Imágenes de páginas

petty magistrates' courts throughout the island. The resident magistrates, besides holding courts of their own, preside in the courts of petty sessions. There are elected periodically boards in the parishes with jurisdiction over roads, markets, sanitation, poor relief, etc. There are several direct taxes on land, houses, horse carriages, etc., which are devoted entirely to improvements and administration in the parish in which they are collected.

Mauritius.—The law is based on the Code Napoleon and other French laws introduced when Mauritius was controlled by the French Government, but these have since been substantially modified by colonial ordinances.

. Natal.The legal system is based upon the Roman-Dutch law which is in force in Cape Colony, modified by local legislation in reference to the English and their descendants. In 1875 steps were taken to supersede the tribal organization in the native population. A law was enacted establishing a native high court to administer justice to the natives and place them under the ordinary criminal law of the colony, except as regards political crimes, crimes arising out of native customs, and crimes declared triable under any local native law, all of which are reserved for the native high court.

Straits Settlements. The law in force is adapted by local ordinances from English and Indian law; the Indian penal code, with slight modifications, having been adopted, while the civil procedure is based on the English judicature acts. There is a supreme court with sessions at Singapore and Penang every two months, and quarterly at Malacca, and it holds civil sittings monthly at Singapore and Penang, and once a quarter at Malacca. In the Malay Federated States, which are administered by the governor of the Straits Settlements, local laws and regulations are in force, but have in many cases been amended through the influence of the British resident in each of the States.

India.—Sir James Stephen says of the penal code of India that it “may be described as the criminal law of England freed from all technicalities and superfluities and modified in some few particulars to suit the circumstances of British India." The following description of the laws in force in British India is condensed from Sir John Strachey's work, India, which M. Chailley-Bert, who has made a careful study of conditions in India in his La Colonisation de l'Indo-Chine, commends in the highest terms.

“In 1793 the issue of formal and definite legislative enactments in India began in the series of laws known as the Bengal, Madras, and Bombay regulations. These, and such acts of Parliament as applied to India, constituted, apart from Hindu and Mohammedan law, of which I must speak separately, the civil and criminal law of British India. Before the transfer of the government to the Crown the administration of criminal justice was in an unsatisfactory condition. * * * In 1853, when the East India Company's charter was renewed, and again in 1861, commissions were appointed to prepare a body of substantive law for India, and to the work of these commissions and to the eminent men who have held the office of legal member of council we owe the succession of excellent laws which have been passed by the Indian legislature and which form chapters in a system of codified law. * * * In 1861 the supreme and sudder courts were abolished by act of Parliament, and in substitution for them high courts with both criminal and civil jurisdiction established. The judges of the high courts are in part English barristers and part members of the Indian civil service, and there are usually in each court one or more native judges chosen from the native judicial service or from the pleaders. These high courts are the courts of appeal from the district courts, criminal and civil, and their decisions are final, except in certain cases in which an appeal lies to the judicial committee of the privy council in England. * * * The code of criminal procedure is in force throughout British India, and among all the laws of India there is no one more important than this, which regulates the machinery by which peace and order are maintained and crime prevented and punished. It describes the constitution of all the criminal courts, defines the powers which each court can exercise, classifies the offenses under the penal code, regulates the manner in which police investigations are to be carried on, the power of the police to make arrests, the proceedings to be taken for keeping the peace, for the removal of public nuisances, and to make all inquiries and trials, and the admission of bills for the revision of sentences. In every province there is a certain number of divisions, in each of which a court of sessions is established, and in every sessions division are a certain number of districts, to each of which the magistrate, called the district magistrate, is attached. To enable the magistrate or judge to exercise jurisdiction over European British subjects he must be appointed a justice of the peace, and the justice of the peace himself must be a European British subject. There are three classes of magistrates: (1) Courts of presidency magistrates and magistrates of the first class, who can pass sentences of imprisonment not exceeding two years and fine not exceeding 1,000 rupees; (2) courts or magistrates of the second class, who can impose sentences not exceeding six months and fine not exceeding 200 rupees; (3) courts or magistrates of the third class, who can pass sentences of imprisonment not exceeding one month or fine not exceeding 50 rupees. In certain cases, and under certain restrictions, magistrates of the first class can pass sentences of whipping. Until 1872 British subjects could only be tried by one of the high courts except in trivial cases. Since that time it has been provided that European British subjects should be tried by magistrates of the highest class, who are also justices of the peace, but it was necessary that the magistrate or judge should himself be a European or British subject. The law has since been so modified that if a native judge be appointed to the post of district magistrate or sessions judge his powers in regard to jurisdiction over European British subjects will be the same as those of an Englishman holding a similar office. This provision, however, is subject to the condition that every European British subject brought to trial may claim the right of trial by a jury of which not less than one-half shall be Europeans or Americans. In case a sufficient number of Europeans and Americans can not be found to constitute a jury the case must be transferred to another district. Until the year 1836 European British subjects were under the jurisdiction of the supreme courts alone. It was then decided that they should be made amenable to the civil courts of the country, and that in this respect no distinction should be maintained between them and natives. Since that time no distinctions of race have been recognized in the civil courts throughout England. At the present time native judges preside over the great majority of the courts. Excepting the higher appellate tribunals almost the whole administration of civil justice is in their (the natives') hands. They exercise jurisdicition in all classes of civil cases over natives and Europeans alike, and no word of objection of the latter is ever heard. A lord chancellor did not give the native judges too high a character when he said, in the House of Lords in 1883, as the result of his experience in Indian cases appealed to the privy council, that 'in respect of integrity, of learning, of knowledge, of soundness, and satisfactory character of the judgments arrived at the judgments of the native judges are quite as good as those of the English. I think that the highest authorities in India would even go further and say that, excepting the high courts, the native judgments are the better of the two. In disposing of business of this sort superior knowledge of the language and habits of the people gives to the natives many advantages over the Englishmen.

“While the codification of the criminal law of British India is complete, the codification of the civil law is a far more difficult task. Both Hindus and Mohammedans are in possession of great bodies of law, parts of which are believed by them to be of more or less divine origin, containing elaborate instructions on every sort of subject affecting property, inheritance, and the relations of life. Unless native customs and feelings and prejudices are repugnant to humanity and justice we are bound to respect them, and the mere suspicion that we desire to interfere with them might be politically dangerous. No one is likely to attempt to codify the Mohammedan law, and there is no single body of Hindu law that is generally recognized. It differs in different provinces and is constantly modified by local and personal customs. A large part of the substantive civil law, therefore, must remain untouched by our legislation. Codes relating to contracts, negotiable instruments, transfer of property, etc., and a complete code of civil procedure have already been enacted, and these, with certain exceptions, saving local usages and common rights, are generally applicable throughout British India. Another important chapter of the act of 1865 contains a law of intestate and testamentary succession, but the greater part of it applies only to Europeans and has no application to Hindus or Mohammedans."


The following statement on the administration of justice in India is prepared by Romesh Dutt, C. I. E., lecturer in Indian history at the University College, London, late of the Bengal civil service, and published in the British Empire Series, 1900:


“The high courts of Calcutta, Madras, Bombay, and Allahabad, and the chief court of Lahore, exercise appellate and revisional jurisdictions over the judicial work of the judges and magistrates in the different provinces. If there is one institution in India more than another for which the population of India entertain the greatest respect and veneration it is the high courts of India. The Indian mind naturally holds justice as the noblest attribute of sovereignty, and regards a court of justice as higher than the court of a ruler. The executive government of India, too, is based on old and despotic principles, and the people of India naturally regard with respect, and almost with affection, the courts of justice which temper that despotism and control its judicial functions.

“Under the supervision of a high court, which extends over an entire province, there is, generally speaking, a judge in each district in the more advanced parts of India.

JUDGES AND CIVIL COURTS. “A district judge is the head of all the civil courts in his district, but tries very few original cases himself. He has well-trained and able officers under him called subordinate judges and munsifs, who take up and dispose of all civil cases that arise in the district. The ability and integrity with which these officers perform their work have received recognition from the highest authorities from time to time, and prove the wisdom of the policy inaugurated by men like Munro, Elphinstone, and Bentinck, of virtually intrusting the entire civil judicial work to the natives of India. The district judge has a controlling power over these civ appeals. He also tries those important criminal cases which the magistrate of the district commits to the sessions for trial. In jury districts the judge is assisted by a jury in the disposal of these sessions cases, but in other districts he is assisted by assessors, who sit with him, but whose verdict is not binding on him. Not hampered with executive or revenue work, district and session judges soon acquire a fair degree of judicial training, and the people generally regard their impartial and unbiased decisions with greater respect than the decisions of magistrates who are executive officers and the heads of the local police. It is only very heinous offenses, however, which come up to the sessions judge for decision; most of the criminal work is done by magistrates.


“There is a district magistrate in each district in India; his duties are various, and he is the real executive ruler and administrator of his district. It would be difficult within our limits to fully describe the various functions which he has to discharge, or the numerous responsibilities which rest upon him. Briefly speaking, he collects revenues and taxes; he looks after roads and bridges; he controls primary schools and hospitals; he is the head of the district board and local boards; he inspects municipalities; he is the head of the police, and directs inquiries in important cases; he is the general prosecutor in all cases; he is the head magistrate and has the cases tried by his subordinates, and he is the appellate court in reference to all c

llate court in reference to all cases tried by his subordinates exercising second and third class powers. It is obvious that this arrangement is not suited to the present time, or to the present state of progress in India. The arrangement was considered necessary in the early years of British rule in India; its continuance, after the lapse of a century, makes British administration more despotic and more generally unpopular than it need be. As a rule, district magistrates are men of ability, judgment, and a great deal of moderation and good sense, but it is not possible for any class of men to be invested with the powers of a policeman and judge, of a prosecutor and appellate court, without giving offense to an intelligent and progressive people, educated in English schools, and keenly alive to the requirements of justice. The question of separating judicial and executive functions in India has been discussed in this country on more than one occasion. Two secretaries of state for India, Lord Cross and Lord Kimberley, recognized that the separation was needed in the interests of justice and of equity, but the reform has been postponed, ostensibly on the ground of want of funds. It is almost inconceivable that the want of funds should be pleaded as an excuse for the continuance of a system of administration which is un-English and unjust, and which makes British rule despotic and unpopular in India

“Under the district magistrate, there are various classes of magistrates known as 'joint magistrates,' 'assistant magistrates,' 'deputy magistrates,' (subdeputy magistrates,' 'subdivisional magistrates,' and 'honorary magistrates.' Into a description of these various classes of magistrates it is not necessary for us to enter. It may generally be stated that the remoter portions of a district are parceled off into subdivisions, and all criminal cases in these subdivisions are tried by “subdivisional magistrates,' or their subordinates. Cases occurring in the central portion of a district come up before the district magistrate himself, and he distributes them among his subordinates at the headquarters of the district.

“The various classes of magistrates enumerated above are generally men of education and experience, and perform their duties in a manrer which is creditable to them. Great care is taken to see that cases are not needlessly postponed from day to day, and that the parties and their witnesses are not harassed by being required to attend too often.


W. J. V. Money, a former British official in India, in his Java, or How to Manage a Colony, says: “I am sorry to say many of the Dutch laughed irreverently when I told them that, on account of the natives' dislike to our regulation law, our dislike to the nonregulation no law, and our wish to administer the same law to Europeans and to the thirty-two or more different nations and races of India, all in different stages of cultivation, we proposed enacting a series of codes for the whole country, which had been elabcrated by the cleverest men and best lawyers in England and in India. I urged that these codes contained the latest and most refined theories and decisions on all questions of criminal and civil jurisprudence, and even made preparations in some respects for a more refined law than the English had yet attained to. The Dutch answered that a simple procedure code to facilitate the action of the provincial courts, and to keep the nonprofessional judges within certain limits and up to a certain standard might be very advisable, but that codes of laws, if drawn by wisdom itself, could not but be even newer and stranger to native ideas than the old hated regulations. They added that the more highly civilized such codes were, the more incomprehensible and the more unlike the only native standards of law, the Hindoo and Mussulman precepts, would such codes be. The Dutch asked if in our native schools, as in theirs, the children did not spend their lives in learning the Koran or the Shasters, according to their creed, and in forming their ideas from the laws propounded therein; and they begged to know how we could expect that after every native in the country had learned one combined set of religion and law for sixteen or twenty years he should either understand, should appreciate, or should like laws as different from those inculcated with his faith as light is to darkness. They said they understood the application of European law to natives, when, as the Spaniards had done in the Philippine Islands, the old religions, with the laws thereof, were utterly destroyed and swept away, and the whole population was reared and educated in the Christian faith, with the ideas of Christians, but they asked what we could expect but discontent and dissatisfaction, while teaching Hindu and Mussulman laws and practicing English ones?


“Since my return from Java, the code of procedure has been passed and has become the law of India. One of its clauses has had a curious and unexpected result in stopping litigation. It requires the plaintiff to affirm the truth of his complaint, which respectable natives will not do. This arises partly from unwillingness to affirm to the numerous false and speculative cases which yet the native was ready to support by purchased and suborned perjury and forgery, but still more from the stricter native's idea of the indignity of affirming personally even to the truth, and of the impiety of swearing to what, in the smallest particular, may turn out not to be strictly accurate. This will aggravate the existing evil of redress being so constantly sought by illegal means, for the native who will not affirm, even to a true statement, will not scruple to hire armed bravos to make a murderous attack upon his enemy or otherwise to support his pretensions by purchased violence or suborned fraud. So far as litigation is not prevented by the affirming clause, the code of procedure will hardly remedy the evils I have mentioned as the real sore of the Indian provincial jurisprudence, and probably will not affect them at all. It gives no means of restoring oral testimony to its natural prominence in the search after truth, nor does it point out what documentary evidence ought or ought not to be received and looked at by the judge. It assumes that evidence is tendered and objected to, is received or rejected on discussion, and is based altogether on a state of things existing only in the Queen's courts at the Indian capitals, and utterly unknown to either provincial judge or native practitioners. The different native and European judicial officers in the interior of India have had several meetings to try and make out the new requirements and injunctions of the procedure code, which they feel to be totally unsuited to the existing state of things in their courts. It expressly directs the evidence, in civil as well as in criminal cases, to be taken before the judge in fact; but, as it does not alter the former tedious and irrelevant mode of giving evidence, or the slow process of recording question and answer at length, in the uneducated native clerk's complex version of the vernacular, a strict compliance with its provisions on the present system will overwhelm the judge and will cause the arrears of business to be even larger than they now are. As the procedure code neither reduces expenses nor the mass of papers and makes both native lawyers and court clerks more indispensable than before, and as it may also possibly open up new fields of undetected dodges to the native legal practitioner, its reception by those classes is likely to be as flattering as its authors could desire. Should the natives of India, however, fail to receive it as a panacea for their legal woes, the fault, of course, must lie in their stupidity and ignorance. If the object had been to satisfy and content ignorance and stupidity, instead of perforce enlightening them, the procedure code would have been made more like the native's only idea of procedure,—viz, ready access to the judge or court to tell his own story, with either summary justice thereupon, or a short day fixed for the production of witnesses in open court, followed by speedy and final judgment, in accordance with native laws and customs.


The Dutch, by adopting a different course, by simplifying the procedure of the courts, by leaving to the native his old custom. or law, and by giving him security for the undisputed enjoyment of his rights, have at least made their judicial system acceptable to the country; while, by gradually abolishing only those provisions of Mussulman law which are abhorrent to humanity, they have succeeded so far in humanizing their subjects without exciting any lasting or serious discontent. This limits the selfish objects of their rule, which does not profess to seek more than the material peace and prosperity of the country. But the question yet remains to be decided, whether a gradual extension of the same system in India might not produce yet larger and more valuable moral results.

“The application of a similar primitive system of jurisprudence might possibly, sooner and more successfully, raise the natives of India to the standard of European cultivation, than enlightened codes which attempt to bridge, at one span, centuries of gradual progression and improvement. Local custom, varying with the varying conditions of society over the wide expanse of our Indian empire, may be more theoretically objectionable, but can hardly be so practically hurtful as the application of the most refined legal speculations of the nineteenth century to different stages of civilization, ranging from the extreme barbarism of some of the jungle tribes to the feudal relations of the thirteenth century, or, at the best, to the low moral and material culture of the Bengalee, with the prejudices and vices of European society in the seventeenth century.


Sir G. C. Lewis, in his work on Government of Dependencies, which holds high rank among all European students of colonial methods, says:

“If a territory belonging to an independent state, or being itself independent, is acquired by cession or conquest, the syster of law which obtains in it at the time of the acquisition can hardly fail to be considerably different from that of the dominant country which acquires it. In general a country thus acquiring a dependency is satisfied with reorganizing its local government and modifying its public law, and is contented to leave its civil law (or jus privatum) unchanged. By this mode of proceeding the dominant country

No. 9- 18

secures its own dominion and avoids the production of the confusion which must inevitably ensue in any community upon a sudden change of its law of property and contracts. Thus, as we have already seen, the Roman municipia and provinces retained for a time much of their peculiar laws and institutions under the dominion of Rome. In like manner every country conquered by or ceded to the Crown of England retains such laws and rules of law (not inconsistent with the general law of England affecting dependencies) as were in force in it at the time of the conquest or cession until they are repealed by a competent authority. Now, inasmuch as many independent states and many dependent colonies of other states have become English dependencies, many of the English dependencies have retained wholly or in part foreign systems of jurisprudence. Thus Trinidad retains much of the Spanish law; Demarara, the Cape of Good Hope, and Ceylon retain much of the Dutch law; Lower Canada retains the French civil law according to the coutume de Paris; St. Lucie retains the old French law as it existed when the island last belonged to France; Mauritius retains such of the French codes as were extended to it; Malta, which was a municipality of the Kingdom of Sicily, retains the old Siçilian law as modified by the subsequent legislation of the grand masters; the Ionian Islands retain much of their old Venitian law, and the dominions of the East India Company retain much of the Hindoo, Mahometan, and other native systems of law and legal usages. Blackstone properly remarks that the common law of England does not obtain as such in an English dependency acquired by conquest or treaty.

“It has been remarked above that the rule of English law respecting the communication of the statute and common law of the mother country to an English colony produces two singular consequences: First, that different portions of the statute and common law of the mother country are in force in different colonies; and secondly, that most of the alterations in the statute and common law of the mother country which have been made since the foundation of the colony are not received in the colony. An analogous effect is produced by the rule of the English law respecting the retention of the native law of a dependency acquired by England, in cases in which the dependency has been the dependent colony of another State. In these cases the laws of the mother country, as they existed at the time of the transfer of the colony, are in force in such colony without any of the alterations which may have been made subsequently to the transfer. Thus the province of Lower Canada has for its civil law the French law, according to the coutume de Paris, although that law has long since been superseded in France by the laws of the revolution and the codes of Napoleon. In like manner the Dutch colonies ceded to England are subject to the Dutch law as it existed at the time of the cession. The ancient law of Holland,' says Mr. Henry in his preface to his translation of Vanderlinden's Institutes of the Laws of Holland, 'as it existed before the subjugation of that country to France and the introduction of the code Napoleon, still prevails in the Dutch ceded colonies, which never admitted the new code, from the circumstance of their being, during the war which preceded the short peace of Amiens and the treaty of Paris, under the dominion, by conquest, of Great Britain.' So, again, the French codes, which are in force in the island of Mauritius, are received in the form in which they were introduced into the island, and without the modifications which have subsequently been made in them by the French legislature.


Education naturally follows the physical and commercial development of a new country, and this is especially true in the class of colonies in which the population of the governing country has but a small representation. In the self-governing, or “habitation," colonies, made up chiefly of Europeans or their descendants, educational facilities are more nearly coincident with other stages of development, but in the tropical colonies, in which the European population consists of little more than the government officials and the merchants and planters, educational development has been slow and extremely irregular.


In the English colonies, aside from the great self-governin communities of Canada, Australia, and South Africa, the educational facilities and methods are fitted solely to local conditions. In the Netherlands colonies the educational system has until recently been chiefly in the interest of the resident Europeans and those assimilated with them, and this is to a great extent true in the French colonies, except in the older communities such as Algeria and the French West Indies, where educational facilities have been developed among the natives as well as for the families of Europeans there residing. "The English Crown colonies," says Sir Charles Dilke, “yield examples of every kind of educational system, from those of Hongkong and Barbados, which provide almost as freely for the education of the black or yellow population as do the self-governing colonies for that of their white inhabitants, down to those which resemble that of India in the paucity of the number of pupils attending schools in proportion to the total population. It is impossible, and if it

re possible it would be useless, to describe in detail the various plans adopted for education in Crown colonies. In St. Helena is a compulsory system, while the schools consist partly of government schools and partly of schools (more numerous) merely assisted by the State. In Malta there is a government system of foreign schools; but the schools are denominational, and, in fact, strictly Roman Catholic. In Hongkong there is a government secular system, but the colony also aids denominational schools. In the majority of the Crown colonies, but a majority which does not contain the most important, the system is one of denominational schools aided by the State, as, for instance, in British Honduras, British Guiana, the Gambia, Lagos, and Sierra Leone. In Ceylon there are government unsectarian schools which are free for vernacular education, while fees are taken for English teaching; but there are also a larger number of State-aided schools, mostly denominational. In the Straits Settlements there is a similar system, as well as in Mauritius, Of the West Indies, Trinidad has the most interesting educational history. The majority of the population are Roman Catholic, and in addition

to a large Roman Catholic black population there is a considerable element of Spanish and French whites, yet a secular system was · introduced by a rash governor, with the natural result that the Roman Catholic clergy, assisted, I believe, by the clergy of the Church of England, took away a large proportion of the children from the schools. The system had to be withdrawn, and one of State aid to schools of all descriptions substituted. In Jamaica and the Leeward Islands education is increasing among the negroes with remarkable rapidity, Turks Island has a free and unsectarian system, while in Antigua, St. Kitts, and Nevis the system is denominational with State aid; but the fees which are exacted in nearly all the islands are a hindrance to education among the negroes. In Grenada there is a double system of government and of aided schools; in Bermuda a compulsory system, but without free schools; in Bahamas a free unsectarian system, partly compulsory, as well as aid to other schools; while Barbados heads the list among West Indian colonies in the proportion of school attendance to population, and maintains government scholarships to be held at Oxford or Cambridge, as well as makes grants to the winners of scholarships at London University."


The following statement with reference to the educational system of the Netherlands is from the Statesman's Year-Book, 1901: ; “For the education of the Europeans and persons assimilated with them there were in 1878 seven public middle-class schools, with 1,016 pupils and 102 teachers. The cost of these schools to the government was 583,592 guilders, and the revenue out of the school fees 86,887 guilders. There were in the same year, for Europeans 133 mixed elementary schools and 31 for girls only, with 20 private schools, ' the total attendance being 15,077 and the cost 2,471,912 guilders, and the income 283,056 guilders. For natives there were in Java and Madura in 1898 223 government schools with 43,094 pupils and 216 private schools with 23,795 pupils. In the Dutch East Indian territory, outside of Java and Madura, there were in 1897 296 government schools with 42, 230 pupils and 529 private schools with 25,807 pupils. There were also in Java and Madura in 1887 18,608 Mohammedan schools with 291,721 pupils, and in 1898 there were 519 schools for foreign orientals with 8,688 pupils. There are also in Dutch East India 5 normal schools, with 27 teachers and 169 pupils, and 4 schools for sons of native chiefs with 211 pupils.”

“In the matter of education the Dutch adopted, and still to this day adopt,” says Boys, in his Notes on Java, “a very decided policy. They deliberately keep the Javans ignorant of all Western literature. There are schools in the villages, generally ! presided over by one of the priests, but instruction in Dutch or in any language except the Javan vernacular is rigorously excluded. Primary education alone is attended to, and no higher education of any kind permitted. Neither is the use of Dutch in conversation with natives encouraged, and should a Javan acquainted with the Dutch colloquial address an official in that language he finds himself at once checked and rebuked by being answered in the vernacular. The Hollanders at any rate are determined that they will create for themselves no difficulties of the sort that they see surrounding the English in India. They argue that the Javans would generally make no good use of their education, and the spectacle of the Congress' certainly leads them to think that this opinion is well justified. This is only one of the points in which the Dutch system is diametrically opposite to the liberal and self-sacrificing policy of the British, and it is this contrast in the administration which makes the study of the government by Holland of its great oriental dependency and a consideration of the results so intensely interesting and instructive to the Anglo-Indian."


The following description of the educational facilities furnished by the French Government in Algeria is also from the Statesman's Year-Book, 1901: “Primary schools are either French, French-Arab, or Arab. In 1897 the total number was 1,161, with 104,207 pupils (62,873 boys and 41,334 girls). The nationality of the pupils in 1896 was 52,108 French, 14,791 Jews, 19,362 Mussulman, and 37,839 foreign. There are higher Mussulman schools at Algiers, Constantine, and Tlemcen, where pupils are prepared for native employments. There is also at Algiers an institution for higher instruction in law and the sciences and a higher school of letters. At Algiers (city) and Oran are lycées with altogether 2,000 pupils. The native population is entirely Mussulman, the Jews being now regarded as French citizens. The grants for religious purposes in the budget for 1900 were: To Catholics, 829,700 francs; to Mussulman, 307,430 francs; Protestants, 97,600 francs, and Jews, 28,970 francs.”


In India a systematic effort has been made by the government both for the encouragement of, and aid to, primary schools among the masses, and for higher grade and collegiate education for those whose circumstances permit such an undertaking. Warren Hastings founded the first college in Bengal in 1782, and maintained it for some years at his own expense to encourage the study of Arabic and Persian literature and Mohammedan theology; to qualify the Mohammedans of Bengal for the public service, and enable them to compete with the Hindus for employment under the government. Lord Macaulay in 1835 urged the introduction of English methods of education and the English language in the higher education in India, especially for those who were to aid in the administration of the government, and the principles which he laid down at that time have been in the main adhered to ever since. In 1854 a department of public instruction was constituted, universities were to be founded, institutions for training teachers established, the number of government colleges and high schools increased, new middle-class schools created, the English language to be the medium of instruction in the higher branches of education, and the vernacular language in the lower, though English was to be taught whenever there was a demand for it. A system of grants in aid to private institutions was to be based on entire abstinence from religious instruction given in the schools. Aid was to be given within certain limits to all schools which imparted a good secular education and were under competent management. This system has been put into operation throughout British India. Every province has its separate educational department, with a large staff of officers, colleges, schools, and grants in aid. In some parts of India there have been from time immemorial considerable numbers of village and local schools with instruction of a very elementary kind. In the Hindu schools the instruction is : chiefly or wholly secular. The Mohammedan schools have a religious character. In Bengal and Madras the existing system of primary instruction is in a great measure based on the indigenous schools which receive grants in aid from the State. In Bombay, Punjab, and the northwestern provinces the primary schools are mostly provided by the State at the cost of local funds raised by land tax. In Burma primary education is almost entirely in the hands of Buddhist monks. Reading, writing, arithmetic, and sometimes a little mensuration are taught in the primary schools.

With the above statement of the basis of the school system of India the following statement from the Statesman's Year-Book of 1901 may be presented as the latest concrete information on present educational conditions in India: “Since the appointment of a commission in 1883 to investigate the whole system of education in India the results have been to place public instruction on a broader and more popular basis, to encourage private enterprise in teaching, to give a more adequate recognition to indigenous schools, and to provide that the education of the people shall advance at a more equal pace along with the instruction of the higher classes. Female education and the instruction of certain backward classes of the community, such as Mohammedans, received special attention. Notwithstanding the progress of education the proportion of the total population able to read and write is still very small. It is estimated that in British India only 22.2 per cent of the boys of a school-going age attend school; the percentage in the case of girls being 2.3. The statistics compiled up to March 31, 1899, show the number of pupils in the schools of India, including colleges, private institutions, training schools, and primary and secondary schools for the masses, 4,357,821; of which number 3,955,668 were males and 402,153 females. This, however, is an increase of over 25 per cent in ten years, the figures for 1888 for all classes of pupils being 3,473,895. The total number of educational institutions in India is 149,948; of which 22,804 are public, 61,494 are aided, and 65,650 are private and unaided. At the head of the national system of education in India there are the five universities of Calcutta, Madras, Bombay, Allahábád, and the

« AnteriorContinuar »