II.-GOVERNMENT. For forms of Government let fools contest; -Pope, E. M. THE saying of the greatest English exponent of Political Philosophy, Edmund Burke, that no country in which population flourishes can be under a bad Government, introduces us to the subject of the political constitution of Ancient India. Burke lays down two important standards to test the good or bad government of a nation: (1) Population, and (11) Wealth. All the Ancient Greek writers and travellers are agreed that the Ancient Aryas were the largest nation on the earth. Appollodorus states that "there were between the Hydaspes and Hypanis (Hypasis) 1,500 cities, none of which was less than Cos." Megasthenes says that "there are 120 nations in India." Arrian admits that the Indians were the most numerous people and that it was impossible to know and enumerate the cities in Aryavarta. Strabo says that Eukratides was the master of 1,000 cities between Hydaspes and Hyphasis. Professor Max Dunker says "the Indians were the largest of the nations." 1 Elphinstone's India, p. 241. See Strabo, Lib. XV, 2See his Chapter on India, C. VII. See also his History of Nations, 6,22,23. 3 History of Antiquity, Vol. V., p. 18. Ctesias states that "they (Hindus) were as numerous as all the other nations put together."1 But the most important proof of the over-abundant population of Ancient India is to be found in the successive waves of emigration from India to the different parts of the world, founding colonies and planting settlements in what are now called the Old and the New Worlds. ་ As regards wealth, India has always been famous. for its immense riches. "Golden India" is a hackneyed phrase. Both in population and in wealth, India, at one time was not only pre-eminent but was without a rival. 113 What higher authority, what more positive proof of the good government of Ancient India is required than the fact that "Ancient India knew no thieves," nor knew why to shut the doors of its houses even at the time when, according to Dr. Johnson, "the capital of the most civilized nation of modern times is the true Satan-at-home." Prepare for death, if here at night you roam, And sign your will before you sleep from home.' The form of Government depends upon the character of a people, the conditions of life obtaining among them, and the principles of their social system. 1Strabo states that "Polibhothra was eight miles long and had a rampart which had 570 towers and 64 gates." As late even as the 16th century, Kanauj was reported to have contained no less than 30,000 shops of betelsellers and "sixty thousand sets of musicians." See Historical Researches, Vol. II., p. 220. 2 For further information on this subject, see Wealth." 3 See Strabo, Lib, XV. p. 488 (1587 edition), With changes in respect of these matters, the form of Government also undergoes a change. Broadly speaking, the best form of Government is that which enables only men of high character, noble minds, wide sympathies, men of sterling qualities and talents to rise to the top, and prevents men of shallow minds, mean capacities, narrow sympathies, and unscrupulous characters from coming into power, it being always understood that the proper functions of Government are only (1) national defence, and (II) protection of one individual or of one class from another.. The form of Government may vary, but the spirit depends on the ethical side of a people's character. It is well said Political rights, however broadly framed, Will not elevate a people individually depraved. If high moral principles guide the people in their daily conduct as a nation, the Government of that nation is free from those party strifes, that incessant warfare raged by one individual against another and by one class against another for power or for protection, which is a leading feature of all European and American Governments of the present day. It is this law that discovers to us the eternal principle, that spiritual elevation not only helps material prosperity but is essential to the happiness of a people, and that it is an index to the realization of the aim and object of all government. Mr. Herbert Spencer says: "There has grown up quite naturally, and indeed almost inevitably among civilized peoples, an identification of freedom with the political appliances established to maintain freedom. The two are confused together in thought; or, to express the fact more correctly, they have not yet been separated in thought. In most countries during past times, and in many countries at the present time, experience has associated in men's minds the unchecked power of a ruler with extreme coercion of the ruled. Contrariwise, in countries where the people have acquired some power, the restraints on the liberties of individuals have been relaxed; and with advance towards government by the majority, there has, on the average, been a progressing abolition of laws and removal of burdens which unduly interfered with such liberties. Hence, by contrast, popularlygoverned nations have come to be regarded as free nations; and possession of political power by all is supposed to be the same thing as freedom. But the assumed identity of the two is a delusion-delusion, which, like many other delusions, results from confounding means with ends. Freedom in its absolute form is the absence of all external checks to whatever actions the will prompts; and freedom in its socially-restricted form is the absence of any other external checks than those arising from the presence of other men who have like claims to do what their wills prompt. The mutual checks hence resulting are the only checks which freedom, in the true sense of the word, permits. The sphere within which each may act without trespassing on the like spheres of others, cannot be intruded upon by any agency, private or public, without an equivalent loss of freedom; and it matters not whether the public agency is autocratic or democratic: the intrusion is essentially the same."1 1 Herbert Spencer's Autobiography, Vol I., p. 439, It is due to a thorough recognition of this truth that the Indian sages laid so much stress on the necessity of formation of Hindu character on ethical and altruistic principles, to secure political as well as social prosperity. The higher the ethical development of character, the greater the freedom enjoyed by a people. It is in this sense true that the best-governed people is the leastgoverned people. Over-government is an evil, a positive evil, and a very frequent evil. Over-government defeats its own ends. The real object of government is frustrated: its proper functions are neglected. Mr. Herbert Spencer says: "Among mechanicians it is a recognized truth that the multiplication of levers, wheels, cranks &c., in an apparatus, involves loss of power, and increases the chances of going wrong. Is it not so with Government machinery, as compared with the simpler machinery men frame in its absence? Moreover, men's desires when left to achieve their own satisfaction, follow the order of decreasing intensity and importance: the essential ones being satisfied first. But when, instead of aggregates of desires spontaneously working for their ends we get the judg ments of Governments, there is no guarantee that the order of relative importance will be followed, and there is abundant proof that it is not followed. Adaptation to one function pre-supposes more or less unfitness for other functions; and pre-occupation with many functions is unfavourable to the complete discharge of anyone. Beyond the function of national defence, the essential function to be discharged by a Government is that of seeing that the citizens in seeking satisfaction |