It seems proper that I
should prefix to the following biographical sketch some mention of
the reasons which have made me think it desirable that I should
leave behind me such a memorial of so uneventful a life as mine. I
do not for a moment imagine that any part of what I have to relate
can be interesting to the public as a narrative or as being
connected with myself. But I have thought that in an age in which
education and its improvement are the subject of more, if not of
profounder, study than at any former period of English history, it
may be useful that there should be some record of an education
which was unusual and remarkable, and which, whatever else it may
have done, has proved how much more than is commonly supposed may
be taught, and well taught, in those early years which, in the
common modes of what is called instruction, are little better than
wasted. It has also seemed to me that in an age of transition in
opinions, there may be somewhat both of interest and of benefit in
noting the successive phases of any mind which was always pressing
forward, equally ready to learn and to unlearn either from its own
thoughts or from those of others. But a motive which weighs more
with me than either of these, is a desire to make acknowledgment of
the debts which my intellectual and moral development owes to other
persons; some of them of recognised eminence, others less known
than they deserve to be, and the one to whom most of all is due,
one whom the world had no opportunity of knowing. The reader whom
these things do not interest, has only himself to blame if he reads
farther, and I do not desire any other indulgence from him than
that of bearing in mind that for him these pages were not
written.
I was born in London, on the 20th
of May, 1806, and was the eldest son of James Mill, the author of
the History of British India. My father, the son of a petty
tradesman and (I believe) small farmer, at Northwater Bridge, in
the county of Angus, was, when a boy, recommended by his abilities
to the notice of Sir John Stuart, of Fettercairn, one of the Barons
of the Exchequer in Scotland, and was, in consequence, sent to the
University of Edinburgh, at the expense of a fund established by
Lady Jane Stuart (the wife of Sir John Stuart) and some other
ladies for educating young men for the Scottish Church. He there
went through the usual course of study, and was licensed as a
Preacher, but never followed the profession; having satisfied
himself that he could not believe the doctrines of that or any
other Church. For a few years he was a private tutor in various
families in Scotland, among others that of the Marquis of
Tweeddale, but ended by taking up his residence in London, and
devoting himself to authorship. Nor had he any other means of
support until 1819, when he obtained an appointment in the India
House.
In this period of my father's
life there are two things which it is impossible not to be struck
with: one of them unfortunately a very common circumstance, the
other a most uncommon one. The first is, that in his position, with
no resource but the precarious one of writing in periodicals, he
married and had a large family; conduct than which nothing could be
more opposed, both as a matter of good sense and of duty, to the
opinions which, at least at a later period of life, he strenuously
upheld. The other circumstance, is the extraordinary energy which
was required to lead the life he led, with the disadvantages under
which he laboured from the first, and with those which he brought
upon himself by his marriage. It would have been no small thing,
had he done no more than to support himself and his family during
so many years by writing, without ever being in debt, or in any
pecuniary difficulty; holding, as he did, opinions, both in
politics and in religion, which were more odious to all persons of
influence, and to the common run of prosperous Englishmen, in that
generation than either before or since; and being not only a man
whom nothing would have induced to write against his convictions,
but one who invariably threw into everything he wrote, as much of
his convictions as he thought the circumstances would in any way
permit: being, it must also be said, one who never did anything
negligently; never undertook any task, literary or other, on which
he did not conscientiously bestow all the labour necessary for
performing it adequately. But he, with these burdens on him,
planned, commenced, and completed, the History of India; and this
in the course of about ten years, a shorter time than has been
occupied (even by writers who had no other employment) in the
production of almost any other historical work of equal bulk, and
of anything approaching to the same amount of reading and research.
And to this is to be added, that during the whole period, a
considerable part of almost every day was employed in the
instruction of his children: in the case of one of whom, myself, he
exerted an amount of labour, care, and perseverance rarely, if
ever, employed for a similar purpose, in endeavouring to give,
according to his own conception, the highest order of intellectual
education.
A man who, in his own practice,
so vigorously acted up to the principle of losing no time, was
likely to adhere to the same rule in the instruction of his pupil.
I have no remembrance of the time when I began to learn Greek; I
have been told that it was when I was three years old. My earliest
recollection on the subject, is that of committing to memory what
my father termed vocables, being lists of common Greek words, with
their signification in English, which he wrote out for me on cards.
Of grammar, until some years later, I learnt no more than the
inflections of the nouns and verbs, but, after a course of
vocables, proceeded at once to translation; and I faintly remember
going through Aesop's Fables, the first Greek book which I read.
The Anabasis, which I remember better, was the second. I learnt no
Latin until my eighth year. At that time I had read, under my
father's tuition, a number of Greek prose authors, among whom I
remember the whole of Herodotus, and of Xenophon's Cyropaedia and
Memorials of Socrates; some of the lives of the philosophers by
Diogenes Laertius; part of Lucian, and Isocrates ad Demonicum and
Ad Nicoclem. I also read, in 1813, the first six dialogues (in the
common arrangement) of Plato, from the Euthyphron to the Theoctetus
inclusive: which last dialogue, I venture to think, would have been
better omitted, as it was totally impossible I should understand
it. But my father, in all his teaching, demanded of me not only the
utmost that I could do, but much that I could by no possibility
have done. What he was himself willing to undergo for the sake of
my instruction, may be judged from the fact, that I went through
the whole process of preparing my Greek lessons in the same room
and at the same table at which he was writing: and as in those days
Greek and English lexicons were not, and I could make no more use
of a Greek and Latin lexicon than could be made without having yet
begun to learn Latin, I was forced to have recourse to him for the
meaning of every word which I did not know. This incessant
interruption, he, one of the most impatient of men, submitted to,
and wrote under that interruption several volumes of his History
and all else that he had to write during those years.
The only thing besides Greek,
that I learnt as a lesson in this part of my childhood, was
arithmetic: this also my father taught me: it was the task of the
evenings, and I well remember its disagreeableness. But the lessons
were only a part of the daily instruction I received. Much of it
consisted in the books I read by myself, and my father's discourses
to me, chiefly during our walks. From 1810 to the end of 1813 we
were living in Newington Green, then an almost rustic
neighbourhood. My father's health required considerable and
constant exercise, and he walked habitually before breakfast,
generally in the green lanes towards Hornsey. In these walks I
always accompanied him, and with my earliest recollections of green
fields and wild flowers, is mingled that of the account I gave him
daily of what I had read the day before. To the best of my
remembrance, this was a voluntary rather than a prescribed
exercise. I made notes on slips of paper while reading, and from
these in the morning walks, I told the story to him; for the books
were chiefly histories, of which I read in this manner a great
number: Robertson's histories, Hume, Gibbon; but my greatest
delight, then and for long afterwards, was Watson's Philip the
Second and Third. The heroic defence of the Knights of Malta
against the Turks, and of the revolted Provinces of the Netherlands
against Spain, excited in me an intense and lasting interest. Next
to Watson, my favourite historical reading was Hooke's History of
Rome. Of Greece I had seen at that time no regular history, except
school abridgments and the last two or three volumes of a
translation of Rollin's Ancient History, beginning with Philip of
Macedon. But I read with great delight Langhorne's translation of
Plutarch. In English history, beyond the time at which Hume leaves
off, I remember reading Burnet's History of his Own Time, though I
cared little for anything in it except the wars and battles; and
the historical part of the Annual Register, from the beginning to
about 1788, where the volumes my father borrowed for me from Mr.
Bentham left off. I felt a lively interest in Frederic of Prussia
during his difficulties, and in Paoli, the Corsican patriot; but
when I came to the American War, I took my part, like a child as I
was (until set right by my father) on the wrong side, because it
was called the English side. In these frequent talks about the
books I read, he used, as opportunity offered, to give me
explanations and ideas respecting civilization, government,
morality, mental cultivation, which he required me afterwards to
restate to him in my own words. He also made me read, and give him
a verbal account of, many books which would not have interested me
sufficiently to induce me to read them of myself: among other's
Millar's Historical View of the English Government, a book of great
merit for its time, and which he highly valued; Mosheim's
Ecclesiastical History, McCrie's Life of John Knox, and even Sewell
and Rutty's Histories of the Quakers. He was fond of putting into
my hands books which exhibited men of energy and resource in
unusual circumstances, struggling against difficulties and
overcoming them: of such works I remember Beaver's African
Memoranda, and Collins's Account of the First Settlement of New
South Wales. Two books which I never wearied of reading were
Anson's Voyages, so delightful to most young persons, and a
collection (Hawkesworth's, I believe) of Voyages round the World,
in four volumes, beginning with Drake and ending with Cook and
Bougainville. Of children's books, any more than of playthings, I
had scarcely any, except an occasional gift from a relation or
acquaintance: among those I had, Robinson Crusoe was pre-eminent,
and continued to delight me through all my boyhood. It was no part,
however, of my father's system to exclude books of amusement,
though he allowed them very sparingly. Of such books he possessed
at that time next to none, but he borrowed several for me; those
which I remember are the Arabian Nights, Cazotte's Arabian Tales,
Don Quixote, Miss Edgeworth's Popular Tales, and a book of some
reputation in its day, Brooke's Fool of Quality.
In my eighth year I commenced
learning Latin, in conjunction with a younger sister, to whom I
taught it as I went on, and who afterwards repeated the lessons to
my father; from this time, other sisters and brothers being
successively added as pupils, a considerable part of my day's work
consisted of this preparatory teaching. It was a part which I
greatly disliked; the more so, as I was held responsible for the
lessons of my pupils, in almost as full a sense as for my own: I,
however, derived from this discipline the great advantage, of
learning more thoroughly and retaining more lastingly the things
which I was set to teach: perhaps, too, the practice it afforded in
explaining difficulties to others, may even at that age have been
useful. In other respects, the experience of my boyhood is not
favourable to the plan of teaching children by means of one
another. The teaching, I am sure, is very inefficient as teaching,
and I well know that the relation between teacher and taught is not
a good moral discipline to either. I went in this manner through
the Latin grammar, and a considerable part of Cornelius Nepos and
Caesar's Commentaries, but afterwards added to the superintendence
of these lessons, much longer ones of my own.
In the same year in which I began
Latin, I made my first commencement in the Greek poets with the
Iliad. After I had made some progress in this, my father put Pope's
translation into my hands. It was the first English verse I had
cared to read, and it became one of the books in which for many
years I most delighted: I think I must have read it from twenty to
thirty times through. I should not have thought it worth while to
mention a taste apparently so natural to boyhood, if I had not, as
I think, observed that the keen enjoyment of this brilliant
specimen of narrative and versification is not so universal with
boys, as I should have expected both a priori and from my
individual experience. Soon after this time I commenced Euclid, and
somewhat later, Algebra, still under my father's tuition.
From my eighth to my twelfth
year, the Latin books which I remember reading were, the Bucolics
of Virgil, and the first six books of the Aeneid; all Horace,
except the Epodes; the Fables of Phaedrus; the first five books of
Livy (to which from my love of the subject I voluntarily added, in
my hours of leisure, the remainder of the first decade); all
Sallust; a considerable part of Ovid's Metamorphoses; some plays of
Terence; two or three books of Lucretius; several of the Orations
of Cicero, and of his writings on oratory; also his letters to
Atticus, my father taking the trouble to translate to me from the
French the historical explanations in Mingault's notes. In Greek I
read the Iliad and Odyssey through; one or two plays of Sophocles,
Euripides, and Aristophanes, though by these I profited little; all
Thucydides; the Hellenics of Xenophon; a great part of Demosthenes,
Aeschines, and Lysias; Theocritus; Anacreon; part of the Anthology;
a little of Dionysius; several books of Polybius; and lastly
Aristotle's Rhetoric, which, as the first expressly scientific
treatise on any moral or psychological subject which I had read,
and containing many of the best observations of the ancients on
human nature and life, my father made me study with peculiar care,
and throw the matter of it into synoptic tables. During the same
years I learnt elementary geometry and algebra thoroughly, the
differential calculus, and other portions of the higher mathematics
far from thoroughly: for my father, not having kept up this part of
his early acquired knowledge, could not spare time to qualify
himself for removing my difficulties, and left me to deal with
them, with little other aid than that of books: while I was
continually incurring his displeasure by my inability to solve
difficult problems for which he did not see that I had not the
necessary previous knowledge.
As to my private reading, I can
only speak of what I remember. History continued to be my strongest
predilection, and most of all ancient history. Mitford's Greece I
read continually; my father had put me on my guard against the Tory
prejudices of this writer, and his perversions of facts for the
whitewashing of despots, and blackening of popular institutions.
These points he discoursed on, exemplifying them from the Greek
orators and historians, with such effect that in reading Mitford my
sympathies were always on the contrary side to those of the author,
and I could, to some extent, have argued the point against him: yet
this did not diminish the ever new pleasure with which I read the
book. Roman history, both in my old favourite, Hooke, and in
Ferguson, continued to delight me. A book which, in spite of what
is called the dryness of its style, I took great pleasure in, was
the Ancient Universal History, through the incessant reading of
which, I had my head full of historical details concerning the
obscurest ancient people, while about modern history, except
detached passages, such as the Dutch War of Independence, I knew
and cared comparatively little. A voluntary exercise, to which
throughout my boyhood I was much addicted, was what I called
writing histories. I successively composed a Roman History, picked
out of Hooke; and an Abridgment of the Ancient Universal History; a
History of Holland, from my favourite Watson and from an anonymous
compilation; and in my eleventh and twelfth year I occupied myself
with writing what I flattered myself was something serious. This
was no less than a History of the Roman Government, compiled (with
the assistance of Hooke) from Livy and Dionysius: of which I wrote
as much as would have made an octavo volume, extending to the epoch
of the Licinian Laws. It was, in fact, an account of the struggles
between the patricians and plebeians, which now engrossed all the
interest in my mind which I had previously felt in the mere wars
and conquests of the Romans. I discussed all the constitutional
points as they arose: though quite ignorant of Niebuhr's
researches, I, by such lights as my father had given me, vindicated
the Agrarian Laws on the evidence of Livy, and upheld, to the best
of my ability, the Roman Democratic party. A few years later, in my
contempt of my childish efforts, I destroyed all these papers, not
then anticipating that I could ever feel any curiosity about my
first attempts at writing and reasoning. My father encouraged me in
this useful amusement, though, as I think judiciously, he never
asked to see what I wrote; so that I did not feel that in writing
it I was accountable to any one, nor had the chilling sensation of
being under a critical eye.
But though these exercises in
history were never a compulsory lesson, there was another kind of
composition which was so, namely, writing verses, and it was one of
the most disagreeable of my tasks. Greek and Latin verses I did not
write, nor learnt the prosody of those languages. My father,
thinking this not worth the time it required, contented himself
with making me read aloud to him, and correcting false quantities.
I never composed at all in Greek, even in prose, and but little in
Latin. Not that my father could be indifferent to the value of this
practice, in giving a thorough knowledge of these languages, but
because there really was not time for it. The verses I was required
to write were English. When I first read Pope's Homer, I
ambitiously attempted to compose something of the same kind, and
achieved as much as one book of a continuation of the Iliad. There,
probably, the spontaneous promptings of my poetical ambition would
have stopped; but the exercise, begun from choice, was continued by
command. Conformably to my father's usual practice of explaining to
me, as far as possible, the reasons for what he required me to do,
he gave me, for this, as I well remember, two reasons highly
characteristic of him: one was, that some things could be expressed
better and more forcibly in verse than in prose: this, he said, was
a real advantage. The other was, that people in general attached
more value to verse than it deserved, and the power of writing it,
was, on this account, worth acquiring. He generally left me to
choose my own subjects, which, as far as I remember, were mostly
addresses to some mythological personage or allegorical
abstraction; but he made me translate into English verse many of
Horace's shorter poems: I also remember his giving me Thomson's
Winter to read, and afterwards making me attempt (without book) to
write something myself on the same subject. The verses I wrote
were, of course, the merest rubbish, nor did I ever attain any
facility of versification, but the practice may have been useful in
making it easier for me, at a later period, to acquire readiness of
expression.
1 I had read, up to this time, very little
English poetry. Shakspeare my father had put into my hands, chiefly
for the sake of the historical plays, from which, however, I went
on to the others. My father never was a great admirer of
Shakspeare, the English idolatry of whom he used to attack with
some severity. He cared little for any English poetry except Milton
(for whom he had the highest admiration), Goldsmith, Burns, and
Gray's Bard, which he preferred to his Elegy: perhaps I may add
Cowper and Beattie. He had some value for Spenser, and I remember
his reading to me (unlike his usual practice of making me read to
him) the first book of the Fairie Queene; but I took little
pleasure in it. The poetry of the present century he saw scarcely
any merit in, and I hardly became acquainted with any of it till I
was grown up to manhood, except the metrical romances of Walter
Scott, which I read at his recommendation and was intensely
delighted with; as I always was with animated narrative. Dryden's
Poems were among my father's books, and many of these he made me
read, but I never cared for any of them except Alexander's Feast,
which, as well as many of the songs in Walter Scott, I used to sing
internally, to a music of my own: to some of the latter, indeed, I
went so far as to compose airs, which I still remember. Cowper's
short poems I read with some pleasure, but never got far into the
longer ones; and nothing in the two volumes interested me like the
prose account of his three hares. In my thirteenth year I met with
Campbell's poems, among which Lochiel, Hohenlinden, The Exile of
Erin, and some others, gave me sensations I had never before
experienced from poetry. Here, too, I made nothing of the longer
poems, except the striking opening of Gertrude of Wyoming, which
long kept its place in my feelings as the perfection of
pathos.
During this part of my childhood,
one of my greatest amusements was experimental science; in the
theoretical, however, not the practical sense of the word; not
trying experiments—a kind of discipline which I have often
regretted not having had—nor even seeing, but merely reading about
them. I never remember being so wrapt up in any book, as I was in
Joyce's Scientific Dialogues; and I was rather recalcitrant to my
father's criticisms of the bad reasoning respecting the first
principles of physics, which abounds in the early part of that
work. I devoured treatises on Chemistry, especially that of my
father's early friend and schoolfellow, Dr. Thomson, for years
before I attended a lecture or saw an experiment.
From about the age of twelve, I
entered into another and more advanced stage in my course of
instruction; in which the main object was no longer the aids and
appliances of thought, but the thoughts themselves. This commenced
with Logic, in which I began at once with the Organon, and read it
to the Analytics inclusive, but profited little by the Posterior
Analytics, which belong to a branch of speculation I was not yet
ripe for. Contemporaneously with the Organon, my father made me
read the whole or parts of several of the Latin treatises on the
scholastic logic; giving each day to him, in our walks, a minute
account of what I had read, and answering his numerous and most
searching questions. After this, I went in a similar manner through
the Computatio sive Logica of Hobbes, a work of a much higher order
of thought than the books of the school logicians, and which he
estimated very highly; in my own opinion beyond its merits, great
as these are. It was his invariable practice, whatever studies he
exacted from me, to make me as far as possible understand and feel
the utility of them: and this he deemed peculiarly fitting in the
case of the syllogistic logic, the usefulness of which had been
impugned by so many writers of authority. I well remember how, and
in what particular walk, in the neighbourhood of Bagshot Heath
(where we were on a visit to his old friend Mr. Wallace, then one
of the Mathematical Professors at Sandhurst) he first attempted by
questions to make me think on the subject, and frame some
conception of what constituted the utility of the syllogistic
logic, and when I had failed in this, to make me understand it by
explanations. The explanations did not make the matter at all clear
to me at the time; but they were not therefore useless; they
remained as a nucleus for my observations and reflections to
crystallize upon; the import of his general remarks being
interpreted to me, by the particular instances which came under my
notice afterwards. My own consciousness and experience ultimately
led me to appreciate quite as highly as he did, the value of an
early practical familiarity with the school logic. I know of
nothing, in my education, to which I think myself more indebted for
whatever capacity of thinking I have attained. The first
intellectual operation in which I arrived at any proficiency, was
dissecting a bad argument, and finding in what part the fallacy
lay: and though whatever capacity of this sort I attained, was due
to the fact that it was an intellectual exercise in which I was
most perseveringly drilled by my father, yet it is also true that
the school logic, and the mental habits acquired in studying it,
were among the principal instruments of this drilling. I am
persuaded that nothing, in modern education, tends so much, when
properly used, to form exact thinkers, who attach a precise meaning
to words and propositions, and are not imposed on by vague, loose,
or ambiguous terms. The boasted influence of mathematical studies
is nothing to it; for in mathematical processes, none of the real
difficulties of correct ratiocination occur. It is also a study
peculiarly adapted to an early stage in the education of
philosophical students, since it does not presuppose the slow
process of acquiring, by experience and reflection, valuable
thoughts of their own. They may become capable of disentangling the
intricacies of confused and self-contradictory thought, before
their own thinking faculties are much advanced; a power which, for
want of some such discipline, many otherwise able men altogether
lack; and when they have to answer opponents, only endeavour, by
such arguments as they can command, to support the opposite
conclusion, scarcely even attempting to confute the reasonings of
their antagonists; and, therefore, at the utmost, leaving the
question, as far as it depends on argument, a balanced one.
During this time, the Latin and
Greek books which I continued to read with my father were chiefly
such as were worth studying, not for the language merely, but also
for the thoughts. This included much of the orators, and especially
Demosthenes, some of whose principal orations I read several times
over, and wrote out, by way of exercise, a full analysis of them.
My father's comments on these orations when I read them to him were
very instructive to me. He not only drew my attention to the
insight they afforded into Athenian institutions, and the
principles of legislation and government which they often
illustrated, but pointed out the skill and art of the orator—how
everything important to his purpose was said at the exact moment
when he had brought the minds of his audience into the state most
fitted to receive it; how he made steal into their minds, gradually
and by insinuation, thoughts which, if expressed in a more direct
manner, would have roused their opposition. Most of these
reflections were beyond my capacity of full comprehension at the
time; but they left seed behind, which germinated in due season. At
this time I also read the whole of Tacitus, Juvenal, and
Quintilian. The latter, owing to his obscure style and to the
scholastic details of which many parts of his treatise are made up,
is little read, and seldom sufficiently appreciated. His book is a
kind of encyclopaedia of the thoughts of the ancients on the whole
field of education and culture; and I have retained through life
many valuable ideas which I can distinctly trace to my reading of
him, even at that early age. It was at this period that I read, for
the first time, some of the most important dialogues of Plato, in
particular the Gorgias, the Protagoras, and the Republic. There is
no author to whom my father thought himself more indebted for his
own mental culture, than Plato, or whom he more frequently
recommended to young students. I can bear similar testimony in
regard to myself. The Socratic method, of which the Platonic
dialogues are the chief example, is unsurpassed as a discipline for
correcting the errors, and clearing up the confusions incident to
the intellectus sibi permissus, the understanding which has made up
all its bundles of associations under the guidance of popular
phraseology. The close, searching elenchus by which the man of
vague generalities is constrained either to express his meaning to
himself in definite terms, or to confess that he does not know what
he is talking about; the perpetual testing of all general
statements by particular instances; the siege in form which is laid
to the meaning of large abstract terms, by fixing upon some still
larger class-name which includes that and more, and dividing down
to the thing sought—marking out its limits and definition by a
series of accurately drawn distinctions between it and each of the
cognate objects which are successively parted off from it —all
this, as an education for precise thinking, is inestimable, and all
this, even at that age, took such hold of me that it became part of
my own mind. I have felt ever since that the title of Platonist
belongs by far better right to those who have been nourished in and
have endeavoured to practise Plato's mode of investigation, than to
those who are distinguished only by the adoption of certain
dogmatical conclusions, drawn mostly from the least intelligible of
his works, and which the character of his mind and writings makes
it uncertain whether he himself regarded as anything more than
poetic fancies, or philosophic conjectures.
In going through Plato and
Demosthenes, since I could now read these authors, as far as the
language was concerned, with perfect ease, I was not required to
construe them sentence by sentence, but to read them aloud to my
father, answering questions when asked: but the particular
attention which he paid to elocution (in which his own excellence
was remarkable) made this reading aloud to him a most painful task.
Of all things which he required me to do, there was none which I
did so constantly ill, or in which he so perpetually lost his
temper with me. He had thought much on the principles of the art of
reading, especially the most neglected part of it, the inflections
of the voice, or modulation, as writers on elocution call it (in
contrast with articulation on the one side, and expression on the
other), and had reduced it to rules, grounded on the logical
analysis of a sentence. These rules he strongly impressed upon me,
and took me severely to task for every violation of them: but I
even then remarked (though I did not venture to make the remark to
him) that though he reproached me when I read a sentence ill, and
told me how I ought to have read it, he never by reading it
himself, showed me how it ought to be read. A defect running
through his otherwise admirable modes of instruction, as it did
through all his modes of thought, was that of trusting too much to
the intelligibleness of the abstract, when not embodied in the
concrete. It was at a much later period of my youth, when
practising elocution by myself, or with companions of my own age,
that I for the first time understood the object of his rules, and
saw the psychological grounds of them. At that time I and others
followed out the subject into its ramifications, and could have
composed a very useful treatise, grounded on my father's
principles. He himself left those principles and rules unwritten. I
regret that when my mind was full of the subject, from systematic
practice, I did not put them, and our improvements of them, into a
formal shape.
A book which contributed largely
to my education, in the best sense of the term, was my father's
History of India. It was published in the beginning of 1818. During
the year previous, while it was passing through the press, I used
to read the proof sheets to him; or rather, I read the manuscript
to him while he corrected the proofs. The number of new ideas which
I received from this remarkable book, and the impulse and stimulus
as well as guidance given to my thoughts by its criticism and
disquisitions on society and civilization in the Hindoo part, on
institutions and the acts of governments in the English part, made
my early familiarity with it eminently useful to my subsequent
progress. And though I can perceive deficiencies in it now as
compared with a perfect standard, I still think it, if not the
most, one of the most instructive histories ever written, and one
of the books from which most benefit may be derived by a mind in
the course of making up its opinions.
The Preface, among the most
characteristic of my father's writings, as well as the richest in
materials of thought, gives a picture which may be entirely
depended on, of the sentiments and expectations with which he wrote
the History. Saturated as the book is with the opinions and modes
of judgment of a democratic radicalism then regarded as extreme;
and treating with a severity, at that time most unusual, the
English Constitution, the English law, and all parties and classes
who possessed any considerable influence in the country; he may
have expected reputation, but certainly not advancement in life,
from its publication; nor could he have supposed that it would
raise up anything but enemies for him in powerful quarters: least
of all could he have expected favour from the East India Company,
to whose commercial privileges he was unqualifiedly hostile, and on
the acts of whose government he had made so many severe comments:
though, in various parts of his book, he bore a testimony in their
favour, which he felt to be their just due, namely, that no
Government had on the whole given so much proof, to the extent of
its lights, of good intention towards its subjects; and that if the
acts of any other Government had the light of publicity as
completely let in upon them, they would, in all probability, still
less bear scrutiny.
On learning, however, in the
spring of 1819, about a year after the publication of the History,
that the East India Directors desired to strengthen the part of
their home establishment which was employed in carrying on the
correspondence with India, my father declared himself a candidate
for that employment, and, to the credit of the Directors,
successfully. He was appointed one of the Assistants of the
Examiner of India Correspondence; officers whose duty it was to
prepare drafts of despatches to India, for consideration by the
Directors, in the principal departments of administration. In this
office, and in that of Examiner, which he subsequently attained,
the influence which his talents, his reputation, and his decision
of character gave him, with superiors who really desired the good
government of India, enabled him to a great extent to throw into
his drafts of despatches, and to carry through the ordeal of the
Court of Directors and Board of Control, without having their force
much weakened, his real opinions on Indian subjects. In his History
he had set forth, for the first time, many of the true principles
of Indian administration: and his despatches, following his
History, did more than had ever been done before to promote the
improvement of India, and teach Indian officials to understand
their business. If a selection of them were published, they would,
I am convinced, place his character as a practical statesman fully
on a level with his eminence as a speculative writer.