in a manner which is very much to the detriment of the latter, the Englishman, on the other hand, launches the most fiery denunciations against those of his countrymen who are responsible for Indian policy.  Their want of enterprise is characterised by the appalling polysyllabic adjective “hebetudinous,” which it is perhaps as well to explain means obtuse or dull, and they are told that they “are infected with the Babu spirit, and cannot see beyond their immediate horizon.”

M. Dautremer thinks that it is somewhat narrow-minded of the Englishman to inflict on himself the torture of wearing cloth or flannel clothes in order that he may not be taken for a chi-chi or half-caste, who very wisely dresses in white.  He expostulates against the social tyranny which obliges him to pay visits between twelve and two “in such a climate and with such a temperature,” and he gently satirises the isolation of the different layers of English society—­civilian, military, and subordinate services—­in words which call to mind the striking account given by the immortal Mr. Jingle of the dockyard society of Chatham and Rochester.  It is, however, consolatory to learn that all classes combined in giving a hearty welcome to the genial and sympathetic Frenchman who was living in their midst.  Save on these minor points, M. Dautremer has, for the most part, nothing but praise to accord.  He thinks that “all the British administrative officers in Burma are well-educated and capable men, who know the country of which they are put in charge, and are fluent in the language.”  He writhes under the highly centralised and bureaucratic system adopted by his own countrymen.  He commends the English practice under which “the Home Government never interferes in the management of internal affairs,” and it is earnestly to be hoped that the commendation is deserved, albeit of late years there have occasionally been some ominous signs of a tendency to govern India rather too much in detail from London.  Speaking of the rapid development of Burmese trade, M. Dautremer says, in words which are manifestly intended to convey a criticism of his own Government, “This is an example of the use of colonies to a nation which knows how to put a proper value on them and to profit by them.”

The warm appreciation which M. Dautremer displays of the best parts of the English administrative system enhances his claims for respectful attention whenever he indulges in criticism.  He finds two rather weak points in the administration.  In the first place, he attributes the large falling-off in the export of teak, inter alia, to “the increase in Government duties and the much more rigid rules for extraction,” and he adds that the Government, which is itself a large dealer in timber, has “by its action created a monopoly which has raised prices to the highest possible limit.”  The subject is one which would appear to require attention.  The primary business of any Government is not to trade