celebrate her jubilee as Empress of Hindustan Captain Trotter is already well known as an Indian historian. His new work is, however, the most ambitious to which he has put his hand. The fifty years during which the Queen has ruled over India cover more history than any preceding century in the East of which we have record. Events of the highest import succeed each other as rapidly as the scenes are shifted in a theatre. Beginning with the lurid glories, not unmixed with dishonour, of our earlier Afghan wars, Captain Trotter leads us from annexation to annexation-Sindh, the Punjab, Oudh-until we find ourselves struggling for life in the death-grips of the Mutiny; and then to the wonderful re-establishment of British influence, and that renaissance of Indian progress which is destined to end no one can tell where, and carry ourselves no one knows whither. The events which have happened in India under Victoria's reign are of sufficient interest to make their bare recital interesting; and when a writer who is as much master of his subject as is Captain Trotter records them, the result cannot fail to be readable.

There are peculiar difficulties in writing Indian history, and though we fully admit the excellence of Captain Trotter's India under Victoria,' we are not quite sure that he has succeeded in completely mastering them. Fortunately for the Indian Viceroy, no officious member of his Legislature can" beg to ask" for any information about what is going on; and although inquisitive members of the Opposition at home may succeed in elicit ing statements, or even drawing out a Blue-book, still it is a "far cry to Lochow," and the real sources of Indian history generally remain

entombed in Viceregal bureaux and secretariat pigeon-holes. Fifty years from his death was the time prescribed by the great Marquis of Dalhousie during which his papers were to be sealed from the gaze of biographer or historian. Only seven-and-twenty years of this period have already expired; but when the seals are broken, we confidently expect that even such a complete account as Captain Trotter gives of the annexation of the Punjab and Oudh will have to be rewritten, while we shall be much surprised if his opinions regarding these transactions are not considerably modified. We may say once for all, that though we can trust to Captain Trotter's facts, we generally find ourselves out of sympathy with his views. Our previous acquaintance with his writings. scarcely prepared us to find in him a eulogist of the Ilbert Bill; or of Lord Ripon's pro-native, sentimental administration; and we trust, by the time when he comes to expand the postscript in which he dismisses the career of the late GovernorGeneral, he will have reconsidered the subject. It is not every AngloIndian who, when he returns to settle in his native country, can maintain unweakened the impressions which he formed in the East. Nor would it be well if it were so, for Anglo-Indians have a tendency to grow narrow and illiberal, as become members of the small white oligarchy who rule two hundred millions of dusky skins. But we see too often that a remarkable-indeed we may say a miraculous-conversation overtakes many old Indians when they find themselves once more at home. Their ayes become noes, their noes ayes; they surrender all the convictions which personal knowledge and experience had wrought in them, in favour of the too often

sentimental ideal about Indian affairs held forth by those whose sole acquaintance with India has been derived from the map and the newspaper. Mr Trotter's views are, of course, intelligent, and, we are sure, conscientious, but we must conclude that he has lost touch of Anglo-Indian feeling; and when he can assail the Indian Government or a Viceroy on any point that is unpopular in this country, he does not spare his censure. His judgments are often incomplete, so as to mislead. We quite agree with his estimate of the misconduct of the first Afghan war, but its results were not without value. But for the impression our avenging army made upon the Afghans, there is every probability that they would have swooped down on India when the Mutiny broke out, and rendered our position altogether untenable. Nor can we aggree with Captain Trotter in many of his views regarding the economics of Indian administration. He is all in favour of the ryot, and pronounces a very unmerited condemnation of Lord Cornwallis's Permanent Settlement, which, more than any other measure of civil polity, tended to give the British a firm foothold on India; and he warmly approves of the concessions which the Government has subsequently forced the zemindars to make - concessions which may be compared, in a mild way, to those forced upon landlords by Mr Gladstone's Rent Bill. In the same way the Talukdari settlement of Oudh, effected by Lord Canning and Sir Charles Wingfield, comes in for an undue amount of

severe criticism, while Sir John Lawrence's measures in favour of the cultivators are praised at some expense to the faith of the pledges of the Indian Government. We yield to none in our admiration of Sir John Lawrence, nor can his services to India be easily overrated; but these services were performed before he took his seat on the Viceregal gaddi. His career as Governor-General failed to realise the expectations which had been based upon his past; and, with the previous case of Sir Charles Metcalfe, went far to establish an argument that the Indian Civil Service is not the best training-school for the guidance of the Supreme Government.

We are not going to deal in detail with the more recent chapters in Captain Trotter's History, for we fear we should be compelled to differ from him at every other point where he forms a judgment. We would rather give testimony to the value of his work as a record of facts clearly and graphically told; and where the reader will be obliged to vary from his conclusions, he will not fail to do justice to the generous and liberal spirit which animates the writer. A pretty close test of Mr Trotter's two volumes satisfies us that he has left almost nothing out which deserves to find a place in history. Does he omit the Bombay riots of 1874? or, like Mr Justice Stareleigh, have we not got them “in our notes"? But no event that has had any bearing on Indian policy or affairs has been overlooked in Captain Trotter's interesting volumes.

Ing recess, although of short duation, has been pregnant with pertant events. Lord Salisbury's Government meets Parliament de prived of two of its most distingeord and intential members, at a moment when that loss can 11. be endured. According to the Sommen evin on of men, the Earl af Iddesleigh and Lord Randolph Churchill were held to represent the ve derent schools of Conwaca acknowledge the Lewership of Lord Salisbury. That Xth sacuid quit the Government mmediately before the reassents Ang of Parliament would, rez rcumstances, have schick evere low at the Aut 10:1 Thus weakened at nement and it is omy

1

L

the nnate and inerent p

t he foundation ; on

that the IOW WA
Lave

aratively little

4

་་

claim in the successes of the general election. Lord Randolph has done more than any one else to popularise the Tory party," and to disabuse men's minds of the idea that it is the "party of reaction," from whom no progress is to be expected. He has obtained an influence with the masses" which is possessed by hardly any other public man of the day, and is regarded by many men as the link between the "Constitutional” and the "Liberal" party-the pioneer to lead the former forward to a point at which the moderate and rational portion of the latter may be able to join and unite with them against the revolutionary programme of some of those who aspire to lead them. The departure from the Government of such a man cannot but be counted as a loss, and we must not for a moment forget that his was the sharpest sword that was waved aloft in the recent electoral contests his the keenest lance that was couched against our Separatist foes. We must, however, confess to a feeling of regret that Lord Randolph has not felt it his duty, at the present crisis, to postpone every other political desire or ambition to the one great necessity of preserving unimpaired the strength and unity of the Government which was formed for the main object of resisting the disunion of the empire. However honest, abie, and eminent, Lord Randolph was still one of the youngest of the Cabinet; and it appears to us that there is no subject, of however great importance, the consideration of which might not have been postponed, and every possible difference of opinion laid aside for the moment, until the power of the Separatist party had been completely shattered, and their policy abandoned. We say this in all respect to Lord

Randolph, and in the full belief that he has acted from the highest and most conscientious motives; but there are moments when sacrifices of individual feeling must be made in the interests of the public, and real sacrifices sometimes betoken a more real and unselfish patriotism than even that forfeiture of position and power to which Lord Randolph has submitted, sooner than abandon or postpone for the moment his personal convictions.

The loss of Lord Randolph Churchill has not been entirely without its compensations, especially as we are convinced that his independent support will still be rendered to the constitutional Government. Mr Goschen, who has long been Conservative in his opinions, and as such has encountered the full force of Radical denunciation and abuse, has joined the Conservative Cabinet as a "Liberal Unionist," and thus conferred upon the Government the double advantage of his own personal weight and ability, and the assurance which his action affords the country that the tie between the Liberal and Conservative Unionists is as firm and unbroken as ever. Whilst congratulating the Government upon Mr Goschen's accession to its ranks, we cannot but offer our congratulations to that gentleman himself upon his extrication from a painfully false position. The number of so-called Liberals has of late years not been few who have con-. stantly condemned in private the measures for which party exigencies compelled them to give their votes, and to support by their public actions; the truth being palpable to unprejudiced observers, that for some time past there has been an assimilation and approximation between moderate men of both po

litical parties which has rendered the old party watchwords and combinations practically absurd and obsolete. If Mr Goschen has not voted for measures which he condemned, he has done that which in the eyes of thick-and-thin partisans is actually worse; for, sitting on one side of the House, he has spoken strongly against the measures and policy of those who were the accepted leaders of that side. In truth, the logical mind, the strong common-sense, the reasonable Liberalism of Mr Goschen, have all tended to show him the illogical and unreasonable position of those latter-day Liberals who have gradually discarded the former and vital principles of the old Liberal party. Mr Goschen may rely upon it that, for a man of his keen intellectual powers and unquestioned ability, there is far more scope in the Tory" than in the "Radical" party: the one he may hope to "Liberalise," because circumstances and the lessons taught by time have caused them to become a progressive party; the latter he can never moderate, because it is immoderate, and because of the revolutionary spirits who influence and guide that "advanced" section of their supporters, upon whom they depend for success at the polls, and who year by year more absolutely control their policy as a party. The right place for Mr Goschen-and not only for Mr Goschen, but for Lord Hartington and his followers-is in the ranks of the party now led by Lord Salisbury, by their union with which they would form and consolidate one strong and irresistible party upon a national and constitutional basis. The necessity for such a party must appear more obvious than ever to those who consider the position of the country at the present moment.

So far as foreign affairs are concerned, prudent and patriotic men of every party will rejoice to see the seals of the Foreign Office in the firm grasp and strong hands of Lord Salisbury. No statesman who has of late years occupied the position of Foreign Secretary has inspired more general confidence; and the influence of Great Britain in continental Europe is tenfold that which was formerly the case during the days of the old 1880 Gladstone Government, now happily passed away. It is impossible to view the affairs of the Continent without uneasiness; and circumstances beyond our control may cause the occurrence of events likely to result in grave complications, and to require the greatest amount of nerve and prudence at the British Foreign Office. such be the case, the country will feel greater reliance upon Lord Salisbury than upon any other of our statesmen; and we cannot but congratulate ourselves upon his resumption of the office for which he is so well fitted, and which he has already filled with so much credit to himself and advantage to his country.

Should

But whatever may be the interest attaching to foreign affairs in the coming session, it is abundantly evident that the same question which engrossed the attention of Parliament and the country in 1886 will again force itself forward in 1887, and will require the best efforts of our statesmen for its solution. The state of Ireland has, indeed, occupied the time and tried the patience of the British Parliament for the last six years in a remarkable manner. Be it remembered that this monopoly of parliamentary attention by Ireland has been coincident with the reopening of the land question by Mr Gladstone in 1880-81, and