did Mill say about the government of India?  Remember he was not merely that abject and despicable being, a philosopher.  He was a man practised in government, and in what government?  Why, he was responsible, experienced, and intimately concerned in the government of India.  What did he say?  If there is anybody who can be quoted as having been a champion of representative government it is Mill; and in his book, which, I take it, is still the classic book on that subject, this is what he says—­

“Government by the dominant country is as legitimate as any other, if it is the one which, in the existing state of civilization of the subject people, most facilitates their transition to a higher state of civilization.”

Then he says this—­

“The ruling country ought to be able to do for its subjects all that could be done by a succession of absolute monarchs, guaranteed by irresistible force against the precariousness of tenure attendant on barbarous despotisms, and qualified by their genius to anticipate all that experience has taught to the more advanced nations.  If we do not attempt to realize this ideal we are guilty of a dereliction of the highest moral trust that can devolve upon a nation.”

I will now ask the attention of the House for a moment while I examine a group of communications from officers of the Indian Government, and if the House will allow me I will tell them what to my mind is the result of all these communications as to the general feeling in India.  That, after all, is what most concerns us.  For this unrest in the Punjab and Bengal sooner or later—­and sooner, rather than later, I hope—­will pass away.  What is the situation of India generally in the view of these experienced officers at this moment?  Even now when we are passing through all the stress and anxiety, it is a mistake not to look at things rather largely.  They all admit that there is a fall in the influence of European officers over the population.  They all, or nearly all, admit that there is estrangement—­I ought to say, perhaps, refrigeration—­between officers and people.  There is less sympathy between the Government and the people.  For the last few years—­and this is a very important point—­the doctrine of administrative efficiency has been pressed too hard.  The wheels of the huge machine have been driven too fast.  Our administration—­so shrewd observers and very experienced observers assure me—­would be a great deal more popular if it was a trifle less efficient, a trifle more elastic generally.  We ought not to put mechanical efficiency at the head of our ideas.  I am leading up to a practical point.  The district officers representing British rule to the majority of the people of India, are overloaded with work in their official relations, and I know there are highly experienced gentlemen who say that a little of the looseness of earlier days is better fitted than the regular system of latter