the world's history. It was the government of a few
hundred highly skilled administrative experts backed by a small
professional army, ruling a vast agglomeration of subject peoples. It
was frankly an absolute paternalism, governing as it saw fit, with no
more responsibility to the governed than the native despots whom it had
displaced. But it governed well. In efficiency, honesty, and sense of
duty, the government of India is probably the best example of
benevolent absolutism that the world has ever seen. It gave India
profound peace. It played no favourites, holding the scales even between
rival races, creeds, and castes. Lastly, it made India a real political
entity--something which India had never been before. For the first time
in its history, India was firmly united under one rule--the rule of the
_Pax Britannica_.

Yet the very virtues of British rule sowed the seeds of future trouble.
Generations grew up, peacefully united in unprecedented
acquaintanceship, forgetful of past ills, seeing only European
shortcomings, and, above all, familiar with Western ideas of
self-government, liberty, and nationality. In India, as elsewhere in the
East, there was bound to arise a growing movement of discontent against
Western rule--a discontent varying from moderate demands for increasing
autonomy to radical demands for immediate independence.

Down to the last quarter of the nineteenth century, organized political
agitation against the British "Raj" was virtually unknown. Here and
there isolated individuals uttered half-audible protests, but these
voices found no popular echo. The Indian masses, pre-occupied with the
ever-present problem of getting a living, accepted passively a
government no more absolute, and infinitely more efficient, than its
predecessors. Of anything like self-conscious Indian "Nationalism" there
was virtually no trace.

The first symptom of organized discontent was the formation of the
"Indian National Congress" in the year 1885. The very name showed that
the British Raj, covering all India, was itself evoking among India's
diverse elements a certain common point of view and aspiration. However,
the early congresses were very far from representing Indian public
opinion, in the general sense of the term. On the contrary, these
congresses represented merely a small class of professional men,
journalists, and politicians, all of them trained in Western ideas. The
European methods of education which the