　of　a　guide　in　the　performance　of　their　duty；　nor　a　competent　judge　of　the　mode　in　which　it　has　been　performed。　Let　any　one　consider　how　the　English　themselves　would　be　governed　if　they　knew　and　cared　no　more　about　their　own　affairs　than　they　know　and　care　about　the　affairs　of　the　Hindoos。　Even　this　comparison　gives　no　adequate　idea　of　the　state　of　the　case：　for　a　people　thus　indifferent　to　politics　altogether　would　probably　be　simply　acquiescent　and　let　the　government　alone：　whereas　in　the　case　of　India；　a　politically　active　people　like　the　English；　amidst　habitual　acquiescence；　are　every　now　and　then　interfering；　and　almost　always　in　the　wrong　place。　The　real　causes　which　determine　the　prosperity　or　wretchedness；　the　improvement　or　deterioration；　of　the　Hindoos　are　too　far　off　to　be　within　their　ken。　They　have　not　the　knowledge　necessary　for　suspecting　the　existence　of　those　causes；　much　less　for　judging　of　their　operation。　The　most　essential　interests　of　the　country　may　be　well　administered　without　obtaining　any　of　their　approbation；　or　mismanaged　to　almost　any　excess　without　attracting　their　notice。　　　The　purposes　for　which　they　are　principally　tempted　to　interfere　and　control　the　proceedings　of　their　delegates　are　of　two　kinds。　One　is　to　force　English　ideas　down　the　throats　of　the　natives；　for　instance；　by　measures　of　proselytism；　or　acts　intentionally　or　unintentionally　offensive　to　the　religious　feelings　of　the　people。　This　misdirection　of　opinion　in　the　ruling　country　is　instructively　exemplified　（the　more　so；　because　nothing　is　meant　but　justice　and　fairness；　and　as　much　impartiality　as　can　be　expected　from　persons　really　convinced）　by　the　demand　now　so　general　in　England　for　having　the　Bible　taught；　at　the　option　of　pupils　or　of　their　parents；　in　the　Government　schools。　From　the　European　point　of　view　nothing　can　wear　a　fairer　aspect；　or　seem　less　open　to　objection　on　the　score　of　religious　freedom。　To　Asiatic　eyes　it　is　quite　another　thing。　No　Asiatic　people　ever　believes　that　a　government　puts　its　paid　officers　and　official　machinery　into　motion　unless　it　is　bent　upon　an　object；　and　when　bent　on　an　object；　no　Asiatic　believes　that　any　government；　except　a　feeble　and　contemptible　one；　pursues　it　by　halves。　If　Government　schools　and　schoolmasters　taught　Christianity；　whatever　pledges　might　be　given　of　teaching　it　only　to　those　who　spontaneously　sought　it；　no　amount　of　evidence　would　ever　persuade　the　parents　that　improper　means　were　not　used　to　make　their　children　Christians；　or　at　all　events；　outcasts　from　Hindooism。　If　they　could；　in　the　end；　be　convinced　of　the　contrary；　it　would　only　be　by　the　entire　failure　of　the　schools；　so　conducted；　to　make　any　converts。　If　the　teaching　had　the　smallest　effect　in　promoting　its　object　it　would　compromise　not　only　the　utility　and　even　existence　of　the　government　education；　but　perhaps　the　safety　of　the　government　itself。　An　English　Protestant　would　not　be　easily　induced；　by　disclaimers　of　proselytism；　to　place　his　children　in　a　Roman　Catholic　seminary：　Irish　Catholics　will　not　send　their　children　to　schools　in　which　they　can　be　made　Protestants：　and　we　expect　that　Hindoos；　who　believe　that　the　privileges　of　Hindooism　can　be　forfeited　by　a　merely　physical　act；　will　expose　theirs　to　the　danger　of　being　made　Christians！　　　Such　is　one　of　the　modes　in　which　the　opinion　of　the　dominant　country　tends　to　act　more　injuriously　than　beneficially　on　the　conduct　of　its　deputed　governors。　In　other　respects；　its　interference　is　likely　to　be　oftenest　exercised　where　it　will　be　most　pertinaciously　demanded；　and　that　is　on　behalf　of　some　interest　of　the　English　settlers。　English　settlers　have　friends　at　home；　have　organs；　have　access　to　the　public；　they　have　a　common　language　and　common　ideas　with　their　countrymen：　any　complaint　by　an　Englishman　is　more　sympathetically　heard；　even　if　no　unjust　preference　is　intentionally　accorded　to　it。　Now；　if　there　be　a　fact　to　which　all　experience　testifies；　it　is　that　when　a　country　holds　another　in　subjection；　the　individuals　of　the　ruling　people　who　resort　to　the　foreign　country　to　make　their　fortunes　are　of　all　others　those　who　most　need　to　be　held　under　powerful　restraint。　They　are　always　one　of　the　chief　difficulties　of　the　government。　Armed　with　the　prestige　and　filled　with　the　scornful　overbearingness　of　the　conquering　nation；　they　have　the　feelings　inspired　by　absolute　power　without　its　sense　of　responsibility。　　　Among　a　people　like　that　India　the　utmost　efforts　of　the　public　authorities　are　not　enough　for　the　effectual　protection　of　the　weak　against　the　strong；　and　of　all　the　strong；　the　European　settlers　are　the　strongest。　Wherever　the　demoralising　effect　of　the　situation　is　not　in　a　most　remarkable　degree　corrected　by　the　personal　character　of　the　individual；　they　think　the　people　of　the　country　mere　dirt　under　their　feet：　it　seems　to　them　monstrous　that　any　rights　of　the　natives　should　stand　in　the　way　of　their　smallest　pretensions：　the　simplest　act　of　protection　to　the　inhabitants　against　any　act　of　power　on　their　part　which　they　may　consider　useful　to　their　commercial　objects；　they　denounce；　and　sincerely　regard；　as　an　injury。　So　natural　is　this　state　of　feeling　in　a　situation　like　theirs　that　even　under　the　discouragement　which　it　has　hitherto　met　with　from　the　ruling　authorities　it　is　impossible　that　more　or　less　of　the　spirit　should　not　perpetually　break　out。　The　Government；　itself　free　from　this　spir