especially, a Mahratta Brahman, who was known to some persons in England when he visited it as the Pandit of the Maharája Dhulíp Singh, and now works under the Benares missionaries as a catechist, unites the most earnest conscientiousness and simple-minded humility to varied and thoughtful learning. Truly such men are in Hindostan the salt of the earth and the light of the world; and though as yet perhaps their influence is little felt, yet to increase their number must be the earnest effort of our missionaries, or rather of all true Christians, for to them we must look as the instruments through whom the English nation may hope to accomplish the noblest and holiest work which God has given us to do-the conversion of India to the faith of Christ.

"It is now many years since I fell very ill, and, leaving Calcutta, came to "reside at Benares, where I used every possible means known to Hindus in "order to get well. Mr. Duncan, who

was at that time Resident at Benares, "and was my particular friend, pro"cured for me also the assistance of "several European surgeons, who were "not able to afford me relief. At length "a Hindu, who had been very ill, pro"cured some medicinę and advice from "a merchant, Mr. Wheatly, by which "he obtained a cure. On this I "also sought acquaintance with Mr. "Wheatly. He gave me a New Tes"tament, and I bought of him a Book "of Common Prayer. He often passed "much time with me in explaining the

"of the Christian religion. In respect "of my complaint, he recommended 66 some simple medicines, but advised, "above all, that I should apply myself "to God in prayer, to lead my mind "into the truth, and to grant me bodily "healing. I complied with his advice, "and obtained a perfect cure. I then "asked him what I should do for the

66

name of Jesus Christ. He advised "that as I had felt the benefit of the "advice which he had given, I ought to "consult the benefit of my countrymen, "and with this view found a school for "education in English, Bengali, Per'sian, and Hindi. In compliance with "Mr. Wheatly's advice, I set about establishing such a school, and with "the help of my friends raised a fund "to supply 200 rupees a month for the "endowment of it. Afterwards, Mr. "Wheatly, failing in business, became "himself the first schoolmaster. His

66

66

66

66

plan was first to instruct my family "in Christianity, and pray with them; "and then to teach the English language to the scholars who attended. "He continually taught me that from joining in prayer and reading the scriptures no loss of caste was inIvolved, but piety would be increased. "After a short time Mr. Wheatly "died. I had heard through him "of the Rev. Mr. Corrie, and through "him had sent a small donation with a "letter to the British and Foreign Bible Society. I often prayed that he might come to Benares; and at length he came to reside at this place. From "the information communicated by him respecting the Church Missionary So"ciety. . . I determined upon making "the Calcutta committee of that society "the trustees of my school, "legal measures are in progress for transferring the school endowment permanently into their hands. In the meantime, my house in Bengali Tolah, "which cost me 48,000 rupees in building, has been appropriated for the "school-house, and Mr. Adlington has begun to give instruction in the

66

66

and

1 He afterwards increased it to nearly double

In the last number of this Magazine I ventured to make some comments on a passage in Mr. Froude's "History." They touched upon a very grave question of public morality. They were intended. to vindicate what I conceive was the spirit of Mr. Froude's note-at all events, what I am sure is the spirit of the writer-from a misconstruction to which his words seemed to me to be liable. My first complaint of them was, that, by drawing too sharp a distinction between the ethical maxims of the sixteenth century and of the nineteenth, they threatened to deprive us of some of the valuable lessons from the history of the former which no one had more successfully drawn out than Mr. Froude. My second was, that, by too hastily adopting a prevalent confusion between the claims of conscience and the claims of private judgment, the writer had suggested the thought that the duties of a citizen, and especially of a soldier, must be tried by a different law from that which we apply to the highest questions of all.

Since the article appeared, I have had proofs that I should have been most unjust as well as most uncharitable, if I had pronounced judgment upon Mr. Froude for what appeared to me an inaccuracy in his method of stating his

case.

My own remarks have made me suspected by very kind and just critics of holding opinions which would be at least as dangerous as any that I could have attributed to him. I am particularly thankful that my observations should be brought to the test which I myself demanded for them, that of their application to our own times. If they will not bear that test they must be wrong, and I hope that I shall be most ready to confess that they are wrong.

If I were merely continuing an old topic, still more if I were merely justifying myself, I should feel that I had no business to occupy more space in the columns of a magazine which is bound to seek for variety, and the readers of which cannot be interested in the opinions of a particular man. But the criticisms to which I have alluded introduce new and stirring questionsquestions that are of the profoundest interest to us all at the present moment. The tone in which they have been expressed can cause nothing but gratitude in the person who is the object of them, and the principle which they involve is so serious that it deserves all the reflection that can be bestowed upon itall the light that can be brought from

any

"wise saws or modern instances" to bear upon it.

The first objection to which I refer is contained in a very intelligente and friendly notice of Mr. Froude's work in the Examiner of October 6th. The writer agrees with me, both in my high estimate of the "History," and in my heitation respecting the apology for Cecil's conduct which was contained in the note. But he thinks that my doctrine respecting the duty of a soldier to fulfil his task as a defender of his country, without debating the question in his mind whether any specific war upon which she has entered ought to have been commenced, might oblige a Neapolitan soldier to follow the fortunes of Francis II. rather than to pledge himself to the cause of Garibaldi. I thought of alluding to this topic myself in the course of my article; I believe it was an omission not to do so. I am glad that the writer in the Examiner gives me an opportunity of rectifying the mistake.

Before I refer to the special case of Naples, I must take leave to remark that the terms of my proposition clearly presume the existence of a settled government, under which the soldier is serving and which he has no doubt whatever is the government of his country. A civil war of necessity raises this doubt. When it has begun, the soldier must decide what is the service of his country. How agonising that question became in the case of our own Civil War, every one knows. The Parliament invoked the name of the King against the King. It became at last an idle, insincere formula; but in the beginning of the war it expressed faithfully the conflict in men's minds, the question where the legitimate authority dwelt. And that question was not settled by private judgments. A conscience of law, of its unutterable sacredness, of the obligation which it imposes-a conscience rising out of that of an actual, personal Lawgiver and King to whom all rulers must bow-gives that period its unspeakable interest for all generations of English

after the deposition of Richard, to an anarchy of private judgments, the interest. ceases; we are sure that on some terms that anarchy must end. So that, I believe, a civil war, while it makes that simple obedience which I demanded of the soldier in a state of peace and order impossible, yet illustrates very strikingly the distinction upon which I rested the demand.

I do not, however, for a single instant confound the struggle in which a Hampden might be found on one side, and a Falkland on the other, with the Italian struggle of our day. I try to believe that good men may be so attached to the symbols of order with which they have been familiar from their nurseries, as to think that they should cling to those symbols when they express only outrage upon order, the contempt of written and confessed law, the breach of all promises that bind gentlemen, the violation of all oaths by which creatures appeal to the judgment of their Creator. With these, as with all personal cruelties to brave, faithful, enduring citizens, which it is simple Atheism to suppose are not hateful in the sight of Almighty God, the name of Francis IL is associated. Let him shift his plea to what court he pleases; let it be one where the strict letter of the law is enforced; let it be one of equity or chivalry; the sentence must be the same. In the highest of all, the ratification must be the most complete. When the question is presented to the Neapolitan soldier, "Is the service of 'your country the service of the man

who upholds this state of things, or the "service of a man who comes to protest "in the name of justice, law, and God, "against this state of things?"—I can but see one answer. Even if there had not been granted to the Italian of the nineteenth century all the same signs of God-desertion which were granted to the Englishman of 1688-in what some have called our silken revolution-even if the sceptre had not dropped from the hands of the Bourbon as it dropped from the hands of the Stuart, and at