156 [June, 1902,] 
IMPERIAL INSTITUTE JOURNAL. 
Vol. VIII. No. 90. 
LECTURES AND PAPERS. 
“THE CONDITION OF THE PEOPLE OF INDIA.” 
(By J. D. Rees, Esq., C.I.E .) 
Lord Elgin presided on the ioth March at a lecture given at the Imperial Institute by 
Mr. J. D. Rees, C.I.E. , late Member of the Viceroy of India’s Legislative Council, on “ The 
Condition of the People of India.” 
The chairman, in his introductory remarks, said the subject to be brought before 
the audience was one which, he thought he might fairly say, would appeal to everybody, for 
he did not think there would be anyone present who would like to profess himself indifferent 
to the condition of 300,000,000 of our fellow-subjects. It was also a subject of very great 
magnitude, very great complexity, and of very great difficulty to anyone who attempted to 
deal with it. Pie could remember very w r ell that, when he went to India, one of the first 
things which impressed itself upon him was the great caution with which one ventured to 
apply any experience one had gained in this country to problems that arose in India. But in 
this particular subject, anyone dealing with it not only had to make an estimate of the 
conditions obtaining In India, but had also the great, and, perhaps, greater difficulty of 
translating those difficulties into language which would be intelligible to those who had never 
seen India. In order to bring home the facts of native life in India to this country, it was 
useless to ignore that one of the main difficulties that we had before us was to let people here 
understand what really were the wants of the people over in India. 
To compare the conditions of life, the income and needs, of the Indian peasantry with 
those of similar classes in Eastern and Western Europe was, said the lecturer, a useless, and, 
indeed, an impossible task. He thought that, upon the whole, the Indian peasant, in 
ordinary years, was not in a much inferior position — when his wants and his moans of 
supplying them were taken into consideration — to the peasant of Europe. The contrast was 
in wants. The peasant in Eastern Europe had fewer wants than the peasant of Western 
Europe, but considerably more than the Indian peasant ; in fact, proximity to the tropics 
determined not a lower standard of comfort, but a lower standard of wants. The Indian 
peasant could feed and keep himself in good health, with grain and a few condiments, for a 
penny a day ; he usually had free quarters, or accommodation at an almost nominal rental, 
and his expenses for clothes were but small. The British working man, on the other hand, 
had to pay from 25 per cent, to 40 per cent, of his earnings in rent, and his expenses 
for food and clothing were, of course, very considerable. 
It was extremely difficult to teach the Indian peasant thrift. Under former rulers he 
had avowedly been allowed but enough for bare subsistence, and any margin our lower land- 
tax left him served but to enhance his credit with the money-lenders, and so contribute to 
his indebtedness. When the peasant grasped the idea of putting a penny by for a rainless 
day, a great advance would have been made ; but the habit of centuries had not as yet been 
weakened. The question as to the improvement of the peasant’s condition was one that 
could hardly be decided by statistics. Doubtless his nominal income had increased, 
but owing to payments in cash — instead of in grain, as .formerly — and higher prices, he was 
probably not very much better off than before, except where he had profited by the local 
expenditure of British capital, and the establishment of some new, or the development of 
some old, industry. 
Mr. Rees here quoted what a recent writer had said in describing the life of the North 
Indian peasant, male and female, “as one of ceaseless monotonous toil, a constant struggle 
to keep body and soul together, but one which enforces industry and temperance, and is com- 
patible with a good deal of simple charity and kindliness, and a ready cheeriness which can 
find amusement in the veriest trifles.” The agricultural labourers, who were often described 
as one degree removed from destitution, did not suffer from want of food unless crops failed, 
and prices rose. The petty proprietors were poor, but their condition had largely improved 
in the last 30 years. The people would not emigrate in large numbers, and they would 
indulge in litigation. The State could only keep the poorest out of taxes paid by the poor. 
Meanwhile the middle and higher classes became richer, and, up till now, the Government had 
not, said Mr. Rees, got at their pockets to any great extent. 
Indian agriculture, as had been said, presented ** a perfect picture of careful cultivation 
Combined with hard labour, perseverance, knowledge and fertility of resource,” and no one 
else but a Chinaman could make a living off a Hindu’s small holding. To suppose that the 
Government could raise the condition of the depressed classes was a dream ; but by letting 
them, and their labour systems, alone and by creating and encouraging a diversity of 
occupations and industries, other than agriculture, the Administration could show them a 
way whereby they might obtain salvation. 
One of their own eminent men, the late Mr. Justice Ranade, had pointed out to his 
fellow-countrymen the encouraging increase in the export of manufactured goods in recent 
years, which had been relatively greater than the rise in the export of raw produce. He had 
rightly attributed this change to the influx of British capital and enterprise, which he had 
considered a very hopeful sign in the already altered relations between Indian exports and 
imports of raw and manufactured goods. 
There was no limit, Mr. Rees contended, to which this development might not extend 
in a country in which such vast stores of raw material existed alongside the cheapest, and by 
no means the least efficient, labour in the world. 
What social form the people of India were likely to develop he did not know. Sir John 
Strachey, an experienced statesman, had written in 1S99 : ** They are intensely conservative, 
and wedded, to an extent difficult for Europeans to understand, to every ancient custom,” 
and “ between their customs and religion no line can be drawn.” Social reform from within, 
indeed, showed no such signs of development as industrial reform. The latter, the people, 
and the Government, of this country should be as anxious to promote as they should be 
unwilling, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the customs of the people, who were, it 
might be believed, slowly increasing in prosperity, notwithstanding the ravages of plague, 
pestilence and famine. 
With regard to famine, Mr. Rees deprecated the action of some of the illustrated papers 
in emphasising the sufferings of the people instead of the great administrative achievements 
of famine relief. When the provinces which had never had famine, since the new Code had 
come into force, had all experienced one famine under its provisions, great mortality need no 
longer be expected ; as it had been proved that the death-rate of a district, during a 
second famine under the new Code, was but little above the normal, owing to the people 
knowing how to avail themselves of relief. Grain was always now available, although famine 
prices were twice the ordinary ones. In the ante-railway days sixty-four times the ordinary 
prices had been a common increase. The financial prospect was, however, serious, for the 
expenditure entailed in relieving these periodical visitations was very great ; and all were 
agreed that no new taxes should be imposed on the Indian, and it was idle to talk of using, 
for his relief, taxes collected from the British. Hence the importance of administrative 
economy. 
Mr. Rees advocated the employment of Indians wherever possible, and deprecated 
forcing upon the people any expensive and scientific services of administration, for which 
they were neither ripe nor willing, but for which they would have to pay. He also urged 
that we should not be so willing to accept as authorities upon Indian religions, customs, and 
conditions, those who had adopted other standards and who, therefore, could but represent a 
small minority. 
“HOME LIFE IN CANADA.” 
[By Hamar Greenwood, Esq.) 
Mr. Hamar Greenwood, on the 17th March, delivered a lecture at the Imperial 
Institute entitled “ Home Life in Canada.” Colonel Willoughby Wallace, Commanding 
the King’s Colonials, Imperial Yeomanry, presided. 
In the immense and bracing Dominion of the West the great characteristic of home and 
social life was, said Mr. Greenwood, freedom from artificial restraint. The great majority 
of Canadians were the descendants of those pioneers who first settled in the forests and on 
the prairies of the colony. These early settlers had started level in every sense, and the 
healthy idea of equality engendered by this shoulder-to-shoulder building-up of the country 
was still the dominant factor in Canadian life. 
The majority of Canadians lived on farms ; and in a farmer’s household everybody, 
including the farmer, worked and worked hard. There was no strict line drawn between 
the members of the house and the hired man. That individual generally had his seat at the 
family table, and was treated and paid in a way that would startle an English farmer. But this 
condition of things, which was all the better for the hired man, who usually became a freehold 
farmer in the course of time, did no harm to the family, who generally believed in helping 
others up and not in holding them down. Canada was certainly a paradise for all those 
who had to start life from the ranks. They were treated with a consideration undreamed 
of in the old world, and this very consideration tended to fire them with the colonial 
enthusiasm “ to get on,” and get on they certainly did. Any mail, or woman, who went 
to work on a farm in Canada would never be slighted or treated with contempt, but would 
receive every encouragement and be treated with every respect. 
Owing to the admirable educational system of the Dominion, the boys and girls alike 
always found a good school at their very doors, and the rule was for the children of all kinds 
and conditions of parents to attend the same school. Co-education of the sexes obtained. 
In the elementary and secondary schools and in the universities the sexes worked together, a 
system which had developed a type of womanhood, and a type of chivalrous manhood that, 
said Mr. Greenwood, justified co-education for all time. The custom of sending all children 
to the same school “ at the threshold ” kept the home circle unbroken until the children had 
grown up and struck out for themselves. Parents and children saw a great deal of each 
ether, and the word “home” meant more in such families than it possibly could in those 
where the youngsters “ looked in” only during vacations. 
During the winter months, when there was comparatively little for the farmer to do, the 
strong desire to get ahead often prompted people to attend the elementary schools to improve 
their education. The lecturer here instanced an occasion when one winter he had, in a 
village school, taught a farmer and his three grown-up sons, reading, writing and arithmetic. 
As was not unnatural, the sons soon made more progress than the father. 
In Canada all churches were free, and all schools practically so ; and there were no 
landed or other privileged classes. These facts tended to bring all conditions of people 
together in social intimacy. In the little village to which he had referred there was but one 
place of worship, which, on Sunday mornings, was used by the Methodists, in the after- 
noon by the Baptists, and in the evenings by the Presbyterians, and, with some few excep- 
tions, the congregation in each case was the same. Every man, woman and child in a 
farming community frequently met together a. some social gathering, especially if that 
gathering was in any way connected with the vil age school. Compared with English village 
life, life in a Canadian village, especially in the winter, the great social season, was a perfect 
buzz of sociability. The love of outdoor sports like tobogganing, skating and sleigh riding, 
further tended to bring people together. Nearly every town and village had its skating 
rink and there was no restriction of membership. All classes enjoyed this exhilarating- 
pastime together. Healthy sport helped to keep down snobbishness and to build up not only 
vigorous men and women, but a broad-minded and sympathetic people. 
In towns and cities conditions of home and social life naturally varied from those of 
the country districts. At the same time the quality of good fellowship and the “ help-one- 
another ” idea prevailed. The whole social system of Canada might be said to be built upon 
the idea that men or women should be treated according to what it was possible they 
might become. 
The Canadians looked ahead, not behind. The great majority of the ruling men and 
women of Canada to-day were people of humble but healthy origin. The first Prime 
Minister was the son of a poor Scotch miller, the second started in life as a stonemason, 
the third as an office boy, the fourth as a clerk, and the fifth as a printer ; all this tended 
to make the people look upon every boy as a possible Premier. There was in the Dominion 
no idea of “ betters ” where all were free to be best. 
There was an old saying, in which there was much truth, that in every Canadian’s 
home two books were always found : the Bible and the dictionary. No doubt the one 
accounted for the strong religious element in the home life of the country, and the other 
probably, in some degree, for the speaking capacity of the Canadians, who were born 
talkers. A Canadian home was, Mr. Greenwood contended, the happiest, heartiest home 
on earth. He also had a good deal to say about the hospitality of the people and 
their sense of humour, and altogether gave a most enthusiastic and attractive picture 
of Canadian home life : an account which, he hoped, might possibly induce some of his 
hearers to emigrate to that country. 
Colonel Wallace, in proposing the vote of thanks for an interesting, but far too short 
a lecture, referred to the King’s Colonials, Imperial Yeomanry, which he had the honour of 
commanding, and made some appropriate remarks as to the far-reaching results the assistance 
the Colonials had rendered in South Africa might be expected to have. 
At the conclusion of the lecture a series of interesting cinametograph pictures, 
principally of farming operations in the Far West, were shown by Mr. J. A. Freer, who 
was on the point of returning to Canada after having visited many of the provincial towns 
of England, with his cinametograph, with a view to popularising Canada as a field for 
emigration. 
“LIFE AND LEGEND IN RUSSIAN ART. 
(By Mrs. Rosa Newmarch. J 
(ANGLO-RUSSIAN LITERARY SOCIETY.) 
On May 6, at the meeting of the Anglo-Russian Literary Society, the President, 
Edward Cazalet, Esq. in the chair, Mrs. Rosa Newmarch read a paper entitled : Life 
and Legend in Russian Art. The paper gave a brief account of Russian art from the 
introduction of iconography, by the Greek monks, at the close of the tenth century, down to 
the most recent development of the realistic-national school. Passing over the purely 
imitative art of the eighteenth century, Mrs. Newmarch spoke of Alexander Ivanov (1806- 
1S5S) as the precursor of modern realism in Russian art. In his colossal picture “Christ 
appearing to the Nations,” everything, even to the awkwardness of composition, showed an 
uncompromising desire for the truth. The genre pictures of Fedotov marked a further step 
in this direction. They were humorous comments upon the official and bourgeois life of the 
forties. Such pictures as “ The Newly Decorated Knight ” and “ The Choice of a Bride” 
were pendants to the lighter works of Gogol. With the newly awakened social and political 
life of the sixties, sprang up a new school of painting and literature. These men regarded 
their art as a moral and educational force. They “ went to the people” for their inspiration,. 
