wherein he was rebuking a native deputation for complaining of hard times, reminded them that they could easily remember when a farm-hand’s wages were only half a rupee (former value) a month—­that is to say, less than a cent a day; nearly $2.90 a year.  If such a wage-earner had a good deal of a family—­and they all have that, for God is very good to these poor natives in some ways—­he would save a profit of fifteen cents, clean and clear, out of his year’s toil; I mean a frugal, thrifty person would, not one given to display and ostentation.  And if he owed $13.50 and took good care of his health, he could pay it off in ninety years.  Then he could hold up his head, and look his creditors in the face again.

Think of these facts and what they mean.  India does not consist of cities.  There are no cities in India—­to speak of.  Its stupendous population consists of farm-laborers.  India is one vast farm—­one almost interminable stretch of fields with mud fences between. . .  Think of the above facts; and consider what an incredible aggregate of poverty they place before you.

The first Bearer that applied, waited below and sent up his recommendations.  That was the first morning in Bombay.  We read them over; carefully, cautiously, thoughtfully.  There was not a fault to find with them—­except one; they were all from Americans.  Is that a slur?  If it is, it is a deserved one.  In my experience, an American’s recommendation of a servant is not usually valuable.  We are too good-natured a race; we hate to say the unpleasant thing; we shrink from speaking the unkind truth about a poor fellow whose bread depends upon our verdict; so we speak of his good points only, thus not scrupling to tell a lie—­a silent lie—­for in not mentioning his bad ones we as good as say he hasn’t any.  The only difference that I know of between a silent lie and a spoken one is, that the silent lie is a less respectable one than the other.  And it can deceive, whereas the other can’t—­as a rule.  We not only tell the silent lie as to a servant’s faults, but we sin in another way:  we overpraise his merits; for when it comes to writing recommendations of servants we are a nation of gushers.  And we have not the Frenchman’s excuse.  In France you must give the departing servant a good recommendation; and you must conceal his faults; you have no choice.  If you mention his faults for the protection of the next candidate for his services, he can sue you for damages; and the court will award them, too; and, moreover, the judge will give you a sharp dressing-down from the bench for trying to destroy a poor man’s character, and rob him of his bread.  I do not state this on my own authority, I got it from a French physician of fame and repute—­a man who was born in Paris, and had practiced there all his life.  And he said that he spoke not merely from common knowledge, but from exasperating personal experience.