the Christian religion, shall consist wholly of persons professing that religion.

Mr. Wynn is reported to have also said, that this Bill was rendered necessary by the construction which the Supreme Court at Calcutta had put upon the term tr British subjects," and by which this class was excluded; whereas it had always been the intention of the Legislature that they should be equally eligible with other British subjects professing the Christian religion.

Some mistake, we apprehend, must here exist on the part of the Right Honourable Gentleman, or the reporters of his sentiments; for, during the last session, when a proposition was made by Mr. Hume for adding a clause to the East-India Judges Bill, to admit the "half-caste' on juries, Mr. Wynn is reported to have observed that, however desirable the measure might be, further information was necessary to justify an alteration in the jury-levy in India. The Bill now under remark contains additional evidence to the same effect; for it is not declaratory of the meaning of the law as extant, but premises the expediency of extending the right and duty of serving on juries in the East Indies. Indeed, if the intentions of the Legislature were really such as Mr. Wynn is supposed to have contended, the present Bill limits, not enlarges, the rights of the East-Indians in this particular; for it subjects their privilege of serving on juries to such rules as the courts of judicature in India may lay down respecting their qualification for the office of juror.

The construction which the Supreme Court put upon the term "British subjects," as applicable to this class, was, we have understood, the following: The offspring of a British-born subject and a native woman, if born in - wedlock, was determined to be a British subject to all intents and purposes, and in the full meaning of that term; the illegitimate progeny of such parents were held to be Hindus, on the principle of the English law, that a bastard is nullius filius, without a legal father. Such a decision would seem opposed to all restrictions upon the political functions of the legitimate EastIndians; their disqualification must, therefore, arise from some particular enactment or principle of British law, or local regulation, which, whilst it limits their political liberty in one respect, enlarges it in another; for it will be recollected that a native of India cannot be deported from the country, as a native of Europe may be, if not licensed to reside there.

The construction before-mentioned leads to some gross incongruities and solecisms. For example: if the female offspring of a marriage between a British-born subject and a native woman should cohabit with a Sudra, or even with the outcasts of the Indian native society, and their female progeny, ad infinitum, should do the same, all the offspring of this base intercourse, according to the principle of the English law (namely, that an illegitimate child belongs to the mother, and therefore to the country of the mother) would be British subjects in its enlarged sense; but if any of the females in the chain were to refrain from immoral connection, and marry a native, however respectable, her progeny would be degraded to Hindus.

We have been drawn aside by these remarks from the object we had in view, namely, to make a few observations on the present circumstances and condition of this interesting and increasing class of our fellow-subjects in India.

We have always thought that the East-Indians or Indo-Britons have been too much neglected by the Government, and more especially by the society in which they live. There seems to prevail amongst Europeans in India a prejudice against this class, somewhat analogous in character, though far infe

rior in degree, to that which exists between the two colours in the other hemisphere. If the prejudice in the latter case be, as every Christian must consider it, cruel and unjust, à fortiori it must be so in the former, where none of the palliatives can be found which West-Indians allege on their own behalf, and where every inferiority must be traced to the misconduct of the very society which inflicts the punishment. If the European father of every" half-caste child strictly fulfilled his duty towards his offspring, we are at a loss to conceive what disparity could exist, either as to capacity, education, rank, or wealth, between the two classes of British subjects in India, the native-born and the foreign-born.

No person who has been in India will deny that there is a line of distinction between this class and Europeans, not so broadly defined, but as visible, as that between the two classes in the west. A recent attempt of the EastIndians to establish a club for social purposes at Calcutta developed the spirit which prevailed amongst the other class. The project was censured and ridiculed in the newspapers, and an insinuation was made that the Government ought to discountenance and forbid it. However the design might be open to objection as to its being ill-advised with regard to the interests of the class, from its tendency to maintain the very distinction which is complained of, it does not appear upon what ground Government or society could take umbrage at the East-Indians forming a club for legal and unobjectionable purposes.

We might say much more upon the inhumanity of stigmatizing this class of persons; but we prefer putting the question upon the ground of policy. We would contend that the policy of the Government requires that they should be treated with more consideration, and that they should be invested with as many of the functions belonging to a British-born subject as can be reconciled with the anomalous constitution of our Indian Government.

In a preceding paper* on this subject we observed that the advancement of this class was a desirable object in the scheme of breaking up the existing constitution of Hindu society; since it was that class with which the converts from Brahminism, when the process of conversion upon an extensive scale shall begin, will naturally incorporate. But if there be any political defect or inherent disability in this class, if they are degraded or lightly esteemed by Europeans, a new temporal obstacle is raised a Hindu will, on becoming a Christian, desert a society where he is respected to join one as a member of which he will be universally despised.

Again what can be more obvious than that this class, under judicious management, would constitute, in spite of certain repulsive particles in the relative composition of the three bodies, a connecting link between the aborigines of India and their conquerors! and a wise politician should labour to corroborate it. The colonization of India, by means of European settlers, one of the wild schemes which the prolific brains of modern theorists have produced, will never be promoted by the British Government till it has become indifferent to the retention of that splendid dependency; but colonization by means of persons of European descent, born on the soil, claiming affinity with the aboriginal nations, and regarding the country as their abiding place,— their home, would not only be liable to none of the objections urged against the other mode, but must be considered as highly expedient and salutary. Again if neglect and inattention be persevered in with respect to this class, it is fit that we should be prepared with some remedy for the moral evils which must

:

* Sec vol. xx, p. 305.

must result from the increase of an idle, vicious, half-European population dispersed throughout India. In certain proposals published last year at Calcutta, for the formation of a society for the benefit of this class, under the auspices of the Bishop of Calcutta and the benevolent Mr. Harington, it was stated, as a notorious fact, that there is in Calcutta, a very large number of young men, born in the country, of European descent, who are out of employ, and destitute of all means of acquiring a livelihood; and that their number is rapidly increasing. This fact ought to produce very serious reflections.

Our preceding remarks are applicable chiefly to those natives of India who are connected by birth with both Europeans and Asiatics; but we generally lose sight altogether in England of another class of East-Indians, in whose behalf national prejudices might be expected to be warmly moved, namely, those natives both of whose parents are European. Surely we are not to be told of inferiority or disabilities here, unless the moral qualities of the English man, like the physical qualities of the English bull-dog, deteriorates by naturalization in a foreign country.

A writer in a Calcutta paper,* who professes to be "better acquainted with that class of Indian society who are European by one side, than most of his countrymen," thus speaks of this class of East-Indians :

For these several years past, a stir has been made in Calcutta by the indirect progeny of Britons. Their voice has gone forth, and I trust those in the land of their paternal sires will not listen to it in vain. Concerning, however, the direct descendants of European fathers and mothers, nothing has been said which could denote the existence of such a class; although it is evident to the least observation, that they are also rapidly multiplying into serious importance; and, to say the least, should not be overlooked. None of the wise men from the east, whose publications I have read, have whispered to the people of the British isles that, in a few years hence, an immense population of direct European progeny will be blooming on the plains of Hindostan; and when they have spoken of the indirect progeny of Europeans, whom they have generally honoured with the appellation of “half-castes," it would be difficult to say whether they have more betrayed their ignorance or their illiberality. These misrepresentations, however, are not difficult to be accounted for; all that has hitherto been given to Europe on this subject, has been given by those who, when in India, had about as much intercourse with the class they have pretended to delineate, as with the inhabitants of Georgium Sidus!

He adds the following statement:

Many elegant and accomplished half-Indian girls have been respectably married, whose blood may soon mingle with that of the proud nobility of England; and en passant, I shall say, will not degrade it either. There are already in Calcutta, and in England too, those who, having "the blood of the house of Timur" in their veins, but who for several generations have been legitimately descended, are in complexion, and in every thing else, not to be distinguished from those of the land of their fathers; and among those so descended, and their descendants, ere another twenty years pass away, he will be a very cunning genealogist who will take it upon him to decide, and he will be a very impertinent puppy who will dare to inquire, who are, and are not pure Europeans: already I have known cases when it was rather equivocal.

We shall not at present pursue this subject farther: it is to be hoped that the hint afforded by the President of the Board of Controul was not without meaning, and that the claims of this interesting, and we believe deserving, portion of the natives of India will experience due consideration.

The Bengal Hurkaru of March 26, 1825.

EDUCATION IN CHINA.

FROM the "Le-ke," an ancient Chinese work, written 500 years before the Christian era, it would appear that the Chinese, at a very early period, recognized the importance of education. In a chapter of that work,* entitled Heŏ-ke (which is devoted to this subject), mention is made of the ancient mode of instruction, requiring that a few families should have a school-room called Shuh, by the side of the gate; that a neighbourhood should have a Seang school; a whole village a Seu school; and a nation, or principality, an institution called Heo. The latter word signifies, in its ordinary sense, a place of study; but it seems to have some peculiar force; it is compounded of the character denoting to imitate, placed in that of a mortar, on that of a cover, over that of a child.

The Chinese inculcate the necessity and importance of early education: Ching-tsze, an eminent writer of the Sung dynasty, says that the ancients taught children as soon as they could eat and speak. He recommends that, as children have not judgment, maxims and essential truths should be daily laid before them, wherewith "to fill their ears and stuff their bellies."

The opinions of the ancients are also contained in a section of the Le-ke, called "Domestic Rules," wherein it is enjoined that, as soon as children can eat food, they should be taught the use of the right hand; and that at six years of age they should be taught numbers.

The object of teaching children early, Choo-foo-tsze says, is to restrain the tendency of the heart to wandering and dissipation, and to nourish virtuous dispositions. His enumeration of the occupations of children begins with sprinkling and sweeping the door."

The Chinese are taught to esteem masters or teachers highly; though some of these are charged with idleness and negligence, and with doing more harm than good to their scholars.

There is nothing in China answering to the European respectable schools or academies for the middle ranks. The wealthy Chinese employ private tutors for their children. The national district colleges, called Heo-kung (or Heenheo) and Foo-heo, are so ill managed that nobody attends them, except at the period of public examination. The masters, called Laou-sze, sometimes let out their situations to others.

The private schools, called Heo-kwan, are attended chiefly by poor children; the Seen-săng, or master, expresses his duties by the phrase Keaou-kwan, "teaching a school." Boys pay entrance money at their first introduction to a schoolmaster; it is called Che-e, and varies in amount according to the circumstances of the boy's friends, from 200 cash to 1 dollar. The master makes no demand, though he expects something. The scholars likewise pay a small sum on two holidays in the year; one on the 5th, the other on the 8th moon; this they call Tsëě-e. On those days the boys do not attend school; and there is a vacation of a month or six weeks at the new year. There are charityschools, called E-heo, not established by the supreme government, but opened by local officers, for grown students. There are no public schools, nor private charity-schools for indigent children. There are night-schools (Yay-heo) in large towns, for those persons who are obliged to labour during the day. Chinese children generally enter the school for one year; not for a quarter or a month. The Tartars reckon monthly. If a boy enters for a year, he

* See Dr. Morrison's Chinese Dictionary, vol. i, part i, pp. 748, et seq.

must

must pay the whole, whether he attends or not. The sum varies from two to six dollars; three dollars is considered an average school-fee for a year.

In a work written by Teen-ke-shih-ching-kin, entitled the "Complete Collection of Family Jewels, or Domestic Monitor," there are no less than one hundred rules laid down for a school. Some of them are here subjoined, to show the importance attached to minute matters in China:

All the scholars must come early in the morning.

When they enter the school, they must first bow to Confucius the sage, and next to the master.

When about to break up in the evening, let an ode be recited, or a piece of history be narrated, the most easily understood, the most affecting, or connected with the most important consequences.

When the school is broken up, bow to Confucius and to the master, as before.

When the scholars are numerous, send them away in parties, each must go straight home, not stop to play on the road.

When they reach home, let them bow first to the household gods, then to their ancestors, then to their fathers and mothers, then to their uncles and aunts.

If there be any visitors at home in the hall, after bowing to the household gods and the tablets of ancestors, the boy must immediately, in an easy composed manner, stand upright, bow the head, and towards the guest utter his or her complimentary title, After bowing and sitting down, he must neither allow himself to talk much, nor, in a frightened manner, try to hide himself.

Three things are to be regarded by him who reads to learn by heart; his eyes, his mind, and his mouth. He must carefully avoid repeating with his mouth whilst the heart is thinking about something else.

Boys must not read too loud, lest they should injure their lungs.

If there be many scholars, they must draw lots to repeat one after another, and not crowd about the master.

They must examine themselves by the passages the master explains, and apply the warnings or good examples to their own case. This, it is added, is a beneficial exercise both to body and mind. Authors express the duty of the scholar thus: Let the scholar make a personal application to himself, saying, "Does this sentence concern you or not? Is the subject of this chapter what you can learn to imitate or not?" Then let the master take the circumstances of the ancient occurrence narrated, or the maxim, and discuss it, in two parts, what should be imitated, and what should be avoided; and cause the scholar to note it, and feel a serious impression of it; and if, on another day, he offends, let him reprove him from the principles explained to him from the book.

When listening to the master's explanations, the scholar must keep his soul from wandering, and pay minute attention.

If the sense and scope of the lesson be not clearly explained in the book, the scholar must come immediately to the master, and inquire particularly: he is not allowed to suppress his having a confused and indistinct understanding of the passage.

In teaching boys, let them first learn cleanliness. Let no refuse ink be accumulated on their ink-stone; no over-night ink left on their pencils; let the pencil be washed clean every evening. The book must be held or lie three inches distant from the body; they must not rub it, or make dog's ears in it, or dot or write upon it.

A boy, when sitting, must be grave and serious; he must not sit cross-legged, nor lay the foot upon the knee, nor lean on one side; he must not in the streets throw bricks or tiles, nor skip, hop, and frisk about, but walk calmly and steadily. Boys must not lay their beads together and whisper; nor pull each other's clothes, nor kick, nor walk with their shoulders together, the arm placed across each other's back, nor point to the east and stare at the west, nor prate on the road about letters, and chatter about fighting.

When a boy meets on the road a superior or a relation, he should immediately stand still, in a composed regular posture, and bending down his head, make a salutation