imperial provinces; and from 1772 to 1828 the general system was one which recognized the native practices and declined to interfere with them. The years from 1828 to 1857, from Lord William Bentinck to the Mutiny, were marked by a definite and conscious tendency, on the part of the paramount power, to introduce regulations conceived from the point of view of England, for instance by the abolition of suttee and thuggee, the introduction of the official use of the English language, and Lord Dalhousie's policy of annexation. The result was disaffection, shown at the time of the Mutiny. From 1858 to 1872 was a period of reconstruction, marked by great increase of efficiency. Native rights were more respected, and the integrity of the native states conserved. At the same time there was much administrative centralization. The period since Lord Mayo's rule, 1872-1900, has been marked by administrative decentralization and especially the completer organization of the eight great provinces. The main lesson of Indian history is the necessity of studying the subject populations as they actually are.
Dr. J. H. Hollander, the Treasurer of Porto Rico, who was to have discoursed upon the finances of the island, was unable to be present. Professor John H. Finley of Princeton, upon the basis of a recent and extensive walking-tour, described the general conditions of Porto Rico, and discussed the resulting financial difficulties which Dr. Hollander had encountered. He also discussed the code which the first commission had provided, and the better plans of the new commission. He believed that projects of administrative reform should begin with the municipalities, and that a form of general government more nearly approaching that of our territories might well be substituted for that which has lately been established.
In the discussion which followed. Professor Henry E. Bourne, of Western Reserve University, emphasized the local quality in our colonial problems. It was possible to study the Porto Rican problem with relation either to our institutions, or to the origin of the Porto Rico bill, or to the Philippine question; or to study the problems of each of our colonies with reference to local conditions and the experience of European nations. Professor Charles H. Hull of Cornell University set forth with great clearness the fiscal system of Porto Rico as it existed in the year 1897-1898, the effects which were necessarily involved in the transfer of sovereignty, those which actually resulted, and the plans made necessary for the future.
In the afternoon, at the session devoted to Western history, Professor Edward G. Bourne of Yale University read portions of that paper on the Legend of Marcus Whitman, which we had the
