humble reforms. For his own part he was dead against legislation in the matter of social reform. According to rational principles such reforms should not be introduced by the intervention of Government. When once they asked for legislation, there was no saying where the line would be drawn or where the legislation would end. He fully sympathised with the previous speaker, and hoped that effect would be given, ere long, to what he had said. In conclusion he expressed a hope that the Conference would be held at the same place every year. Mr. Nagojee Row spoke against the amendment and promised to the meeting the support of the Rajahmundry graduates. After a short discussion, the amendment was put to the vote and lost against a large majority. Mr. C. V. Sundram Sastry pointed out the ambiguity in the words "do his best" in the original proposition, and proposed to substitute the words "that each graduate should pledge himself to carry out the same."

Mr. A. Ramachendra Iyer said that Mr. Sundram Sastry's amendment implied that the graduates were a set of insincere persons. He had much confidence in the good sense of his fellow-graduates, and was sure that they would earnestly push on those reforms. They were not a body of legislators to force laws on their fellow-graduates; and the speaker hoped that they would honestly endeavour to discourage early marriages. The graduates were not all free-agents in social matters; and Mr. Sundram Sastry's amendment would only mean that they (the graduates) should cut themselves off from the circle of those that were near and dear to them.

Messrs. Nagojee Row, Bashyam Iyengar, Balajee Row and G. Subramanian lyer spoke against the amendment, and it was lost.

The original proposition was put to the vote and carried amidst applause. The meeting was then adjourned to 5 p.m. on January 1.

The attendance on the next day was as large as on the previous occasion. Mr. S. Seshayya proposed: "That all graduates should do their utmost to reduce expenditure on marriages and other ceremonies in their own family, and induce others to do the same."

Mr. Nagojee Row seconded, and Mr. Narasinga Row (who read a paper on "Marriage expenses ") supported Mr. Seshayya, the proposition being carried nem. con.

After some discussion a Resolution was passed as follows :

"That in the opinion of this meeting it is necessary and desirable that the movement for the marriage of child widows should be supported and encouraged, and that graduates should

signify in writing their approval of it and their willingness to give support to it as far as circumstances will permit, with a view to the same being published."

This was succeeded by the following Resolutions:—

"That each graduate should communicate to the chairman the extent of his support."

"That all graduates be invited to express their views in regard to Mr. Malabari's document on infant marriage and enforced widowhood."

"That an Association be formed of graduates and other well-wishers for the promotion of these objects."

"That the following gentlemen do form themselves into a working Committee, with power to add to their number, to carry out the foregoing resolutions: Messrs. T. Gopal Rao, P. Ranganadham Mudeliar and G. Subramaniam Iyer, S. Ramasawmy Mudeliar, M.A., B.L., B. Hanumanta Rao, R. Ragunatha Rao, P. Chentsal Rao, K. Verasalingam Puntulu, A. Ramachendra Iyer, S. Seshayya and the Hon. S. Subramaniam Iyer."

The proceedings closed with votes of thanks to the Chairman, and to Dr. Duncan for the use of the Hall. We hope to be informed of the proceedings of this practical Association, which may prove very useful in regard to the improvement of social customs.

SOCIAL REFORM IN INDIA: A SUGGESTION.

I think that every Indian, who loves his country and feels for its present condition, will be rejoiced to see that Mr. Malabari is in right earnest about his work, and that the Notes he wrote some time ago on "Infant Marriage and Forced Widowhood" are not simply the outcome of an empty zeal, such as often manifests itself in our countrymen. He really feels for the sufferings of those whose miserable condition he has most graphically and pathetically depicted in his Notes; and in the Journal of the last month his prospectus has appeared of "An Association for Practical Reform," subject to the suggestions and considerations of Indians who take any interest in social matters. While I differ from Mr. Malabari in certain points and this difference I have expressed in a recent number of this Journal-I desire to express my heartfelt grati

tude and admiration for the impulse he has once more given to our social movement-awakening many a thinking Indian in regard to questions pressing for solution. Much ingenuity has not unfrequently been brought into play respecting questions of marriage and other social customs; many a barren speculation has been ventured, but always without much result. Mr. Malabari is a practical man, and, being discontented with mere talk, proposes some measures of practical Reform.

He suggests that Committees be formed in different parts of India, having both deliberative and executive functions, "working on principles of self-help," and including among many other items of their work: (1) a system of home education for native children; (2) improvement in the marriage customs; (3) encouragement of remarriage and inter-marriage; (4) discouragement of polygamy and ill-treatment of widows; (5) curtailment of expenses on foolish customs. The plan of work that he suggests is divided under two heads: (1) the forming of central and local Committees for discussing and deciding social questions; (2) the collecting of funds for publishing cheap tracts and books in the Vernaculars, interpreting scriptural authorities, sending out preachers, &c. He goes on further as to the rules of membership, &c.; but the most important part of his scheme is what I have just given.

Now, anyone conversant with the periodic discharges of Indian energy, will assuredly find no novelty in this scheme. A similar scheme, in a greatly modified form, which I shall presently commend to Mr. Malabari's consideration, was proposed in the beginning of the last year by Pandit Pran Nath, President of the Kashmeeri National Club, Lucknow. The credit which Mr. Malabari deserves, and justly deserves, is not, in my opinion, so much for the originality of the scheme, as for the moral courage and zeal with which he has grasped an old scheme and recast it for the fresh consideration of his countrymen. But the very fact that the scheme is an old one, raises in our minds a suspicion that if as an old scheme it has often been tried and failed, what warrant there is this time of its success?

It would, doubtless, be a happy day for India if central Committees were formed in different centres, and local Committees all over the country, discussing and deciding social questions, representing the nervous centres of our social organism, and sustaining, controlling, regulating all the activities of our social life. But the state of things, alas! is quite different. One of the greatest misfortunes of my country compels me to differ from Mr. Malabari on one of his most important suggestions, i.e., the formation of Central Committees for carrying on the business of Social Reform. That misfortune

is the conflict of castes. There are, as everyone knows, so many castes and sub-castes in India, with so many prejudices clinging to each of them, that the scheme of organizing an International Committee of Social Reform in Indian society may find a suitable place in a Platonic reverie, but is certainly an illusion which comes in the way of a practical reformer. With this suggestion several other of Mr. Malabari's suggestions must stand or fall. On what principle these Reform Committees will be able to work efficaciously, I fail to see. In the first place, the difference of religion and nationality will prevent the diverse sections of Indian society from coming together for the formation of such Committees. In the second place, the reform which suits one class will not suit another. Considering, then, the extreme difficulty of organizing Central Committees, or, rather, International Associations for Social Reform, it is an utter impossibility that such Committees should discharge the functions assigned to them by Mr. Malabari, as the improvement of marriage customs, encouragement of widow remarriage and international marriage, discouragement of polygamy, &c.

But one suggestion of Mr. Malabari's, I think, is most fertile, and most worthy of the consideration of thoughtful Indians; and that suggestion alone, if properly developed and worked out, is, in my opinion, quite capable of doing all what he so earnestly desires. Mr. Malabari feels the necessity of "a system of home education for children, supplementing the instruction given at school, and bearing specially on domestic and kindred subjects." In this suggestion Mr. Malabari has, doubtless, struck the right chord of most of our difficulties and misfortunes. Nothing can be more alarming and more pitiable than the state of the early education of Indian boys and girls. Public schools cannot meet that difficulty. In some parts of India children are altogether left to the mercy of professional tutors, not unfrequently of loose character. They remain under such tutors till the age of 13 or 14. The subject of the tutorial system is of a very painful interest; but this is not the place to dwell upon the vices of that system. The one thing which makes it a matter of pressing necessity to do something respecting the early education of Native children, is the dreariness which the school instruction presents to, and the aversion that it produces in, young minds. It is a law of our nature, that the recollection of a thing or place which has given us pain at any time, always produces painful feelings in us; while the recollection of a thing or place associated with some happy incident of our life produces the opposite effect. Applying this principle to the education of our children, we can well anticipate the result in their after lives, of an education which has been

always associated with pain. When a boy is prevented from indulging in any play whatever, when all his energies are crushed and he is commanded to be always at his books, when in the school he is taught books which can never be congenial to a young mind, and has to cram up dead and dry formulas without at all understanding what they mean, then does it need any prophet's eye to foresee the disastrous consequences of such an education? Can one, to whom the acquisition of knowledge in early years has been the one source of unfailing misery, be expected to continue studies after the school-life has come to a close? Besides producing aversion towards knowledge, the early education of our children produces another effect of a far more disastrous kind. It tells upon their health. Many an Indian parent is haunted by the superstition that the best behaved and best disciplined child is one who always reads and never plays. Hence, in India, we have no healthy games and sports, such as English children have. Every kind of physical exercise is discouraged. Sedentary habits, on the other hand, are encouraged by parents and by society. This is one of the chief causes of the weakness and the unhealthiness of many of our educated youths. The prevailing shortsightedness among our school-taught young men may be traced to this cause. The three great Indians of this century have died, within a short period, in the full vigour of their lives; and the likelihood is that their constitutions could not bear the excessive mental strains to which they had been subjected. Then, again, the moral and religious education of children is as indispensable as anything else. But the principle of religious neutrality in public schools is founded on good reasons. The diversity of castes and religions in India makes the introduction of religious teaching in schools impossible. Much more could be said about the faulty early education of our children, but this is quite enough for the present purpose.

Now how is the difficulty to be met? Mr. Malabari has most wisely made us alive to this great defect in our social system, and he suggests "a system of home education for Native children, bearing specially on domestic and kindred subjects." Such a system involves a good many things. I think it includes the founding of such primary schools as may be able to meet all the defects of the early education of Native children. It ought to be the earnest endeavour of every Indian to put his shoulder to the wheel in carrying out this scheme, and preserving the soft and plastic faculties of children from being twisted, stunted and withered. Mr. Malabari thinks of this work being carried on by the Committees organized for Social Reform. To me his suggestion seems most reasonable.