It is stated that one object of Government Education in India is to "raise the moral character of those who partake of its advantages."

It must be admitted that even at home this most important part of education is greatly neglected. The Report of the Education Commission in 1861, quotes the following:

"Teachers are, from the very nature of the case, under a temptation to prepare their scholars mainly with a view to make a good show at the inspector's visit, and though I believe that very few are guilty of yielding to this temptation in an extravagant degree, yet I think that many fail to appreciate the importance of adapting the subject-matter of their lessons to the moral and social necessities of their pupils." p. 232.

The evil has been greatly aggravated of late years by the system of payment by results. An Inspector says:

"Indeed the tendency of the New Code is to cause the managers and teachers to regard simply the pecuniary grants, and all that does not tend to produce an increased result as to these is hardly taken into the account. For one manager that asks me if his school is getting on well, there are 20 who now say, 'How much shall we get?' and the expression on a child's failure to pass any subject is not regret at his ignorance so much as indignation at his stupidity and the consequent loss."*

In India, the intense competition caused by the University Examinations, tends, both on the part of teachers and students, to make "passing" the grand aim in education.

The following extracts from Adam's Report on Vernacular Education in Bengal and Behar, show the neglect of moral teaching in native schools :

"As to any influence of the teachers over the pupils-any attempt to form the sentiments and habits, and to control and guide the passions and emotions,—such a notion never enters into their conceptions, and the formation of the moral character of the young is consequently wholly left to the influence of the casual associations amidst which they are placed, without any endeavour to modify or direct them." p. 94.

"A higher intellectual cultivation, however, is not all that is required. That to be beneficial to the individual and to society must be accompanied by the cultivation of the moral sentiments and habits. Here the native system presents a perfect blank. The hand, the eye, the ear, are employed; the memory is a good deal exercised; the judgment is not wholly neglected; and the religious sentiment is early and perseveringly cherished, however misdirected. But the passions and affections are allowed to grow up wild without any thought of pruning their luxuriances or directing their exercise to good purposes. Hence I am

* Report of the Committee of Council on Education, 1864-65, p. 114.

inclined to believe, the infrequency in native society of enlarged views of moral and social obligation, and hence the corresponding radical defect of the native character which appears to be that of a narrow and contracted selfishness, naturally arising from the fact that the young mind is seldom, if ever, taught to look for the means of its own happiness and improvement in the indulgence of benevolent feelings, and the performance of benevolent acts to those who are beyond a certain pale. The radical defect of the system of elementary instruction seems to explain the radical defect of the native character; and if I have rightly estimated cause and effect, it follows that no material improvement of the native character can be expected, and no improvement whatever of the system of elementary education will be sufficient, without a larger infusion into it of moral instruction that shall always connect in the mind of the pupil, with the knowledge which he acquires, some useful purpose, to which it may be and ought to be applied, not necessarily productive of personal gain or advantage to himself." p. 101.

Several years ago, the orientalist, Dr. E. Roer, when Inspector of Schools in Bengal, thus urged the importance of systematic instruction in morality :

"I take this opportunity of expressing my sentiments on another important question, viz., whether our present vernacular schools fulfil the object of giving a sound education to the people. A sound education would imply that the pupils are not only trained in their mental, but also, and more especially so, in their moral faculties, in such a way that they should know the duties which they have to perform in after-life, duties towards their Creator and their fellow-men, individually as well as to the State whose protection they are enjoying. Now, if there be a duty on the part of the State of imparting education to the people, as has so often been asserted, this duty refers to moral instruction; for, in order to obey the laws of the country, every one subject to their rule ought to know them, and the consequences arising to him from acting or not acting in accordance with them. No question our schools afford a much better mental instruction than the indigenous schools. But, in a moral point of view, I see no great difference between them. A knowledge of geography, &c., may destroy prejudices opposed to higher enlightenment, and in such books as Niti-bodh (a translation of Chambers' Moral Class Book) some good moral lessons may be imparted; but, unconnected as these lessons are and not rising to principles, they can be considered merely auxiliary to moral instruction. In fact, no provision is made to implant in the minds of the pupils a consciousness of duty or a reverential feeling towards the laws of the country."*

One of the most intelligent Native Inspectors in India, Babu Bhudeb Mukerji, referring to the Government vernacular

* Bengal Public Instruction Report, 1857-58, Ap. A., p. 126.

teachers employed in Bengal after a year's training, says of the education they give:

"Practically they mean nothing more by it than teaching their pupils a little to read and write and to cast accounts also. This duty, I have no doubt, they discharge full vigorously, but beyond this, they do very little. The real training of their boys they neglect, if not entirely, for that is impossible under the present system, at least to a very serious extent. This is the more to be regretted, as many of their pupils are not likely to receive any other training at all. There are many causes that conspire to produce this highly culpable neglect in the tutors, but I shall mention here three only:-1st, That they come out from the training schools not sufficiently impressed with the importance of moral education; 2nd, That this sort of education is not in favour with the people, or rather there is no demand for it among them; and 3rd, what though last is not the least, that cramming which has now become the order of the day from the University down to these patshalas, does not leave room enough for education properly so called "*

Even in Government Schools of a higher grade, there seems to be often the same neglect. Mr. Beverley, C. S., Secretary of the Monghyr School, recorded the following remarks in the Visit Book on leaving the station :

"It is much to be wished that the masters could be induced to entertain a loftier idea of their work, and that their heart and soul were wholly devoted to teaching. They should remember the great responsibility which rests upon them, the great influence for good or for evil which they possess in having charge of so many youths' minds and morals committed to them just at a time when both receive impressions so easily from without. The boys they are now educating will take the lead in native society in the next generation, and the tone of that society will depend altogether on the education they receive and the tastes they imbibe at the Government Schools. The masters will then see that it is a moral as well as an intellectual training they are called upon to bestow. This, I fear, is but too often forgotten. It is considered sufficient to instil a certain amount of knowledge into the boy's mind or memory, as the case may be, so that he may pass a fair examination, and the visitor's approval may be extended to the masters. But this is not sufficient. Religious books are forbidden, and very properly, to be taught in the school, but the prohibition does not extend to morality. The two must not be considered as identical. A man may be highly moral without being religious, but no one can be really religious without being moral. Moreover, morality, to some extent, more or less, is the ground work of every system of religion. There is every reason, therefore, why the greatest care and attention should be devoted to this branch of education, and the results, though not so manifest, are in every respect superior. The master who has

* Bengal Public Instruction Report, 1864-65, Ap. A., p. 461.

taught one pupil to scorn a lie, has done more for his own credit and more for the renovation of India than if he had passed twenty boys at the entrance examination, but given them no moral training besides. . . .

"The present masters, I regret to say, have no idea of teaching morality; they hardly know what it means themselves. I would make an exception in the case of the second master, but unfortunately he has not the art of inculcating the practice of it in others."*

The Madras Public Instruction Report for 1871-72 says:

Religion is necessarily banished from our schools. Ethics have hitherto been taught only in the B. A. course, and from the year 1874 Moral Philosophy is to disappear altogether except as an optional subject. . . . It does seem to be a mistake to banish from our schools and colleges, in a country in which the public code of morality is often essentially false, all systematic instruction in that science which 'teaches men their duty and the reasons of it.'"

The Indian Mirror, in noticing Lord Northbrook's speech at the convocation of the Calcutta University, urges the importance of moral instruction, and states one reason why frequently it is not given :

"There is only another point to which we should invite His Excellency's attention. We mean moral training. On its importance it is unnecessary to expatiate. It is indeed to be regretted that there never was even a passing allusion to this subject in the utterances of any of the Vice-Chancellors or Chancellors of the University. But Lord Northbrook, as the head of the Government, must surely feel that moral education is a terrible necessity in state colleges. Where religious instructions are strictly prohibited and the law of neutrality rules with iron sceptre, there is a great danger of ignoring and neglecting moral teaching also. The teachers feel a natural tendency to avoid mentioning any subject which might indirectly give rise to theological discussions. While those who belong to the sceptical or materialistic school are too apt to throw overboard both religion and morality, and speak of God and conscience with derision and contempt. In such a state of things—real not imaginary-it is easy to conceive that the students will grow into indifference to the sacred obligations of morality, and into those shallow ideas of utility and materialism, which are leading many a mind in the present state of social disintegration to infidelity and even immorality in after-life. Government is bound to teach us both speculative and practical ethics to the fullest extent possible, and assiduously train both boys and adults into habits of honesty, truthfulness, sobriety, benevolence, and general purity of character; or it must be responsible for the vices of the nation. Let Lord Northbrook utter only one word of warning, and it will like thunder rouse both teachers and pupils to a sense of their responsibilities. In the interests of public morality, we sincerely and humbly implore the Viceroy to call upon the Director of Instruc

*Bengal Public Instruction Report, 1864-65, Ap. A., pp. 354, 355.

tion, inspectors, deputy inspectors, professors and teachers to inculcate moral lessons and enforce moral discipline by all méans in their power, and thus make the institutions under their charge the nurseries of truth and purity." 12th March, 1873.

A correspondent of the Indian Mirror shows that the above measure would be received with gratitude by parents of all religious denominations:

"It is not theological teaching for which I contend, but moral education. The former is wisely interdicted in all schools and colleges supported by the State, as it would convert these institutions into proselytizing agencies and cause serious and unwarrantable interference with the prejudices and feelings of the subject population. There is nothing, however, in the educational character of India to prevent moral training, in which all classes are equally interested and which all would hail with alacrity. Hindus, Mahomedans, Parsees and Christians would all be delighted to see their children brought up in the knowledge and practice of virtue, and, far from feeling disaffected, would feel profoundly grateful for the blessing."

When the Senate of the Madras University excluded Moral Philosophy except as an optional subject, Native Public Opinion commented upon the proceeding as follows:

"We are bound to protest in the most emphatic terms against the exclusion of general ethics from the system of studies prescribed for the University Examinations. Our surprise is really inexpressible at finding that it is seriously contemplated to remove this subject of vital importance from even the B. A. course, and place it in the category of optional studies. We do not inquire if the University authorities are wise in adopting such a step; we are tempted to ask if they are sane ? While the earnest friends and well-wishers of humanity all over the civilized globe are ransacking their brains to discover new means to prevent vices and crimes in preference to punishing them, what should be thought if an University should coolly and deliberately set aside some of the best means we happily possess already? It seems our youths are to be carefully taught to direct the level and the theodolite, but are not to know how to direct their feelings and passions. They are to study the relations between the sides and angles of trilateral figures, but are to remain totally ignorant of the relations between themselves and their fellow-men. They are to be thoroughly versed in goniometric functions, but are to be thoroughly in the dark as regards the most important functions of social life. Can absurdity further go? We should, on the other hand, insist with all our might upon having ethics carefully taught as soon as the student is able to understand ordinary English. A graduated series of books upon the subject should be named, the lowest of the series being included in the Matriculation course, and the highest in that for the B. A. degree."23rd October, 1872.

The question may be raised, "whether morality apart from